TargetTalk

.


We all know all about 'Cheeken Finger' or 'trigger shyness' in its full blown 'pathological form' when the shooter is " a w a r e " that he is unable to squeeze off a shot at the right time.


But how about the proposition that says... there is a small percentage of chicken finger in most bad shooting... and that those who shoot well seem to be more 'bold' with their triggering than others ?


Elmas


.

I agree.

If you could hold the gun steady, consciously pull the trigger smoothly through the release without flinching, you should hit the X every time.
There is no reason to flinch, anticipate the trigger etc. Its not what your hand has planned for the day.
Most people can aim much better than they can shoot. Why is that?

For me there is a tedious random input generator between my eye and my trigger finger - my (albeit small) brain.

This can be disconnected in various ways:

- Subconscious release - if it exists - really the brain is not too sure when the trigger is going to go so doesn't know when to send the flinch signal.
This takes great mental discipline, or a lot of beer.

- Perfect rollover trigger or clean break with zero backlash trigger. The brain doesn't know the trigger has already broken so doesn't flinch in time.

- Very specific practise techniques:

- Practise aiming with your eyes open, triggering with your eyes shut. Then combine the two for perfect scores.
- Triggering with your eyes shut - Suddenly you realise just how good your trigger is, how light the recoil is and how good your trigger technique is if the finger-sights-eyes-brain feedback loop which causes so much trouble is broken.
- Aiming with your eyes open but not triggering. Use a scatt, or a laser pointer and a video camera to see how good your hold is. As long as your are withing your preferred target area ~70% of the time most of your shots should be there too.

- A couple of cases of liberated Iraqi 9mm and a clunky old auto. Hangfires certainly concentrate the mind.

Maybe an OT quibble (agree witht eh bulk of yoru post), but I have a burning desire to take exception with

"Most people can aim much better than they can shoot."

Actually, many (most? all?) of the skilled shooters actually shoot much better than they can aim.

This can actually be measured with Rika, Scatt, Noptel, etc. equipment.

A typical 560+ MAP shooter will have a (order of magnitude) 10% 8 ring or worse, 40% wide nine or or worse, 70% tight nine or worse, and only 30% or less of the settled hold time will actually traverse the ten ring.

And yet about half of all shots cut the ten ring.

What happens (as the instrumentation shows) is that the skilled shooter breaks almost all of their shots while the muzzle is heading *into* the ten ring, and very few of their shots break while the muzzle is in or moving away from the ten ring.

So what does this have to do with "Chicken Finger" theories? Well, maybe not much (apologize if the quibble is OT), but the point is that consistent, predictable trigger activation is critical. How fast, how slow, etc the trigger activation is doesn't mean squat.

As long as your subconscious can be programmed to *anticipate* when the muzzle is *about to* cover the ten ring, it's all good. As long as your wobble pattern is predictable, and your trigger activation timing is predictable, you will always put a hole closer to the center than your ability to hold.

Steve Swartz

Steve,
No bother about quibbles, all information gratefully received.

What happens (as the instrumentation shows) is that the skilled shooter breaks almost all of their shots while the muzzle is heading *into* the ten ring, and very few of their shots break while the muzzle is in or moving away from the ten ring.

Thats very interesting, I was not aware of this research. I would have thought the frequency of oscillation was too quick for this to happen. In this case the subconscious must be playing some role.

JamesH wrote: I would have thought the frequency of oscillation was too quick for this to happen. In this case the subconscious must be playing some role.

The time delay between the subconscious issuing a command to fire and trigger activation is a fraction of normal reaction time (conscious decison to fire) of , say, 200-300 msec. I happen to have a RIKA plot of my best ever hold, which shows the trace at the edge of the 8 ring (9 oclock) 0.5 sec before firing, in the 9 ring (12 oclock) 0.25 sec before firing, in the center of the 10 ring at firing. I would guess that the 'decision' to fire came as the muzzle was moving down toward the 10. BTW, I am very far from a skilled 560 shootr :(, and continue to struggle to train my unruly subconscious.
Fred

In this case the subconscious must be playing some role.

Imagine that! <smile>

Sorry, I couldn't resist. But, I didn't post just to highlight the quote. I'm compelled to tack the following thoughts onto the thread:

-----------------

Which of the following statements are supported by the findings posted?

A) The subconscious can track the pattern of hold and cause the initiation of a consistent trigger to coincide shot release with aim

B) The subconscious can track the application of a consistent trigger and adjust the aim to coincide with shot release

C) The subconscious can perform both A and B, but mutually exclusive

D) The subconscious can perform both A and B simultaneously

E) None of the above

------------------

Take Care,
Ed Hall
http://www.airforceshooting.org/
http://www.starreloaders.com/edhall/

Ed:

FWIW, I'm starting to come around to D) . . . . both "reacting" and "steering" to a large degree. Whatever data we have pretty much supports both theories.

After the last long thread on this, it was one of those "self fulfilling prophecy"deals. The more I thought about the "steering" idea, the more I "observed" steering taking place.

We will probably never know which is actually the dominant phenomenon- at least in western countries, we would never get the research design past a Human Subjects committee. So we are left with the dismal data from personal perspective.

In other words, those pesky (and grossly unreliable) "I Saw What I Saw" first person accounts . . .

Steve Swartz

Steve Swartz wrote:at least in western countries, we would never get the research design past a Human Subjects committee.

What is a Human Subjects committee?

'pathological form' when the shooter is " a w a r e " that he is unable to squeeze off a shot at the right time.

That's me. I like the term!

I just got my first FP; the first time I touched the trigger I realized "this is not my out-of-the-box Ruger Mk2". When dry firing I can maintain a good hold and delicately squeeze the trigger. Put a round in the chamber and aim at a target and all of a sudden I'm mentally jumping up and down screaming at my index finger to move. What's helping me is a lot of dry firing, and (believe it or not) aiming at a plinking gong at my local range. It lets me practice my hold and live-fire trigger pull without worrying about which scoring ring it's landing in. I hit the 9" gong at 50 yards and I'm content.

"Human Subjects Committee" - In an academic setting, research involving experiments with human subjects need to be approved by a committee to make sure no ones being abused.

You may find that you do much better once you increase the weight of the trigger pull. When the trigger is set very light it can definitely make chicken finger worse.

David Levene mentioned his training tactic of "pumping the trigger"

I tried it , essentially, to aim and squeeze the trigger without arming the dry fire mechanism... and to my surprise found that the sights moved with my trigger "squeeze" ...

I have included it in my practice to help me steady the sights with trigger pull... I find it more helpful than the 'classical' dry fire technique.


Elmas


.