TargetTalk

When shooting on a 5m air target the 10 ring size is reduced to simulate what it takes to shoot a 10 at 10m. Does anyone know what the size would be at 0m. I do a holding exercise with a piece of blue tack on the wall. The bigger the piece the worse your hold can be and stay on it. So i was wondering how big the piece should be to simulate a 10 ring hold.

I think what you're trying to ask is (plezsae disregard if I've got it wrong):

"Assuming 100% perfect sight alignment [all bets are off if this is not 100% true], what is the equivalent perceived size of the 10m 10 ring at some other distance?"

Measure the distance between the lens of your eye and the 10m target face. Then just satisfy the ratio

(size of 10m ten ring)/(eye-10m target distance) = (desired size at new distance)/(eye-new distance length)

or, solving for the answer to your question:

Desired size of ten ring at new distance = [(size of 10m ten ring)*(eye-new distance length)]/(eye-10m target distance)

Hope that helps . . .

[p.s. this is NOT the same thing as the equivalent "ring sizes" at various distances for shooting/scoring]

Ok following this if i did it right the 10ring size at 0m should be .31 of a mm. so at the end of the pistol would be slightly bigger but not really measurable. so at a gues i would say a pensil dot on the wall should be a good simulation

Hmm not sure. An example:

Distance from my eye to front sight: 1 meter
Distance from my eye to target: 11 meters
Size of ten ring at target: 10 mm or .01 meters (for example)

So I want a dot on the wall, 1 meter in front of front sight, that appears to be the same size as the ten ring at 10 meters:

.01m/11m = Xm/2m

.02m/11m = Xm

.0018m = Xm

So your 10 ring dot would have to be 1.8 mm in diameter.

(for a dot resting on the front of the front sight it would have to be .0009m or ~1mm. So a relatively fat dot would work.)

. . . yes I know the 10 ring is not actually 10mm but I wanted to make the math easier . . .

The bigger question is the need for an accurately sized dot at Zero (which personally I think is undefined because you can't have a ten at 0 meters). Holding exercises are best utilized to observe the movement of the sights in relation to one another, and to a lesser extent the entire movement. This can be done with any size mark. The problem with using a mark as small as this imaginary ten, would be is that you'd actually have to focus on this dot to actually see it, which defeats the purpose which is focusing on your front sight.

What you want is a mark regardless of size that lets you observe your movement, it doesn't have to be accurately sized as you're not scoring on it.

Maybe I am over simplifing or taking the question the wrong direction, but isn't the black bull the holding area?

(dot on the wall exercise)
Shouldn't the appearance of the black dot at the wall look the same as when holding on the target at ten meters?

If you use a front sight that covers, (matches) the width of the black bull then use a dot on the wall that appears to be the width of the front sight. This should be true at any practice distance.

It is surprising the large percentage of the time you will be over the ten ring even with a large wobble. Train to improve your hold, but don't be afraid to take the shot (quickly).

Muffo wrote: I do a holding exercise with a piece of blue tack on the wall. The bigger the piece the worse your hold can be and stay on it. So i was wondering how big the piece should be to simulate a 10 ring hold.

Muffo wanted the information so that he could practice a 10 ring hold :-)

At 0 zero meters? Like I said what's the point?

The answer is to make your holding target the width of your front sight. No matter the distance as soon as the front sight touches white your out. This works for zero to.....

why i ask this question is because need to improve my ability to hold the whole pistol still, not the alignment. my shake is almost non existant. I use to have a very good holding area but quiet a lot of shake so i did lots of holding exercises on a blank wall. Now i am to the point where on a blank wall i can see no sight alteration but on a target my hold area is quiet bad. 9ring when going good and then every now and then i will wabble to probably 8 or 7. Y i want to know the size at 0 is i have a mark for my foot on the floow that brings my front sight up to about 1cm from the wall. then i can focuse on the dot and my sight at the same time. this isnt the best for consentrating on the front sight but i can do more work on that later. i made a slight calculation error in the equation as i forgot to take the distance the gun is over the 10. line away.

puttig a dot the same size as the front sight at 0 would be practesing to hold it dead still. you can have some movement and still be in the 10 ring.

At 10 m the 4.5 / 5mm fore site should be about the same size ad the diamiter of the black ( your milage will wary a bit. depending on you arm length) so at zero the black should be about the with of your fore sight.

personly i would recoment a grey dot so you remeber to focus on the sightsn and dont get used to a clear infocus black

julian

JulianY wrote:At 10 m the 4.5 / 5mm fore site should be about the same size ad the diamiter of the black ( your milage will wary a bit. depending on you arm length) so at zero the black should be about the with of your fore sight.

personly i would recoment a grey dot so you remeber to focus on the sightsn and dont get used to a clear infocus black

julian

It should be at 10m but if its the same size at 0 then it doesnt tell you when you are outside a 10 ring hold

I must be dense, but I don't see what's so complicated here. I can see two possible scenarios:

1. Your alignment is remains perfect. In that case a ten-ring hold is the size of the ten ring at 10M, and the same size at 5M, and the same at 0M and at any other distance. With perfect alignment, your hold is 100% parallel error.

2. Your alignment does not remain perfect. In that case, there is no practical answer, because you are adding a continuously variable amount of angular error to your parallel error.

Does this not seem correct?

FredB

FredB wrote:I must be dense, but I don't see what's so complicated here. I can see two possible scenarios:

1. Your alignment is remains perfect. In that case a ten-ring hold is the size of the ten ring at 10M, and the same size at 5M, and the same at 0M and at any other distance. With perfect alignment, your hold is 100% parallel error.

2. Your alignment does not remain perfect. In that case, there is no practical answer, because you are adding a continuously variable amount of angular error to your parallel error.

Does this not seem correct?

FredB

Think about that for a minute. Its not correct. With perfect sight alignment if you move your arm say 30 degrees maintining perfect sight alignment you arent in the 10 ring your not even on the target but your sight alignment is still perfect. Sight alignment makes more difference than your wobble zone but even if your sight alignment is perfect you can still shoot 8s and 7s if your hold isnt adiquate. If you sway your whole body then the 10 ring size remains the same at any distance but seen your shouder acts as a pivit point the is still an angular error when you move your arm

Not knowing any of the assumptions or background of what Muffo was trying to accomplish with respect to training, I simply tried to answer in a straightforward way his actual question.

O.K.

Now perhaps the door has been opened to the whole purpose/premise of "holding drills."

First things first: Are we talking Rifle or Pistol disciplines?

That makes a *huge* difference.

Muffo wrote: Think about that for a minute. Its not correct. With perfect sight alignment if you move your arm say 30 degrees maintining perfect sight alignment you arent in the 10 ring your not even on the target but your sight alignment is still perfect. Sight alignment makes more difference than your wobble zone but even if your sight alignment is perfect you can still shoot 8s and 7s if your hold isnt adiquate. If you sway your whole body then the 10 ring size remains the same at any distance but seen your shouder acts as a pivit point the is still an angular error when you move your arm

So you apparently do not include arm movement and body sway in your definition of "hold"? Exactly what do you mean by "hold"?

They are all factors but im trying to break them down into individual things. lets call it shake wobble and sway. shake is mostly from the rist which causes bad angular errors. Wobble comes mostly from the sholder and this is where I am having trouble and Sway is mainly from the hips and ancles. Sway has the same affect at 0m as at 10m or 100m.

Muffo wrote:They are all factors but im trying to break them down into individual things. lets call it shake wobble and sway. shake is mostly from the rist which causes bad angular errors. Wobble comes mostly from the sholder and this is where I am having trouble and Sway is mainly from the hips and ancles. Sway has the same affect at 0m as at 10m or 100m.

"shake wobble and sway"
sounds like an old R&R song

Not how I would describe the problem, but anyway....let's think about it in your terms. You are saying:
1. Wrist movement produces huge angular errors;
2. Arm movement originating at the shoulder produces smaller angular errors;
3. Body sway produces parallel errors.

You are trying to improve your angular error from the shoulder. As I pointed out above, there is no practical way to calculate a ten-ring-equivalent size of target when continuously variable angular error is involved.

Seems to me the best thing would be to experiment with different size close-up targets and find what works best for you.

FredB