Tracking # of 10's in Training?

[Oz]

I consistently hear "only worry (think) about shooting 10's and what you do to shoot those 10's". I've also been told over and over to not worry about the scores shot in training. I'm getting better at it. But the analyst part of me has a difficult time of letting go of measuring something!

In combining the two thoughts and complying, yet still appeasing measurable analysis, wouldn't it make sense to track the number or percentage of 10's shot in training?

Oz

[RobStubbs]

I consistently hear "only worry (think) about shooting 10's and what you do to shoot those 10's". I've also been told over and over to not worry about the scores shot in training. I'm getting better at it. But the analyst part of me has a difficult time of letting go of measuring something!

In combining the two thoughts and complying, yet still appeasing measurable analysis, wouldn't it make sense to track the number or percentage of 10's shot in training?

Oz

There's nothing specifically wrong in tracking the number of 10's in training - as after all the whole point of training is to shoot better = better scores = more 10's. Although it's also about shooting more technically good shots and less poor ones. I would class this sort of info a nice to have for the shooter and of secondary importance over the items below.

What you need to divorce yourself from is doing any kind of analysis on the fly, i.e. as you're shooting. Try not to count 10's, count string scores and worst of all do not count the number of 7 and 8's (or other poor shots). At the end of the shoot analyse how it went. As well as a note of the score, write down how it felt, what went well and what areas you feel left room for improvement.

Rob.

[Freepistol]

Oz,
I used to track all the scoring rings when shooting free pistol. I wanted something to do when I couldn't be shooting and that was analyzing my shooting. I really enjopyed it. I used to shoot 10 shots in the sighter and then the 60 shot match. It was fun to see how the bullets were moving toward the center as my scores improved. Later, I realized I could get more practice in if I kept shooting a target until I couldn't see where my bulets were impacting the target. The better I got the fewer rounds I could send down range.
If you want to look at the excel spread sheet, I posted it last year. I will try to find it and post the link later today.
Ben

[Ed Hall]

I've always considered it good practice to track the shots that fall within a chosen ring - for newer shooters, that may even be the 7-ring. If you are focusing on what you want, you are giving your subconscious positive input. I consider that a good thing - much better than highlighting what you don't want.

Take Care,
Ed Hall
Air Force Shooting Homepage
Bullseye (and International) Competition Things

[2650 Plus]

Personally Ive tracked tens for years because thats what I was trying to shoot. My log book is repleat with pages of tens and blank spaces when the shot hit outside the ten ring. As has been said, I may have shot a nine once but I don't remember it. The real value to me was that any time I had a string of tens going I would ask my self "what are the odds that my next shot will also be a ten" I would look at a page in my book and always come up with a positive and reinforcing answer, Shoot tens my friend and enjoy. Good Shooting Bill Horton

[jholtman]

Counting tens has been a challenge drill that I have used with my shooters for a long time. Another variation is to use the hit or miss drill. If you shoot a ten, that is a hit and anything else is a miss. Less skilled shooters can use a 9 or better as a hit.
Jim

[Soupy44]

I prefer to count everything. For example, there are people that shoot 1s and 8s and do average to kinda well that way. They have more 10s than their nearby competitors, but the same score. It's important data that you're losing your shots wide, or that you're barely losing them in the 9 ring with greater numbers. In my college competition days, I think I had one 7 nearly every match while shooting in the 560s, even if I didn't have any 8s.

I guess my thought is to track as much info as you can keep track of. I have a massive spreadsheet for this. I'll clean it up and post it on here later.

[Ed Hall]

I prefer to count everything. For example, there are people that shoot 1s and 8s and do average to kinda well that way. They have more 10s than their nearby competitors, but the same score. It's important data that you're losing your shots wide, or that you're barely losing them in the 9 ring with greater numbers. In my college competition days, I think I had one 7 nearly every match while shooting in the 560s, even if I didn't have any 8s.

I guess my thought is to track as much info as you can keep track of. I have a massive spreadsheet for this. I'll clean it up and post it on here later.

Please consider that this is only my Not So Humble Opinion, but tracking things other than what you want sends the wrong message(s) to your subconscious. Spending (thought) energy on things lends meaning to them and they will take a considerable amount of work to send away. Perhaps your seven always showed up because you expectd to always have a seven and your subconscious needed to ensure that it occurred.

Some people have to study errors and learn how to make them more apparent in order to stop. I consider this the long way. Studying the things that work, repeating those things and letting the rest fall by the wayside is a more direct path. This is the path of those we call "gifted." Perhaps the real gift is in the ability to let go of those things that aren't wanted so the true focus and energy can be spent with those things that are of interest.

Take Care,
Ed Hall
Air Force Shooting Homepage
Bullseye (and International) Competition Things

[Soupy44]

The 7s weren't the reason I kept track of everything. The spreadsheet I used tracked the directions I dropped points. It wasn't as good as a scatter plot, but it calculated the number of points dropped on each clock direction. The 7 thing was just something I later saw.

For example, I found that in standing, both air and smallbore, I lost most of my points at 3 to 6, and 9 o'clock. I concluded that the 3 and 9 were general standing wobble, but the low right shots were due to imperfect trigger pull. I was far from yanking on the trigger, but it surely wasn't as good as it could get. Using this info, I was able to improve my performance.

I feel that if you don't know where or why you are losing points, you dn't have any basis on how to fix it. I agree that you should concentrate on 10s, but the lesser shots still exist and should be considered.

[Freepistol]

This comes down to two different theories of how to shoot {perform in any sport} well.

1. What is hurting my performance?
Make corrections so I don't do that any more.
Stop the bad habits.
Eliminate those techniques that are contributing to the poor performance.

2. What am I doing when perform correctly?
Concentrate on the good technique.
Only repeat the performance that resulted in the desired outcome.
If I focus only on doing everything correctly, the incorrect techniques
will fade from conscience and unconscience behavior.

[Ed Hall]

This comes down to two different theories of how to shoot {perform in any sport} well.

1. What is hurting my performance?
Make corrections so I don't do that any more.
Stop the bad habits.
Eliminate those techniques that are contributing to the poor performance.

2. What am I doing when perform correctly?
Concentrate on the good technique.
Only repeat the performance that resulted in the desired outcome.
If I focus only on doing everything correctly, the incorrect techniques
will fade from conscience and unconscience behavior.

The two basic methods described succinctly.

I would postulate that the second manner is more direct and therefore less time consuming, since we don't have to analyze what doesn't work.

For the first method, we might even need to make the error(s) more apparent, i.e. happen more often, to be able to identify it(them). Then, after we've made it more habitual, we need to "kick the habit." Many great shooters have used this method, but they had time to spend on shooting.

The second version is the one I subscribe to, especially for those of us that can't spend all our time with our shooting. I also contend that it is the very way we learned to make so many things natural in our lives, which is what I consider the pinnacle of shooting to be: the making of shooting a ten as natural as walking up stairs or drinking from a glass.

I also suggest that we approach shooting in the manner we approached learning to walk. Although, I don't remember my first steps, I think I spent more time trying to figure out how to stand up and get there, than I spent figuring out why I fell down.

Take Care,
Ed Hall
Air Force Shooting Homepage
Bullseye (and International) Competition Things

[Steve Swartz as Guest]

Agreed . . .

Back to the original question, why not track *your* performance against those things *you* are trying to do?

"There ain't no useful information out past that front sight!"

Figure out what you are supposed to be doing right.
Pay attenion to doing the right things.
Measure whether or not you are doing the right things right.

(holes in paper are a side effect- some of them, desirable side effects but side effects nonetheless- of actions you are trying to perform. Don't measure scores. Measure the quality of your settle, trigger release, etc. and the holes in the paper will take care of themselves.)

[FredB]

Don't measure scores. Measure the quality of your settle, trigger release, etc. and the holes in the paper will take care of themselves.

Steve,

Scores are obviously a very indirect measure of shooter performances because they measure everything as a whole, rather than individual behaviors. However, a score is an objective measurement. Could you tell us how you directly and objectively measure the individual behaviors that you mention? I can remember you posting something about a behavior scoring system you use, but this still depended on subjective judgments of each behavior, IIRC.

Thanks,
FredB

[jackh]

If you are good enough to track "tens" as the only satisfactory shots, then by all means do it. Most of us need to decide what is a satisfactory shot based on performed group size. Hopefully the size will forever progress smaller. Shots outside the group cluster could be the non-tens. But for me they are the ones in the white. :)

Performed group size and consistency. Two measures.

[RobStubbs]

If you are good enough to track "tens" as the only satisfactory shots, then by all means do it. Most of us need to decide what is a satisfactory shot based on performed group size. Hopefully the size will forever progress smaller. Shots outside the group cluster could be the non-tens. But for me they are the ones in the white. :)

Performed group size and consistency. Two measures.

See Steve's post above, that highlights it more succinctly. It's more the good processes and techniques we're interested in tracking, the outcomes (scores) are a side affect. We're also not talking about 10's as the only good shot as that depends on the individual. What we need to remember is that's it's quite possible to shoot technically poor shots that are still tens.

Rob.

[Philadelphia]

I consistently hear "only worry (think) about shooting 10's and what you do to shoot those 10's". I've also been told over and over to not worry about the scores shot in training. I'm getting better at it. But the analyst part of me has a difficult time of letting go of measuring something!

In combining the two thoughts and complying, yet still appeasing measurable analysis, wouldn't it make sense to track the number or percentage of 10's shot in training?

Oz

I don't know that I have much to add but I find that writing stuff actually helps me so here's my reply . . . :)

1. There are no scores shot in training. Scores are shot in practice. If you are training then nothing worth knowing happens beyond the front sight.

2. Tracking tens in practice does make perfect sense. This is the performance -- the test -- of the effectiveness of your training. If you shoot consistent tens using a consistent shot process, you are doing what you are supposed to do.

But in reality, tracking tens can be a misleading indirect measure of your overall performance. If you shoot 50% tens and 50% scattered all over the target, that's far different than 50% tens and 50% nines, yes? ;)

So . . . train for more specific focused aspect of behavior -- it is the proper behaviors that lead to results on the paper. Practice to test your application of those behaviors consistently each and every time. Make sense?

If you have to measure something in training, measure the frequency of the behavior you are training -- if it's less than 100% just knowing that can help to make it 100%.

[Steve Swartz as Guest]

2 am outside tjhe bar and a policeman comes across a drunk staggering around under a streetlight, frantically searching the sidewalk. "What seems to be the problem here?" asks the cop. The drunk replied "You have to help me! I lost my wallet and can't seem to find it!" Reluctantly, the policeman helped the man search for half an hour with no luck. "Are you sure you dropped it here under this streetlight?" he asked.

"No, actually; i lost it in the dark alleyway over there!"

"Then why the bloody h3!l are we looking over here!?"

"Well, its too dark to see in the alleyway . . . "


O.K., we all know you can execurte perfect behaviors and shoot a "not ten;" just like you can mess up your technique and shoot a ten. However, if you execute the proper behavirs all the time, that is the fastest and most reliable way to shoot more tens, more often.

Or, if not tens, you will at least BE SHOOTING THE BEST YOU POSSIBLY CAN!

Instead of "counting holes in paper," how about measuring stuff like:

- Did I smoothly enter a settled state in my aiming area?
- Did I maintain my settle during the releawse of the shot?
- Was I physically focused intently on the front sight during the settle and shot release?
- Was I mentally focused on maintaining sight alignment during the settle and shot release?
- Was my trigger initiation subconscious, not forced, and within 3-7 seconds of the settle?
- Was my trigger execution rapid, smooth, and balanced with no affect on alignment?
- Did I physically folow through on the shot?
- Did I mentally follow through on the shot?
- Did i quickly and smoothly recover back into the aiming area, with perfect alignment?

Etc. You get the idea . . . as discussed previously, you can set up a checklist for each shot and "score" your behaviors as yes/no or use a sliding scale. Don't try to score every single thing on every single shot right away; it takes a while to become aware of the quality of yoiur shooting behaviors and you will need to focus on a few elements at a time until you get comfortable paying closer attention to your own performance.

So now you have a system of evaluating performance on those behaviors that whould lead to the delivery of a perfect shot; you also have data that will pinpoint those areas you need to work on in order to improve your performance.

Yeah, this is "TQM" type stuff but hey, if it works for Toyota and Honda in improving processes much more complex than shooting a ten . . .

Steve

[Guest]

That sounds a lot like stinkin thinkin

[FredB]

Instead of "counting holes in paper," how about measuring stuff like:

- Did I smoothly enter a settled state in my aiming area?
- Did I maintain my settle during the releawse of the shot?
- Was I physically focused intently on the front sight during the settle and shot release?
- Was I mentally focused on maintaining sight alignment during the settle and shot release?
- Was my trigger initiation subconscious, not forced, and within 3-7 seconds of the settle?
- Was my trigger execution rapid, smooth, and balanced with no affect on alignment?
- Did I physically folow through on the shot?
- Did I mentally follow through on the shot?
- Did i quickly and smoothly recover back into the aiming area, with perfect alignment?

Etc. You get the idea . . . as discussed previously, you can set up a checklist for each shot and "score" your behaviors as yes/no or use a sliding scale. Don't try to score every single thing on every single shot right away; it takes a while to become aware of the quality of yoiur shooting behaviors and you will need to focus on a few elements at a time until you get comfortable paying closer attention to your own performance.

Steve,

Here's my recent experience, doing pretty much what you describe above, for over a month of training. Shooting mostly on blank targets, I stopped using a scope and instead noted the quality of several individual behaviors for each shot. I even tried this system once in a small local match.

I found the results quite disappointing for the following reasons:
1. There seemed to be no correlation between my perception of good-to-acceptable behaviors and good shot groups, i.e. when I felt that my behaviors were good, the groups were no better than when I felt my behaviors were not so good.
2. The self-evaluation of individual behaviors is highly subjective. At first I tried a simple yes/no system, but soon found that insufficient to describe what I was perceiving. However a scaled evaluation started to feel quite arbitrary after I used it for a while.
3. As a result of 1. and 2., I feel the "data" gathered is essentially meaningless.

That's why I asked, in my previous post, how do you objectively measure these behaviors? In my experience, subjective evaluation and notation of individual behaviors is far more distracting than it is helpful. I was hoping, when you used the word "measure", that you had some way of objectively (and quickly) measuring behaviors, so that the flow of the shot process would not be disturbed.

I understand that a month's trial may not be sufficient for this concept to work. However, I did not feel much - if any - sense of progress to keep my interest in this experiment going. On the contrary, I'm concerned that building a habitual pattern of self-judgment into the shot process may be unhelpful.

I'll be very interested in reading a response from you on this.

Regards,
FredB

[Guest]

Am I holding as I am supposed to hold
Am I seeing as I am supposed to see
Am I triggering as I am supposed to trigger
Is my mind free of distractions, allowing a nice flow of these factors