TargetTalk

What, in your own experience, are the differences in the technical challenges in these two disciplines? Is free pistol mostly about hold and air pistol about trigger control and follow through? Why is the free pistol considered the most difficult discipline and the longest to master? Is it because a smooth trigger release and a good follow through are largely mental challenges while finessing one's hold takes a long time to accomplish as it really is a purely physical task?

Both free pistol and air pistol require exactly the same skills in shot development and execution. There is absolutely no issue in transitioning from one to the other for those that train in both. World class scores in either are equally difficult to achieve. I am not sure what the actual differences are between the targets/distances mathematically, but free pistol is more challenging (score for score) for a variety of reasons. It would be interesting to do a mathematical comparison of the two targets to see how the scoring ring sizes would compare at the same distance. Perhaps this is the main reason for the differences in scores.

BEA wrote:I am not sure what the actual differences are between the targets/distances mathematically, but free pistol is more challenging (score for score) for a variety of reasons. It would be interesting to do a mathematical comparison of the two targets to see how the scoring ring sizes would compare at the same distance. Perhaps this is the main reason for the differences in scores.

The target and projectile diameters are not proportionate to the distance from the firing line.

The diameter of the black on the 50m target is 200mm
The diameter of the black on the 10m target is 50mm

To score a 10.0 on the 50m target the centre of the shot hole needs to be a maximum of 27.8mm from the centre of the target.
To score a 10.0 on the 10m target the centre of the shot hole needs to be a maximum of 8.0mm from the centre of the target.

To score a 7.0 on the 50m target the centre of the shot hole needs to be a maximum of 102.8mm from the centre of the target.
To score a 7.0 on the 10m target the centre of the shot hole needs to be a maximum of 32.0mm from the centre of the target.

These figures indicate that you need a better shot to score the same value on a 50m target than you do on the 10m target. This is not always the case though. If all errors causing the shot not to hit the centre of the target were angular then you could simply use a factor of 5 to compare the distance of the shot from the centre. This would mean that the 50m target is harder to score the same shot value on.

All errors are not angular however, some are parallel. In this case, for example, a shot centre 24mm from the centre of the 10m target would score 8.0. The same error on the 50m target would score 10.1.

In reality most errors are a combination of angular and parallel, sometimes cancelling each other out, but with a predominance of angular.

All of the above, coupled with other factors such as wind, can be simplified to "the 50m target is harder to score well on".

Don't forget that for those relationships to be kept "true", bullet diameter al 10 metres should be of 1,1 mm.

Instead, using a 4,5 mm.pellet is equivalent to using a 22,2 mm bullet at 50 meters......................... errors in AP are minimized as (to be precise) a pellet hitting the target 13,5 mm of the exact center of the bull ( an ideal "10,9") will still scora a 10,1.-

That is taking into account a 11,5 mm. 10-zone and a 4,5 mm. pellet, plus a security margin.

In FP, a shot hitting (13.5 x 5 times for distance = 67.5 mm) so far away the "10.9"" will barely make a 9.6.

Add to the equation the composed recoil (soft as it is, is enough) of a .22 bullet catching you JUST in the moment you relaxed a little bit your grip and yopu may go search your hole at 2 o'clock upper right in the 6-ring (if you're a right-handed shooter) or worse.

When all is said and done, FP is for people who likes to suffer................................ I'm one of them!

Yes, target being different and farther away is one obvious difference, but it is an "outer" difference. My question is how does it translate into "inner" differences in the shooter and how does it emphasize the relative importance of various aspects of the shooting technique. There are also other things that are different too, no wraparound grip in AP, heavier trigger, longer bullet departure time, etc. BEA thinks that there is not much difference in the technique. In his book with Antal, Skanaker emphasized some things and played down some others. I do not want to list them here, not to "skew" your own perception.

renzo wrote:Don't forget that for those relationships to be kept "true", bullet diameter al 10 metres should be of 1,1 mm.

That's why I used "the centre of the shot hole" in my examples. I obviously used the correct projectile diameter in the calculations: 5.6mm for 50m and 4.5mm for 10m.

My bad David, as our calculations referring how afar AP bullet hole can be from ideal center to still score a 10.0, I supposed you didn't.

Still, our numbers difer a lot.

renzo wrote:Still, our numbers difer a lot.

When comparing different targets and different projectiles it is best to work using the centre of the hole required to achieve a certain score.

To score a 10.0 on a 50m target the hole centre is (50.0+5.6)/2 = 27.8mm from the centre

To score a 10.0 on a 10m target the hole centre is (11.5+4.5)/2 = 8.0mm from the centre

To score a 7.0 on a 50m target the hole centre is (200.0+5.6)/2 = 102.8mm from the centre

To score a 7.0 on a 10m target the hole centre is (59.5+4.5)/2 = 32.0mm from the centre

The 50' reduced free pistol target is roughly the same size as the 10m air pistol target.

That, to me, indicates that free pistol is roughly 50% more challenging than air pistol to achieve the same scores ((50-33)/33).

Of course, you also have to remember the old saying: "In air pistol, you are the General, and the pistol is the Private. In free pistol, the pistol is the General, and you are the Private."

David Levene wrote:

renzo wrote:Still, our numbers difer a lot.

When comparing different targets and different projectiles it is best to work using the centre of the hole required to achieve a certain score.

To score a 10.0 on a 50m target the hole centre is (50.0+5.6)/2 = 27.8mm from the centre

To score a 10.0 on a 10m target the hole centre is (11.5+4.5)/2 = 8.0mm from the centre

To score a 7.0 on a 50m target the hole centre is (200.0+5.6)/2 = 102.8mm from the centre

To score a 7.0 on a 10m target the hole centre is (59.5+4.5)/2 = 32.0mm from the centre

I stand corrected.

Thanks a lot.

john bickar wrote: you also have to remember the old saying: "In air pistol, you are the General, and the pistol is the Private. In free pistol, the pistol is the General, and you are the Private."

...wasn't the ending, "In free pistol, the pistol is also the General."?

shaky hands wrote:

john bickar wrote: you also have to remember the old saying: "In air pistol, you are the General, and the pistol is the Private. In free pistol, the pistol is the General, and you are the Private."

...wasn't the ending, "In free pistol, the pistol is also the General."?

Yeah, that sounds more betterer :)

Shooting good in practice is easy (mine was 100/100 couple times)
But shooting in competition need more mental fitness than technical. it's hard to master. Really hard.....

David.... I might be missing something with respect to your "parallel" errors. All I can see are angular displacements. If you happen to step a foot to the right or left to the target center line, it is still an angular displacement to correct back to the correct target center.... What am I missing ? Thanks....

spektr wrote:David.... I might be missing something with respect to your "parallel" errors.

As an example, imagine that you are perfectly on aim but then get body sway from your ankles.

You whole upper torso, head, eyes, arm, pistol etc would be offset by a certain amount. It doesn't matter how far away the centre of the target is, the shot will miss it by that same amount.

As I said, most errors are either angular or a mixture of angular and parallel.

The angular errors are generated by the hand pivoting at the wrist, and the arm pivoting at the shoulder. But where would the parallel errors be generated? The only source I can think of if swinging of the shoulder joint together with the whole upper body. The diameter of the 10 ring is 5 cm. I do not think that swinging in the shoulder can reach amount that large even in shooters with a rather poor stability.

shaky hands wrote:The angular errors are generated by the hand pivoting at the wrist, and the arm pivoting at the shoulder. But where would the parallel errors be generated?

Ankles?

You'd be surprised (or maybe not) how few people can stand still without swaying, even with their arms by their sides.

shaky hands wrote:The diameter of the 10 ring is 5 cm. I do not think that swinging in the shoulder can reach amount that large even in shooters with a rather poor stability.

The diameter of the 10 ring on the 10m AP target is 11.5m. Add the diameter of the pellet and we see that an error of just over 8mm, call it 8.1mm, would give you a score of 9.9.

If that 8.1mm error was caused by a parallel error, such as sway from the ankles, then you would still have an 8.1mm error at 50m; a score of 10.7.

If however that 8.1mm error at 10m was caused by a (more normal) angular error, such as wrist movement, then it would equate to a 40.5mm error at 50m; a score of 9.4.

This difference in the results of different types of errors is one of the reasons why it is difficult to compare scores shot at 10m and 50m. It is also one of the reasons why using Scatt, for example, to simulate a 50m shoot at 10m can give unexpected results. ETs can only tell you that there was an aiming error, not what caused it, so extrapolates them all as if they were angular errors.

But doesn't SCATT also keep track of the lateral velocity of the muzzle? (I do not know whether this is the case with SCATT but always hoped that it was.) Tracking exact position of the muzzle and its velocity would then be all that's needed to predict shot placement accurately.

shaky hands wrote:But doesn't SCATT also keep track of the lateral velocity of the muzzle? (I do not know whether this is the case with SCATT but always hoped that it was.) Tracking exact position of the muzzle and its velocity would then be all that's needed to predict shot placement accurately.

SCATT doesn't track the position of the muzzle or its velocity. It tracks where the gun is pointing, (from memory) 125 times per second.

It doesn't know why a gun is not pointing at the centre of the target, it just knows that it isn't (buy a calculated amount).

It can't tell whether that's because the front and rear sights are out of alignment (angular error) or because the upper torso, eyes, arm, wrist, rear sight and front sight are all still perfectly in alignment with each other but have all moved away from the centre of the target by the same amount (parallel error).

SCATT can tell exactly where the gun is pointing on the target, but that is only for the actual distance to the target. If you are trying to simulate shooting at a different distance then it is less accurate. It assumes that any gun not pointing at the centre of the target is because of an angular error and multiplies the size of the error accordingly.