call the shots

[zuckerman]

I remain unconvinced that “calling the shots” is helpful. My rational is that the ability to “know” where the shot >happened<, is only a reinforcement of negative thinking. The shot is done, your focus needs to be on only the current shot, without thinking or worrying about what or where the last shot was, or worrying what or where the next shot will be, and attempts to "correct" the current shot with "information" about the last shot will only cause further degradation of the current shot. I wish that I had the ability to forget the ability of calling the shots.

[RandomShotz]

I don't know if calling the shot is for corrective purposes - the hole is in the paper and beyond correction. And I think that "correcting" the point of aim according to where the last round hit is generally considered a bad idea.

I am a serious amateur (seriously amateur?) shooter, so my opinions may not jive with those of the top shooters and coaches here, but for me the ability to call the shots is indicative of awareness of the shot process. If I can't call a shot, then my attention was not were it was supposed to be. Knowing that I hit a 7 at 1 o'clock before I look through the spotting scope is not as important as knowing that I jerked the trigger (again), but being able to call the shot means that I was aware enough of what was happening to know that I jerked the trigger (again) and that the 7 was earned and not the fault of the ammo, the gun, the phase of the moon, etc.

Roger

[justadude]

What you are discussing here is the difference between someone who shoots and a precision or competitive shooter.

You are very correct in your statement that once a shot is done you need to quit worrying about it, but being able to call the shot does put you in touch with what you do need to be worrying about.

While the ability to "call the shot" can have some annoying results, "I don't even have to look in the scope to know I want to have that one back" it can also have some pleasant results, "I don't have to look in the scope to know I just tore the center out of the ten ring, and did not even touch the sides."

The ability to call the shot means that you are connected to the gun and know what it is doing or you are doing with it. That is the mark of a precision shooter.

Try thinking of calling the shot as a dynamic event, how was the hold? How was the release? How was the follow through? Rather than a simple static event of Where was the front sight when the gun went off?

This may help you move more toward a performance goal analysis away from the outcome (was that a 10?) analysis.

Good Luck
'Dude

[v76]

I find the affirmation akin to saying to not use a SCATT because both tell you you're not perfect. I think every shooter starts with some prejudice and/or the assumption that they aren't - I think it's a matter of perception after calling a shot. Personally, I'll notice if I make a good or bad shot and know why - then it's back to my normal shot process.

[Pat McCoy]

"Calling the shot" has at least two benefits. First, it requires you to follow through by continuing to look through the sights. Second, it allows you to adjust your sights.

I'm interested in how you make sight adjustments if you are not "calling" your shot. If you just adjust off the last hole in the target you'll be chasing bullet holes forever.

[BobGee]

One of my (many, many) shooting  problems is knowing how my shots develop during a string of shots on paper targets. I can look through the scope after each string and see, perhaps, a nice group of four with one flyer. I have good 22LR ammunition and pistol (SK Pistol Match Special and a Walther GSP) so I know that the  flyer will be my fault. What I don't know is where abouts in the string the flyer came. If I look through the scope after each shot then I break my rhythm and each shot becomes a first shot, not one of a string. If I leave it to the end of the string, then I've no idea how my shots developed and which one was the flyer. Calling the shots can only be worthwhile if you're able to view each shot as it happens (possible with electronic target but not so with paper without breaking up the string) and to compare that with your perception of where the shot went. 

The only solution would appear to be electronic targets (which record the order of the shots) or to have an observer, the latter being difficult to organise each time one wants to shoot. My wanting to shoot "strings" is because that is how one normally shoots in competition and also I've read elsewhere that one should not be obsessed with where each shot falls but approach each shot as a new beginning.

I guess there is not solution to this dilemma. 

[orionshooter]

for me the ability to call the shots is indicative of awareness of the shot process. If I can't call a shot, then my attention was not were it was supposed to be.

I agree with Roger.

Calling the shot does not require you to dwell on that information to the detriment of your next shot. You have plenty of time to clear your head and begin the shot process all over.

[Brian M]

My wanting to shoot "strings" is because that is how one normally shoots in competition and also I've read elsewhere that one should not be obsessed with where each shot falls but approach each shot as a new beginning.

lol, you just said that you believe that you shoot "strings" in competition... and then contradict yourself and say that you've read that it's best to shoot 1-shot matches. It's one or the other. For AP and FP, you absolutely shoot one-shot strings. Each shot is an entity of itself, has nothing to do with the prior or next shot. Obviously, in BE/sport/rapid fire matches, you're shooting strings.

If you're shooting 5 shot groups, you can still call your shots, just mark them on paper without checking them. Hone your skills and soon you WILL know which one was the flyer.

I'm obviously a fan of calling shots. It's an essential (to me) skill in precision shooting.

[BobGee]

Bit disappointed Brian. I’m glad I gave you an opportunity to laugh out loud. However, I don’t think you got my point as clearly I’m not very good at explaining myself. (I’m also not sure about this desire to “point score” against other members of the forum.)

It would appear that you are shooting AP or FP, which is one shot at a time – not at all the same as other disciplines such as ISSF Standard, Sport or Rapid Fire each of which shoot strings.

What I meant, for those with enough time to try to understand me, is that, although each shot in a “string” is a “new beginning” (perhaps an incorrect descriptor), one is not disassembling one’s whole stance, focus, breathing, grip, etc. between shots if one is shooting a string. One would be doing that if one needed to observe each shot through a scope, or “score it on paper”.

Clear enough now?

Bob

[Crete]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuYjAC6RXKw

[Spencer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuYjAC6RXKw

pity the target and rear sight are shown so crisply.

[lastman]

I remain unconvinced that “calling the shots” is helpful. My rational is that the ability to “know” where the shot >happened<, is only a reinforcement of negative thinking. The shot is done, your focus needs to be on only the current shot, without thinking or worrying about what or where the last shot was, or worrying what or where the next shot will be, and attempts to "correct" the current shot with "information" about the last shot will only cause further degradation of the current shot. I wish that I had the ability to forget the ability of calling the shots.

There is a major flaw in your reasoning here.

When you are calling the shot. The shot process has not finished.

You should still be in the process of your follow through. Anyone can call a poor shot, because most of the time the error is obvious. But to accurately call a good shot means you have been focused on your sighting and been committed to your shot process.

To say "I wish I had the ability to forget the ability of calling the shots." Is no different than saying "I wish I had the ability to forget the ability to focus on the sights."

Good luck

[BEA]

If you do not call your shots (watch your sights very carefully to pick on any sighting error, assuming that you are not rock steady) how can you possibly adjust your sights effectively? You must know why something happened in order to know what to change, or if any changes are necessary.

[Isabel1130]

It takes quite a while to learn how to call your shots well, and it helps a lot if you have a good hold. It is easier with a dot sight than with irons.
That said, inability to call your shots is also a symptom of an error called not focused on the sights. It can often mean that you are looking somewhere else (like at the target) at the moment the shot breaks.

[BEA]

I think the ability to call shots is a key factor in what makes some shooters better than others. It takes critical vision, the ability to see the slightest imperfections in sight alignment, to effectively call shots. Some shooters no doubt have good holds, but lack critical vision. They are good scope shooters but not reliably so with open sights. Then the opposite occurs too, good vision but so so hold. The shooters that excel have both the hold and critical vision...and the mental determination to bring everything together.

[Russ]

I think the ability to call shots is a key factor in what makes some shooters better than others. It takes critical vision, the ability to see the slightest imperfections in sight alignment, to effectively call shots. Some shooters no doubt have good holds, but lack critical vision. They are good scope shooters but not reliably so with open sights. Then the opposite occurs too, good vision but so so hold. The shooters that excel have both the hold and critical vision...and the mental determination to bring everything together.

My applause BEA!

[Rover]

I go with BEA.

I also think this is why many top shooters train/shoot with an air pistol. No hiding anything with one of those.

[BEA]

You are correct Rover in that AP uncovers all flaws and errors. AP requires supreme sight alignment and trigger control, as does FP. However, I am tempted to say that critical vision is something you either have or do not have. I am not sure it is something you can develop. I do believe it is something that you can have and refine with training. I know and have known some excellent bullseye shooters (with scopes) over the years that do lots of training, but they never reach the same level of accomplishment in international pistol. I believe this is due to having good holds and effective training, but they simply lack the critical vision needed for success with open sights.

[Crete]

One of my (many, many) shooting  problems is knowing how my shots develop during a string of shots on paper targets. I can look through the scope after each string and see, perhaps, a nice group of four with one flyer. I have good 22LR ammunition and pistol (SK Pistol Match Special and a Walther GSP) so I know that the  flyer will be my fault. What I don't know is where abouts in the string the flyer came. If I look through the scope after each shot then I break my rhythm and each shot becomes a first shot, not one of a string. If I leave it to the end of the string, then I've no idea how my shots developed and which one was the flyer. Calling the shots can only be worthwhile if you're able to view each shot as it happens (possible with electronic target but not so with paper without breaking up the string) and to compare that with your perception of where the shot went. 

The only solution would appear to be electronic targets (which record the order of the shots) or to have an observer, the latter being difficult to organise each time one wants to shoot. My wanting to shoot "strings" is because that is how one normally shoots in competition and also I've read elsewhere that one should not be obsessed with where each shot falls but approach each shot as a new beginning.

I guess there is not solution to this dilemma. 

The use a digital video camera attached to a spotting scope may help.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCx2pAtfl18

[RandomShotz]

A digital camera trained on the shooter might be more useful.

Roger