OK, maybe I'm off the deep end this time, but here are some even deeper proposals to consider.
This will address primarily Steve's query as to what I am trying to get at, which is really the gist of the thread. Unfortunately, I'm not all-knowing and am having a difficult time projecting that which I'm studying and coming to believe in. But I'll try to detail it more. Maybe the briefest explanation would be that I believe the current common methods to be somewhat passive (which isn't really true) and where I'm trying to head (and promote via discussion) as being active.
To specifics, let's examine a shot plan for AP/FP (which of course varies throughout shooters).
For this example we train for a consistent and fast trigger. Let's say we make it 35 milliseconds from initiation to completion. We imbed this action into our subconscious such that it knows the trigger will be 35ms through training. Then we tell our subconscious via visualization that we would like to fire while our hold is minimal and the aligned sights are in our acceptable area. Next, we go through our routine for a shot and when we start to enter our aiming area, we turn the completion over to the subconscious expecting it to decide when the best time to start the trigger is so coincidence will occur at optimum everything. Then we just watch and wait, and sometimes wait and wait. Eventually, if we notice it didn't happen, we may abort the shot. Otherwise, the shot happens and we check for success (based on whatever our personal criteria for success are).
I consider this a somewhat passive approach.
What if instead of providing a definition of "proper" sight alignment, setting up the floating hold pattern over the aiming area and letting our subconscious perform pattern analysis, which varies from match to match (sometimes even within a match), we told the subconscious that we wanted to create a hole in the distant ten, and based on the subconscious's determination of everything, the gun is raised, moved to the optimum location for success as the trigger is operated and the subconscious performs all actions in concert for a hole where you wanted it? No setting up any preliminary parameters, no specific trigger, no varying hold pattern. Just a pure action, controlled by the subconscious that places the sights as necessary and operates the trigger in concert with the sights, to record the shot where requested. The speed of all the unfolding actions to be determined fully by the subconscious as it sees fit for success.
<flame suit adjusted for fit>
Currently we tell our subconscious how to align the sights, how to hold the gun, how to operate the trigger, how to hold on target, what to look for, etc. What if we just told it what we wanted, then said, "Make it so!" and turned it loose during training? Would we just shoot all over the place, or would we learn the intricacies of firing a well placed shot totally through our subconscious. If we were to turn it that loose, would our confidence follow the successes of our training? (Provided, of course, that we had any successes... <smile>)
If our subconscious had a familiarity of shooting equal to that of other everyday abilities, would it be able to adjust all parameters such that it could examine all the input and shoot a ten just by the will of "making it so?" Instead of fighting for perfect sight alignment placed in a perfect orientation, with perfect grip and perfect trigger, what if the subconscious was so aware of all the effects and had such a profound understanding of "the big picture" it could adjust on the fly to ensure a ten? What if perfect sight alignment only meant that the subconscious knew the details of compensating for less than perfect? What if that could be true of all the little things? Instead of waiting for the opportunity of coincidence, what if that coincidence could be forced to occur by the subconscious. Instead of waiting and hoping for a shot, with the possibility of aborting looming over us, what if the subconscious was bent on making all the details fall into place to guarantee a ten.
OK, I might have gotten a little extreme for a minute or two. I'm sure we can't just step out and shoot all tens without some formalized training. But what if that training was more in the line of letting the subconscious learn all the details? Maybe we don't have the ability to devote that much time to letting the subconscious learn through successes and failures. Maybe we're too short on patience. After all, it took us years to learn some of our finer motor skills. What if we used our already learned details, but we weren’t so strict in our adherence and allowed our subconscious some room for experimentation? Would we possibly gain anything? What about those bonus shots - the ones where it looked awful, but printed well? Random occurrence, or subconscious was let loose?
I'll jump out now so the flames can get going. Maybe we can get this thread up into the multipage realm. (Of course, multipage may happen soon with the size of some of these posts. I’m glad I put “Long” in the title.<smile>)
Take Care,
Ed Hall
http://www.airforceshooting.org/
http://www.starreloaders.com/edhall/
Totally Subconscious Shooting?? (Long)
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
-
Bob Fleming
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 8:25 pm
- Location: Hunt County, Texas
I like the word instinct because the normal decision making process is not used. While “instinctive” shooting is clearly not similar to the instinctive actions of animals, like geese flying south at the beginning of winter, I think that it better describes the fact that we do not wait for the perfect sight picture to decide to pull the trigger in the hopes of discharging the weapon before the perfect alignment is gone. Those who use no sights on a bow to aim the arrow are called instinctive shooters; perhaps that is how the word instinctive came to be used for these types of activities. Intuitive shooting may indeed be a better way to describe it. Instinctive and all the other descriptions currently in use do not communicate the concept well. It really is an extremely simple and common way of doing things that normal people use effortlessly every day for the most ordinary tasks, not the mystical rites performed only by gurus that most seem to believe. I feel that one of the better communicators (not me, I was a drop-out) reading this thread may be about to formulate a paragraph or even one sentence that actually reveals the hidden simplicity of this to those who do not already see it. The funny thing about nearly all statements that have been made by those who have experienced this contain the key. Those who have not realized what they are already doing cannot seem to understand. I do not know why. It is just too simple, they think is must be complicated.
It does take time to build up that “muscle memory” (another common and perhaps flawed description) to shoot without thinking. How many steps did you take before you walked so smoothly and confidently that you no longer pay attention to the act of walking? We walk instinctively yet walking is a learned action. How many times did you reach for that glass before it did not matter if it was a tumbler or a mug that you picked up without thinking about it? This is not a short-cut to the goal, it is the goal.
Bob Fleming
It does take time to build up that “muscle memory” (another common and perhaps flawed description) to shoot without thinking. How many steps did you take before you walked so smoothly and confidently that you no longer pay attention to the act of walking? We walk instinctively yet walking is a learned action. How many times did you reach for that glass before it did not matter if it was a tumbler or a mug that you picked up without thinking about it? This is not a short-cut to the goal, it is the goal.
Bob Fleming
I don't think the sub-c can do all this much by itself. Your hold has to be pretty darn good in the first place for the sub-c to polish off the sight alignment and sight picture during the trigger press.
One thing missing here is what degree you expect the sub-c to do. i.e. turning regular 10's into inner 10's(or X's), or 8's into 10's.
Still I believe there cannot be a total sub-c shot process. There has to be a point of approval somewhere in the mind. Otherwise how would you know when to put the gun down?
I watched a certain competitor, now LtC, shoot a SF gallery 100 point target that was all inside 10's. His final couple shots were definitely not sub-c judging by the beads of sweat and number of aborts.
One thing missing here is what degree you expect the sub-c to do. i.e. turning regular 10's into inner 10's(or X's), or 8's into 10's.
Still I believe there cannot be a total sub-c shot process. There has to be a point of approval somewhere in the mind. Otherwise how would you know when to put the gun down?
I watched a certain competitor, now LtC, shoot a SF gallery 100 point target that was all inside 10's. His final couple shots were definitely not sub-c judging by the beads of sweat and number of aborts.
Jack,jackh wrote:I don't think the sub-c can do all this much by itself. Your hold has to be pretty darn good in the first place for the sub-c to polish off the sight alignment and sight picture during the trigger press.
One thing missing here is what degree you expect the sub-c to do. i.e. turning regular 10's into inner 10's(or X's), or 8's into 10's.
Still I believe there cannot be a total sub-c shot process. There has to be a point of approval somewhere in the mind. Otherwise how would you know when to put the gun down?
I watched a certain competitor, now LtC, shoot a SF gallery 100 point target that was all inside 10's. His final couple shots were definitely not sub-c judging by the beads of sweat and number of aborts.
I think you are confusing subconscious with unconscious. In subconscious the actions are performed without conscious thought but that process is still something the conscious is aware of. So when it failed to break the conscious kicks in - because the subconscious has been upset by the abnormal time.
The act of shooting subconscious will not transform you into a world class shooter. You need the techniques, the hold and the very consistent shot cycle - as all of that is what programs the subconscious.
As best as I can describe it if you shoot with conscious shot release you will get more fliers, apparent snatches and generally worse scores. Sure you will get 10's and 10x's but you will be giving away points.
In your last point you forget that the subconscious act is just one part of the shot process. The shooter consciously initiates the shot but the act of pulling the trigger is subconsciously trigger by the sight alignment / picture. So the subconscious act may be just 3 or 4 seconds in each shot cycle.
Rob.
-
Steve Swartz
O.K. Ed- this now sounds an awful lot like "Point Shooting." If I'm wrong, correct my misimpression.
My understanding of point shooting differes only from your proposed "integrated subconscious process" (may I coin that term and acronym ISP for you?) is that in point shooting, the inputs to the subconscious process are primarily kinesthetic (re previous email; related to situational awareness and body "feel" with visual imput limited to narrow channel 3-D environmental situational awareness).
Kinesthetic ("point") shooting is where you train for an intuitive (better than "instincitive?" Agree with the picked nit) full-body process of using physical senses of where your hand is in relationahip to the gun in relationship to the muzzle in relationship to the target in relationship to trigger pressure delivery.
Works like a champ for Ed MicGivern shooting 6" balloons and other objects at 10-15 feet with a 38 special revolver. Side note: Ed uses a revolver because it's FASTER (no typo) than any available semi-auto.
Sounds an awful lot like what you are proposing for slow fire against a dime at 10 meters?
Ya know where I'm going with this . . .
p.s. I really like your description of "current theory" in the post above. Much better than others I've seen, thanks.
Steve Swartz
My understanding of point shooting differes only from your proposed "integrated subconscious process" (may I coin that term and acronym ISP for you?) is that in point shooting, the inputs to the subconscious process are primarily kinesthetic (re previous email; related to situational awareness and body "feel" with visual imput limited to narrow channel 3-D environmental situational awareness).
Kinesthetic ("point") shooting is where you train for an intuitive (better than "instincitive?" Agree with the picked nit) full-body process of using physical senses of where your hand is in relationahip to the gun in relationship to the muzzle in relationship to the target in relationship to trigger pressure delivery.
Works like a champ for Ed MicGivern shooting 6" balloons and other objects at 10-15 feet with a 38 special revolver. Side note: Ed uses a revolver because it's FASTER (no typo) than any available semi-auto.
Sounds an awful lot like what you are proposing for slow fire against a dime at 10 meters?
Ya know where I'm going with this . . .
p.s. I really like your description of "current theory" in the post above. Much better than others I've seen, thanks.
Steve Swartz
Wow. It's getting deep and confusing. I love it.
I think there is a problem that we don't have a language to describe what we are talking about, instinctive, intuitive, subconscious, unconscious have subtly different meanings and may mean different things to different people. Never the less, I will throw in my two cents.
I do believe that the subconscious is is capable of performing all the tasks involved with shooting a 10 with no conscious involvement. Sometimes I find myself at work with no conscious memory of showering, shaving, dressing or brushing my teeth, but I am dressed and I don't have socks on my teeth, so I must have done these things.
WRT to learning to shoot the same way we learn to eat, it seems like it would be possible (and probably more successful) but I can't think of techniques to train the subc to do it. When we learn to eat, the subc gets negative feedback when it misses the mouth (ouch! that hurts) and positive feedback when it is successful (yum! food). Both of these emotional responses are instinctive (known from birth, not learned) and fundamental to the subc.
What do we use to encourage the subc to put the hole in the center of the target? Do we just shoot and whenever it is in the right location stare at it and think warm thoughts? Do we visualize with a fuzzy grey picture of the gun rising and firing, then focus on where the shot landed? Or are you talking about taking the shot very quickly after raising the gun so the conscious mind does not have time to interfere? Would that be different than taking the shot after a fixed period of time and letting the subc make sure the sights are aligned at that moment? Does it matter?
That is were I am getting stuck on this discussion. I guess I am more of a hands on guy rather than a theorist. I need some concrete examples to understand the concept.
Steve Turner
I think there is a problem that we don't have a language to describe what we are talking about, instinctive, intuitive, subconscious, unconscious have subtly different meanings and may mean different things to different people. Never the less, I will throw in my two cents.
I do believe that the subconscious is is capable of performing all the tasks involved with shooting a 10 with no conscious involvement. Sometimes I find myself at work with no conscious memory of showering, shaving, dressing or brushing my teeth, but I am dressed and I don't have socks on my teeth, so I must have done these things.
WRT to learning to shoot the same way we learn to eat, it seems like it would be possible (and probably more successful) but I can't think of techniques to train the subc to do it. When we learn to eat, the subc gets negative feedback when it misses the mouth (ouch! that hurts) and positive feedback when it is successful (yum! food). Both of these emotional responses are instinctive (known from birth, not learned) and fundamental to the subc.
What do we use to encourage the subc to put the hole in the center of the target? Do we just shoot and whenever it is in the right location stare at it and think warm thoughts? Do we visualize with a fuzzy grey picture of the gun rising and firing, then focus on where the shot landed? Or are you talking about taking the shot very quickly after raising the gun so the conscious mind does not have time to interfere? Would that be different than taking the shot after a fixed period of time and letting the subc make sure the sights are aligned at that moment? Does it matter?
That is were I am getting stuck on this discussion. I guess I am more of a hands on guy rather than a theorist. I need some concrete examples to understand the concept.
Steve Turner
well I have been reading the posts quite interested, and as a newbie (with no real experience or technique) sounds quite attractive, and logical. Still and this goes to Ed, have you tried "leting the subC loose" in practice? and if so what happened?
If this could actually work, would it be ok for a newbie to try or do you have to be above the basics?
And to add to some of the examples, yes not everyone is a good driver, but I have noticed that sometimes the subconcious drives the car. sometimes you get back into the driving and you think "woah that was not good, what If I passed a red light" but low and behold you started the car when the light turned green. and there is no good and bad reward as in eating to train the subc.. so I do think that leting the subc do shooting is quite possible
If this could actually work, would it be ok for a newbie to try or do you have to be above the basics?
And to add to some of the examples, yes not everyone is a good driver, but I have noticed that sometimes the subconcious drives the car. sometimes you get back into the driving and you think "woah that was not good, what If I passed a red light" but low and behold you started the car when the light turned green. and there is no good and bad reward as in eating to train the subc.. so I do think that leting the subc do shooting is quite possible
-
CR10XGuest
ED:
I'll put out some thoughts here before I go back into hiding for a while. As I look back over this and it's kinda of rambling but maybe some o fth points fit. Remember my original comments, I'm a living example of the original problem you described in your first post on this. So, what's the use of holding still if I can't get the shot off. They don't give points for just standing there (unfortunatly).
First, I think the "picking up the glass" example is good except (you knew this was coming) for one small difference. When we pick up the glass to drink we have some definite feedback (and therefore stopping points) along the way. Our fingers touch the glass and meet some resistance, the glass touches our lips and we don't punch ourselved in the face, ect.
Pistol shooting for the most part is missing these important feedback points and therefore presents us with a problem which is almost exactly like a golf shot (swing). We do not have a tactical (physical point of) reference, except visual) for when we are "still" or motionless or whatever you want to call that little space of not appearing to have movement relative to the sights or the target. There's nothing to push against.
So, as I struggled with this problem, I went back to another basic question. Why did I loose so many points (for a while) when switching from open sights to dots? There must have been a clue in there somewhere.
So, we do not have much physical input to define the position of the gun and how it will react. Only our eyes and some limited feedback from the hand, arm and trigger finger, etc. But I only had two things, the dot and the target to look at so what was the problem.
Well, it eventually came to me that I had lost the fixed (well mostly or somewhat anyway) reference of the front and rear sights. And most importantly that was the feedback that let me know the gun was lined up correctly and giving me the feedback for when the trigger messed that part up. Since I used sub-six, the wobble was apparent, but the visual clues for alignment were always there (even when I didn't pay that much attention to it.
With the dot's, my reference was gone. There was just this wildly wobbing dot that would never and sill pretty much doesn't, settle down.
But I eventually learned that there were some clues to shoot or not shoot the shot.
First and most important was that when the dot was still, the only place it could go was further away from the center. The time had passed.
Second, when the dot is moving away, it will get futher away before it can come back. Do not try beat the twitch.
Third, when the dot is coming back to the center everything is in the correct feedback mode. Let the trigger stay ahead of the dot. (This is not sweeping the 10 ring by any means, just a natural progression).
Fourth, the most un-noticed but highly important part of the trigger process is that part from the time the sear trips until the trigger hits the overtravel. Make sure you can feel and complete that part of the process. It ain't over until you feel the overtravel stop.
Remember my comments about Lones statement (in the latrine at Camp Perry of all places). "Shoot the first 10 you see." I believe that he shoots for X's. And if he wanted to say shoot the first X you see, he would have said it that way. So, I believe (doesn't really matter what else exists if it works for me) that he ment shoot the first 10 you see, AND IT WILL BE AN X by the time everything is done.
Out but still reading and thinking.
Cecil Rhodes
I'll put out some thoughts here before I go back into hiding for a while. As I look back over this and it's kinda of rambling but maybe some o fth points fit. Remember my original comments, I'm a living example of the original problem you described in your first post on this. So, what's the use of holding still if I can't get the shot off. They don't give points for just standing there (unfortunatly).
First, I think the "picking up the glass" example is good except (you knew this was coming) for one small difference. When we pick up the glass to drink we have some definite feedback (and therefore stopping points) along the way. Our fingers touch the glass and meet some resistance, the glass touches our lips and we don't punch ourselved in the face, ect.
Pistol shooting for the most part is missing these important feedback points and therefore presents us with a problem which is almost exactly like a golf shot (swing). We do not have a tactical (physical point of) reference, except visual) for when we are "still" or motionless or whatever you want to call that little space of not appearing to have movement relative to the sights or the target. There's nothing to push against.
So, as I struggled with this problem, I went back to another basic question. Why did I loose so many points (for a while) when switching from open sights to dots? There must have been a clue in there somewhere.
So, we do not have much physical input to define the position of the gun and how it will react. Only our eyes and some limited feedback from the hand, arm and trigger finger, etc. But I only had two things, the dot and the target to look at so what was the problem.
Well, it eventually came to me that I had lost the fixed (well mostly or somewhat anyway) reference of the front and rear sights. And most importantly that was the feedback that let me know the gun was lined up correctly and giving me the feedback for when the trigger messed that part up. Since I used sub-six, the wobble was apparent, but the visual clues for alignment were always there (even when I didn't pay that much attention to it.
With the dot's, my reference was gone. There was just this wildly wobbing dot that would never and sill pretty much doesn't, settle down.
But I eventually learned that there were some clues to shoot or not shoot the shot.
First and most important was that when the dot was still, the only place it could go was further away from the center. The time had passed.
Second, when the dot is moving away, it will get futher away before it can come back. Do not try beat the twitch.
Third, when the dot is coming back to the center everything is in the correct feedback mode. Let the trigger stay ahead of the dot. (This is not sweeping the 10 ring by any means, just a natural progression).
Fourth, the most un-noticed but highly important part of the trigger process is that part from the time the sear trips until the trigger hits the overtravel. Make sure you can feel and complete that part of the process. It ain't over until you feel the overtravel stop.
Remember my comments about Lones statement (in the latrine at Camp Perry of all places). "Shoot the first 10 you see." I believe that he shoots for X's. And if he wanted to say shoot the first X you see, he would have said it that way. So, I believe (doesn't really matter what else exists if it works for me) that he ment shoot the first 10 you see, AND IT WILL BE AN X by the time everything is done.
Out but still reading and thinking.
Cecil Rhodes
-
Steve Swartz
Cecil:
Agree with most; the combination of
- Lack of tactile/kinesthetic feedback for initiating signal (it's visual)
- Different threshold of acceptability for shot release (higher degree of precision required); and
- Primacy of fine motor control vice gross control in movement
combine to make ISP shooting somewhat impractical for Air and Free pistol.
However that's only my "shoot from the hip" =8^) opinion for now!
Cecil also great (but slightly semantically different) description of the traditional settle-accept-subconscious release method. Amazing how many people never "get" the idea that if you break the shot at the moment of perfect sight picture you will shoot way too late . . .
Steve
Agree with most; the combination of
- Lack of tactile/kinesthetic feedback for initiating signal (it's visual)
- Different threshold of acceptability for shot release (higher degree of precision required); and
- Primacy of fine motor control vice gross control in movement
combine to make ISP shooting somewhat impractical for Air and Free pistol.
However that's only my "shoot from the hip" =8^) opinion for now!
Cecil also great (but slightly semantically different) description of the traditional settle-accept-subconscious release method. Amazing how many people never "get" the idea that if you break the shot at the moment of perfect sight picture you will shoot way too late . . .
Steve
Steve,Steve Swartz wrote: Amazing how many people never "get" the idea that if you break the shot at the moment of perfect sight picture you will shoot way too late . . .
Steve
But that is the crux of the problem and why the majority of people have trouble accepting the subconscious shot release principle. We all know that every now and again the sights just behave perfectly and sit in the right place for ages. In those circumstances a manually released shot will still end up in the right place. People therefore perceive the ultimate answer is to repeat that process, especially since the subconscious shot release is counter inuitive to most people.
I hate to admit it but until very recently I would have classed myself as one of those 'ludites', and I'm still only learning to perfect subconscious release.
Rob.
[quote="RobStubbs"][quote="Steve Swartz"]
Amazing how many people never "get" the idea that if you break the shot at the moment of perfect sight picture you will shoot way too late . . .
Steve[/quote]
Steve,
But that is the crux of the problem and why the majority of people have trouble accepting the subconscious shot release principle. We all know that every now and again the sights just behave perfectly and sit in the right place for ages. In those circumstances a manually released shot will still end up in the right place. People therefore perceive the ultimate answer is to repeat that process, especially since the subconscious shot release is counter inuitive to most people.
I hate to admit it but until very recently I would have classed myself as one of those 'ludites', and I'm still only learning to perfect subconscious release.
Rob.[/quote]
Can we have conscious "cheeken finger" , or subconscious "cheeken finger", or both?
Amazing how many people never "get" the idea that if you break the shot at the moment of perfect sight picture you will shoot way too late . . .
Steve[/quote]
Steve,
But that is the crux of the problem and why the majority of people have trouble accepting the subconscious shot release principle. We all know that every now and again the sights just behave perfectly and sit in the right place for ages. In those circumstances a manually released shot will still end up in the right place. People therefore perceive the ultimate answer is to repeat that process, especially since the subconscious shot release is counter inuitive to most people.
I hate to admit it but until very recently I would have classed myself as one of those 'ludites', and I'm still only learning to perfect subconscious release.
Rob.[/quote]
Can we have conscious "cheeken finger" , or subconscious "cheeken finger", or both?
An interesting thread...
1/ started me thinking about the terminology used, and the problems with the meanings attached to the words used - which got me writing out a 'short' explanation on some of the principles being discussed. In its own way a road to ruin, as there is (probably) not a 'short' explanation in 'words'
2/ following the thread has reinforced the belief that reading is no substitute for one-on-one/hands-on coaching - the unavoidable misunderstanding from the written (and spoken?) word cannot be avoided
3a/ knowledge is not the same as performance - perhaps even a hinderance.
3b/ knowledge (and chasing) of higher level techniques is not much use if the basics are deficient
4/ chasing 10s is an interesting approach - chasing a small 'group' consistently in the same place, and then moving the sights might be a better objective.
Regards to all,
(a flu struck) Spencer
1/ started me thinking about the terminology used, and the problems with the meanings attached to the words used - which got me writing out a 'short' explanation on some of the principles being discussed. In its own way a road to ruin, as there is (probably) not a 'short' explanation in 'words'
2/ following the thread has reinforced the belief that reading is no substitute for one-on-one/hands-on coaching - the unavoidable misunderstanding from the written (and spoken?) word cannot be avoided
3a/ knowledge is not the same as performance - perhaps even a hinderance.
3b/ knowledge (and chasing) of higher level techniques is not much use if the basics are deficient
4/ chasing 10s is an interesting approach - chasing a small 'group' consistently in the same place, and then moving the sights might be a better objective.
Regards to all,
(a flu struck) Spencer
-
Guest
-
Bob Fleming
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 8:25 pm
- Location: Hunt County, Texas
NEWS FLASH: You are already shooting from the subconscious when you flinch!
Chicken finger, flinch and several other bad things are from the subconscious. It is completely illogical to flinch when discharging an Air Pistol or Rimfire yet this is a common problem. The subconscious does not utilize logic, it only reacts without taking the time to decide anything. Great care must be exercised when training the subconscious or it will not provide the desired results. Master the fundamentals before trying to rely on shooting without thinking.
The subconscious, or whatever the correct nomenclature may be, cannot judge good and bad. It is reinforced by emotional responses (this is only my uneducated theory) and cannot tell the different between good emotion and bad emotion. This is why the thought “another 10, everything is normal” works so well. Unfortunately, the thought “DAMN!” also reinforces what the subconscious just did and since those kinds of emotions are often very strong, the subconscious is very strongly rewarded for the wrong sort of performance.
Ignore bad shots and enjoy the good shots.
Bob Fleming
Chicken finger, flinch and several other bad things are from the subconscious. It is completely illogical to flinch when discharging an Air Pistol or Rimfire yet this is a common problem. The subconscious does not utilize logic, it only reacts without taking the time to decide anything. Great care must be exercised when training the subconscious or it will not provide the desired results. Master the fundamentals before trying to rely on shooting without thinking.
The subconscious, or whatever the correct nomenclature may be, cannot judge good and bad. It is reinforced by emotional responses (this is only my uneducated theory) and cannot tell the different between good emotion and bad emotion. This is why the thought “another 10, everything is normal” works so well. Unfortunately, the thought “DAMN!” also reinforces what the subconscious just did and since those kinds of emotions are often very strong, the subconscious is very strongly rewarded for the wrong sort of performance.
Ignore bad shots and enjoy the good shots.
Bob Fleming
Bob,
The subconscious has been likened to a three year old child. It cannot differentiate good and bad and reinforces whatever it's told hence the 'think only positive' comments. It also loves repetition in the same way kids will watch the same cartoon hundreds of times or want you to read the same story over and over. The repetition is comforting because it's familiar and that's a very good way to try and picture the subconscious (or at least it helps me 'visualise' it)
Rob.
The subconscious has been likened to a three year old child. It cannot differentiate good and bad and reinforces whatever it's told hence the 'think only positive' comments. It also loves repetition in the same way kids will watch the same cartoon hundreds of times or want you to read the same story over and over. The repetition is comforting because it's familiar and that's a very good way to try and picture the subconscious (or at least it helps me 'visualise' it)
Rob.
-
Steve Swartz
Rob:
Ya nailed it- that "3 year old chold/repetition" thing is *exactly* why dry fire against blank target while focusing only on front sight and perfect trigger is so darned valuable!
We have to *train* our brain to *ignore* the aiming bull (for practical purposes). We have to "train* our brain that once teh settle is achieved, trust the autopilot!
Ed- very valuable and thought provoking thread! Guess Scott gave up on the "best thread of the month" contest. Ya got my vote! Anyone who can get a stubborn guy like me questioning my deepest-held underlying principles on a regular basis like you do is certainly (as we would say in Texas) "A Good Guy To Have Around The Campfire!"
Steve
Spencer- Flu? Get better soon.
Ya nailed it- that "3 year old chold/repetition" thing is *exactly* why dry fire against blank target while focusing only on front sight and perfect trigger is so darned valuable!
We have to *train* our brain to *ignore* the aiming bull (for practical purposes). We have to "train* our brain that once teh settle is achieved, trust the autopilot!
Ed- very valuable and thought provoking thread! Guess Scott gave up on the "best thread of the month" contest. Ya got my vote! Anyone who can get a stubborn guy like me questioning my deepest-held underlying principles on a regular basis like you do is certainly (as we would say in Texas) "A Good Guy To Have Around The Campfire!"
Steve
Spencer- Flu? Get better soon.
-
Ed Hall
Frustration mounts...
Lots of good points are being brought out, but none seem to grasp what I’m trying to develop. Even though I keep thinking I’m describing the aspects I’d like to address, the feedback I’m receiving is proving my failure to transmit what seems so clear to me, and not that complicated. As Spencer has suggested, perhaps this discussion can only really work as a face-to-face encounter. But, since this is our medium, I’ll put forth more writings and see where they lead:
Point shooting conjures up the thought of only using kinesthetics. Why can't we involve all the senses? I'm not saying to disregard the visual cues from the sights. What I am suggesting is that instead of insisting on so many judgmental indicators in order to allow the shot to progress, we turn the subconscious loose to use all senses at its disposal, as well as all motor skills to satisfy our request for a hole in the ten ring to appear.
We always seem to be fighting for perfect sight alignment, minimum hold, in line trigger application, bore parallel gripping pressures, etc. Because of our need to perfect all these portions of our process, we have to rely on everything to be perfect and fit all together to get the result we're searching for. This sets us up with a judgment call. We end up actively trying to get a shot off, while passively trying to watch everything and consciously trying to judge if we should keep going, with the bail out of aborting the shot if everything isn’t within “specs.” We seem to be engrossed in performing the perfect routine as defined by our conscious studies. What if we considered the perfect shot as the one performed by the subconscious with no conscious intervention?
What if we let the subconscious align the sights, place them where needed and fire the shot without starting out by performing some of the task consciously. What if, when we set up the aligned sights on target and then give the go ahead to the subconscious, we’ve turned it over too late? So now the subconscious has to work with second best, because it missed out on best. I know it would sound scary at first to give that much power to the subconscious, but what if? Have you ever had those really early shots that are a true surprise because you weren’t quite ready to turn things over to the subconscious but the gun fired? Barring the ones where you weren’t even in your aiming area, what did the results look like?
I frown on any conscious corrections because it throws off the subconscious, but the subconscious is already making corrections to everything. That’s how you hold on aim - you point toward your area and the developed motor skills work the fine adjustments to keep moving you back toward the center of your hold.
So, no, I’m not saying to quick draw and fire. I am suggesting that the subconscious be allowed to take on more of the shot process. Give it the go ahead prior to making everything consciously perceived perfect. Like was mentioned before, everything we see is history. It already happened. If we align the sights and place them in the center of our aiming area and then turn everything over to the subconscious, all the perfection we worked for has passed. The subconscious will now have to wait for “next time.”
I’m also not trying to recommend dropping all the work toward perfecting technique. But I am suggesting allowing the subconscious to study outside the restrictions we consciously build when we decide what perfect technique is. IOW, instead of just dry firing while trying to keep the sights perfect, play with the trigger a bit while just watching and see what various activities actually do to the sights. Your subconscious will capture all that data. Additionally, if you are concentrating on keeping the sights aligned while you slowly bring back the trigger, can you truly detect whether they are being disturbed by the trigger and corrected via another mechanism without letting go and watching what is happening?
As to newer shooters, what should they be doing to aid in moving things to the subconscious? All the same things that are already being taught about the fundamentals, but with an open mind to studying what effects different activities have on the sights. Personally, I feel the trigger is number one, numeral uno, the thing that is, the most important of the fundamentals. As I said earlier, I believe “Trigger trumps sights.” I also believe that the sights are there to show you how pure the trigger is - The sights are a trigger purity indicator...
Thanks again to all for the continuing thoughts.
Take Care,
Ed Hall
http://www.airforceshooting.org/
http://www.starreloaders.com/edhall/
Lots of good points are being brought out, but none seem to grasp what I’m trying to develop. Even though I keep thinking I’m describing the aspects I’d like to address, the feedback I’m receiving is proving my failure to transmit what seems so clear to me, and not that complicated. As Spencer has suggested, perhaps this discussion can only really work as a face-to-face encounter. But, since this is our medium, I’ll put forth more writings and see where they lead:
Point shooting conjures up the thought of only using kinesthetics. Why can't we involve all the senses? I'm not saying to disregard the visual cues from the sights. What I am suggesting is that instead of insisting on so many judgmental indicators in order to allow the shot to progress, we turn the subconscious loose to use all senses at its disposal, as well as all motor skills to satisfy our request for a hole in the ten ring to appear.
We always seem to be fighting for perfect sight alignment, minimum hold, in line trigger application, bore parallel gripping pressures, etc. Because of our need to perfect all these portions of our process, we have to rely on everything to be perfect and fit all together to get the result we're searching for. This sets us up with a judgment call. We end up actively trying to get a shot off, while passively trying to watch everything and consciously trying to judge if we should keep going, with the bail out of aborting the shot if everything isn’t within “specs.” We seem to be engrossed in performing the perfect routine as defined by our conscious studies. What if we considered the perfect shot as the one performed by the subconscious with no conscious intervention?
What if we let the subconscious align the sights, place them where needed and fire the shot without starting out by performing some of the task consciously. What if, when we set up the aligned sights on target and then give the go ahead to the subconscious, we’ve turned it over too late? So now the subconscious has to work with second best, because it missed out on best. I know it would sound scary at first to give that much power to the subconscious, but what if? Have you ever had those really early shots that are a true surprise because you weren’t quite ready to turn things over to the subconscious but the gun fired? Barring the ones where you weren’t even in your aiming area, what did the results look like?
I frown on any conscious corrections because it throws off the subconscious, but the subconscious is already making corrections to everything. That’s how you hold on aim - you point toward your area and the developed motor skills work the fine adjustments to keep moving you back toward the center of your hold.
So, no, I’m not saying to quick draw and fire. I am suggesting that the subconscious be allowed to take on more of the shot process. Give it the go ahead prior to making everything consciously perceived perfect. Like was mentioned before, everything we see is history. It already happened. If we align the sights and place them in the center of our aiming area and then turn everything over to the subconscious, all the perfection we worked for has passed. The subconscious will now have to wait for “next time.”
I’m also not trying to recommend dropping all the work toward perfecting technique. But I am suggesting allowing the subconscious to study outside the restrictions we consciously build when we decide what perfect technique is. IOW, instead of just dry firing while trying to keep the sights perfect, play with the trigger a bit while just watching and see what various activities actually do to the sights. Your subconscious will capture all that data. Additionally, if you are concentrating on keeping the sights aligned while you slowly bring back the trigger, can you truly detect whether they are being disturbed by the trigger and corrected via another mechanism without letting go and watching what is happening?
As to newer shooters, what should they be doing to aid in moving things to the subconscious? All the same things that are already being taught about the fundamentals, but with an open mind to studying what effects different activities have on the sights. Personally, I feel the trigger is number one, numeral uno, the thing that is, the most important of the fundamentals. As I said earlier, I believe “Trigger trumps sights.” I also believe that the sights are there to show you how pure the trigger is - The sights are a trigger purity indicator...
Thanks again to all for the continuing thoughts.
Take Care,
Ed Hall
http://www.airforceshooting.org/
http://www.starreloaders.com/edhall/
more thoughts and perhaps a parallel
Ed, (et al)
I have enjoyed, pondered, evaluated and tried to relate to posts in this thread. Several analogies have popped up that bear consideration (water glass etc.). Another may well be playing a musical instrument. As a clarinetist, many things happen when I play. My fingers all know the locations to be in to produce certain notes. For new passages in difficult pieces, I must slow down the tempo and establish the "pattern". This definitely requires "conscious" effort. Through repetition, subconscious starts assuming the operative control. Mind you, there are fleeting visits from the conscious reminding me that the passage is up-coming and that it is crucial to initiate the "pattern". I may even remind myself of tricky fingering combinations. However, the real player is an alter ego when it gets down to performing. With enough practice....it goes pretty well most of the time. Not unlike shooting???
Anyway, the point of this response is to underscore the interplay of conscious/subconscious. Establishing the pattern is very conscious. Execution is very (the desired result) subconscious. At the same time, the conscious must monitor and call the subconscious into focus....without taking over the process. You are quite correct in the challenge of this format to carry on such an esoteric discussion. But, since we love the sport and suffer much introspection in isolation, it is truly a joy to have the opportunity to "kick this stuff around" with kindred spirits no matter the circumstance. Let's keep at it!
CraigE
I have enjoyed, pondered, evaluated and tried to relate to posts in this thread. Several analogies have popped up that bear consideration (water glass etc.). Another may well be playing a musical instrument. As a clarinetist, many things happen when I play. My fingers all know the locations to be in to produce certain notes. For new passages in difficult pieces, I must slow down the tempo and establish the "pattern". This definitely requires "conscious" effort. Through repetition, subconscious starts assuming the operative control. Mind you, there are fleeting visits from the conscious reminding me that the passage is up-coming and that it is crucial to initiate the "pattern". I may even remind myself of tricky fingering combinations. However, the real player is an alter ego when it gets down to performing. With enough practice....it goes pretty well most of the time. Not unlike shooting???
Anyway, the point of this response is to underscore the interplay of conscious/subconscious. Establishing the pattern is very conscious. Execution is very (the desired result) subconscious. At the same time, the conscious must monitor and call the subconscious into focus....without taking over the process. You are quite correct in the challenge of this format to carry on such an esoteric discussion. But, since we love the sport and suffer much introspection in isolation, it is truly a joy to have the opportunity to "kick this stuff around" with kindred spirits no matter the circumstance. Let's keep at it!
CraigE
further observation.....
Sorry I neglected to include this in the above post:
No acceptable results will happen without proper basis of fundementals for techniques. As I see it, this thread presumes a knowledge of fundementals techniques so that the conscious/subconscious are able to evaluate the efforts. MHO, CraigE
No acceptable results will happen without proper basis of fundementals for techniques. As I see it, this thread presumes a knowledge of fundementals techniques so that the conscious/subconscious are able to evaluate the efforts. MHO, CraigE