TargetTalk

Oh fer cryin out loud I thought jpg's were kosher . . . o.k. will get to it tomorrow some time- contact me at leslieswartz@verizon.net if you are interested in a monthly or per session document to help you organize your training effort.

Sorry.

Congratulations Steve - this topic has 'hit the ton' with a hundred replies

Spencer

If only Steve could translate it into a good match score.

Anonymous wrote:If only Steve could translate it into a good match score.

Guest, whether Steve is right or wrong, don't fall into the trap of thinking that "knowing how to shoot a good score" is the same as "being able to shoot a good score" (or vice versa).

A couple thoughts from a newcomer perspective (3 years of shooting), working hard to learn and improve:

1) Ed Hall wrote: "...Remember, I believe the best results come from making shooting tens a natural action. To achieve that, you must understand there is a subconscious interaction with the physical world and allow it to take place, instead of using the subconscious only as a playback mechanism for a consciously constructed program..."

This reminds me of what Andy Moody told me at a Zins-Moody Clinic last year. He said, only half kidding, that he could never be a law enforcement officer because just when the sights align and he sees what he wants to see... the gun always goes "bang". I think he was referring to the subconscious!

2) Steve Swartz wrote: "... As long as your fundamentals are solid (settle, align, perfect trigger manipulation) all you need to do is just get the heck out of the way of the shot . . ."

Over the last three years there have been three strings (I shoot Bullseye) where I've been "in the shooting bubble" and gotten "...out of the way of the shot..." as Steve says. As I replay those strings in my mind, I remember my sights as being huge as a highway billboard. I have no recollection of seeing anything - anything - other than the sights. They were HUGE, and I was really only an observer standing there in front of this huge black billboard looking at the front sight through a huge notch.

If I just visualize any string of fire, I can see the target, frame, berm, everything. Needless to say, those three strings were my best so far.

3) At the above referenced clinic, I also remember Brian Zins saying there is no set way to approach the stance, hold, etc. His words went something like "...if you consistently shoot tens by holding the pistol upside down and squeezing the trigger with your pinky, then that's what you need to do..."

Hope this helps other novices like myself.

Guest:

Great points . . . and the way you put it raises a VERY critical and MISUNDERSTOOD issue in shooting at any level.

- Perfecting the shot process and allowing the subconscious to do the hard work (and everything that goes along with that fundamental premise; just the way you put it above)

PLUS

- Specific technique "behaviors" (specifics about how each individual executes the behavior "grip" for example) will vary between individuals; and both are "right" in the way they are executing the technique

EQUALS

- How do we ever know which specific "behavior" (e.g. should the inside of my elbow be vertical or horizontal for me to get the best results for me?) is "BEST?"

*Not* a "rhetorical question."

How do *you* know which version of "proper technique" is *best* for you?

And isn't that kind of an important thing to know?

Spencer wrote:Congratulations Steve - this topic has 'hit the ton' with a hundred replies

Spencer

100x yawn...

Steve are you trying to arrive at your optimum technique by using some sort of empirical data? Are you taking the fundamental elements of the shot process back apart once learned?

From the original post:
a) Events where PERFECT behaviors were executed and shot was delivered
b) Events where an ABORT was properly executed
c) Events where NOMINAL (acceptable) behaviors were executed and shot was delivered
d) Events where an ERROR was made and a shot was released that should have been aborted
e) Total Number of Shots Attempted (T)

Is a) "I shot a ten."? b) "I lowered."? c)"I shot a nine."? d) "I should have lowered, shot an 8."? and e) "I raised this dang gun How many times?"?


Let's go back to my analogy of threading the needle.
Hold the needle steady
Line up the thread
Push (press) it through

These are what you measure to focus your training effort/improve your performance:

And this is how the pieces fit

jackh wrote:Steve are you trying to arrive at your optimum technique by using some sort of empirical data? Are you taking the fundamental elements of the shot process back apart once learned?

From the original post:
a) Events where PERFECT behaviors were executed and shot was delivered
b) Events where an ABORT was properly executed
c) Events where NOMINAL (acceptable) behaviors were executed and shot was delivered
d) Events where an ERROR was made and a shot was released that should have been aborted
e) Total Number of Shots Attempted (T)

Is a) "I shot a ten."? b) "I lowered."? c)"I shot a nine."? d) "I should have lowered, shot an 8."? and e) "I raised this dang gun How many times?"?

Jack, my reading of Steve's PANE training process is that the shot values you refer to in your example are not known during training (no looking in the scope). After training is completed, you can go back and see whether the shot you noted a P was in fact a 10, or perhaps the one you called an E was a 10. I do this by video recording the shots and playing them back after I am finished shooting. I have just started this and will try it for a while to see if it is worthwhile.

Fred and All:

This is a very important point; one that I didn't figure out until I had been using this for a while.

Let's say your technique has plateaued because you have an "ingrained error" i.e. a bad habit that you perform fairly consistently.

Initially- you will see a disconnect between your evaluation of a "perfect behavior" (man, that shot looked and felt "solid!") and the outcome (hmm- why was that a 2:00 9?).

You need to plot the shots- and if you see a definite trend (my "behaviorally good shots" are all 9.2 at 235 degrees) you have to - I know this is counter-intuitive- move your sights so that the "behaviorallly good" shots are centered in the deep ten ring.

For a while at least- until you break your bad habit- there will be a disconnect between your "holes in paper" and your "behaviors."

Once you clean up your bad habits, (this will take a while) you will leap off your plateau and settle in on a new level of performance.

But during the transition you will SUFFER!

Fred:

Sorry I do agree with your previous post (about what the role of PANE exercise is and how you are using it)- I just agreed with you "in my head" and jumped right to the next point.

Also for Bryan/Bill/Jack/Russ(Guest) benefit I need to restate that the purpose of focusing on PANE (executing behaviors) is that by concentrating on performing the things *you do* (behaviors) perfectly and properly, you can determine where you need to focus your training efforts.

Not: "I'm shooting a lot of nines. I need to shoot more tens."

But: "I need to focus on my front sight."

One will get you nowhere- the other will show you the way to improve your performance.

If we don't "pay attention to" (measure? perhaps) those things we ourselves are actually doing (focus-alignment-trigger- etc.) how are we ever going to learn how to do them better?

Steve, I am a novice pistol shot and also not nearly as skilled at annunciating things as the rest of you, but here it goes!

Steve asked: "...How do *you* know which version of "proper technique" is *best* for you?..."

Well - at my skill level that's really easy: I immediately see an enormous improvement! At your skill level the marginal improvement (or degradation) is, I imagine, much more subtle and hard to detect.

I can't imagine that anybody, at any skill level, wouldn't benefit from the Zins-Moody Clinic. The biggest thing I learned was how everything hinges on the trigger. You can have perfect everything but if the trigger disrupts alignment its going to be an ugly shot.

My largest incremental improvement thus far was going to a roll trigger. Start it moving outside perfect sight picture. It takes a leap of faith for the novice to do this, but it works perfectly when I've got the courage to do it!

Yes, Yes, Yes !!!! Start the finger moving first then work to simplify the thought process by eliminating every thought that is unrelated to firing the perfect shot. Study your best shots learn to repeat them at will. Ignore your bad shots as you are not trying to shoot bad shots and by ignoring them you do not burn in a high level of concern about the possibility of firing another. Think in a positive manner about how you are going to fire the next shot and refine the thought process along with refining the shot sequence during training periods, but prior to a competition stablize your thought process and shot delivery sequence by practicing what works best for you. I despise negatives but there is one I am willing to accept. Dont count down your score while shooting. Count at the end of the match, [ See, I did manage to refrase to the positive] Good Shooting Guest and all. Bill Horton

Guest:

There is a big difference between "sight picture" (if you wait for a perfect sight picture your shot will always break to the outside) and "Alignment." Perfect alignment is required. Perfect sight picture is actually a Bad Thing.

Of course, Perfect trigger is a PREREQUISITE for everything else.

This much *everybody* agrees on (but of course- not everybody actually puts in the work or discipline to make it a reality).

The recent umm "discussions" have centered around the "religious" question of "do you let the trigger drive the sights into alignment, or do you let the alignment signal the trigger?"

While not critical to the training plan I have presented, yes, I fall on the "focus on making your alignment perfect, and the trigger will happen subconsciously" school of thought.

This of course applies to International Pistol Shooting (this forum) and not Bullseye shooting (which is a different forum and different techniques apply).

Our host created the Bullseye forum to reduce the amount of friction between "BE Speak" and "ISSF Speak" but you know how that goes . . .

Steve, You seem to be saying that the fundamentals change and that what applies in BE is different from "INTERNATIONAL". Again we must disagree. There is only a minor difference in technique and absolutely none in the fundamentals, Do all those things that allow a stiller gun, Apply a steadily increasing presure to the trigger that causes the pistol to fire without distrubing stillness and sight allignment, And work to achieve the highest possible perfection in sight allignment before the pistol fires. When this is done properly follow through is assured and the shooter can call his / her shot with real accuracy. No witch craft is involved just hard work perfecting the steps necessary to accomplish all of the above. Good Shooting Bill Horton

Steve Swartz wrote:
This of course applies to International Pistol Shooting (this forum) and not Bullseye shooting (which is a different forum and different techniques apply).

Steve.
Not clear to me, from your comments, which techniques/behaviors apply to ISSF shooting, and which to Bullseye. Since I continue to shoot both sports, I'd appreciate your comments on which behaviors to train for the two sports.

Fred

(Dot in scope) does not equal (sight alignment)

(Sustained fire) does not equal (slow fire)

Let me remind everyone that Hershel Andersons' 2680 was shot with a square post front sight and a square notch rear sight and that ain't so different from ISSF shooting. Trying to develope a wedge issue is how the polititions win elections not how we shoot tens. I am also reminded of Russ comment about people who own international type guns but shoot club level scores. Good Shooting Bill Horton