TargetTalk

My point exactly Isabel .... " the people who make the Olympics, with rare exceptions, have both". By both I mean the desire, accompanied by a natural talent that cannot be matched by time and effort alone.

Over the last two months three new members joined our Club. They have completed firearms safety course, been granted provisional handgun licenses, and are now able to compete in Club competitions using Club guns. ( walther sp22's. ..cheap, relatively accurate, but TERRIBLE triggers )
Shooting in only his second competition last weekend one of the shooters shot a 50 in the precision round . Five shots within 30mm.. !
The others had hits and misses.....which one does everyone think will have a more successful ( score wise ). journey , and why would one person with virtually no experience be able to do what most shooters will never achieve given a lifetime of coaching and positive mental training ? ..natural ability.
Whether this young man continues to show the same enthusiasm in twelve months time is an unknown to me, but I am fascinated by such a special talent
The Russians have been doing it for years....identify talent, and focus training/coaching resources on these people.
That's no reflection on everyone else, nor does it diminish their right to try for the stars.

Personal Best Score Reported from Australia Competition Gold Coast, 9 Jun 2012
http://midwestacademyconsulting.wordpre ... -jun-2012/

Is 99 Talent or The New set of Knowledge in progress?

What you're saying is like saying that someone who has a naturally easy time through primary school (12th grade) will be the most successful in college.

Well, being someone who had easy A's through primary school, effortlessly easy, and then dropped out of college because I couldn't cut it, I have to say that just because it's something you have Witnessed, doesn't make it true. In fact, how many of those shooters you've seen with 'natural ability' have shot at the international level?

The person who performs the best, has the best work ethics. People with "natural ability" don't have to work for it, and thus plateau easily, get frustrated easily and quit easily. On the other hand, the person that has to Work at it from the start doesn't get frustrated when they plateau, they just work through it. Well, so long as they have the drive to be shooting (or doing whatever it is they're doing).

I remember listening to Matt Emmons about this and he's on the same page as everyone else. With no "natural" ability himself (self claimed), but prior experience in working hard to perform at a high level, he just worked hard to be where he is now.

I'd hazard to say that "natural ability" is the single biggest hurdle a shooter could have if they want to shoot at an elite level.

Holy cow. A subject that both Brian and Russ agree on. The world must be coming to an end ;)

Hello Russ. I would like to think that it is a combination of both natural talent and knowledge.

Hello Brian. My experience has shown that a lack of natural ability is a greater hurdle than being talented.
Not continuing, by putting in the hard yards, is not the personal domain of gifted people. I would consider more drop by the wayside that don't have talent than those that do.
In the end, I feel that the final outcome will be more rewarding for a coach to identify natural talent and nurture it, than to plod along trying to help a less talented shooter reach their potential.
At the end of the day, everyone will make an individual assessment regarding this discussion.

"Hello Russ. I would like to think that it is a combination of both natural talent and knowledge."

The way how your mind is preconditioned is a problem. Each student who accomplished 8 hours of initial training with me made a big jump in score performance regarding their condition as a talent. I do not consider myself as a talented athlete, which is why I created the system to beat the Russian selection process and it is working pretty well regarding the age requirements. All my students are at the age from 35 to 67 years old and are making progress that was not available to them for last 3 or 20 years of practice.

Good for you Russ....keep up the good work.

So please use discretion when you will make advice next time for less experienced athletes.

Here's a piece of advice for beginners, if someone gives you advice that you don't agree with, such as making sweeping statements on your future suitability, yet they know little about you, go get a second opinion. They might be judging your ability based on their inability.

Brian M wrote:What you're saying is like saying that someone who has a naturally easy time through primary school (12th grade) will be the most successful in college.

Well, being someone who had easy A's through primary school, effortlessly easy, and then dropped out of college because I couldn't cut it, I have to say that just because it's something you have Witnessed, doesn't make it true. In fact, how many of those shooters you've seen with 'natural ability' have shot at the international level?
. . . .

I would say your example is the exact opposite of shooting, Brian. When in primary school one is "held by the hand" through the learning process. Students' learning is more on the teacher than the student. When in college, it is the students' responsiblilty to learn. When one first starts to shoot, it's an individual effort. As one improves, coaching becomes an option and required if one makes the national team. The better one shoots the more help is available.

Freepistol, unfortunately that is a function of the bad system we have here in North America. People don't get coaching until they get to a certain place which is usually a plateau, from there they get coaching and often have to unlearn the bad things that got them to that point.

I know we've had this discussion on here before but in North America shooters seem to expect coaching for free and as such even when they c
Get coaching they treat it as such ( free advice). Very few other sports provide free coaching. I know many if us here in c
Canada now charge for coaching, even if it's more of a token charge that maybe covers gas and a coffee. Since starting to actually charge, people actually start to seek it out earlier. I think it might be cause when you give it for free people are afraid they are taking advantage and new shooters won't ask, when you charge it's a business transaction and they feel if they pay they are entitled.

I myself am looking at starting archery, and there are classes that charge $100 for six group lessons 1hr each or private lessons at $40/hr.

One off the biggest challenges after taking my class is to get influenced by the people (some coaches or athletes) with a preconditioned mindset or limit of their current set of knowledge and experience regardless of their involvement in this sport.
How do you recognize which advice you should follow?
I’m providing three months of support after my class to help my new students make the new set of knowledge permanent. I still do not have complete control of the situation; there is always the chance that someone who appears as authority may influence his performance. This is why I’m offering a few further steps in continuing education, such as the advanced level and Master class. All levels are offered with Free evaluation and 3-12 months of my support.

Russ wrote:One off the biggest challenges after taking my class is to get influenced by the people (some coaches or athletes) with a preconditioned mindset or limit of their current set of knowledge and experience regardless of their involvement in this sport.

... or possibly just with different ideas to yours.

I presume that you are not claiming your methods to be the only "correct way".

There are a lot of ways to improve my system. :)

Richard H wrote:Freepistol, unfortunately that is a function of the bad system we have here in North America. People don't get coaching until they get to a certain place which is usually a plateau, from there they get coaching and often have to unlearn the bad things that got them to that point.

I know we've had this discussion on here before but in North America shooters seem to expect coaching for free and as such even when they c
Get coaching they treat it as such ( free advice). Very few other sports provide free coaching. I know many if us here in c
Canada now charge for coaching, even if it's more of a token charge that maybe covers gas and a coffee. Since starting to actually charge, people actually start to seek it out earlier. I think it might be cause when you give it for free people are afraid they are taking advantage and new shooters won't ask, when you charge it's a business transaction and they feel if they pay they are entitled.

I myself am looking at starting archery, and there are classes that charge $100 for six group lessons 1hr each or private lessons at $40/hr.

You usually need a very large population base to economically support an program that is large enough so coaches can actually make a living coaching. A lot of the best shooters in the US came out of government supported programs like the AMU. Most of these people will help you for free.

Shooting is not a big money sport, and my advice to anyone contemplating becoming a professional shooting coach is "Don't give up your day job."

"Don't give up your day job."
No one is talking about this option yet. At the same time if I have option to spent time with my family instead to go to the shooting range to work more hours for free, I will choose to stay home.

Practice is not the process of only making holes in the paper.
It is process of development of character and personal development!

Russ wrote:There are a lot of ways to improve my system. :)

That's not quite what I was suggesting Russ.

I have never witnessed your methods in action so cannot say they are good or bad.

What I am suggesting is that there might be other different methods that could be as effective, or even more effective.

I have recently been in the extremely fortunate position of being able to witness, at close quarters, some of the greatest pistol shooters in the world working with their coaches. Admittedly this was in the end-game of their preparation for one of the biggest matches of their lives rather than in a transition from good to elite. I am now more convinced than ever that there is no single correct way to shoot, train or coach.

"What I am suggesting is that there might be other different methods that could be as effective, or even more effective."
You are welcome to share those more effective methods.

"I am now more convinced than ever that there is no single correct way to shoot, train or coach."
My goal is simple: 570 in Air Pistol can be a reachable goal for any healthy and motivated individual in a period of time within one year.
570 in AP can secure a position inthe National finals in many countries.
To score 570 in AP for a healthy and motivated individual, they do not need any talent, just a correct set of knowledge, motivation and hard work!
My method is working model. Do you have something better in your pocket?

Russ wrote:"What I am suggesting is that there might be other different methods that could be as effective, or even more effective."
You are welcome to share those more effective methods.

I am not the coach of World and Olympic Champions, but their methods do seem to work pretty well.

I would guess that they would be as loathe to publish their methods as you seem to be.

I wonder what chewie49 (the original poster) is making of all this...