Behavioral Metrics

[Steve Swartz]

A couple of people asked me about this whole "behavioral focus" thing after my post about goals for the USASNC.

FWIW this "Behavioral Focus" philosophy basically says since you can only control things that you personally do, your training effort should be focused on improving your performance on those things.

Simply put, a hole in the paper you can't control. Your trigger action you can control. So you should focus on the behavior of "trigger action" and not even measure or worry about "holes in paper."

Granted, the whole purpose of training is to get better "holes in paper" - just like in football/soccer it is to "Score a Goal"- but you should focus your efforts on "Alignment" and not "Shooting A Ten." As in football/soccer- you don't train on "Scoring More Goals" you train on "Kicking the Ball in Such A Way As to Defeat the Goalie" which are two very different things.

O.K.

So what the heck do we measure, if we agree that measuring "Holes in Paper" doesn't really help us improve our performance through training?

1. Learn to recognize what the proper behaviors are
2. Establish performance thresholds that you can recognize and evaluate
3. Measure perforamnce against those behavior performance thresholds

For each training session/match, you must keep track of:

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)

"PANE" as it were. Personally, I track PAN and then subtract P+N from total shots to get E; I don't want to re-enforce ERRORS I want to focus on PERFECT behaviors.

So now we can develop USEFUL and MEANINGFUL metrics for tracking progress and focusing efforts:

Swartz Purity Index: SPI = P/T (Larger is Better; 0<SPI<1)
Swartz Efficiency Index: SEI = (P+N+A)/T (Larger is Better; 0<SEI<1)
Swartz Stupidity Index: SSI = E/T (Smaller is Better; 0<SSI<1)

Yeah this may seem way too "Cerebral" to some.

However, it's really simple in practice:

- Focus on performing the right technique
- Track your ability to perform the right technique
- Scores will follow

(p.s. I use a "clicker" in my pocket to track "N" events. I write tick marks for P's and A's. The E's I just blow by . . . don't want to focus on Es . . . and the Holes in Paper + As gives me total attempts. T-(P+A+N)=E so it is actually easier to track than scores. AND much more beneficial to track than scores!)

[Steve Swartz]

Slight error in my description above . . . what was it?

[Guest]

could it be one of the many typos? or the BS "schwartz" thing?

[2650 Plus]

Suggest concentrate on performing the technique CORRECTLY [ Just add the one word to the lines.] Remenmber the key word KISS if all else fails. Or if you prefer just move the highlighted word to its correct place. Good Job Steve. Good Shooting Bill Horton

[tleddy]

I agree with 2650... Good Job. Steve.

I recently acquired a Noptel Trainer; it allows one to test what they think they saw in the shot process. It is brutal...

... but that is just fine. One may experiment with different techniques and have instant feed-back on the shot and the history of that shot. Learn the positive requirements to improve, apply them and see the change (note: not always an improvement - that is where the experimentation comes in.)

Tillman

[toznerd]

Wow,

That is a lot of "Cerebral" information to keep track of during a match or training. I have actually attempted to go in the opposite direction, and remove as many conscious thoughts from the process of releasing a shot. If I can get to "stable follow-through" as the last vestige of conscious thought as the process begins, I generally shoot inside my area of hold, without those pesky reminders that I am a human. It is still an exhausting process, but seems to be working.

surculo ergo sum

toznerd

[RobStubbs]

Wow,

That is a lot of "Cerebral" information to keep track of during a match or training. I have actually attempted to go in the opposite direction, and remove as many conscious thoughts from the process of releasing a shot. If I can get to "stable follow-through" as the last vestige of conscious thought as the process begins, I generally shoot inside my area of hold, without those pesky reminders that I am a human. It is still an exhausting process, but seems to be working.

surculo ergo sum

toznerd

I'm not sure if Steve was suggesting you keep track of all those things in a match, but I would personally suggest that is not what you want to do - unless you have designated that match as a training match rather than one of the more important matches.

In important matches you should be replicating the processes you've trained and just focus on the proper, and good aspects and put aside anything negative - until your post match review. If you find trouble remembering things at the end then make brief reminder notes, but forget about them during the shooting.

Rob.

[Steve Swartz]

During TRAINING (it's very simple to do in a match as well, but I agree with Rob's point).

- Buy a "clicker" (counting device that adds up a tally every time you depress the trigger

- Put a pencil and piece of paper at the bench

- Put the "clicker" in your non-shooting hand

- Shoot
-- If a nominally acceptable shot, then CLICK
-- If an abort, then mark a tally sheet for an abort
-- If a perfectly executed shot, then mark tally sheet for a perfect shot
-- If a PTFGD event, ignore it

So why do this?

Just like a coach asking you tell them where the front sight was as the shot broke (what is the purpose of that? to force you to concentrate on the front sight of course), you are tracking perfect executions. In order to track perfect (or nominal executions, you must be concentrating on what?

You must be concentrating on what those behaviors are.

I have found that once I started doing this, I was paying much more attention to:

- How good my alignment was
- How well I executed my trigger control (release and execution)
- How well I was focusing on the front sight
- The quality of my settle and my ability to recognize a "good" settle
- The quality of my approach to the target

In other words, by

FOCUSING ON BEHAVIORS

oddly enough, I found I was

FOCUSING ON EXECUTING BEHAVIORS PROPERLY

As a side effect my scores took a significant bump off my previous plateau.

Oh and all the "cerebral stuiff" (like addition and subtractio to calculate the three metrics) are done AFTER you are finished training. Use the metrics to track whether or not your performance is improving.

Or not.

Just by paying attention to BEHAVIORAL stuff your scores will improve whether you choose to analyze your performance or not.

[2650 Plus]

I sugest that we should pay very close attention to a pearl of wisdom posted by TOZNERD in this thread. Notice particulary the comment about simplifing . I would say Simplify, Simplify, Simplify. Reduce your thinking to the minimum required to fire a controled shot and think the same thing on every shot, in the rythem at which you actually fire the shot. Make that " your best shots" Per Lanny Bassham as in the ultimate you concept. I hope this makes sense as I've been enjoying a Jim Beam and coke tonight. Good Shooting Bill Horton

[Steve Swartz]

Settle-Alignment-Front Sight-Trigger

If you are keeping score, for yourself OR anyone else, you ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION to the important stuff.

Focus on the right stuff.

First, ya gotta know what the right stuff is.

[Steve Swartz]

p.s. I never got a whole lot of value out of Lanny and all his "cerebral" stuff . . . !

[RobStubbs]

p.s. I never got a whole lot of value out of Lanny and all his "cerebral" stuff . . . !

I guess it's the same with all written material, some you like and can follow the style and concepts, others just doesn't hit the spot. I personally like the majority of Lanny's writings and I think there's a lot of value in most of what he says.

Rob.

[Guest]

+1 on Lanny Basham, proven theory and methods.

[Fred Mannis]

I hope this makes sense as I've been enjoying a Jim Beam and coke tonight. Good Shooting Bill Horton

Maybe, maybe, as a chaser. But not in the coke! Waste of good bourbon :-)

Fred

[Steve Swartz]

Sorry forgot to include the "TIC" emoticon.

[Mark Briggs]

Many good points here, Steve. One thing that I practice is positive reinforcement of aborts. If I abort I congratulate myself on having exercised excellent judgement. For me an abort is almost as good as a "perfect" shot delivery because it reaffirms that I'm really watching what I'm doing and have the ability to recognize when something isn't working.

Also, when a bad shot happens I also take a moment to reflect on it and see if there was a piece of information available to me some time in the shot process that should have triggered the abort decision. I'm guilty of often trying to take a disaster and force it into a nominal performance. Analysis of poor shots focuses not on what I did wrong, but when I should have noticed things were wrong. Utilizing this technique has effected a noticeable improvement in the rate of occurrence of real stinker shots.

[Haleva]

One thing that I practice is positive reinforcement of aborts. If I abort I congratulate myself on having exercised excellent judgement. For me an abort is almost as good as a "perfect" shot delivery because it reaffirms that I'm really watching what I'm doing and have the ability to recognize when something isn't working.

Would you consider an abort that should have produce a shot (and due to chicken finger did not break) a good delivery ?

Personally I would have like to avoid these aborts . In the bigger picture it causes a waste of energy on void attempts .

[Steve Swartz]

Then the "Purity" metric is your Key Performance Indicator.

I agree that an aborted PTFGD shot is not as good as a "Perfectly Executed" shot.

But it is certainly better than tossing the shot out there- no matter where the hole ends up.

[RobStubbs]

Would you consider an abort that should have produce a shot (and due to chicken finger did not break) a good delivery ?

Personally I would have like to avoid these aborts . In the bigger picture it causes a waste of energy on void attempts .

It's a good delivery on 2 points - one you still have a shot in the gun which can still be a 10. And 2 you didn't 'force' the shot off knowing you were struggling. It does however identify an underlying problem, but that is one to work on at another time (although of course dry firing in the match can be used to try and overcome the fear of pulling the trigger).

Rob.

[bryan]

steve, you been put to the test yet? long 6 weeks.

"Simply put, a hole in the paper you can't control. Your trigger action you can control. So you should focus on the behavior of "trigger action" and not even measure or worry about "holes in paper."

So who controls the holes in paper?

(Swartz Hole In Target detector)=S.H.I.T detector (less is best)


why trigger action, it is not your trigger that moves the shot off, its that little guy in the back of your head that says Im not happy, time for a xyz, then your ultamate you goes, doh.
so the better you hold it, the smoother you squeeze, the more severe you will break your wrist to shoot this xyz.

If your little guy is happy, (subconcious) then you might find yourself jerking a hole into the middle, then in disbelief to why it was not a 7, just a lucky shot! you then proceed to shoot a 7 to ensure you can.

I think it is very important to formulate a shooting plan to be in control of yourself. maybe somewhat simpler than yours, with the more commonly used terms. but once you are in control, you can start to focus on the important things, not jotting down what you are doing, the idea is to get into a flow.
take notes when you finish.

dont know if reinforcing an aborted shot is so good, regardless of why, within reason, it was a failure to prepare for the shot properly. just put it down without much thought about it and start again, properly.

jimmy in coke is fine, long as it is the real thing, none of that no sugar stuff.