TargetTalk

If you believe you can't you won't, but just simply believing you can with out doing anything else won't make it happen either.

alb wrote:

Ed Hall wrote:... I was suggesting that he could choose to remain at a higher level.

Ed, I don't know what that means. It seems to suggest that having a single 2-sigma event for 20 shots means that he has reached that higher level in the first place. It also seems to imply that shooting master class scores is a simple matter of making a conscious choice to do so. I somehow doubt that this is what you intended to say.

I will agree that a new high score does not mean it is the new average. There is no mathematical way that can ever occur after the very first score. But new high scores that are significantly better than average are an awakening of the elements needed to produce them. It is better to examine those elements that were different and incorporate those that improved the outcome. Often, just the proof that one can do this well is enough to move up. We need these boosts to remind us of our ability to improve, as opposed to being reminded by all the outside influences that shooting is tough, "or everyone would be firing perfect scores."

Moving up doesn't have to be by small increments, as though we're "sneaking up" on a new peak. I have personally improved my own performance significantly in a number of instances by simply changing my attitude. In fact, that's how I moved up to High Master Outdoors in Bullseye. (I have also allowed my attitude to contribute to plateaus and valleys.) In my cases, the attitude was not a driving factor in a change of training. The difference occurred solely at the mental focus level. As to disappointment, it is a good motivator. If you are not disappointed with your performance, why improve? In fact, I'd say the biggest impediment to improvement with a vast majority of our shooters is that they are happy with their performance level. And, that is OK. But, again, if you're happy, why improve?

As an aside, small improvements gradually occurring can sometimes be the result of not wanting to leave a particular trait behind. We sometimes get too tied to some aspect to let go of it so we can move on. Often, we've reached (or are near) the limit of a particular portion of our routine. The only way to make the next step is to drop that aspect that is limiting us. Let me provide a bold example:

I'm sure we all pretty much agree that with open sights the front sight has to be in focus. How far can we go by looking at the target instead? Sixty per cent? Seventy per cent? It's hard to say, but we know that looking at the target is a limiting technique. But, what if we're afraid to lose that seventy per cent by letting go of the target? Will it be that easy to switch? What then happens, when we finally make the switch and it helps? Probably, a bold score increase. We should embrace that change and move forward, accepting that we can now shoot at a higher level.

alb wrote:I've re-read this entire thread and I can't find a reference anywhere to "he's not human." I hope you weren't attributing this to me, since that isn't what I was saying at all.

That was not a reference to AlB. My apologies for any confusion. I try to write my posts to encompass a variety of things and address all readers, although I will sometimes address an individual. I try to make that pronounced by starting with their name. The references to "not being human" have been supplied to me over the years to describe many of our top shooters in the BE world, such as Mario Lozoya, Jason Meidinger, Brian Zins, Steve Reiter, Darius "Doc" Young and others who shoot so much better than the "normal" competitors. The inference is, "You're human, and humans can't perform that well. It's inhuman to be that good."

alb wrote:In the mean time, until I can find that next incremental improvement, I practice my wrist-strengthening exercises, my hold exercises, my dry-firing and my shooting, in the hope that I can do what I'm currently doing just a little bit better.

This sounds good as an approach to incremental improvement and is great if you only have a little ways further to progress. I suggest a different approach for those that want to improve with greater increments, especially those who aren't firing Master level scores: Learn, through concentrated study, what techniques provide the greatest reward. Learn how to replicate those traits. Make changes to see how they affect things and when something makes a big improvement, latch onto it for awhile to see how you can make it permanent. And, as I said before, don't underestimate your capabilities with too much "realism." Your subconscious will think that's all you want to achieve.

And, be careful of your practice - only practice those techniques that you want to ingrain - preferably, those that produce center tens. Leave any limiters behind...

Take Care,
Ed Hall
U.S. Air Force Competitive Shooting Teams
Bullseye (and International) CompetitionThings

Try this on for size:

I've shot about 100 rounds today, and I'm scoring much worse. Not too far off of my old average, but fliers are creeping back in that I had previously eliminated (flying out to a six maybe once every twenty shots, when it used to be a seven). Hardly unexpected as we've discussed, but still annoying.

So I kept shooting after the first twenty. A bit of improvement, my hold steadied. I can attribute that to warmup, so no big deal.

Then I kept improving through each twenty, with occasional flashes of brilliance (48s and 49s). Then I plateaued, still feeling bad.

And then finally, everything swirled back together and I called three tens and a close nine in a row, easy as pie. This with an aching shoulder and eyes going bleary.

So here's my guess: Like riding a bicycle or learning how to get up on water skis, it's hard as heck until you do it once. And then it's still hard, but now that you know what it feels like, you can recognize that feeling when you chance upon it again. Keep practicing, and you get to that sweet spot more quickly each time.

So, rather than just keep beating my head against bad shooting, next time I'm going to keep searching until I find that spot more quickly. It's there, I just have to remember to go find it rather than wait for it to show up.

H.

Ed Hall wrote:I will agree that a new high score does not mean it is the new average. There is no mathematical way that can ever occur after the very first score. But new high scores that are significantly better than average are an awakening of the elements needed to produce them. It is better to examine those elements that were different and incorporate those that improved the outcome. Often, just the proof that one can do this well is enough to move up. We need these boosts to remind us of our ability to improve, as opposed to being reminded by all the outside influences that shooting is tough, "or everyone would be firing perfect scores.

As an engineer who has studied accuracy and how to measure it, including generating Monte Carlo simulations with upwards of 500,000 shots, I can assure you that the computer can and does produce such results (like 189/200) over short strings purely by random chance. There simply are no "mental aspects" to a 2-dimensional gaussian distribution. There are, however, randomly occurring 2- and 3-sigma events. Like it or not, that is reality.

If you didn't conciously change anything, and that 2-sigma event hasn't suddenly become a 1-sigma event, then most likely it was due to 'luck', not "an awakening of the elements" needed to produce it. Perhaps, in the final analysis, this is the only difference in our two perspectives.

Ed Hall wrote:Moving up doesn't have to be by small increments, as though we're "sneaking up" on a new peak. I have personally improved my own performance significantly in a number of instances by simply changing my attitude. In fact, that's how I moved up to High Master Outdoors in Bullseye. (I have also allowed my attitude to contribute to plateaus and valleys.) In my cases, the attitude was not a driving factor in a change of training.

When I was competing in archery back in the 1980's, my scores plateaued at around 270/300 (barely 'expert' in bullseye terms). So, in an effort to try for an incremental improvement, I switched from the high-wrist hold that I had been taught to a low-wrist hold (change in technique). Over the next couple of months, my scores went up to an average of 295/300 ('high master' in bullseye terms), and continued to improve after that. The mental aspects, such as confidence in my new ability, followed closely behind -- they didn't precede it.

When I started shooting bullseye last May, I was averaging 750/900 with my .22 with a high score of 768. Then I traded in my Ruger for a used Pardini (change in equipment). A week and a half later, I shot an 832. I've been stuck at that level ever since. The person that I bought the Pardini from had been shooting expert scores, but he switched to a Model 41. He's been shooting in the 750's ever since. The experience hasn't done anything positive for his confidence.

I purchased a .45 last August, and my scores with it rapidly improved with it for a while. Then they plateaued at around 795/900. In an effort to find an incremental improvement, I switched to a 'roll' trigger. Not being one to do things half-way, I switched to a roll trigger on the Pardini also. My scores for both guns went into the tank. After 2 months and over 13,000 rounds of ammunition, I gave up on the roll trigger and switched back to a crisp trigger, and my scores immediately went back to where they were before. Perhaps I didn't give it a long enough trial, but it's hard to know sometimes when enough is enough. Still, I don't think it was a waste of time -- I believe I did learn something about trigger control from the experience.

I truly believe that I can be shooting master-class scores by next October, and that I'm probably only one incremental improvement away from it. You'd better believe that I'm constantly searching for it, including coaching and reading everything I can find on the subject, and trying new things. In the meantime however, I'm not about to give up practicing.

Picking up those 54 points necessary to go from master to high master may very well be purely a mental thing, but it seems to me that going from sharpshooter or expert to master is more a matter of technique and/or equipment.

Ed Hall wrote:As to disappointment, it is a good motivator. If you are not disappointed with your performance, why improve? In fact, I'd say the biggest impediment to improvement with a vast majority of our shooters is that they are happy with their performance level. And, that is OK. But, again, if you're happy, why improve?

There's an old saying, "Winners never quit, and quitters never win ... but, if you never win and you never quit, you're an idiot!"

It all depends on how you define 'winning'. Yes, disappointment is a great motivator, but if all you ever experience is disappointment, then it's a great motivator to quit.

Regards,

Al B.

I think I see where you're going, but let me posit this: you seem to make changes and then see what happens, rather than see what is going wrong, and trying to change that.

For example, I'm pretty much aware of why I miss on every shot. I don't really throw any shots that I call a ten and then discover an eight, but I see plenty of shots where I can say my wrist twitched, I snatched the trigger, my hold just plain moved away, etc. etc.

So as far as equipment goes, I only think it is useful inasmuch as it can help you correct the problems you know you already have. My IZH is more accurate, as far as the barrel goes, than any human can hold. However the trigger, grip, balance, etc. may all be contributing factors as to WHY my wrist twitches, or the sights move while I pull the trigger.

I think where you have to draw the line is after working on a particular aspect for a while, say pulling the trigger without movement in the sights, and you're just not having any luck, it's time to change equipment or technique. But I don't think changing those things randomly in a search for results is the best method.

H.

I'll give you my paradigm:

As a dedicated pistol shooter (BE & Intl) of 15 years, I never thought I'd end up here but I am at a point where I just don't care anymore. As a result, when I do shoot, I am shooting better than I ever have. My air scores are back in the 570's, Free in the 540's (but I only do it 1x/month).My Monday night BE league has a 290 + average, BE is on the edge of 2600, etc etc. I have other interests that are taking over and I am seriously under motivated in pistol. I am operating somewhere between careless and carefree. I have no second thoughts about pulling the trigger, meanwhile, where am I pointing? ...bang ...oh yeah there. 10.

The worry, is that at some point, instead of exercising what has become a mere formality in my mind, I will start to care again, and with that comes apprehension and concern over outcome and the inevitable slump.

The worse you want it, the worse it is.
This is the mental aspect after you understand and have mastered the physical aspects.

regards

Houngan wrote:I think I see where you're going, but let me posit this: you seem to make changes and then see what happens, rather than see what is going wrong, and trying to change that.

Actually, I try not to think too much about what is going wrong, only about what I can be doing to improve. Thinking about what you are doing wrong puts an image in your mind of doing exactly what you want to avoid. It's a form of mental rehersal.

That being said, when I use a SCATT trainer, I can see the speed of my muzzle accelerating during the last 100 to 200 milliseconds. This suggests a need to improve my trigger control. So, after reading a multitude of articles extolling the virtues of 'roll' triggers, I decided to try it. It didn't seem to make any difference as far as SCATT was concerned, but my live-fire performance went seriously south. I have discussed this with a couple of friends of mine who are high masters. I would compare the difference between a roll trigger and a crisp trigger as being like the difference between a manual transmission and an automatic transmission. Ultimately, the manual transmission gives you more control. But I don't know anyone who has ever driven a manual transmission who didn't experience a serious case of 'clutch foot' the first time he was out alone in heavy traffic.

I tried doing an excercise where I would attempt to press the trigger part-way and hold it at a point just before it would break, in order to develop a feel for that type of trigger. This was similar to the exercise where you hold your car stationary on the side if a steep hill using only the clutch and the accelerator. I've taught several people to drive a manual transmission this way and it always seems to take less than a minute for them to develop the correct feel, after which they no longer have a problem with it (note: you should stop this excercise if you start to smell the clutch burning!).

I've also noticed that when the .45 doesn't go completely back into battery, which causes it to not fire when I'm expecting it to, I get a tremendous flinch in my wrist. I get this same type of flinching at other times as well, and it seems almost like the trigger is 'catching'. This doesn't happen at all when I dry-fire. I also experience this same 'catching' sensation from time to time with the crisp trigger, both on te .45 and on the .22.

Perhaps during live-fire, the sear isn't engaging the hammer hooks at exactly the same point each time due the recoil, and this may be causing subtle changes in the feel of the trigger. With a roll trigger, there is considerably more engagement surface, so more variation is possible, which would explain why I've had more difficulty with it. Unfortunately, I haven't developed any theories yet on how to deal with this.

Also, with the .45, my arc-of-movement on a slow-fire target actually goes out to the 7-ring, so I do wrist strengthening exercises as well as hold exercises to try to reduce my arc-of-movement.

I suspect that one of the differences between my dry-fire results and my live-fire results is that the pistol might be turning slightly in my grip during recoil -- more so with the .45, so I've just recently started concentrating on gripping the pistol more from the sides than from front and back. I haven't had much practice with this yet (so it isn't yet an ingrained habit), and it also seems to have an effect on my operation of the trigger.

Houngan wrote:But I don't think changing those things randomly in a search for results is the best method.

The point is, I don't make changes randomly, I make changes directed at improving what I perceive to be my most significant weaknesses, after a considerable amount of analysis and research. If the change feels right, I stick with it and try to make it a subconcious part of an overall 'gestalt', controlled by the feedback that I get by watching the sight. The reason I stuck with the roll trigger for so long is that it felt right. Unfortunately, my scores didn't reflect this. I may return to it at some future date, however.

Regards,

Al B.

We're on the same page, then. For the .45, there are two types of movement after the shot, one is a flinch, the other is the motion to return the gun to the aiming point. Which way is your wrist deflecting?

H.

Houngan wrote:We're on the same page, then. For the .45, there are two types of movement after the shot, one is a flinch, the other is the motion to return the gun to the aiming point. Which way is your wrist deflecting?

My .45 recoils up and to the right (the barrel has a left-hand twist). When I experience the wrist spasm, it moves down and to the right (I'm left-handed). I don't believe that it is a recoil-induced flinch. I was starting to experience the same thing with the .22 when I adjusted the trigger to give it a roll. I also used to experience the same problem with my Ruger, which has a naturally 'creepy' trigger. While I have never had a dud round with the .45, I've had lots of duds with the .22, including with the roll trigger adjustment, and the sight never seems to move on the target at all when this happens.

I really think it's most likely related to sear engagement. If the sear engages the hammer hooks more deeply once in a while than at other times, even of it's only a couple of thousandths of an inch difference, it can feel like a 'catch' even though it isn't. And I never feel anything like that during dry-firing.

Al B.

alb wrote:

Houngan wrote:We're on the same page, then. For the .45, there are two types of movement after the shot, one is a flinch, the other is the motion to return the gun to the aiming point. Which way is your wrist deflecting?

My .45 recoils up and to the right (the barrel has a left-hand twist). When I experience the wrist spasm, it moves down and to the right (I'm left-handed). I don't believe that it is a recoil-induced flinch. I was starting to experience the same thing with the .22 when I adjusted the trigger to give it a roll. I also used to experience the same problem with my Ruger, which has a naturally 'creepy' trigger. While I have never had a dud round with the .45, I've had lots of duds with the .22, including with the roll trigger adjustment, and the sight never seems to move on the target at all when this happens.

I really think it's most likely related to sear engagement. If the sear engages the hammer hooks more deeply once in a while than at other times, even of it's only a couple of thousandths of an inch difference, it can feel like a 'catch' even though it isn't. And I never feel anything like that during dry-firing.

Al B.

Hmm. I'd almost lean towards a timing issue,since it started with the roll trigger. A bit late, and the trained "return" motion kicks in too early. I haven't really messed with this too much in BE, but it's a common issue in IPSC when trigger timing goes off a bit.

H.

I can't possibly write all the stuff I'd like to addressing all the information from the last several posts without taking all day. I also try to only suggest positive approaches, although I have been caught trying to identify errors in technique. I will only hit a couple things briefly for now. Maybe I'll have time later to go further in depth.

AlB wrote:My .45 recoils up and to the right (the barrel has a left-hand twist). When I experience the wrist spasm, it moves down and to the right (I'm left-handed). I don't believe that it is a recoil-induced flinch.

These two things are not related and the recoil direction is due to the elbow orientation, not the barrel twist. A right-handed shooter recoils to the left and up.

The roll trigger has to be manipulated in a smooth manner completely from start to finish. Trying to stage it is, in effect, a multiplication of the hesitating trigger in a crisp style mechanism. Many shooters think they are being smooth, by applying pressure very slowly, but a really slow operation will cover up the true workings.

Learn to operate the trigger without looking at the sights during DRY FIRE. ENSURE the gun is EMPTY and oriented SAFELY. Make the movement determined from start to finish. Notice how it feels and how long (actually, how short) a time it takes to complete. Make it a determined operation, not just a yank. After you have learned how it feels and have made it a short determined manipulation, move to the sights and see what happens when you use the same trigger operation. Use the visual feedback from the sights to refine your trigger finger placement, using the same operation. Work with that trigger operation for your dry fire and then use the same one for your live fire.

I placed an exercise on line a couple years ago that you might like to review. I have had some good feedback from some BE shooters who tried it. I would like to invite TT readers to test the exercise and provide feedback as well, if any are interested. The exercise is located at:

2006 New Year's Training Exercise

I must run for now. I hope to offer some more material in reference to the last few posts, but it might be awhile before I compose it.

As always, all comments welcomed...

Take Care,
Ed Hall
U.S. Air Force Competitive Shooting Teams
Bullseye (and International) Competition Things

Ed Hall wrote:The roll trigger has to be manipulated in a smooth manner completely from start to finish. Trying to stage it is, in effect, a multiplication of the hesitating trigger in a crisp style mechanism. Many shooters think they are being smooth, by applying pressure very slowly, but a really slow operation will cover up the true workings.

Ed,

Thanks a lot for your suggestions with regard to the roll trigger. Your description of the problem makes a lot of sense. I did find myself trying to press the roll trigger more and more slowly the more I shot with it in an effort to gain better control over it. I will definitely give your exercise a try. Hopefully it isn't something that will take forever for me to become proficient at.

Ed Hall wrote:These two things are not related and the recoil direction is due to the elbow orientation, not the barrel twist. A right-handed shooter recoils to the left and up.

You are, of course, correct when you say that recoil direction is determined by elbow orientation, and that the two actions that I described are not related. As I said in my previous post, I don't think I'm experiencing a recoil-induced flinch. However, barrel twist does influence the direction of recoil, at least to some extent. Allow me to quote from, "Understanding Firearm Ballistics" by Robert A. Rinker, pg. 68:

"Torque Twist
Some weapons also have a noticeable torque twist. For readers that have never experienced it, the gun wants to turn or rotate around the barrel. This is experienced mostly with handguns like the .44 magnum that have a strong recoil and lightweight rifles with high velocity cartridges. The torque twist is an opposite reaction to the rifling in the barrel, which is forcing the bullet to turn one way as it turns the gun the opposite way. It would be proper to say that it was Newton's third law in operation once again."

My Les Baer .45 was apparently designed with right-handed shooters in mind, since the torque-twist force on a left-hand twist barrel is to the right, opposite to the direction that the elbow bends on a right-handed shooter. Also, most of us have more strength curling our wrists in than curling them out. So the torque-twist force on a left-hand twist barrel is also opposite to the stronger muscles in the forearm. When I eventually get the gun re-barreled (hopefully not for a long time), I'll specifiy a right-hand twist. I don't believe that it is really causing me problems though.

Again, Thank you,

Al B.