TargetTalk

I can tell John B. you are more the international shooter than strictly bullseye, totally different game as im sure you know. I use a scope, but not as a crutch for my mind, just to verify my zero is good for a shot or two if im on a range where it may be off a little, my way works for most every National champion that ive watched or read about. Id love to see you argue this concept with Jim Henderson or B.Zins, ive watched both win matches without a scope on their box at all If something works for you then by all means do it but there is more than one way to high scores, lets just agree to disagree on this one.

GunRunner wrote:I can tell John B. you are more the international shooter than strictly bullseye, totally different game as im sure you know.

What is the difference?

Surely the goal in both parts of the sport is to shoot as many perfect shots as you can, resulting in a winning score.

Why should a technique used by the overwhelming majority of top ISSF shooters, checking that every shot is where they expected it to be, not also be valid for other parts of the sport.

OK those at the top of ISSF shooting will not be using a scope, they'll be using a monitor, but they'll be using it for the same reason.

GunRunner wrote:I can tell John B. you are more the international shooter than strictly bullseye

I am legitimately curious why you would say this.

Gentlemen (John, David), you have been presented with a challenge, please don't dodge it. GunRunner presented an empirical evidence -- Zins and Henderson don't use a scope when shooting bullseye matches, an argument against the paramount importance of it -- would you address this? Do you dispute its validity? If not, how do you explain it? Conventional or international is a moot point here, clumsily made by GunRunner, it is not really important. Both Zins and Henderson are as good free pistol shooters as there are in this country (with Zins once winning an Olympic selection match).

First, the reference to international was to say some of the matches are very different and if that is your primary sport im sure you do things that have helped you before Some of those if im correct give you 60 minutes to shoot 60 shots im sure many scope more in that kind of match.
imo international is much tougher than bullseye so I meant no disrespect at all. I also didn't say Henderson and zins never use a scope, just that I have shot with them at matches when they did not. They both do use them most times as I do to scope a shot or two to confirm the zero is correct at 50 yards and unless they are having zeroing issues you will not see them look after each shot. There is no time to scope each shot in timed and rapid fire so in them I scope after the first string of timed and adjust zero if needed and im done with the scope. Scopes are a needed tool just I don't use them as some posters here do, we all do what works best for us.

here is a article Jim wrote which includes his thoughts on the use of a scope, if your interested.
http://www.bullseyepistol.com/henderson.htm

I've been told that Zins, at least, can see the holes without a scope.

shaky hands wrote:Gentlemen (John, David), you have been presented with a challenge, please don't dodge it.

I don't think we need to. Look at the results sheet from the Olympics, ISSF World Championships, World Cups etc and tell me which shooters in the 10m Pistol 50m Pistol or 25m Pistol precision stage do not look at their monitor after every shot.

But habit is not necessarily determinative. It does not mean causation. If one can be at the level of US champions (which is, admittedly, short of the level of Olympic champions) and not use scoping, may be it is not that important after all.

Rover, Zins can see .22 holes at 50 yards? Can he walk on water too?

"People don't like to scope every shot because it's HFW."

Hello John Bickar,

You've got me scratching my head on this one; just what does "HFW" stand for anyway? Thanks!

David Levene wrote:

shaky hands wrote:Gentlemen (John, David), you have been presented with a challenge, please don't dodge it.

I don't think we need to. Look at the results sheet from the Olympics, ISSF World Championships, World Cups etc and tell me which shooters in the 10m Pistol 50m Pistol or 25m Pistol precision stage do not look at their monitor after every shot.

Monitors? Hard not to see one when its right in front of you. International is a different sport.

GunRunner wrote:Monitors? Hard not to see one when its right in front of you. International is a different sport.

Many shooters will place their monitor so that it's hidden by their shooting arm. It saves trying to watch the shot go through the target.

Looking through a well placed decent scope is hardly any more effort. Indeed, when I was shooting internationally there weren't any electronics.

Why do you think that techniques to improve precision shooting would be different between the various forms of the sport.

In his book with Antal the former Standard pistol world record holder (583) Skanaker advised against scoping in 150 second series ("it wastes valuable time") but advised for it in free pistol.

David Levene wrote:

GunRunner wrote:Monitors? Hard not to see one when its right in front of you. International is a different sport.

Many shooters will place their monitor so that it's hidden by their shooting arm. It saves trying to watch the shot go through the target.

Looking through a well placed decent scope is hardly any more effort. Indeed, when I was shooting internationally there weren't any electronics.

Why do you think that techniques to improve precision shooting would be different between the various forms of the sport.

Because we are not machines, what works for some doesn't for others,. My view is and I said before, if your confidant in your ability and your zero then why scope? the fired shot is gone and nothing can change that if you shot a X then great but if you shot a 6 then many will get anxious or upset and might shoot another bad shot. Ive read many things from top shooters in both sports and many don't think its a good idea to scope every shot, seems the book by Basham said that too.

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I occasionally have a hit where I didn't call it.

That tells me it's time to do a little dry firing before proceeding.

I know that I did that because I look at the target.

GunRunner wrote:imo international is much tougher than bullseye so I meant no disrespect at all

No offense taken. I have been shooting bullseye for 25 years and probably have equivalent experience and accomplishments on either side (bullseye/international). There are a lot of parallels.

GunRunner wrote:here is a article Jim wrote which includes his thoughts on the use of a scope, if your interested.
http://www.bullseyepistol.com/henderson.htm

Thanks for that. Curious if his thought process has changed after shooting a lot more international over the past 3 years.

mr alexander wrote:You've got me scratching my head on this one; just what does "HFW" stand for anyway?

That's a TLA that Erich Buljung was fond of. The H stands for "hard" and W stands for "work".

This was a great thread. Good strong opinions with no insults. Ice job everyone.

My experience is this. I've only been shooting two years. Made master rather quickly and have been working for over a year to go High Master. One thing I was doing on rare occasion is not look down the spotting scope on a slow target, if it has been going so well. If I know that show was a 10 or X, I consider not looking for the next round. As I evolve I see that this breaks from the routine and is not appropriate. I then started scoping every slow fire shot. Slow fire is not a 10 round match, it is one round match, shot ten times in a row. Each 1 round match should be consistent.......Each set up, system, trigger pull, follow through,stance, and use of equipment like a spotting scope should remain th same. I'm focused on keeping using the scope. It has not provided match pressure, only the opposite.

Again, great topic.

Murph wrote:This was a great thread. Good strong opinions with no insults. Ice job everyone.

My experience is this. I've only been shooting two years. Made master rather quickly and have been working for over a year to go High Master. One thing I was doing on rare occasion is not look down the spotting scope on a slow target, if it has been going so well. If I know that show was a 10 or X, I consider not looking for the next round. As I evolve I see that this breaks from the routine and is not appropriate. I then started scoping every slow fire shot. Slow fire is not a 10 round match, it is one round match, shot ten times in a row. Each 1 round match should be consistent.......Each set up, system, trigger pull, follow through,stance, and use of equipment like a spotting scope should remain th same. I'm focused on keeping using the scope. It has not provided match pressure, only the opposite.

Again, great topic.

IMO you really only developed a shot process, that can be done in many ways and provide the same results. Slow fire isn't 10 matches as you said, its really 30 in that scenario. So if you scope the first shot or two and they are on call and your zero is good then to me its less stressful to concentrate on the next shot rather than process one that is already in the history books. So since there is good evidence on both ways working for some of the best shooters then it lies in what works best for you.

I've had a high master tell me you're not a man unless you scope each slow fire shot! His words not mine. Too me, I think folks are combining two separate things- scoping a shot as part of your shot process vs. the other separate issue of match pressure, which there are lots of different ways in handling that. To me scoping shots is invaluable as calling shots is part of my shot process. If you suffer through match pressure (don't we all?) and deal with it by not looking through the scope, well it could be something that holds you back. just my .02 and i agree a great topic

This is what beats me: if you must scope to learn to call your shots, can't you stop scoping once you have in fact learned that skill? Or is learning to call your shots a lifetime process that never comes to fruition?

[/quote]... the fired shot is gone and nothing can change that if you shot a X then great but if you shot a 6 then many will get anxious or upset and might shoot another bad shot.[/quote]


Gunrunner,

I understand the point you are making here. Yes, once the shot's fired, it's gone. And, there's nothing that can done about it

afterwards. I do scope every shot in Slow Fire. If it's a 10, I give myself a mental "attaboy". Then I try to repeat the same process

when executing the next shot. True, if some see that a scoped shot is a 6, many will get anxious/upset and may fire another 6 or

even worse. Here's where they need to get a grip on themselves. I agree with those who say that shooting is a mental game. After

getting that 6, one needs to rely on self discipline, motivation, determination, and self control while preparing for the next shot.

Keeping your emotions in check is of great benefit here. When I see a bad shot through the scope, I ask myself 2 questions:

"Why did this happen?" and "What corrections are you going to make for the next round"? Unlike some, I do not use my scope to

keep a mental tally of my score as I'm shooting. Strictly use it to confirm the call and make adjustments in my technique, if it's

necessary to do so. Regarding your score, here's what a sports psychologist once told me to keep in mind while on the firing line:

"Focus on the fundamentals and the score will take care of itself!".



John Bickar: Okay, so now I know what "HFW" stands for. Now what does "TLA" mean? And please, use fully spelled out words in your

reply. Thanks!