TargetTalk

No coach around here at all

jackh wrote:No coach around here at all

Then you've got a lot of hard work to teach yourself to be a self-coach.

Even then, with only one student (yourself), I'd be surprised if you would get the experience of identifying different problems to enable you to maximise your shooting potential.

A good coach doesn't just find all of the tools/techniques he needs in books.

Good luck in your search for improvement.

jackh wrote:No coach around here at all

Jack why would any coach even bother answering on this board anymore, only to be attacked.

Just follow the collective wisdom, hold your pistol steady and think happy thoughts.

I fear this place is going the way of the bullseye forum. They weren't happy enough fighting amongst themselves there they brought it here

Hi Cecil,

Thanks for dropping my name again, but I don't think I feel as passionate as once upon a time about what I preach. Maybe that's due to my current attitude, which does need adjustment.

Anyway, although I do preach studying the positive, I also allow error-correction on occasion, and must confess to falling into that pit myself. (Shh... don't tell anyone.) I also believe error correction can be used effectively. OTOH, I believe that self error-correction is the long way around.

In the case of a coach, they can evaluate errors and provide direction without getting as wrapped up in those errors. An individual has to study the error to see what it is - wasted time, and often more effort practicing the error. Then, they have to develop a strategy to remove the error and test the implementation of the new procedure. Sometimes this avenue has to be travelled if the error is ingrained strongly enough, but I "preach" leaving the errors you can, behind and studying what it takes to perform what you want.

Back to the coach. A coach can provide positive direction to a shooter without making them spend a great deal of time studying the error. They can identify an unwanted trend and steer the shooter toward the wanted one. An obstacle to this is a person like myself that wants to know all the "why's" for everything. I personally have to work hard to study only the positive side.

As with everything, the WOM can be used or misused by either party and my feeling is that it should be used only in the case of a heavily ingrained error, and then it should be used sparingly and preferably by/with the help of a coach.

As for the passion in my words, I'm not sure I have it any longer. If everyone thinks I'm full of it, so be it. One of my eyes is showing some brown...

Take Care,
Ed Hall (who passionately believes that the ultimate is to make shooting tens as natural as walking up stairs, drinking from a glass, etc.)
Air Force Shooting Homepage
Bullseye (and International) Competition Things

Ed that is the best part about a coach, he can identify the errors and the good and guide the athlete in positive light. Just because a coach identifies the errors in performance doesn't mean he has to focus the athlete on those errors.

Ed, good to hear from you. Yes, I know how the "passion" comes and goes. 'm in a reflective mood myself lately. Too much work and not enough training. But, I do have an invite to do a session at our upcoming Indoor State match next month. Clark Hardesty, Grayson Plamer and I, maybe Gregg from the NC Association Team can make it too. So I was searching for some topics and this thread started out OK. Kinda digressed into "mine is bigger or better" though.

Anyway, I greatly agree a good coach will know the error performed. And I would hope instead of saying "this is what you did wrong", will be able to suggest the positive correction. But, I would also assume the coaches first queston would be "what was your call", "what did you see", etc. Because without the knowledge that the shooter actually saw and called the shot, I'd feel like it would be just programming a robot like response. (Although sometimes that may the ultimate goal for some, insert BIG Grin here!~).

Now here's an example. Just a couple of weeks ago the weather was good enought for some time at the outdoor 50 yard club range. I was working with the primary and backup Marvel conversions. Took a couple of hours to shoot about 40 shots. After the first couple of shots with the primary unit, the next 2 shots were 9's at 9:00, but definitely not exactly where I called them. The next shot was an 8 at 8:00 and the next was a 7 at 8:00. Each time I had reviewed a better shot (10) but noted that the shots were not on call. I had called them all 10's slightly left.

With the 9's I was beginning to wonder; with the 8, I knew it was not me; and after the 7 I looked at the gun and there was the expected crack on the left side at the corner. What a waste it would have been if I had been chasing the wheel and whatever recommendation it had for X number more shots. On the other hand, without my commitment to what I saw, I could have just started cranking on the sight.

So, even at this stage, I'm back to the passion of actually seeing everything possible for the entire shot. And yes, I'm studying the good shots.

So, in closing, error idendification and correction can work, postive reinforcement and study the good can work, we can learn with a coach and we can learn without a coach. It just seems that the "positive" outlook seems to bring a commitment and mindset that might seem, shall we say, committed in all senses of the word for the individual. I even remember others on the list starting out with a "do all the steps and figure out the problem" approch and then coming up with another opinion later in their development.

To each his own path and own time. But we need to keep an open mind in case we miss the path or run out of time.

Hope to see you again at Perry. Remember..... technique, passion, commitment and desire.

Cecil

oh brother,

RMinUT wrote:Ed, Cecil, Bill you can have them. At this point i'd rather lay in the mud, read the wind, and focus on shooting 10's with a rifle.

I think most of us can live with that - in fact, there are probably more than a few who would downright prefer that.

RMinUT wrote: Ed, Cecil, Bill you can have them. At this point i'd rather lay in the mud, read the wind, and focus on shooting 10's with a rifle.

Have a nice day, you happy fellow.

RMinUT wrote:oh brother, I go skiing for one day and the Canadians run amuk. Ed, Cecil, Bill you can have them. At this point i'd rather lay in the mud, read the wind, and focus on shooting 10's with a rifle.

I read this, and I am disappointed, Robert. Looks like when things don't go your way, you start personal attacks, mainly based in supposed American-superiority. Apparently, if people disagree with you, it is "Canadians running amuk".

I have a lot of friends in the USA and I am glad that they didn't think the same way as you. And don't get your panties in a knot: most are Republicans and some even work for the NRA, CMP, USAShooting and Pilkguns. I'm a Conservative and like guns. See, we're just like brothers.

Unfortunately, you've as yet to understand one thing written. If one doesn't agreed with your viewpoint, you try to reduce their argument to simplistic polar opposites of whatever you think. Well, life isn't so simple. I never said focus on the wild shots. I said identify and correct the error. Apparently, even that is above your simple comprehension.

Guys, I really could care less if you take my advice. Honest. What I do worry about is when some people utter nonsense all over the novices, negatively impacting their development. Dropping a grain of truth, fully unsupported in a chatroom, can be misleading. A new shooter doesn't know how to deliver a good shot. Often, you see bad technique producing a lucky10. Do you want them to reproduce that again? Good heavens, no.

Yes, I've had some success in coaching. And yes, there were no shooting medals won at the Olympics by Canada. Still, I've never been prouder in my life. I hope that one day you can experience that.

In the meantime, enjoy rutting in the mud.
Patrick

Regards.

RMinUT wrote:Coach Haynes,
<snipped to just keep in the good bits>
Regards.

You really do insist on missrepresenting what's been written above to a major degree.

Patrick wrote

I never said focus on the wild shots. I said identify and correct the error. Apparently, even that is above your simple comprehension.

Note the words 'Identify' and 'correct'. I won't go on in detail because it's wasted key strokes.

Rob.

P.S. I don't know Patrick other than online and I'm not Canadian...

RobStubbs wrote:

RMinUT wrote:Coach Haynes,
<snipped to just keep in the good bits>
Regards.

You really do insist on missrepresenting what's been written above to a major degree.

Patrick wrote

I never said focus on the wild shots. I said identify and correct the error. Apparently, even that is above your simple comprehension.

Note the words 'Identify' and 'correct'. I won't go on in detail because it's wasted key strokes.

Rob.

P.S. I don't know Patrick other than online and I'm not Canadian...

Sir,
I took offense to Patrick's attitude that if coaches focus on positives even from the beginning that they are closed minded. He has pointed out that errors must be identified, fine. Every shooter i've been around can identify a mistake, they are usually located in the white. So because I chose to not focus them on shots in the white that makes me closed minded? One shooter I helped was looking at the chart and couldn't really figure out what he had done. He was sure he was focused but couldn't see the error indicated by the chart. I asked him, nicely even, where on the chart did it show him how to shoot a ten. He took two seconds and said nowhere, so I asked him, again nicely, why he was looking at the chart when it clearly won't help him shoot a 10. He's never to my knowledge looked at the chart again. Every target he shows me I ask him what he did to shoot the tens. He is pretty good about describing how he does and repeats it. That is all i care about as his part time coach. He's about to break 570 in AP after 2/2.5 years of competition. He tops 500 in Free. Much better than my progress using a mistake chart. He is easily capable of high 570's AP currently and of course just needs to tighten up the mental focus to get there.
I only submit to you that I am just as passionate about my coaching as is Patrick. I don't have books by doctors to support my method, just a couple a happy collegiate shooters. I am fine with that. Hopefully next season I'll be asked to help out again.

With that attitude and offensive regard to others, I'm glad that RM is not my coach. Is that how they teach people to act in the holy mormon state?

RMinUT wrote:I took offense to Patrick's attitude that if coaches focus on positives even from the beginning that they are closed minded. He has pointed out that errors must be identified, fine. Every shooter i've been around can identify a mistake, they are usually located in the white. So because I chose to not focus them on shots in the white that makes me closed minded?

I may be wrong (probably am) but I have re-read this thread and haven't spotted where either Patrick or Richard called you "closed minded".

Some posters seem to be suggesting that Patrick is advocating "the chart" as useful or desireable in all circumstances. What he has written certainly does not say that. It is just one tool (of many) which has its uses in some circumstances.

If you think that you can coach people to shoot at a high level without identifying (not focussing on) their errors then fine. I would suggest however that none of the great coaches I have come accross during my shooting career have followed that path; I wonder why not.

beginer wrote:With that attitude and offensive regard to others, I'm glad that RM is not my coach. Is that how they teach people to act in the holy mormon state?

you signed up for that? A little late to the dogpile.



I apologized to the people I offended because of a misscommunication on my part. If you can't live with that, good, hang on to it.

...

RMinUT wrote:I was coached by a National Champion that said the chart is not the best training method. I threw it away and my scores went up.

I obviously cannot argue with you on that point. It doesn't mean however that for some shooters, at some stage in their shooting career, it is not a suitable tool. That is all that Patrick was advocating.

David Levene wrote:

RMinUT wrote:I was coached by a National Champion that said the chart is not the best training method. I threw it away and my scores went up.

I obviously cannot argue with you on that point. It doesn't mean however that for some shooters, at some stage in their shooting career, it is not a suitable tool. That is all that Patrick was advocating.

yes Sir, Patrick and I will agree to disagree.

For starters "the chart" isn't a training method, it's simply a tool and not an overly useful one at that, it may help some identify where to look when they have no idea where to look but aside from that not much else. No one other than yourself has advocated "the chart" as a training method.

All I asked was who you had coached, then I get your tantrum, I sort of know something about Bill, I have no idea about you, other than the childish personal attacks that you have displayed on this board, which came off as some thing less than I'd expect from a real coach, but hey it takes all kinds.