TargetTalk

I'm certain the "skill" is erratic and that you can't reliably call every shot, but can come very close; at least that has been my experience.

So if you could not call a particular shot, what do you think was the reason? Did you stop paying attention? Were you shaking so much you had no idea in which direction the shot went? Were you too lazy to put the gun down and restart the process? With the red dots prevalent in bullseye these days there are no really excuses not to call your shots. If your hold is within the 9 ring, an 8 feels like hitting someone else's target. You might not be able to tell an inner 9 from an outer 10, but that's ok, who cares, you'll get your 10s from the law of averages. (Surely, Bickar will laugh at you for not learning how to hold the 10-ring, but that is a different story.)

You're right about the red dot, but I shoot a lot of FP and AP. I think my main problem the breaking of attention. I think this may be due to a tired eye, which is why I have a new lens coming for my shooting glasses. Back when I could see, I could tell where in the 10 ring my shot was.

A guy who goes by "BEA" on this forum, and who has won a lot of stuff, put it thus:

BEA wrote:I think the ability to call shots is a key factor in what makes some shooters better than others. It takes critical vision, the ability to see the slightest imperfections in sight alignment, to effectively call shots. Some shooters no doubt have good holds, but lack critical vision. They are good scope shooters but not reliably so with open sights. Then the opposite occurs too, good vision but so so hold. The shooters that excel have both the hold and critical vision...and the mental determination to bring everything together.

You are correct Rover in that AP uncovers all flaws and errors. AP requires supreme sight alignment and trigger control, as does FP. However, I am tempted to say that critical vision is something you either have or do not have. I am not sure it is something you can develop. I do believe it is something that you can have and refine with training. I know and have known some excellent bullseye shooters (with scopes) over the years that do lots of training, but they never reach the same level of accomplishment in international pistol. I believe this is due to having good holds and effective training, but they simply lack the critical vision needed for success with open sights.

I copied that quote down and have saved it, and not only for it being the rare occasion where someone agrees with Rover.

shaky hands wrote:(Surely, Bickar will laugh at you for not learning how to hold the 10-ring, but that is a different story.)

No I won't, and don't call me Shirley.

shaky hands wrote: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?

27 (I said 25 earlier but it's actually 27) years in this game and I haven't mastered it yet. Still trying to break 2650.

mr alexander wrote:Now what does "TLA" mean?

"Three-Letter Acronym" :)

john bickar wrote: Still trying to break 2650.

I just wanted to tell you both good luck. We're all counting on you.

shaky hands wrote: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?

Calling your shot is not the end of the process. You must then check that you called it correctly.

If the shot isn't where you called it (I used to call within half a ring, some are better some are worse) then you know that something has gone wrong with your shot process; normally that you were not watching the sights as well as you thought you were.

(Apart from a gun or ammunition problem I can't actually think of another reason for the shot call not to be correct.)

shaky hands wrote:

john bickar wrote: Still trying to break 2650.

I just wanted to tell you both good luck. We're all counting on you.

Yes, I remember. I had lasagna.

David Levene wrote:(I used to call within half a ring, some are better some are worse)

But this is my point: once you are at that level of proficiency (and with the dot it is so much easier to achieve than with the open sights), your own shots calling can replace scoping.

David Levene wrote:(Apart from a gun or ammunition problem I can't actually think of another reason for the shot call not to be correct.)

Well, the electronic targets being F'd up, which happens, and which really brings us back full circle in this discussion.

shaky hands wrote:

David Levene wrote:(I used to call within half a ring, some are better some are worse)

But this is my point: once you are at that level of proficiency (and with the dot it is so much easier to achieve than with the open sights), your own shots calling can replace scoping.

I'm sorry but I think you are missing the point. Calling the shot, and checking that you have called it correctly, is your check that you watched the sights correctly on that shot. Calling the shot without checking it is a pointless process as it proves nothing.

BTW, I have no idea whether it works with a dot sight; I've never used one.

David Levene wrote: I'm sorry but I think you are missing the point. Calling the shot, and checking that you have called it correctly, is your check that you watched the sights correctly on that shot. Calling the shot without checking it is a pointless process as it proves nothing.

In other words, you are saying that one's skill in calling shots is inherently unreliable, cannot be trusted, and must be verified every single shot. As opposed to, once developed, being mostly reliable and only needing a once in a while control measurement.

shaky hands wrote:

David Levene wrote: I'm sorry but I think you are missing the point. Calling the shot, and checking that you have called it correctly, is your check that you watched the sights correctly on that shot. Calling the shot without checking it is a pointless process as it proves nothing.

In other words, you are saying that one's skill in calling shots is inherently unreliable, cannot be trusted, and must be verified every single shot. As opposed to, once developed, being mostly reliable and only needing a once in a while control measurement.

Garbage in, garbage out.
If you aren't watching the sights properly then you won't call the shots correctly (other than by luck).

Watching the sights correctly, apart from being an essential for good performance, will also give you big clues when other elements of your technique are not perfect. It is therefore a check on those elements.

Scoping to verify the shot call is a check on your attention to the sights.

If your shot call is wrong then although you might have thought that you were watching the sights correctly, you probably weren't.

mr alexander wrote:

... 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![/quote]

Managing ones mind is easier for some but not others, I have witnessed many times over the years shooters who scoped a shot get very upset at what they saw. One so mad he slammed his loaded gun on the bench and cussing loudly, This upset many of us and even brought the match to a halt while he got a stern talking to for his actions.
Another scope issue not discussed, Many guys who scope a lot seem like they replaced it with tryng to call the shot and Ive seen many set their scope up focused on the wrong target, instead of trusting their shooting and zero and the called shot they trust the scope and start trying to re zero the dot to whatever shot his neighbor just fired, loosing many points and having the gun zero messed up before they figure it out. The use of a scope is needed but overuse can be a good or bad thing depending on how you do things.

GunRunner wrote, " I've seen many set their scope up focused on the wrong target". Perhaps, these shooters would benefit from having two dot sights. Use one mounted on their pistol and the other on their spotting scope. LOL!

Yes, people do make these kinds of mistakes. Speaking of errors, some have also cross-fired onto another's target. Have seen this several times. These things can and do happen. One must always apply maximum focus and concentration when on the firing line.

I agree with the comment made by Mr. Alexander. Pistol shooting is 90% mental. And, when shooting, everyone must keep their
emotions from getting the best of them. Not doing so certainly can ruin the enjoyment for everyone else.

Scope or don't, you eventually have to face the holes. If we're scoping because we're not sure of call or if we're not scoping because we think the outcome would be a distraction; both are just indicators of different areas for potential improvement.

I've shot between Brian and Jim at Camp Perry, Canton, etc. several times and both seemed to use their scopes pretty often. As a matter of fact, I seem to remember that every box on the HM relay had a scope on it. Now I could have missed someone.

People scope the wrong target, people shoot on the wrong targets. The ones that scope don't seem to loose as many points as those that shoot on the wrong target and not finding out right away. Those that scope on the wrong target get some exercise twisting the knobs.

No matter how good we are at calling, I've found the fastest way to confirm a loose scope / mount / failing scope is by calling and scoping. On the other hand, I rarely scope at the short line.

Just my thoughts. Have fun!

David Levene wrote:

shaky hands wrote: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?

(Apart from a gun or ammunition problem I can't actually think of another reason for the shot call not to be correct.)

Sometimes my shot call is unexpectedly off quite a bit. Outside of a gun or ammo problem, I do have a theory about another

potential reason for this. Let's assume we have a right handed person. If the trigger is jerked a bit, the shot should go low and left,

so the shooter calls it at 7 o'clock. But, before the bullet actually leaves the barrel, he also heels the pistol a bit as well. Heeling

typically will place a round at 1 o'clock. Peering through the scope, it turns out that it's a 10! How did this happen? The 7 0'clock

jerk and the 1 o'clock heel create two different movements that are in opposite directions from one another. The jerk and the heel

cancel each other out, resulting in the unanticipated surprise. I once talked to another Bullseye shooter about this. He claimed that

the same thing has happened to him at times. Are we correct about this theory or are we missing something here?

big mouse wrote:Yes, people do make these kinds of mistakes. Speaking of errors, some have also cross-fired onto another's target. Have seen this several times. These things can and do happen. One must always apply maximum focus and concentration when on the firing line.

I agree with the comment made by Mr. Alexander. Pistol shooting is 90% mental. And, when shooting, everyone must keep their
emotions from getting the best of them. Not doing so certainly can ruin the enjoyment for everyone else.

Oh good, we didn't scare the OP off.

As you may have gathered, this topic is like emacs vs. vi, Chevy vs. Ford, Coke vs. Pepsi. Strong opinions on either side.

Although, in the case of scoping every shot, and vi, one side is clearly correct ;)