TargetTalk

I believe it was Abraham Lincoln who wisely said "The man who represents himself in a Court of Law has a Fool for a Lawyer!" Let it be said the same might apply at least to some degree in hte shooting sports: "The person who attempts to teach him/herself how to shoot has a fool for a coach!"

However, for a variety of reasons

- cost
- availability
- lack of quality coaches
- interest/enthusiasm

many of us find ourselves inthe position of having to do just that. At least in part. This series of posts/threads is intended to assist the "typical struggling duffer" to bring their game to teh next level. "TSD" is the shooter wishing to improve his/her skills; attending maybe 1-2 group coaching events per year but having to struggle on their own for the majority of their effort). The series will be designed for the total newbie; I hope as we go along the not-so-newbie-but-still-struggling shooters will benefit as well.

Lock and Load!

So a potential student (coworker, fellow shooter at the range, etc.) accosts me for advice on shooting. Where to begin?

First, we discuss the goals and objectives of the shooter.

- Why do you shoot?
- What do you see yourself doing in shooting in the future?

This brings up the issue of

- What kind of shooting (plinking? competition? self defense?) are you primarily interested in?

This brief conversation ends with a discussion of the various types of shooting sports/activities available, and a discussion of various shooting resources available through the NRA, USAS, adn the CMP; as well as other shooting organizations (SASS, IDPA, etc.).

Homework for student: Visit some websites and explore the various types of shooting activities that may interest them.

Homework for coach: dig up a copy of NRA Pistol Shooting pamplet/book.

Chat with thje student again.

Give them a copy of the NRA introductory materials.

Ask them about their shooting experience.

Clarify their goals/objectives.

Wait and see if they begin asking about going shooting . . .

someone likes to hear himself talk, how about shooting a few scores first mate ?

Anonymous wrote:someone likes to hear himself talk, how about shooting a few scores first mate ?

We've been here before.

You do not need to be a great shooter to be a good coach. In fact, many great shooters only know the way they shoot which may not necessarily transfer to others. I would go so far as to suggest that may not even know the way they shoot themselves. They may think that they know but, over the years, their "automatic" techniques may well have evolved without them realizing.

Anonymous wrote:someone likes to hear himself talk, how about shooting a few scores first mate ?

Steve has been asked by many of us including myself to post his ideas on training..he has been kind enough to take the time, effort, and thought to do so. for which I thank him.

It seems to me the above (guests quoted post) was entered with little or no time or effort put into his thoughts on what Steve is tryng to do with his posts on training or why he posts them.

Perhaps in the future the person could take the time to follow the posts and the threads that generate them to see if their comments are warranted.

Dave

Anonymous wrote:someone likes to hear himself talk, how about shooting a few scores first mate ?

Everyone like 'anonymous' must remember that we are not all like you. We have a variety of shooting goals, from Olympic hopefuls to just want to shoot better on Sunday. "Coaching" means different things to us. Again from the Olympic Team Coach to Sundays advisor. Me, I am somewhere in between.

Before I begin I sincerely hope that no one will take this the wrong way.
I think perhaps that some members (including yours truly) have no idea as to who Steve Swartz is.

Perhaps for those that are reading these various threads presented by Steve Swartz that Steve would be better served if he were to introduce himself first as to his qualifications. This perhaps might alleviate some of the raised eyebrows as it were.

I'm quite confident that if I were to simply get on a forum site such as this and start "teaching" that most, if not all, would sit back and think; "OK....now who the hell is this guy"? It's obvious that some here know who Steve Swartz is but by the same token it is also obvious that there are those who don't. Like said, perhaps an introduction could be of some help. Just a thought.

~Phil

pwh wrote:Before I begin I sincerely hope that no one will take this the wrong way.
I think perhaps that some members (including yours truly) have no idea as to who Steve Swartz is.

Perhaps for those that are reading these various threads presented by Steve Swartz that Steve would be better served if he were to introduce himself first as to his qualifications. This perhaps might alleviate some of the raised eyebrows as it were.

I'm quite confident that if I were to simply get on a forum site such as this and start "teaching" that most, if not all, would sit back and think; "OK....now who the hell is this guy"? It's obvious that some here know who Steve Swartz is but by the same token it is also obvious that there are those who don't. Like said, perhaps an introduction could be of some help. Just a thought.

~Phil

Phil.
One of the great things about TT is its archive and its search function. If you do a search for Swartz under Olympic Pistol you will find 355 entries search.php?mode=results. Take a few minutes to browse the entries to learn something about Steve Swartz.

I don't always agree with Steve, but he is certainly a dedicated teacher. If it were me, and I had a class like this, I would walk out.

Fred

Fred:

What about my proposed approach in Lesson 0 would have you walking out?

Phil:

Fair enough- but please contqact me directly and I'll be happy to provide whatever background information you need. However, as I've posted in this venue many times before, I refuse to participate in the whole macho "Public D*ck Measuring Exercise*" that relies on the absurd argument by authority and halo effect assumptions.

Steve

*There are four related ludicrous assumptions underlying this phenomenon:
1- Only a world class athlete (WCA) can teach you anything useful about this sport;
2- No non-WCA can teach you anything about this sport;
3- Anything a WCA has to say about this sport is valuable and true;
4- Nothing a non-WCA has to say about this sport could be valuable or true.

My theory/position/opinion is this:

A. There are WCAs who also make fabulous coaches
B. There are WCAs who make horrible coaches
C. There are non-WCAs who make fabulous coaches
D. There are non-WCAs who make horrible coaches (but not for long)

The universe is populated by (for any discipline) 5% type A, 30% Type B, 60% type C, and 5% Type D coaches . . .

[yeah, I totally made those nbumbers up!]

Steve Swartz wrote:Fred:

What about my proposed approach in Lesson 0 would have you walking out?

Steve,
I'm sorry - I did not express myself properly. What I meant was that if I were the teacher and had an unruly class like this, I would walk out. Probably the reason I never became a teacher.

Fred

Steve:

To buttress your argument against "only WCA" trainers: If that argument were true, there would be no NBA coaches.

Steve and Fred,

Sorry, but I think you totally misunderstood my post as so often happens on a forum site given the occasional confusion of the type written word. I own and run a forum site so I'm well aware as to its misgivings in such matters as this.

Steve, I never questioned your expertise but simply was trying to point out that there are some who have no idea who you are and ergo some of the comments made about your posts. As for doing a search I never bothered simply because I noticed that Steve just joined this site today (05/22/08). I believe that is why some of the somewhat argumentative or the "who are you to talk" type of posts came about. I was simply trying to clarify any further misgivings that may possibly come about as to what Steve is placing forth here on the site.

As mentioned previously I have owned and have run a forum site for some years related to the cultivation of bonsai and its art. I know from years of experience that if someone new came onto the site who was not well known and had no introduction as to his/her experience in the field and started "teaching" it would most certainly raise up some heads and possibly lead into some unwanted and perhaps sharp or critical posts as has happened here already. I simply felt that it all could have been avoided with a proper introduction on Steve's part for those who are not aware of his "expertise", "experience", etc.

I was in no way questioning but simply trying to clarify Steve's experience to others so that any further unwanted and needles confrontations would not arise in the future.

Sorry......guess I've just been an administrator on a forum site for so long and well acquainted as to the unfortunate meanderings that can accompany it at times that I felt it necessary to make the post I did. No harm whatsoever was meant toward Steve in any way shape or form and I'm sorry if it was conceived in any way in such respect.

I am for the most part on the Olympic rifle forum of this site but I do occasionally drop in here to check things out as many of the disciplines of rifle shooting and pistol shooting are quite intermingled in many respects.
Looking forward to hear more form Steve and, as said, no disrespect was ever intended on my part. Sorry if there was any misunderstanding. As said, such is the type written word and how so many times and easily it can be misconstrued.

~Phil

To Steve's point. One should not have to prove one self to others for them to listen to the advise being given. As most know in this sport the advise given here will not work for all today or never but could some day when said advise is truly understood and when the person reading the advise has the ability to use it.

The caution is some people may not understand the advise and use it incorrectly and then think they did not know what they were talking about.

Here is something that will work for everyone. Take a piece of advise and put it down on paper in a notebook "Toolbox". This new found piece of information could be of use to you today, tomorrow, or never but you have it just in case you need it or a friend needs it.

I think most people shoud be able to tell if they are getting some advise which is not a load of bull.

BTW Steve is a very good shooter and can shot the scores. He also has the ability to communicate how to shoot the scores if you care to take the time to listen (read) what he has to say you may learn something and improve your scores.

Phil:

No offense taken at all! You did set off my "autoreply bot" about how many people seem to believe you can't learn anything from people who can't outshoot you . . . the "D*ck Measuring Contest" I referred to that is somewhat prevalent among some participants. I want to keep out of that whole "my dad can beat up your dad" mentality. ithink it cheapens the spirit of collaborative learning that I think represents the heart and spirit of this board.

[I was kind of amused by your perception that I had just joined the site a few days agao (yes- you are correct- I *registered* for the site a few days ago; have been a regular contributor/participant though for a few more weeks than that!)]

Fred: Oh ok that makes sense; your comment seemed kind of odd but now I get it thanks!

Steve Swartz wrote:No offense taken at all!

Good to hear Steve.

Steve Swartz wrote:[I was kind of amused by your perception that I had just joined the site a few days agao (yes- you are correct- I *registered* for the site a few days ago; have been a regular contributor/participant though for a few more weeks than that!)]

Yes, I of all people should have probably taken the time to do a search. I and the moderators on my site are constantly urging people to use the search feature first before asking repetitive questions although that does not really apply here. I assumed from reading your posts that you seemed to know of what you talked about although I believe there were a couple here who posted somewhat negative replies simply because they, as I, did not know who you were.
Over the years I have seen many instances of those who posted on forum sites with advice which although, was not ill intended, was wrong and or misleading. Better to receive no advice at all rather than poor or wrong advice which some at times blindly accept. Again, I am not referencing this to you but simply making a broad statement as to forum sites as a whole.

As for your reference to the "D*ck Measuring Contest" I found it quite amusing and could well understand why you would not want to get into such a childish debate. In most cases, although not all, it is paramount that one must be well experienced in his/her craft first before one can teach it. By the same token, as one member here alluded to, that although one may be very proficient in ones craft, sport, etc. does not necessarily make that person a good teacher. I’m confident that there are quite a few Olympic pistol/rifle coaches who themselves have never reached Olympic competition but that does not negate their ability to be good teachers. Like said, this is not true in all endeavors but I would venture to say that coaching a shooter is one of those examples where the teacher does not necessarily have to be better than the student.

Fred Mannis wrote: I don't always agree with Steve, but he is certainly a dedicated teacher. If it were me, and I had a class like this, I would walk out.

Fred Mannis wrote: Steve,
I'm sorry - I did not express myself properly. What I meant was that if I were the teacher and had an unruly class like this, I would walk out. Probably the reason I never became a teacher.

Steve Swartz wrote:
Fred: Oh ok that makes sense; your comment seemed kind of odd but now I get it thanks!

Just had to take another moment in pointing out as to how the type written word can so many times be misconstrued! I’ll have to admit that at first I was a tad surprised as to Fred’s comment seeing that he seemed to be backing you up and then saying he would walk out! lol Such things can happen all too often on a forum site.

Teach on Steve. It seems as though your credentials for doing so has been well backed up and established by some long time members here and once again I'm sorry if I inadvertently stepped on anyones toes!

~Phil

I have been in this sport for along time both in rifle and pistol. I can shoot good scores in both. Not olympic level yet.

I do wish had Steve and a few other peoples ability to communicate the science behind the sport to others so well.

Have a great weekend and happy shooting to everyone.