TargetTalk

Had a dinner with a shooting friend. We discussed focus on front sight vs. smooth trigger. He said he believed smooth trigger is FAR more important than front sight.

He said he attended one of Brian Zinns' shooting class. Zinns truly believed smooth trigger is far more important than focus on front sight.

One of my friend's tidbit from that class was to take the front sight off, and just concentrate on a smooth pull. My friend said he actually shot as well with no front sight on as with front sight on.

What do you think?

Could you shoot just as well without the front sight? Just concentrate on a smooth trigger pull? Ever done that? What does that prove?

seamaster wrote: Could you shoot just as well without the front sight? Just concentrate on a smooth trigger pull? Ever done that? What does that prove?

I do not think it is possible to shoot "as well" without the front sight. But I tried to shoot with a front sight blurred (out of focus) while the target was in focus. Due to my severe hypermetropia it was easy to (change the lens as to) have the target in focus and the front sight out of focus. After few hours of training it was possible to shoot well enough, but not better! It is even possible that my *mind* focused on the target as if it was the front sight, while the blurred front sight was ... the target. Sort of inversion, maybe.

It's too simplistic to say one is more important than the other IMHO. Both are important and without both you will never excel in shooting.

Rob.

Sorry, Rob. It is NOT too simplistic. Any putz can hold the gun up with the sights in alignment.

Squeezing the trigger while doing that is a whole new ball game.

Quoting Ed Hall:
The sights are the trigger purity indicator.

Rover wrote:Sorry, Rob. It is NOT too simplistic. Any putz can hold the gun up with the sights in alignment.

Squeezing the trigger while doing that is a whole new ball game.

Rover,
Sorry but it is too simplistic. 'Any putz' as you nicely put it can squeeze a trigger smoothly. Doing so with the sights aligned, in the right place, that's more difficult.

Rob.

I just took up both AP and Bullseye in May this year. I'm shooting pretty consistently in the 530's and working my way to the 540's in AP and just starting to shoot Expert and some Master scores with a couple of 99 targets in Bullseye but no cleans - yet!

I have read and been told at this point it's 90% mental. When I have an errant shot (<9) it is almost always a grip/trigger issue. Small muscle movements in my grip during trigger pull.

This error almost always (for me) can be traced back to a deviation or disengagement from my shot process - mental. Very rarely do I have a sight alignment/sight picture issue when I start the trigger squeeze/pull.

Dave
- heading downstairs to dry fire.

seamaster wrote:Had a dinner with a shooting friend. We discussed focus on front sight vs. smooth trigger. He said he believed smooth trigger is FAR more important than front sight.

He said he attended one of Brian Zinns' shooting class. Zinns truly believed smooth trigger is far more important than focus on front sight.

One of my friend's tidbit from that class was to take the front sight off, and just concentrate on a smooth pull. My friend said he actually shot as well with no front sight on as with front sight on.

What do you think?

Could you shoot just as well without the front sight? Just concentrate on a smooth trigger pull? Ever done that? What does that prove?

.



You can shoot reasonably well with no sight. But only if you use a substitute sight picture. The precision will be less.

I can relate an experience from a practice session with a red dot sighted 208s. I had just adjusted the pistol for which I wore my closeup reading glasses. I returned to fire but forgot to switch glasses. The red dot was out of focus and the target was out of focus. A very poor sight picture indeed. But I fired the string anyway just for grins and giggles. It was one of the best groups I had all session.

seamaster wrote: Could you shoot just as well without the front sight? Just concentrate on a smooth trigger pull? Ever done that? What does that prove?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thCl_mYIUBE (from 06.00) The video seems to show that one can shoot well with no sights and no smooth trigger pull :-)

But people who score > 590 in AP necessarily parallel-process (in a way or another) at least smooth trigger pull and accurate sighting.

When I shoot without the dot on, I usually shoot high.

I agree with Ed Hall, and Brian Zins. The sight whether dot or irons, is just an indicator that your gun is pointed at the target.

Chances are good, while you are staring intently at the front sight, your hold is deteriorating.

I find I shoot my best, all other things being equal, when I dry fire several times without looking at the sight or the dot. It trains my trigger finger to perform in a smooth and automatic manner, and gets my desired shot process established before I level the gun on the target.

Isabel1130 wrote: I agree with Ed Hall, and Brian Zins. The sight whether dot or irons, is just an indicator that your gun is pointed at the target.

Isabel,

While I think we agree on the primacy of the trigger, Ed Hall did not at all mean what you say above. When he would say that the sight was the "trigger purity indicator", I believe he meant that the main purpose of the sight was to let you know how good your triggering was. You look at the sight alignment (or dot movement) in order to see what you are doing/have done with your trigger pull. Getting on target (aligned in the case of iron sights) is just a secondary use for the sight.

FredB

FredB wrote:

Isabel1130 wrote: I agree with Ed Hall, and Brian Zins. The sight whether dot or irons, is just an indicator that your gun is pointed at the target.

Isabel,

While I think we agree on the primacy of the trigger, Ed Hall did not at all mean what you say above. When he would say that the sight was the "trigger purity indicator", I believe he meant that the main purpose of the sight was to let you know how good your triggering was. You look at the sight alignment (or dot movement) in order to see what you are doing/have done with your trigger pull. Getting on target (aligned in the case of iron sights) is just a secondary use for the sight.

FredB

What ED is essentially saying, is if the sight moves while you are triggering, it is your triggering that is the problem, and not your hold or your sight picture.

Zins believes that Air pistol, and free pistol are all hold, because the triggers are too light to really require any skills.

A heavy triggered ball gun exposes poor triggering.

The reason the dot is not very useful as a triggering indicator, is because it is always moving, and if you don't just give up on trying to make it still, and focus on your triggering, you will develop all sorts of bad habits, like adjusting your sight picture with your wrist.

seamaster wrote: One of my friend's tidbit from that class was to take the front sight off, and just concentrate on a smooth pull. My friend said he actually shot as well with no front sight on as with front sight on.

What do you think?

No way, I think, unless your friend has an exceptionally high midichlorian count.

I actually saw a shooter have a front sight fall off in a bullseye match a couple of years ago. Out of three shots that he tried that way, he missed the scoring rings completely twice and got one scoreable shot (and no, that wasn't up to his ability). I don't know if he shifted all his concentration to the trigger, though, so it might be irrelevant.

"I actually saw a shooter have a front sight fall off in a bullseye match..."

The shooter would have to adjust to a new sight picture. It may take time. Again precision would be less.

jackh wrote:"I actually saw a shooter have a front sight fall off in a bullseye match..."

The shooter would have to adjust to a new sight picture. It may take time. Again precision would be less.

It really is not an urban legend. I shot with a Staff Sgt named David Wagner, at a German range near Waechtersbach in 1983? He had a 1911 that he had no sights installed on yet. At 25 meters, he shot a four inch group with the gun. It wasn't centered in the black, but still, a pretty darn good group.

I wish more people would show up at the matches I go to with no front sight. Brian is a very talented shooter for sure, but he is so very wrong about free and air pistol trigger control not requiring skill. The fact is this...trigger control and sight alignment are both equally vital. They are linked together by the subconscious. Trigger control has nothing to do with the amount of force that is required to pull it, but rather it is the timing of the release. The timing has to be in sink with the sight movement, if it is not, then good luck in hitting the 10 ring. Can you hit the target without a front sight? Sure. However, you won't win much just by hitting the target or shooting a 4 inch group.

BEA wrote:I wish more people would show up at the matches I go to with no front sight. Brian is a very talented shooter for sure, but he is so very wrong about free and air pistol trigger control not requiring skill. The fact is this...trigger control and sight alignment are both equally vital. They are linked together by the subconscious. Trigger control has nothing to do with the amount of force that is required to pull it, but rather it is the timing of the release. The timing has to be in sink with the sight movement, if it is not, then good luck in hitting the 10 ring. Can you hit the target without a front sight? Sure. However, you won't win much just by hitting the target or shooting a 4 inch group.

Brian Zins never said that free pistol and air pistol dont require skill. He said that shooting one well is "all hold" because the ultra light triggers dont require you to integrate your triggering into your hold. It is indeed all timing and not technique as you have suggested above.

Having shot next to some very fine free pistol shooters at conventional pistol matches, their scores indicate, that the two disciplines dont have a great deal in common.

Of course, you dont want to shoot a match without a front sight. It is a drill to teach you to focus on your triggering, just like the drill of shooting a blank target teaches you to watch your front sight (and not the target).

This point is hardly worth arguing except for the benefit perhaps of some new shooter. I was in the Walther factory in Germany years ago. There was a Free Pistol in their display case that had a electronic trigger, a wire coming off of the grip with a small box on the end with a button on it. This box with button was obviously meant to be placed in the pocket of the non shooting hand. This has been declared illegal as the firearm must be fired by the holding hand. If shooting FP were all hold with little or no trigger control necessary, then this device would have never been experimented with as a potential advantage. Despite a FP trigger potentially being very light, you can still disturb the sight picture with the trigger release or with the anticipation of the release. You still must develop your subconscious to coordinate your sight alignment with the trigger release (control). All elements of this shot delivery sequence are equally important for consistently good scores.

BEA, What you see as an advantage, I see as a safety issue. There are many good reasons to require a competition gun to be fired with your trigger finger, and not with a button in your off pocket.
Sure you can disturb your sights on a free pistol when triggering it, but in my opinion, Zins knows what he is talking about. Hold is a much bigger factor in free, and air while triggering is more important in standard, centerfire, and rapid.

Some people, like John Zurek do both quite well, and Zins, from what I understand was one position away from making the Olympic team for air several years ago. He has "walked the walk", and should be listened to.

Believe who and what you wish, but I did not almost make the team.