Jake Di Vita

I get where you're coming from for sure. I think your diagnosis of index being tuned more towards irons is absolutely correct. It's 100% a matter of training and proficiency regardless of how far the dot is above the barrel. Sure, the closer the dot is to the bore axis the easier it is to switch between irons and the dot, but given the proper amount of work you can tune yourself in to practically anything (and the better you are the less work will be required). The only reason I use a side mounted scope is to eliminate possible ejection issues. The difference between the side mount and the conventional mount has made no difference to my shooting other than a slightly different gun position at extension. Sure, and that's about what I expected. I believe that he's experiencing a difference, but he's not going to sell me that the dot is the problem.

So here you're saying the problem is it takes too long to aim with a dot because you'll hit an inch or two low at close targets. What if I told you that I know automatically where to aim with a dot on any target because I know precisely where a round will hit at any distance. It doesn't take a split second longer for me to put the dot at the top of the upper a zone rather than the middle of the head. You're gonna have to do a lot better than this. Also, as a tip, shooting over your slide on partial targets is certainly going to end up biting you in the ass. First of all, if you know what you are doing it takes absolutely no longer at all to find the dot when shooting from an awkward position. Why? Because I practice from odd positions all the time. I look at the target, move my gun so it is between the target and my face, and the dot is there. Every...single...time. While you're shooting based off your slide, I have a nice crisp dot bouncing in my glass telling me exactly where my rounds are going. Just because you don't experience the same thing doesn't mean that the dot is somehow inferior to irons for close targets. The emperor has no clothes. The comical part of all this is you're trying to strengthen your position by saying "well I can just aim down the slide with a limited gun" which is the exact same thing as what we do with an open gun - we look over the slide at the target, it just so happens that doing this properly puts the dot in the center of the glass. Have you paused to think of why shooting over the slide is an advantage over irons on close stuff? If you're going off your irons you are aligning 3 different things with your eye....the target, the front sight, and the rear sight. If you're ignoring your sights and going off the slide, you're aligning 2 things with your eye, the target and the slide. This is certainly a bit faster than using your sights, but also less precise. Now with the dot you are also only aligning only 2 things with your eye, the target and the dot. It takes no longer to use the dot than it does to aim over the slide, the difference here is you don't lose the precision with a dot that you lose by aiming over the slide. You seem to think for some reason that it's difficult or slow to put the gun on target, see red, and pull the trigger. The only way you can think this is if you're needing to hunt for the dot which by default means you're lacking proficiency with it. If you are lacking proficiency with the dot your opinion on it's efficacy is irrelevant and unfounded. Out of curiosity, what class are you?

There's really not enough information here to give a good plan. What you feel is "proper" and "the right things" may not in truth be proper or right. I also don't know what you allow yourself to get away with in dryfire. When I yank a shot, I both see and feel the mistake while I'm making it. Do you see your sights being yanked left when you shoot? If you don't see it that is a big problem and I recommend you re-double your efforts on shot calling after you figure out how to stop moving the gun off target. If you're dry firing with slow and crisp trigger control, that is part of the problem. Needing to minimize time on stages means you aren't always going to have perfect trigger control. I think dryfire needs to be done pulling the trigger hard and fast so you can learn how to keep the gun still with less than perfect trigger mechanics. It is a common misconception that great trigger control is required to shoot accurately for the type of shooting we do. With the information you provided the only thing I can really say for certain is that you are moving the gun off the target before the bullet has left the barrel and you need to figure out how to stop doing that. Hold the gun firmly still on target and don't let it move while pulling the trigger. If you're having trouble seeing yourself make the mistake, a red dot can help to highlight the problem.

"Why aiming is useless" is such a click baity title. That being said, I completely agree with his overall premise which is the most important thing to do in order to hit the target is pull the trigger without allowing the gun to move. Aiming isn't useless...it just doesn't matter if you can't keep the gun still. I don't think this is accurate. It's entirely possible to pull the trigger "wrong" and still not let the gun move off target leading to a well placed shot. With the type of shooting we do where time is at a premium, having perfect trigger control on every shot isn't realistic. Instead I think the goal should be to be able to aggressively pull the trigger less than perfectly and force the gun to stay steady through it. For me this was done by improving my grip (especially force applied), focusing on intently driving the gun to a specific spot on the target throughout the act of the shot, and a ton of repetitions. A lot of people have the bad habit of dry firing somewhat lazily. If you have a dog, hold a piece of steak in front of him, move it around, and marvel at the intense laser like singular focus he has on that piece of beef. That's really the focus you should bring to every rep of dryfire. Be totally immersed, squeeze the gun like it owes you money, and keep the damn thing still while you smash the trigger. Experiment with different things in your grip and stance and see if there's anything else you can do that steadies everything up a bit.

Do you store it in your purse?

Absolutely, and the bold is the big one. It's even simpler than that. You concentrate on the target and the dot just appears. Instant precise feedback without even needing to look for it.

Experience. Personal results. Watching other shooters have problems and noticing patterns. I wouldn't call anything that has been said here lecturing, we're having a discussion. Why do people get their feelings hurt when there are disagreements? If you disagree with what Gooldy said, present your case. For the most part I think the statement by him that you quoted is accurate, except I'd add that the better shooter you are the easier you are able to switch between platforms (hence his recommendation for more practice).

I completely agree with the premise of natural point of aim and index being a significant advantage. I also agree that if your NPA and index is off, you can and should improve that through dry fire. What you seem to be missing is what you're saying can quite easily be applied to a dot gun. If you can't apply this stuff to a dot gun then like you said, "you have a problem elsewhere that you have to fix." It sounds to me like you just have a higher skill level with irons than you have with a dot. Here's where you lost me. The lack of clarity you're talking about is in your head. In fact I'd content it's actually the exact opposite of what you're saying. There is more clarity with the dot gun as all the information you want is there for free. You don't have to work for it, all you have to do is put the dot in front of your face and you get precise feedback immediately every single time. I've shot Open for 10+ years now at a decently high level and I've never once felt disadvantaged on a speed course compared to my iron sight shooting brethren.

You're free to think that. Just like people are free to think the Earth is flat if they want to. I however refuse to subscribe to such an idea because it simply doesn't make sense. None of the bells and whistles of an Open gun have ever been distracting to me in any way and I've never heard of another GM saying they were distracting. We're going to have to agree to disagree because I view this sentence as completely and utterly ludicrous. You're saying aligning a notch and post is cleaner and more precise than putting a dot on the target and pulling the trigger. I don't understand how anyone can actually think this statement is true. Once again, I get that you might feel this way because of your results but I think your results have more to do with your personal ability than any built in disadvantage inherent in dots.

Man, I think you're crazy. There is no target I've ever seen at any match in 16 years of shooting that is slower to shoot with a dot than irons. I believe that you like your limited gun more on close targets but that preference has more to do with your personal abilities than anything else. The thought of a built in disadvantage of shooting a dot at close targets? Doesn't exist. The dot is a distraction on close targets? C'mon man. If anything that just means you can't ignore the dot as easily as you can ignore irons. Most people that say stuff like this haven't put very much work into the dot.

Sure, I'll explain some of the mechanisms at work here first. Ankle position is actually a huge deal. Having poor ankle position is a huge indicator for potential achilles injuries, bone spurs, acl injuries, and is usually the culprit behind flat feet. What I define as a collapsed ankle is when the medial malleolus and the navicular bone drop to the floor. This causes a bunch of twisting in the tibia and leads to a valgus knee which then leads to a compromised internally rotated (and possible impinged) hip. In this case the entire kinetic chain has been compromised through the ankle, knee, and hip. Higher risks of injury, less stability, and less force production. You mentioned "having the weight more on the outside of the soles", you're on the right track but there is a bit more to it than that. The ankle joint is a synovial joint, one of the characteristics of synovial joints is that they have joint capsules which essentially is a sack of connective tissue around the joint itself. The capsule is vital to the function of the joint as it provides passive stability by limiting the movement in the joint, seals the joint space, and provides active stability when organized by the person correctly. That organization in all ranges of flexion is external rotation as it "winds" the capsule up and put the joint in it's most effective position. Go ahead and stand up tall with your feet directly under your hips pointed forward. Then squeeze your butt/stomach and try to spin your toes away from each other without actually allowing them to move (make sure you keep that big toe on the ground, he'll want to come into the air). You'll notice your arch becomes more pronounced and you'll feel a bunch of torque generated in your hips. So you're right that the weight is more on the outside of your foot, the difference is between just shifting your weight there (bad) and having the weight there as a consequence of the position you put your body in (good). This is the position I want to back squat or snatch in as it is the strongest and safest position. By extension, I want to adopt the same principles in my shooting stance. Hope this makes sense, I'm sure I can find a video by someone smarter than me if you're a little foggy on what I'm trying to say. Note that the feet don't have to be perfectly straight, but if you turn them out more than 20 degrees or so you'll likely start having trouble organizing the ankle.

Personally, I think the only place relaxation has in the shooting we do is in the mind. I want to be mentally relaxed but physically tight. Through more than 10 years teaching people how to lift, do rudimentary gymnastics, run, etc... I've found that the body tends work better in all things when it has more stability. The way we create stability is by putting our body into the best position possible. For shooting that means stable externally rotated ankles, hips, and shoulders with a neutral spine, rigid trunk, and rigid arms that are straight but not locked. This position isn't something that happens by itself...you have to put your body in that position and then squeeze to hold it there. Obviously you can't do that and be relaxed at the same time. I posted this yesterday in the thread about clenching your butt that describes the amount of tension I'm looking for: So if you stand tall and press your hips forward by clenching your butt cheeks as hard as you can (think prison defense) while at the same time squeezing your belly as hard as possible we'll call that 100%. That's the amount of stability I want if I'm doing a max effort lift. Good posture needs the same overall tightness, but at about 10% of max (all day all the time). When I'm shooting, I'm probably hovering around 50% of max squeeze. It's easy to hold and more than enough stability for shooting a pistol. The last thing I want when I'm doing something athletic is a physically relaxed body.

Tons of shit covered nickels. Perfect lol. So if you stand tall and press your hips forward by clenching your cheeks as hard as you can (think prison defense) while at the same time squeezing your belly as hard as possible we'll call that 100%. That's the amount of stability I want if I'm doing a max effort lift. Good posture needs the same overall tightness, but at about 10% of max (all day all the time). When I'm shooting, I'm probably hovering around 50% of max squeeze. It's easy to hold and more than enough stability for shooting a pistol. The last thing I want when I'm doing something athletic is a physically relaxed body.

I'm glad to see this. If I had a nickel every time I coached someone to squeeze their butt while they're lifting, I'd have a shit ton of nickels. Squeezing your butt cheeks rotates your pelvis into a neutral position. A lot of people that experience low back pain can trace their issues back to constantly overextending their lumbar. The glutes also act to help create external rotation of the thigh/hip socket (The most stable position of the hip in all ranges of flexion is external rotation). One of the most common squat faults is letting the knees buckle in. If you know how to use your glutes you keep the knees in a good position (above a stable ankle) which also helps keep the ankle and hip stable. So to answer your question of how to squeeze your butt when you're shooting, drive your knees out hard away from each other. You can test this by getting into your a relaxed shooting stance, push your finger in the side of your cheek, then keeping your finger there drive your knees out away from each other hard and you'll feel the glutes flex.

That's fine, I have no problem questioning it. He's an amazing shooter but he doesn't do everything perfectly and neither did Kobe. The reason given just doesn't compute for me. Follow through doesn't actually depend on your method of releasing the magazine in any way, shape, or form. The only possible way reloading has an effect on your follow through is if you're moving the gun prematurely to get the reload started, in which case that can easily be sorted out through practice. Adding a new slower movement as a bandaid to fix a tiny flaw in your fundamentals just doesn't make sense at all. I'd rather directly fix the flaw.

Even then, there are other options to fix that rather than using your weak hand to hit the mag release. I know some people do it and it works well for them. For me, it just doesn't make sense to delay getting the fresh mag in your hand.

Yeah he did hit the button with his weak hand at 1:22. The only thing I got is a possible injury to his right thumb. There's no other sensible reason I can think of to do it.

Link me. I'd be surprised if this is actually true.

Some good stuff in the video. Couple of thoughts. The first is, you can certainly continue to do drills like this with the sights on the gun as proven by the thousands of people that have sights on their guns that they ignore. I think the benefits you get from training like this is something that is inherent in shooting an open gun and is partly why using a dot is such a powerful training tool. In the drill you're trying to make your natural point of aim, index, and recoil management very accurate and repeatable. Then between drills you're making adjustments based on what you see on target. I don't live fire much but I try to operate my dry fire in a similar way. My goal is to have the first vision of the dot be precisely where I want it to be. Like you, I'll do a drill and make adjustments between the drill based on what I saw. Sometimes those adjustments will be on aspects of my grip and other times I'll adjust my stance. I'm always trying to move at full speed then make myself more precise at that speed. To me, the reason why drilling like this is so valuable with a dot is the immediate, accurate, and easily assimilated feedback that it provides. I think that doing this without the sights is intended to make your eyes focus on the target (I'm assuming you aren't aiming by looking over the slide, which can be really effective). Mechanically that is really no different than shooting with a dot. You don't have to work for the information like you do with sights. It's just there for free.

I'm not a fan of prepping the trigger in dry fire at all. Pull that thing through as fast as you can while forcing yourself to keep the gun still.

When it comes to open I'm a firm believer that a dot is an advantage or at least equal on all targets and I don't think the comp matters much if you're comparing shooters that have a well developed grip. I've heard people say open guns are slower than limited guns at close distance but I think that's a bunch of nonsense.

Well why don't you specify for us then? Does your one handed practice include targets of comparable distance as the standards we're talking about? If it doesn't, then wouldn't it make sense that if you started practicing them more often that you'd become more successful at it? Doesn't sound like luck to me. I think luck is an excuse people like to use when something is harder than they are used to. It makes people feel better that their skills aren't the problem, the stage is the problem. I've shot targets like this before and I don't think luck is much of a factor unless you're closing your eyes and pulling the trigger. The amount of people that cleaned the stage isn't an accurate representation. Earlier someone posted how the average score per class fit right in order with GM being at the top and D being at the bottom. That's still an imperfect analysis but better than number of people shooting the stage clean. Can you name me more than 5 people that you know practice one handed shooting on targets like this? I bet you can't. I haven't practiced much one handed shooting on targets like this but you can bet I will be doing it more often. If people aren't developing themselves to that level, that doesn't mean the stage is too hard....its just harder than what most people (including myself) can currently handle on demand.

I don't see anyone insulting anyone? I still don't think it's too hard and it sure as hell isn't luck. It demands a level of ability that most people haven't tried to get to begin with and then you have to execute that skill when it matters. I'm pretty decent at one handed shooting and I'd probably throw a couple penalties shooting open. The fact they put that in a nationals makes me want to get better at one handed shooting so that I can handle that if it happens again and capitalize on it. When I fail horribly at some type of stage which has happened more times than I can count it is a golden opportunity to get better. If you're trying to tell me that it is impossible to shoot a stage that difficult well on demand then I think you're crazy. You're talking about practicing one handed shooting more than almost anyone you know, then a few lines later you say: " A shot that is 25 yards away, to a zebra, SHO, and 15 yards away on a zebra WHO is just insane." That tells me you probably don't practice on targets like that. You're never going to develop ability beyond the difficulty at which you practice. It's "too hard" because most people don't even try to shoot zebras weak hand at 15 yards. People gotta stop looking at this like it's impossible and just try and up their game for next time. It isn't luck. It is a neglected area of a lot of people's game.

C'mon man, you're taking it a bit far. That obviously isn't true. It does appear that your one handed game isn't quite up to the level of the rest of your game. That doesn't mean you don't know how to shoot. You've trained people, you know how common it is for one handed shooting to be significantly worse than freestyle. This stage just slapped that into a whole bunch of people's faces. Maybe next year the general level of one handed shooting will be better because of this. In my book, that's a good thing.

I agree that making the stage fixed time would have made it a better challenge. I just don't think doing it as it was is unfair or based on luck...just hard. How did you do on the stage in practice the 20+ times you played with it?