Jake Di Vita

Uhhh....have you ever heard of the valsalva maneuver? Your statement is simply 100% incorrect. True that your shouldn't necessarily hold your breath while shooting, but this is one case where you can't compare it with lifting.

I think of trying to rip my hands apart, that winds me up pretty good.

I want to make sure my shoulders are in external rotation to stabilize the joint while shooting so I set my holster position as far back as I need to in order to have a point of reference with my forearm touching the grip/magwell and still be in external rotation with my hands at sides. As for your 2nd paragraph, considering the differences in anthropometry, there is really no correct answer. Experiment with it all on the timer and see what is fastest. For me, I don't like DOH holsters at all.

Alright Frank, let's hear it then please.

Adding compression to a joint definitely increases its stability. No it probably won't help if you don't already know how to control recoil, but it will absolutely aid the shooter with adequate skills.

I'm waiting to fly home from Denver right now. My ap will be in the mail tomorrow.

I figure that is the only reason he is still alive.

Link

Absolutely. If only TEPCO had kept up with safety checks on that nuke plant...perhaps things wouldn't be as nasty as they are. "Hey guys, let's build a nuclear power plant by the ocean in one of the most seismically active places on the planet. Then lets put the generators for the coolant system on the ground." *sigh

I pretty much lost interest after the 3rd episode of the 1st season.... Such a great idea, but horrid execution is ruining it.

Any chance of this filling up? I plan on attending, but I'm putting off sending my app in as long as possible.

Taran is amazingly good at calling his shots from looking over his slide. Nice.

Huh? Are you saying we should ignore the rulebook?

I would think the legality of a stage is pretty relevant towards updated match information, but your wish is my command. http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=124001

Perhaps you missed this part: It doesn't say how far the targets need to move to be considered activated, just that they have to move, correct? After those targets move, it seems like they could be hidden in any way. A clamshell is a good example. This clamshell is just with hard cover. Come to think of it, there is a rule stating activated targets must be activated before they are shot, isn't there? That would nullify that idea.

So if that is the case, what if after activating the popper, the targets moved a few inches before the trap door closed. Have we satisfied the criteria for disappearing targets at that point? If not, why?

Erik, for some reason I don't think you've ever torn both of your hamstrings, have you?

Sure. I agree with that completely. I know and understand that a well developed NPA will get you on target faster, but getting on target and hitting the target are two separate things. With that in mind, how does a well developed NPA aid in your ability to pull the trigger properly? Ditto that question for grip and stance.

Link to discussion on Grip, Stance, and NPA

Comfort? Sure. Consistency? Yep. Less tension? I'll buy that too. But I didn't see an explanation of how it helps you keep the sights on the target until the bullet leaves the barrel. Let me try to word it differently. Take a shooter with the best NPA you can imagine. His grip and stance are picture perfect as well, but he flinches hard a millisecond before the bullet actually leaves the gun. Until he fixes that trigger control issue, he will never be an accurate shooter, correct? Now take a shooter with a garbage NPA and a grip/stance that looks like it's out of Charlie's Angels, but the sights don't budge at all when he drops the hammer. This shooter may not be using "correct" technique and probably isn't very efficient, but he can hit whatever he aims at. If we can agree that these are two very plausible scenarios, I don't think that it's a very big leap to say that the determining factor in accuracy is essentially trigger control. Thoughts?

That was the logical progression of this statement: "So grip and stance can effect recoil control... and yet grip and stance has nothing to do with accuracy? Natural point of aim?" It just reads to me like you are tying the two together. Perhaps I misunderstood what you were trying to say? I would assume (because I don't have much experience with NRA Bullseye or Rifle shooting - although I do have some) that they do it from a consistency standpoint. Having as few changing variables as possible in your execution is very important when it comes to succeeding in competition. I think the primary use of NPA is to allow shooters to get on target quicker with less wasted motion. None of these things have an impact on your ability to keep the sights on the target until the bullet leaves the barrel. Let me ask you this. In your opinion, how does NPA, grip, or stance help you keep the sights on the target through the duration of the trigger pull? (When we get down to the nitty gritty, that is all that accuracy really requires).

I can very easily flip a gun upside down and shoot A's at 20 yards all day long with my pinky on the trigger. I don't think anyone would call that an effective grip, but nonetheless, when given a slow fire setting I can be plenty accurate like that. And once again, I agree with XRe. NPA has no impact on slow fire accuracy either. The only thing that matters is keeping the sights on the target until the bullet leaves the barrel. The error you are making is that recoil control effects accuracy - which it does not since the bullet is gone before you actually even feel the recoil.

I don't yet know for sure.

Totally legit. Grip and stance have NO bearing on slow-fire accuracy what-so-ever.