Robco

The long debated and discussed subject of WHICH target to draw to, has finally been settled for me via live fire experimentation today. In match performances, I have almost exclusively planned to draw to an easy target in situations where 1) we can shoot from the starting position and location and should do so, and 2) in that first array there is another easy target to shoot while leaving. This is not regarding stages where steps must be taken before engaging the initial target - those are another, different controversial subject! Now this will not apply to ALL stages/situations even ones satisfying my conditions 1 and 2 above, for various reasons, but it will to many if not most. So, my thinking and decision was based on the fact that we can always draw faster on an easier target. E.g., the time to initial shot is faster on and easy than on a more difficult target. I further always rationalized that approach by thinking that after the first, easy shots, my grip and focus would be more settled before proceeding to the more difficult targets. Probably true to a large extent, especially if I missed my grip slightly in the draw. I have noted that many top competitors would do otherwise, and I often asked them why. They usually responded, that it was easier for them to speed up than to slow down in an array. Heard it many times, but I never accepted it. Today I tested it at the range. The attached drill layout is what I re-used again for this particular test, although this time I ran it in reverse. I drew to the T5 at 16 yards, then transitioned to the two plates at 17 yards, and then back uprange to T4, T3, T2 and T1 in that order. Long story short, when I ran this drill drawing to T1, then moving on to T2, T3, T4, T5 and ended on the two plates, my times on successful runs, dropping 2 Cs, averaged right around 6.20 seconds, with a draw of 1.21 on T1 at 7 yards. I repeated this many times to get a good baseline for comparison. When I reversed it, Drawing to T5 as laid out above, my average run time with 2 Cs or better, over many repetitions, was 5.54 seconds with a 1.34 draw. WOW! Drawing to the long target made the runs .66 seconds faster with same accuracy level, which is 10.7% less time! So that translates into a 12.64% HIGHER HF !! Which on this "stage" would also be 8.21 MORE stage points! How could that add up in a match! Conclusion: at least as to the extent that this particular sample course of fire experiment proved for me (Limited Major), drawing to the more difficult target is a big winner. Of course some scenarios would dictate proceeding otherwise. By the way, I also have considered this as to deciding whether to wrap into a location to shoot a reach target first upon entry to the location, and then unwrapping on the way out to the easy targets, as opposed to the reverse (In situations where you cannot shoot an easier, sooner-visible one as you enter the position. Max calls this the European Method vs. the American method. I use both and like the European better for the same reason as the Draw target analysis above. Thoughts? Target Focus Speed Drill - Rob Cook - 2-18-15.pdf

Yep. We are only competing with OURSELVES when it is all said and done. Everyone has such different interest and resource levels, it is not even reasonable to try to compete with the top people. No different than golf. If your dad didn't grow up on a golf course with a country club membership, good luck making it in golf. Many try, only a few succeed, and unfortunately, unlike golf, the top people in USPSA usually make about as much from shooting, as, I do shooting! HA!

Wow! You have put a lot of time and investment into the game. I have never actually done much dry fire work, other than learning to draw, speed reloads and some transition and movement work. Once I got up to a decent level on those mechanics I stopped. Stupid as I now see it, and will be starting a much more serious dry fire program now. I never shot a 1911 until I started USPSA, never been in any shooting competition since .22 rifle team in HS. And only shot handguns maybe 12 times before that spread out over the 40 years. So basically started with noting except basic marksmanship knowledge 4 years ago, and no handgun training ever. Hard to make much of a meaningful, specific comment re your query as to how fast we, individually progress. But generally, in my case, I am kind of a natural athlete with good vision and hand eye coordination, though I am pretty out of shape since I do absolutely no exercise other than shooting and rehab stuff on my various injuries from ankles to shoulder and tennis elbow. I need to lose 20 pounds and do a lot more lower body strengthening now, for shooting as well as health. Working on that. I think the main thing that has helped me most, is having an extremely serious and aggressive appetite for knowledge. I hate wasting time or money, and I hate being mediocre. So, if I am going to do USPSA, I am going to find out everything I can to guide and leverage my actual training and ammo and travel expenses. I actively seek out, and then court, the experts in our sport. Easy to do if you go to all the big matches and are not shy. They all appreciate my interest level and are probably amused by my old rookie butt. I do not waste their time. And have even contributed to some of their own teaching abilities as it turns out, by sharing with them all of my experiments and experiences. Many of them have been GM since they were 13 or 16 years old, so have lost some of their ability to empathize with intermediate aspirants like us. I help remind them, while they answer my pointed questions. They KNOW I have spent a lot of time studying it, as revealed in my conversations with them, so they do not feel like they are wasting time helping me. Good guys. Too many to name here! So between buying all the videos, books audios and such I can find and watching them literally a hundred times over, I have crammed a lot of learning and experience into a relatively small time. I have been retired for over 15 years so I can afford the time investment. Like so many complex motor activities, USPSA shooting takes a long time to master - 10 years according to Tomasie, at MY level of involvement and effort. There is a synergy to the submersion method I usually employ, where working so hard at it, 24/7 style, things gel in ways they never could or would had the same exposures and experiences been spread out much more in time. This winter, I decided to really go at it, to get into a true M class performance level. I could get classified as GM anytime pretty easily, and have intentionally avoided doing so. I have already been Class-inflated for over two years now, being M class since the beginning of 2013, I believe, but to date, have only actually shot two big matches at even A class level! Area 7 last year, I shot 79.5% of Travis and Sweeney. So it was legit. But still, mid A !!! Been stuck in the 72-75% range for two whole years, including 14 Area and 3 Nationals. Sucks! But I am my own worst enemy and will soon overcome my self sabotage. I have the skills right now to shoot even high 80%'s, but I have not been ready to actually pull it off yet. I will in 2015. Anyway, spent all of December down in Mesa, AZ, shooting every day. Shot about 18 actual matches during that month, even with the Xmas break, (shot lots of them twice, by registering twice), and practiced at least 2 days a week, plus spent two days training with Nils Jonasson and two with Kyle Schmidt. Both are terrific trainers and guys. Really helped me learn how to practice too. Going back in three days, for the whole month of March to do it all again! So I am not going to have any excuses for not stepping up and breaking out in the 2015 season. But man, what a lot of effort and expense. When I am not shooting, I am reloading or training on something. Or travelling. I will take about 12K rounds down to Mesa Thursday. Had none, 5 days ago when I got back from the Florida open. Finally, talent has a lot to do with any sport or activity. Hard work can overcome a lot and make up for a relative lack of talent, but only so far. Age is not our friend either! I graduated from Rice Univ in Houston after getting admitted "thru the back door" by transferring in with a high grade point from Univ of Hawaii. I would never have had a chance otherwise. Long story short, I found myself in a school where 2 of 3 students were the Valedictorians from their HS! I was barely in the middle third of mine! And it did not make a damn bit of difference how hard I studied or worked, I would only be able to barely keep up. Some of the smarter kids failed due to being lazy, etc. And some of the relative dullards, like me, graduated at middle of the class due working MUCH harder than most had to, but I was not competitive with the smart ones who also worked hard. Not even close. Same thing in USPSA shooting. I might have had a chance at being top 10 at Nationals if I started say, 45 years ago, like Max Michel, KC Eusebio, Matt Sweeney, Nils and on and on. They were all GMs before they hit puberty. So I have no illusions, just like the challenge of being the best I can be at it, and hope I can peak out in top 20 in the next couple years before I am too old and have to start shooting Open! So I like to say, right now, I have all of the ingredients in the kitchen but still do not have the recipe right! (not to say I don't have a lot of room to improve in every aspect of performance, and am working on them constantly). Here is my 2014 Area 7 Match video - my best performance ever, and still a lot of room to grow!

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=208719#entry2341344

Tennis Elbow is so misunderstood that it is almost unbelievable. Look how many of us suffer from it, yet almost ALL the professional advice and treatment is WRONG and completely ineffective, barely even addressing symptoms let alone a cure or prevention. Worse, the standard advice and approach can actually prevent healing (icing for example). Do I have your curiosity? Well I just went thru a new bout of it after doing some intense 1 second reload drills in Mesa in December. Releasing the mag button 40 times in a row in a 20 minute period of 1 shot-reload-1 shot with my Limited gun put me over the edge and in deep doodoo. I shoot full time and wincing every time I draw my pistol does not work for me. So I researched and found this therapist online, and bought and downloaded his simple video instructions on how to do self-therapy for Tennis elbow and it was AMAZING! I have had tennis elbow episodes that lasted 3 years running. This guy's method can HEAL it in a few weeks, permanently. Give it a look. It will blow your mind probably, and will definitely cure your tennis elbow. http://tenniselbowclassroom.com/

Thanks taking the time to make the book suggestions and share the insights from your experience, Rob. I'm reading Brian's book now and it's very helpful. As for my experience and skill level, well, that took some reflection. I'm 62, shot competitively for about 15 years starting in the late 70's (mostly handgun metallic silhouette, some benchrest). Changed careers in the early 90's and didn't have time except for a yearly trip to the range to make sure the old .45 still fired. I started shooting again a couple of years ago, mostly IDPA. I'm kind of a middle of the pack guy who can shoot well when I let myself. Throughout my life I've found that many of the interests that I've pursued have a mental side that ultimately is the most challenging. Whether it's shooting, tennis, golf or playing music. once the mechanical skills are honed to a journeyman degree, the big hurdle to mastery is getting out of your own way and letting it happen. So I've tried a lot of techniques and approaches: visualization, positive affirmations and meditation. All work somewhat, and are generally useful in all that you do. However, nothing works so well for me as quieting my mind and giving it something useful to occupy itself with while the work is getting done. These days I'm concerned more with applying all these things to my life in general, rather than just a sport or an interest. I want to wake up each day to a joyous adventure, greet each moment with open curiosity. I guess it's trite to say "learn to enjoy the journey", but it's also a key. Very interesting Joe. You are definitely a thinking man. Some of what you said above is practically quotation from Lanny Bassham's book! Maturity and lots of life experience do pay off, don't they. You already have a lot more experience than I do in competition. I am confident that will carry over to your current aspirations. The more I work at all of this, trying to improve to a solid/high - M class performance level, the more I realize it is going to require letting go of my own self imposed limitations. I feel lazy often when considering all of this. Mainly because I know how much effort it is going to take to break thru each of the old habits. Today finally got above freezing so I am shooting live fire again, in between reloading sessions. Was 2 degrees yesterday! I am really trying to speed up my shooting and stage times. Now I am focusing on transitions/target acquisition speeds, which is where a lot of the target/sight focus discussions of late have come from. Today, I tried some shooting with the sights both taped up where they could not be seen or used while shooting- just as an experiment to see what that "felt" and "looked" like and to shed light on what I actually do see and look for while shooting. Pretty interesting. It quickly confirmed what I already knew. = I ALWAYS see my sights on every shot including 5 yard shots. Not to say I optically focus on them, but without them at all (when taped over) I really was at a loss both for being able to execute accurate shots and being able to call them at all. I wear corrected eye glasses on my dominant eye simply with a 1X magnification, = reading glass type help. A few days back, I experimented with trying to shoot with plain eye cover, no prescription, and it was a real mess. WITH the corrective 1X lens, I can completely sharply focus on the front sight if I want to, and still see the target at any distance pretty sharply. But the way I shoot most targets, using my corrected glasses, is NOT with a sharp front sight focus. Rather I see the front sight in a middle degree of sharpness which is more than adequate for almost all shots of any difficulty. Without the corrective lens, I cannot see the front sight even at a mid-level of sharp focus, and it is completely debilitating. Having the corrective lens allows me to quickly and easily see the sight in plenty of clarity even if I have a total target focus. So, without the corrective lens, my shooting is no better than if I taped over the sight like I did today. Pretty telling. This result in conjunction with the taping the sight test today, proved that I ALWAYS see my sights while shooting. Period. But again, I rarely have an optical sharp focus on the front sight, unless it is for 35+ yard paper, 15 yard tight partials or maybe 20 yard plate targets, etc. When I really MUST confirm perfect sight alignment due to the difficulty and risk of a target. I would estimate that this front sight focus is called for in only about 15% of the total targets in my match competition, yet I SEE the front sight, albeit not my optical focus, on 100% of my shots. Getting closer to the truth on all of this, the more I experiment around with it all. There is still a lot of work to be done to try and pinpoint how clearly I am optically focusing on the front sight, on targets of varying difficulty. But it is actually natural once we are trained to let the sight picture determine the type of focus and aiming, as well as the type of trigger control required for each shot. I am just trying to figure out how to be fastest with the highest consistency and HF. Not as easy as it sounds. Only by trying all these various options on the same drills, aimed with different methods and all timed and scored for HF comparison, can each of us really know what works best for us. And along the way, we find out things we could not glean intellectually, and many things are actually counter intuitive. Only proper testing can prove the truth. Heading back out for live fire session 2 for the day. Transitions. (And I mean those shot from a static position/location).

I think it's fair to say that not everyone chooses the right places to shoot on the move, but depending on the stage it can make a BIG difference. And, as I've always argued, if you practice shooting on the move, and get good at it, you will realize significant benefits in other areas too. You'll be much more aware of your sights, and it will seem much more natural and instinctive to shoot your way into and out of positions. I think in general, shooting on the move is underemphasized by non-national-level shooters. I agree with all. Sometimes, like on a string of poppers at 15 yards, it is almost always better for iron sights shooters to shoot and run instead. Open might be able to do it on the move, and usually some will, some won't. I discovered the exact same thing when I really started training myself to shoot on the move (SOTM)a year ago (that's right, in my second year as M class I was just beginning to train on it! ). It is the single best way I know of to train a shooter to learn to STAY GLUED to their front sights continuously. And yes, so nobody will think I am contradicting myself, shooting on the move is one of the few situations where I do use a strict, front sight focus! Since the gun is literally ALWAYS moving when SOTM, it is impossible to accomplish or call shots without a front sight focus. Anyone have a different viewpoint on this? Anyway, clearly, the more you can be moving while shooting the faster you can get thru the foot race of each stage (assuming accuracy standards sustained and alternatives like shoot and run are not faster on the clock). I ALWAYS love to find opportunities to shoot leaving and shoot entering locations. The upper body is leaning and moving, even if the feet may not be during these methods, so not strictly SOTM, but very big time savers if done right. But as Max Michel put it, ONLY shoot a target leaving or one entering, "IF you could successfully engage it in the alpha, on the move." Very good decision criteria and advice there. I even bought a waterbed, and set it up on my range to stand on while making it jiggle and swash back and forth under me, while shooting lots of various targets! To make the gun movement arbitrary and beyond my control. Interesting. Not as effective as I had hoped because I used my "sea legs" instinctively to dampen the movement out! Here is a video of it I posted back in July! Some funny sh?t! I will go to any extent to try to figure out how to shoot better!

I think you probably need to be shooting the same or better points for minor, which means you can only afford half as many charlies. Looking at the results from the last few nationals *seems* to confirm this haphazard guess. Maybe you are right. Good on you for checking it out using the nats results.

Cool Nimitz. I cannot wait to get to those parts of Brian's book! Still listening to the first three parts over and over right now (On the Audio version!). Yes, it is interesting to see how many points and seconds are wasted simply by us making POOR choices and decisions on how to shoot a stage. I rarely do any more, but sometimes I am still amazed when I see some other shooter do one differently than I had planned, and it is far better than my way! I just "missed" seeing the oppty when walking thru because I had my mind closed too early in the process. In fact, I kind of rate a match by how many different ways their stages could be shot. When they are all straight forward with little options, it is boring to some degree. And limits the opportunities for "smarter" shooters to exploit and gain an edge due to their creativity. One related thing I learned from Saul Kirsch's videos was that we all have to develop our own database of our own shooting. Time everything in practice so we will know what our transition and split times are at all distances, how long it takes us to run 15 yards, or how distant we can shoot various targets on the move, etc. Only in this way will be able to decide on how to shoot a stage with options available. I recall an awesome example stage in Area 3 2013 (the one where Blake won but forgot to go to chrono!). Anyway, the stage had many targets uprange, and also about 6 paper downrange, 40 yards downrange! There were two shooting areas all the way across the stage, one at the uprange end and one all the way down range, just in front of the 6 targets. So, the options were to shoot uprange arrays then run 40 yards to the downrange shooting area, or shoot all from the uprange shooting area. Man, talking about some math to work out in one's head to decide on that one. Everyone on my squad pussied out and shot all from uprange, and we had a former National champ, Merle Eddington, shooting single stack who I buddied up with. Unfortunately Merle got DQ'd as he began shooting this stage. Rattled by that happening, I took a ton of additional shots on the downrange targets, which were partials!! as insurance. TIME WASTING INSURANCE. Got all my hits but took a ton of additional time. Later, I found that Blake had chosen to make the 40 yard run and kicked butt on the stage. I chose poorly. The accuracy and fast shooting permitted on the downrange targets more than made up for the running time, even if one did not waste so much time on additional insurance shots like I did.

I have had the same experience on poppers. Find myself with a target focus on a popper array at 15 yards and have a miss or two. Then on next array or stage, force a sight focus and no misses. Obviously not only is this all dependent and variable with the target difficulty, but also the shooter's skill level. At 7 or 8 yards, I know I could always get a "hit" on a target as large as 18 X 18 using a "target focus" (remember, that does not mean I do not see my front sight), but we never have such targets in USPSA matches. I shoot plates like that in steel matches often in Mesa at Rio though. In USPSA matches, an open, IPSC paper target is 5-3/4 inches X 11 inches. Did you get that? That is the A zone. Our target is NOT the whole cardboard. It is the A zone on an open target. So, with an open IPSC target at 7 to 8 yards, I can get 2 A hits 100% of the time with a target focus - less than 1/3 the size target of your plate. And it should be said here, at match speed, not group shooting no-time pressure speed. Even from a draw. I am a low-M class limited shooter and think this performance level is representative of my class. If I pushed the speed I might have an A and a close C (less than an inch out of A). And by pushing it, I mean a .90 draw with .18 split. So I am just throwing it out there for you to consider - that this may simply be a training/skill level issue and not a focus or aiming method issue in your case. Getting hung up on a front sight optical focus as a holy-grail will be very limiting in your progress and performance level. You might be better served training yourself to see more while shooting - something I have had to work hard and long at, and still working at it. That seems to be the right path to faster and more accurate shooting universally - where you would, on your stated 18 X 18 plate at 7 or 8 yards, not focus optically on EITHER the front sight or the target, but SEE all of them! (Enos Type 1 and 2 focus). Read Enos' book part 3 about the different types of focus/aiming methods to get a broad perspective on this subject. Might save you some struggling, as it has me.

You go that right.

Not me. BUT I long ago changed my STI Edge sights to Brazzo's "Manny Dot" sights, which Bob created with/for Manny Bragg. They are WAY tighter and smaller than anything Proctor was discussing, and I feel make it almost an "unfair" advantage over others without them. They significantly help on difficult shots, and I do not feel they slow down fast shots on easy targets at all. Shot over 100 matches with them and 100K rounds, and cannot imagine ever changing. "Designed in collaboration with USPSA Champion Emanuel "Manny" Bragg, the MannyDot offers the brightest fiber optic sight with the narrowest post. The top of the post is a narrow 0.070" wide. It then flares down to 0.100" wide at the base to provide added strength. The fiber optic is recessed behind this serrated post to create a precise 0.040" diameter dot which is located as close to the top of the post as possible, thus, allowing you to use the dot as an aiming point. The MannyDot pairs especially well with the Wilson adjustable rear sight with the 0.090" wide notch... http://www.1911store.com/lightningrodmicrodotstisv-2.aspx

Interesting point. Of course, at what speed draw? I can barely get 2 A's at 7 yards in 1.0 seconds with my eyes OPEN! This is I believe what people call natural point of aim. One thing that has not been mentioned in this string, I believe, is sight alignment being ASSUMED. Per your assertion OnePocket, I have trained my hand eye coordination to be able to point my pistol where I am looking, naturally, instinctively, just like we all can with our finger. We all do that to one degree or another, and this should be taken full advantage of on easier targets, for the sake of speed. Using an always-on laser cartridge insert is useful in providing instant feedback loop for training this coordination in dry fire. Look at target, present pistol to aim at the point you are looking at, without using the sights, observe where the laser is hitting, then check sight picture, adjust and repeat, a thousand times! Part of this skill and coordination is that I can hardly hold my pistol and present it without the sights being almost perfectly aligned automatically. You can check this with the laser insert too. This has to do mostly with a proper, balanced grip and a lot of dry fire practice. Essentially, this is how the old west gunfighters operated, and got off a quick and accurate first shot! At least if you believe all the cowboy movie BS we have all been steeped in for 85 years. But for we USPSA competitive shooters, we can and should use this type of aiming (Enos calls it type 1 focus) on close, risk free targets when we can successfully do so with 2A. Brian says he does not even call these type one shots, because he is not really seeing the sights at all (as I understand him to say). He goes on to say, I believe, that on type 1 focus he has NEITHER a target or a sight focus. Makes sense and comports with my own experience. Knowing your own capabilities and limitations as to when to use Type 1 aiming is key, as with any other type of focus/aiming. Very much true regarding shooting on the move too. Max Michel says that the first thing to decide about whether to engage any targets in a stage on the move, is whether you should or not. Manny Bragg taught me that I had a max of 7 yard range within which I could engage full IPSC targets, where I am moving sideways parallel to them. At 7 yards I could consistently shoot all A's on each of the 4 paper. At 8 yards, I would start dropping points. Many repetitions of this run proved this out. Guess what Manny's max range was for these same targets? 8 Yards! Only one more than me, and he is a top 10 in the world shooter of course. Yet in matches, time and again I see C and even A class shooters studying stages and planning on shooting partial targets, moving parallel to the targets, at 10 yards (this would be max of 4 yards for Manny), or full targets at 15 yards! Good luck to them! Here is another post in another thread on the subject. http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=209995&page=2#entry2339858

Joe_Atlanta - a lot of interesting observations you made. I think you described some of the concepts revolving around "letting go" of conscious control of your shooting and letting it flow. Not sure of your experience or skill level (do not see you listed as a USPSA member), but sounds like you are on the right track in many ways. I have found that we are usually our own worst enemies in competition, so much so, that the winners of most matches are the ones who simply make the least mistakes! If you have not already done so, you should obtain and study at least a few books that speak to the mental aspects of competition shooting. 1) Lanny Bassham's With Winning in Mind, I have read it and listened to his video version of it 15 times - the FOUNDATION of my mental game now. http://www.amazon.com/Winning-Mind-3rd-Ed/dp/1934324264/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1424627853&sr=8-1&keywords=bassham+lanny 2) Brian Enos' Practical Shooting, beyond the Fundamentals (which I am currently listening to on Audio MP3 files you can download now for $10) http://www.brianenos.com/store/books.html 3) Steve Anderson's new Get to Work book - his third book - which has helped me understand competition considerations more than I had ever been able to figure out on my own. http://shop.andersonshooting.com/Books/Get-to-Work.html There are many other good books out there, all of which add a lot to the total picture and understanding of how cerebral our shooting competition is. Another thing I am learning about myself and my game now, starting my 5th year of competition shooting (USPSA Limited), is that the real key to successful competitive performances is consistency. Assuming we work and acquire all of the necessary skills and knowledge, it is all wasted if we constantly drop the ball when it matters, in competition. So the above reading materials will help us, eventually, become more consistent in competition performances. And remember, as I am finding, despite all of my huge efforts and investments in this sport (I shoot full time, 50K rounds per year,USPSA only, and shoot ALL of the Area matches and the Limited and L-10 Nationals, among at least 30 other Level 2 and club matches per year and have my own range at my ranch) - you will not go from screwing up 8 of 9 stages in a match, to not screwing up ANY stages, over night. It is a long process. Be patient. I have gone in the last 4 years from screwing up 8 out of 9 stages a match, to now maybe only screwing up 1 or 2 per match. And it has been grueling and frustrating, KNOWING I had the ability to shoot them all much better, but not being "mature" enough yet in the sport, to actually execute to that level of consistency. And I am not anywhere done aspiring or improving, to the contrary, I am still learning how much I do not know, and how weak so many of my skills are! While that is a little depressing, after all the effort and investment I have made in the sport, it is also encouraging, because I am finally shooting in my nominal classification level, (almost) after shooting in big matches 2, and last year 1 class beneath my nominal M class. To make my quest a little more, perhaps overambitious, is the fact that I am 56 years old! So I have to work more on my physical condition too! I get tired of spending $25K a year (travel, ammo, parts, match fees, etc) not counting any value of my time, on USPSA competitive shooting, and not progressing as quickly as I "feel" I should be. I almost "quit" after Area 4 last year, and on the plane flight from Area 4 to Area 8 (the same weekend!) I sat next to Travis Tomasie and Max Michel, who I have met and known for a few years (by brown-nosing up to them at every oppty I could make!). Travis was right next to me across the isle so we talked about shooting the whole time and he assured me that 1) I am on the right track, 2) it takes 10 years , at my considerably high level of involvement, to get to the top tier level of shooting performance! WOW! I had figured only 5 years, so had a grossly unrealistic expectation for my progress. So in actuality, I have 6 MORE years now, starting on a pretty good current foundation, to climb slowly up the ladder. I am confident I can, get to at least shooting 88% to 90% of the top shooters, probably not any higher, due to my age and talent level, etc. But that is a long way from my current 75-80% level in capability. Gains will come slow and small from here on out for me, and that perspective keeps me grounded and a little more patient with my rate of progress. I trust that the big JUMP in my match performance will soon come as a result of mental control, which will permit me to actually shoot to my real ability, and not sabotage my performance as typically occurs now. And the cool thing is, this jump to 85% could literally happen overnight without further training or rounds fired! It is as simple as being able to DECIDE to shoot within myself, at my current capability, not trying to be faster or whatever at match time, and then having the mental control to execute on that decision. We will see in two weeks at Area 2! Anyway, hope this helps a little.

Good find CrazyGiant! This guy in the comment below Proctor's article, said what I have not been able to put into words. Excellent! This will now become my description of how I aim in USPSA iron sight competition shooting. David says: February 15, 2015 at 04:44 I strongly agree with Proctor regarding a less emphatic theory of front sight focus. Most people should be able to optically focus their eyes on the target and still have enough visual data regarding the alignment of the front and rear sights to make very accurate shots. That said, I emphasize mental focus on the sights; you can optically focus on the target (target is clear, sights are fuzzy), but you need to mentally focus on the sights to consistently get solid hits. I call this “cross focus”....

I used to compete in cowboy fast draw. Pure hip shooting. Funny thing was there was kind of a parallel to visual patience with that sort of hip shooting. IIRC we shot a 21 inch diameter steel plate at 10 yards ( with wax bullets) Fast draw is purely head to head. You shoot elimination heats so all you have to do is beat the guys next to you on the line. I had 3 different "draws" First was flat out... Breaking the shot as soon as I cleared leather Second was my "66"... Meaning I'd get the hit two thirds of the time, albeit a touch slower Last was the sure thing... Still shooting from the hip, but index refined enough for 95% hit reliability. Without boring you guys on fast draw competition strategy there was a time and place for each of these. I bring this up because the amount of "focus" put into any shot seems to always be a balance of patience and time. If only I could reconcile that skill set with shot calling Ultimo-Hombre - interesting points. I have, intentionally, kept a very narrow shooting experience. I have not even branched out into other divisions in USPSA competition. So it is great to get broadening perspectives like yours here. My first reaction is that it is notable that you had various responses (draws) you could execute on at will. This is very much like USPSA shooting. Of course, in both sports, the draws are the same, up until the point in the movement where the aiming begins. And then, there are many different methods of aiming. Enos says there are 5 types of "focus." I am still trying to digest all his points. But clearly, there are at least three. And the target and situation as well as the shooter's skill level are what dictates which type is to be appropriate for that particular execution. I think shot calling is a confusing subject. In its simplest form, it means KNOWING where the muzzle was aimed when the shot was released. This can be accomplished in various ways apparently. Shot calling allows a shooter to confidently move on from a prior shot execution, confidently, thus enjoying the efficiencies of so doing. What is confusing is that it does NOT necessarily mean seeing the front sight rise in recoil, per se, and certainly not necessarily with a front sight focus. Or, alternatively, you may not NEED to call a shot on a particularly easy target. Not sure which is "true." But the main point is that you need to SEE enough, to know that the shot was successful, at the earliest point in time, so the shooter can move forward without hesitation. Follow thru is often related to shot calling. And follow thru is a matter of timing, where a shooter allows the sights to return to the target out of recoil, before moving on to another shot or target. This has been called "buying insurance" by Manny Bragg. The patience to wait only a few hundredths of a second to allow the sights to settle from a transition or recoil, can assure an accurate shot. In the scheme of things, this insurance premium (extra 5 hundredths of a second per shot) almost always saves more time and points than it costs overall. Not sure if this even is responsive to your last sentence or not, but it is what occurs to me.

Question = how can you reference/link another thread and post from the enos forum, into a new post? There is a whole other discussion on target focus I could not find by searching, before getting into the subject in this string, that I found last night.

I had never really heard or known anything much about "point shooting" until I started on the enos forum a few days ago, but I did state that what Taran is doing in the "hip shooting" video, is NOT what I (or he) do in a match or in USPSA shooting. So without commenting on the semantics issues, I would just reiterate that when me, or Stoeger among others, speak of "Target Focus" aiming, we are NOT saying we do not see the front sights in relation to the target. We ARE. Just not focused on the sights. And doing so allows shot calling. No way hip shooting can permit seeing the sights at all, meaningfully. It is pure hand eye coordination I would assume. And the only way these shots can be "called" is by the resultant hits being observed. Too late in other words.

Is this the one you are referencing Onepocket? It is a PERFECT example, of how much faster a trained shooter can operate using purely target focus. Not that I would do it in a match, and neither will Taran, but it does illustrate the possibilities if we lose the traditional "front sight focus" brainwashing for a moment. Of course, it is impossible to call a shot without target feedback, if you cannot at least see the front sight peripherally, as in seeing THRU the sights.

Onepocket - that is wise. I have learned from Manny Bragg, among others, to track your match results in many ways. A chief accuracy and speed check as you discussed and mentioned, it what % of points possible you shot, before penalties applied. This should be between 92 and 94 for major PF, maybe a point less for minor? When you shot 94%, you were probably too conservative and slow. Either you shot slowly to be more accurate, or you took a lot of makeup shots to get better hits, but wasted time doing so. If you are under 91% you were probably running the gun to fast, and were a little sloppy. However, in matches with tons of partials, this will be lower for obvious reasons - a smart shooter plays it safe and aims away from the N/S and Hardcover, thus giving up A's intentionally for risk management.

Makes perfect sense Nimitz. That occurred to me, and I think I mentioned it briefly, but you are thinking right. That said, remember that Ben Stoeger started all of this! (i.e., he shoots Production) I can change the scoring from major to minor in Practiscore and see what difference it would make, but that is a nonsensical comparison due to the difference in recoil and thus shooting speeds on splits. In other words, the reason that minor PF is scored differently than Major is precisely for the reason of equating the minor and major PF, everything else being equal. Attached find the results of my Target focus speed test, posted a couple days ago, AMENDED now with three columns added to the right, showing the PF as if I scored it minor, and the differences between Major and Minor PF in %. Not surprisingly, the PF suffered most in the fastest runs, due to poorer hits, when minor scoring applied. BUT the Minor HF on the fastest/least accurate runs is still way higher than on the slower and more accurate Minor HF runs. So the theory and effect of speeding up still is advantageous within this sample anyway. Plus I could have shot it faster with a minor PF, so the results would be even more impressive in the Minor comparison. Power Factor comparison in Target focus Speed test data - Rob Cook - 2-21-15.pdf

Cool. See you at the Area 1 match, 2015.

I am a member of the drinking class.........

Yes Ultimo-Hombre. Tough match for me.

HA! Time-sharing - not multitasking! By the way Brian, I have already listened to half of the book on tape yesterday when I received, it. Much easier for me to get through than when I read it, because I get bogged down as my mind wanders off exploring almost every point you make in the book = so the audio keeps me focused and rolling on through the material. Funny huh. I graduated from law school at age 40 yet learn 10 times better by audio/visual means other than reading! Listened a couple hours while reloading 1K rounds after midnight last night, and not a single reject round! Awesome. Thanks