IMGA target neutralization

[BigDave]

I was wondering what the experienced crowd does here with respect to IMGA target neutralization. For example, on pistol targets, say inside 12 yds, do you shoot deliberately shoot one A. Or do you put two on it as fast as you can and move on? Same for rifle.

I really don't what what would be faster, for me. I'll need to set this up during my next practice to see if there is any advantage. It seems like being deliberate about getting that one A would be slower, but maybe that's just me mind playing tricks?

Thoughts?

[D.Hayden]

I think almost everyone shoots 2.

Exceptions might be A/B only presentations next to a noshoot, things like that.

[Jesse Tischauser]

shoot two. its faster. I have only shot one A on a few close targets especially when those extra bullets save me a mag change.

You should practice where the transition is to being able to hit one A without taking more time than hitting 2 on paper. 3-5 yards works for me.

Edited May 24, 2010 by jtischauser

[Corey]

having never shot IMGA rules before....i would crank two off and move along. only on very close shots would I want to just take the single A shot.

[Jake Di Vita]

Why shoot two if you called an A on your first shot?

[BigDave]

Why shoot two if you called an A on your first shot?

Good question. It seems to come down to which is faster: (1) calling an A hit, or (2) making two shots that hit brown? It seems like (2) would be the safest option with IMGA scoring because if your vision/shot calling is slightly off with (1), it costs at least 5 seconds.

[Corey]

I guess it kinda depends on how fast/accuately you can call an A hit. I can see/hit/call the A zone much much faster at 10 feet that I can at 10 yds. Likewise, 10 yds is much faster than 25 yds. i do however feel pretty good about my ability to hit brown at the longer distances fairly well. much of this debate may depend on an individual's ability to A) call shots accurately and how long does it take to get a good enough sight picture to hit the A zone. If it takes an extra half second to line up properly for an A hit, but i can run a spit of .20 and hit brown on both, the the two shots route is the way to go. If it doesnt take any longer to line up the proper sight picture, why waste the extra .20 second for every target?

[Jesse Tischauser]

Why shoot two if you called an A on your first shot?

When you only need two on brown a lot of times you are calling your misses not your A's.

[StealthyBlagga]

The vast majority of the time, a fast double-tap makes the most sense. The only time I would consider one shot is for an A/B-only (head) shot or if I was shooting a heavy metal rifle on a close-and-fast hoser stage if shooting singles let me eliminate a reload (particularly with a FAL or M1A, which are slower to reload). Otherwise, the extra time taken to hold out for an A just is not worth it.

[Jake Di Vita]

Good question. It seems to come down to which is faster: (1) calling an A hit, or (2) making two shots that hit brown? It seems like (2) would be the safest option with IMGA scoring because if your vision/shot calling is slightly off with (1), it costs at least 5 seconds.

Well as has been discussed many times, it is no slower to know where you hit than it is to not know. I would also say if your target is simply whatever is brown, you give yourself a higher chance of missing the target entirely.

When you only need two on brown a lot of times you are calling your misses not your A's.

I'll wager that isn't true for the people who win. That is not a coincidence.

The vast majority of the time, a fast double-tap makes the most sense. The only time I would consider one shot is for an A/B-only (head) shot or if I was shooting a heavy metal rifle on a close-and-fast hoser stage if shooting singles let me eliminate a reload (particularly with a FAL or M1A, which are slower to reload). Otherwise, the extra time taken to hold out for an A just is not worth it.

Sounds like you don't trust your ability to call the shot. There is no extra time required to shoot an A as opposed to a blind shot on brown.

Not to mention if the shot you called was questionable, you have the option of making it up. But to shoot two rounds on every target when it is not necessary just doesn't make sense to me. Figure every time you do that it adds at least .25 to your time. Decide to shoot 8 doubles instead of 8 alphas and all of a sudden your 2 seconds behind before you even start the stage.

[BigDave]

Well as has been discussed many times, it is no slower to know where you hit than it is to not know. I would also say if your target is simply whatever is brown, you give yourself a higher chance of missing the target entirely.

True. But, if we're looking at the people who win as empirical evidence, they seem to have a reason for putting two on every target under IMGA scoring when a single A is as good as two anywhere in the scoring area.

[Jake Di Vita]

Perhaps you should email them to get the answer from the horse's mouth.

Although I would contend that the rifle and shotgun portion of the match have a higher bearing on the results than the pistol portion. In that scenario you could likely get away with less than ideal execution with the pistol, but that doesn't mean it's the best way of doing it.

Come to think of it...it would likely be better to just treat those targets as steel. How much would it effect your score if you shot two rounds at every piece of steel you encountered regardless of whether you hit it the first time or not.

[bigbrowndog]

when dealing with HM, and reduced magazine capacity a single "a" can save reloads, that is primarily why I do it. but only on pistol targets to 10-15yds and rifle targets out to 35ish past that it is too easy to be wrong about your sight picture/trigger press interface when negotiating a CoF at speed.

trapr

[BigDave]

Perhaps you should email them to get the answer from the horse's mouth.

That's why I posted the question here, Jake.

[Jesse Tischauser]

When you only need two on brown a lot of times you are calling your misses not your A's.

I'll wager that isn't true for the people who win. That is not a coincidence.

I won a pistol this past weekend at a major 3 gun match. I consider that winning!

My natural point of aim on a target is the A zone. So every sight picture I aquire before pressing the trigger to the rear is intended to hit the center of the target. I don't have to call A's though because two D's on the line count as a neutralized target. However, you can't just "double tap" the targets in IMGA matches you have to have a sight picture of some sort to know that you are going to hit the target. Sometimes that sight picture may be a mear glance at the target and a one handed sequence of two shots as you run full speed past a target that is a yard away or it may be a full scale sight picture that requires you to see the A zone, front sight, proper alignment up/down & left/right, press the trigger, bang, track sights, A zone, front sight, proper alignment up/down & left/right, press the trigger, bang on a 75 yard target. Watch the PRO shooters shoot a plate vs shooting a uspsa target. The level of sight alignment is much more focused on the steel because a miss on the plate cost you more than an C on paper does. Its all a balance of risk vs. reward and knowing what you yourself can do with your gun at every possible target presentation.

If you can shoot two on paper from your hip with 100% confidence why would you bring the gun up to eye level and track the sights for two shots?

[kellyn]

I would say almost always put 2 on target, even in Heavy Metal where it might mean extra relaods. When you take the time to build up one A shot and then call it good, you will have easily put 2 anywhere. It is so much safer and faster to go with the 2. Watch people shoot one As. They take forever as they really build a good shot, shoot, and then make sure they got an A. Then if a shot is near a perf. or if they can't see it, they shoot again.

There could be some scenarios where you might want to engage only one or two targets to avoid a reload but even then you should probably just put 2 on each and eat the reload. The time you took to reload is probably about the same as the time to definitively shoot those single As and it carries much less risk. Think about it in terms of an entire match as opposed to engaging a single target. We can all engage one target and call an A but at a match, you have to both shoot and call As on every single paper target you engage. Maybe Leatham could do it under match conditions (then again maybe not!) but I certainly can't.

It is not the same as shooting steel as steel gives you immediate feedback. Paper does not.

[Jake Di Vita]

JT,

When I'm talking about people who win, I'm talking about the best shooters in the world.

And I'll answer your question with a question: Do you shoot from the hip out to 100 yards and beyond? If not, why?

Kelly,

I'm actually surprised to read that from you. Do you really believe you can spray 2 rounds at a target faster than you can call 1 shot? At my best, I was able to score the targets real time as I shot them, and I know of several people for sure that do the same thing. It doesn't slow them down.

but at a match, you have to both shoot and call As on every single paper target you engage.

Uhhh yep. Sounds just like any USPSA match in the country. I don't consider this a problem.

It is not the same as shooting steel as steel gives you immediate feedback. Paper does not.

I remember Brian telling a story about the steel challenge a long time ago where a plate on speed option (I could have the details screwed up) had rubber on the back of it to deaden the sound. IIRC he made up the shot because he didn't hear the ding and had two rounds in the center of the plate upon examination later - which is where the not listening for the hit came from.. I wasn't talking about getting feedback from the steel...you get your feedback from the sights of course. My point is you wouldn't take two shots at each piece of steel (for insurance or not) because 1 shot is all that is required. Similar to steel if you call a bad shot (IE, out of or close to out of the A zone) it is well within your purview to make it up - but arbitrarily deciding to shoot an extra shot on every target is not going to give you the best result. Sure it works and it's "safe" but that doesn't mean it's efficient. I remember talking to Max one time after an Area match...he was pissed that he had 6 make-up shots for the entire match. Probably not a coincidence that he wins most matches he enters.

[Jake Di Vita]

Also I should stipulate that this is only concerning pistol targets. I don't have enough experience with rifles to have an educated opinion on it.

[Jadeslade]

Why shoot two if you called an A on your first shot?

Shooting two is faster than taking the time to guarantee an A-there is a time penalty plus FTN for not an A. Any two on the paper is good.

[Bryan 45]

Give me Horner scoring.

But, otherwise I'll fire two to neutralize.

[bigbrowndog]

even better, give me Redneck Tactical's LPH scoring matrix!!!!!!!!! yeah baby.

trapr

[Jake Di Vita]

Shooting two is faster than taking the time to guarantee an A-there is a time penalty plus FTN for not an A. Any two on the paper is good.

I 100% disagree with you here. I understand the reasoning but I believe the logic behind it is flawed. It takes no longer to shoot an A (and KNOW it is an A) than it takes to shoot two anywhere.

[BigDave]

Do you really believe you can spray 2 rounds at a target faster than you can call 1 shot? At my best, I was able to score the targets real time as I shot them, and I know of several people for sure that do the same thing. It doesn't slow them down.

This is what I'm trying to get at. The people who are winning multi gun under the 1a/2anywhere=neutralized rules are some of the very same people who win IDPA, USPSA, and Steel Challenge national and world titles - specifically Butler, Horner, Voigt, Miculek (among others). In the pistol games where two shots are required on all targets (standards and classifiers notwithstanding), if you'd ask I'll bet they all say that they have clear sight pictures on 99% of their shots and 95%+ of those are A hits or down-0 hits. But why does that change when the scoring changes to 1A/2anywhere. And, when it does change, why are all of the top guns making two shots (and getting hits) when they could make one?

FWIW - I think the Steel Challenge comparison has some bunk to it. That, like Bianchi, has little to no variation in target size, location, or presentation. Not to mention the lack of body movement. Multi gun (and USPSA/IDPA matches) is the opposite. With SC and Bianchi, there is a great deal of muscle memory that comes into play that doesn't or can't in multi gun. You know because of hours of practice that the transition from plate 1 to plate 2 on Roundabout is just a certain way. It is similar in the other action shooting sports, but not nearly as refined.

[Bryan 45]

even better, give me Redneck Tactical's LPH scoring matrix!!!!!!!!! yeah baby.

trapr

Trapr, you'll have to explain the particulars of the RT's rules over a bourbon or two next time I see you.

[Jake Di Vita]

This is what I'm trying to get at. The people who are winning multi gun under the 1a/2anywhere=neutralized rules are some of the very same people who win IDPA, USPSA, and Steel Challenge national and world titles - specifically Butler, Horner, Voigt, Miculek (among others). In the pistol games where two shots are required on all targets (standards and classifiers notwithstanding), if you'd ask I'll bet they all say that they have clear sight pictures on 99% of their shots and 95%+ of those are A hits or down-0 hits. But why does that change when the scoring changes to 1A/2anywhere. And, when it does change, why are all of the top guns making two shots (and getting hits) when they could make one?

I have no idea. I haven't shot much 3-gun, but what I have shot that was under the 1A/2 anywhere rules, I always hit each alpha and never had a problem. I'd really like to hear the top gun's reasoning behind it.

FWIW - I think the Steel Challenge comparison has some bunk to it. That, like Bianchi, has little to no variation in target size, location, or presentation. Not to mention the lack of body movement. Multi gun (and USPSA/IDPA matches) is the opposite. With SC and Bianchi, there is a great deal of muscle memory that comes into play that doesn't or can't in multi gun. You know because of hours of practice that the transition from plate 1 to plate 2 on Roundabout is just a certain way. It is similar in the other action shooting sports, but not nearly as refined.

How does target size, placement, or movement have anything to do with calling your shots? We aren't talking about transitions here - I really don't see how this has anything to do with the subject at all.

When you consider that it takes no longer to shoot an Alpha than it does to shoot at brown this boils down to the ability of calling shots. The only reason you would shoot more than one round is if you weren't sure you hit an A with your first shot. Otherwise all you are doing is firing worthless shots (IE; wasting time). I can see this at 25 yards...not at 10 yards. This is a shot calling problem. It's simple math, less shots (more often than not) = faster time.

Also...I know because I read the sights the instant the gun fired. It has nothing to do with muscle memory.