IMGA target neutralization

[Jake Di Vita]

Alright Kurt, fuel the fire more.

[Religious Shooter]

I can see it with an Open gun. But not with a Lim/Tactical/HM pistol.

[dogdoc]

Here's one to contemplate Jake. Last year at DPMS we shot a pistol only stage (remember Kelly...they were 50pt stages ), two shots anywhere or 1A are the rules for that match. I think there were about 12-14 targets with 2 swingers. So, you could shoot 1 per target and not have to reload. Daniel Horner and myself shot EXACTLY the same time, he shot one per target and I shot 2 and had to do a reload. But when I finished, I was damn sure I shot it clean!

Hang in there Kurt, it will work out for you someday!!

Adam Popplewell

[Jesse Tischauser]

Here's one to contemplate Jake. Last year at DPMS we shot a pistol only stage (remember Kelly...they were 50pt stages ), two shots anywhere or 1A are the rules for that match. I think there were about 12-14 targets with 2 swingers. So, you could shoot 1 per target and not have to reload. Daniel Horner and myself shot EXACTLY the same time, he shot one per target and I shot 2 and had to do a reload. But when I finished, I was damn sure I shot it clean!

Hang in there Kurt, it will work out for you someday!!

Adam Popplewell

Very interesting!

So what this proves is that since Daniel didn't beat you by 10+ seconds he must be really slow at calling his single A's?

Edited May 28, 2010 by jtischauser

[Bryan 45]

(I would like to apologize in advance for saying this, I just can't help myself.)

But Jesse, Daniel is only a M in Ltd and A in L-10.

Which are both higher than I am classed!

Edited May 28, 2010 by Bryan 45

[Jesse Tischauser]

(I would like to apologize in advance for saying this, I just can't help myself.)

But Jesse, Daniel is only a M in Ltd and A in L-10.

Which are both higher than I am classed!

I was being sarcastic. But what you are saying is that maybe he is not really that good at calling his shots since he is only an M class pistol shooter? Either way he is arguably the bests in the world at 3 gun. I think Jack may be right after all. If you're the best in the world only shoot one A and quit wasting all of that ammo.

Personally, I can't even spell Mastr class.

Edited May 28, 2010 by jtischauser

[Bryan 45]

Jesse, usually someone as sarcastic as yourself can also DETECT sarcasm.

I tried (1) A at a local 3 gun match that used IMGA scoring. I found the results to be the same as Kelly, it was a memorable experience.

I did use only one round at Benning last year in Heavy Metal on a couple stages, but since anything other than an A adds time, it makes a little more sense.

Edited May 28, 2010 by Bryan 45

[Middle Man]

We've tested the theory of any two hits versus one A here in B'ham a few times over the past few years with GM, M, A, B and C shooters over a variety of short and medium rifle courses with the end results always favoring two hits. There are a very few target presentations were a single A hit is a near lock, like the last target of the course or certain hard cover targets, where some hundredths of a second can be saved and you don't have to "build up the position" like Kelly said previously. Yet, to take the tenths or hundredths of a second (or even a second) to set up and build the position for each and every target (when a Failure to Neutralize is such a big time killer)

It really boils down to the mental training we've built up over tens of thousands of repetitions engaging targets with two from a handgun. Consider what we've conditioned our brains to do at speed with a pistol...

[benny hill]

PLUS, you must be able to hit the "A" zone on demand, I'm a D<D shooter at best.

[Long Range]

As Kurt said, firing two at a 45cm x 60cm aprox. target is faster for most of us, than one at a 28cm x 15cm aprox, one, and until you know what you can do you, do not have a basis for your theories, and there is a reason they are called theories and not facts. there are very few times that I would shoot one at a target, and it is strictly based on mag changes.

Trapr

I don't remember Kurt speaking in metric.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Long Range

[Jake Di Vita]

Do not assume I have no basis in fact for what I'm saying. I have not done what Kurt said for reasons I have mentioned, but if you think I have never put 1 vs. 2 on the timer, you are sorely mistaken.

[bigbrowndog]

I was not assuming I was merely taking the words I'd read in previous posts and deducing that you were not able to make an informed decision based on your own ability, for the reasons you previously mentioned, otherwise you would not have to ask the question as to why the vast majority of shooters can fire 2 on a target faster than they can 1.

As to my reference to theories and facts, your idea is a theory, until you can PROVE to yourself one way or the other. If you have done so already, then your last post would not read as it does. Apparently the replies from those that do are not sufficient for you to see the reasoning behind the decision. So perhaps you should go out and prove it to yourself oneway or the other, we have already come to grips with our decisions.

Trapr

[Jake Di Vita]

Please, keep the comments coming. All you guys are making me do is practice harder.

[TonyH]

All I can say is this: I want all my competitors to use the 1 A on the target system.

Me too! every time we shoot. Let the one shooters come, a 5 second penalty for what you thought was an A now cost you verus .15 for the extra shot.

[benny hill]

Hell, this weekend I shot a rifle only match witch required 2 anywhere & some targets only had one on it & it was not an A. Cannot call all my shots or piss poor shooter.

[Jadeslade]

Benny around here we call those doubles.

[ken hebert]

They were awfully small doubles then...

[Mbauer67]

This was a good discussion about a topic I have been curious about for a little while. I am really in favor of the LPH scoring, or any system that rewards shooters for accurate hits.

But the fundamental point to this discussion should be that every course and every shooter is different, so depending on those factors every shooter should a plan that best utilizes their skills. IMO, there saying that 2 shots on every target is faster, there are just to make factors for every situation.

[XRe]

Apparently, not every top 3-gunner agrees with the majority in this thread....

[Jesse Tischauser]

Please, keep the comments coming. All you guys are making me do is practice harder.

Jack you could never win a match by trying to only shoot one alpha on every target. Heck I bet you couldn't make the top 25.

I wasn't critisizing your ability just trying to make you practice more.

[mpeltier]

This last weekend at our 2-gun tournament I paid special attention to this very thing. It was very clear that those that were doing the 1-A hit shooting were much slower than those doing double taps. That little bit of precision aiming eats up a lot of time. I am not the fastest pistol shot at our club but on these stages I had a faster time than any of the guys shooting single shot A-hits. I even did a standing reload, and was faster than guys who did not do a standing reload, and usually are faster with a pistol.

[Jesse Tischauser]

Apparently, not every top 3-gunner agrees with the majority in this thread....

He finished 2nd to Voigt on the stage. Losing by 14.5%!!! I don't know how Voigt shot it but that's a lot faster.

Several "Scoped" guys beat his time as well on that particular stage. Did he shoot the entire match that way?

Edited June 29, 2010 by jtischauser

[XRe]

Apparently, not every top 3-gunner agrees with the majority in this thread....

He finished 2nd to Voigt on the stage. Losing by 14.5%!!! I don't know how Voigt shot it but that's a lot faster.

Several "Scoped" guys beat his time as well on that particular stage. Did he shoot the entire match that way?

I don't know how Matt shot the whole match, nor do I know how Mike shot the match - however, Matt didn't shoot every stage in that fashion (per his other videos from the match). You might re-read my comment above again and understand what my point was...

Specific to that stage, you might note that something like half the stage is on the shotgun, and loading thereof. It's not hard to imagine at all that another shooter could pick up a lot of time there, especially if they are used to hand feeding the gun, vs. a die hard open shooter.

[Jesse Tischauser]

Apparently, not every top 3-gunner agrees with the majority in this thread....

He finished 2nd to Voigt on the stage. Losing by 14.5%!!! I don't know how Voigt shot it but that's a lot faster.

Several "Scoped" guys beat his time as well on that particular stage. Did he shoot the entire match that way?

I don't know how Matt shot the whole match, nor do I know how Mike shot the match - however, Matt didn't shoot every stage in that fashion (per his other videos from the match). You might re-read my comment above again and understand what my point was...

Specific to that stage, you might note that something like half the stage is on the shotgun, and loading thereof. It's not hard to imagine at all that another shooter could pick up a lot of time there, especially if they are used to hand feeding the gun, vs. a die hard open shooter.

I don't think we are disagreeing on anything here so the is very unnecessary. Especially since I am so bad with a foil. I was just pointing out the fact that by Matt Burkett disagreeing with most of us on this thread he did not even win the stage. It's impossible to tell if he was better off than if he would have gone two on paper. I do know he would have been better off not missing any of those clays with his rifle on the first shot.

You are correct the shotgun portion was very long and could have easily been the difference on the stage too.

I think we need to get Matt's input on his reasoning and perceived outcome of the 1 shot, 1 kill err I mean 1 alpha strategy. Anybody remember his screename here?

[XRe]

I was just pointing out the fact that by Matt Burkett disagreeing with most of us on this thread he did not even win the stage.

But you also noted that strategy wouldn't even get Jake into the top 25... I don't care whether he won the stage or not - the point is that he used that strategy... The prevailing tone of the thread is a "any serious 3-gunner would never take less than 2 shots per target under IMGA rules" beatdown, and I was pointing out that that's not necessarily all that true....

It's impossible to tell if he was better off than if he would have gone two on paper. I do know he would have been better off not missing any of those clays with his rifle on the first shot.

Execution is quite a bit different than strategy, no doubt...

I think we need to get Matt's input on his reasoning and perceived outcome of the 1 shot, 1 kill err I mean 1 alpha strategy. Anybody remember his screename here?

It's pretty easy.... MattBurkett