Do master competitors point-shoot?

[Nimitz]

If point shooting is defined as not using your sights in some manner then I would submit that it would be impossible to call you shot since the definition of that skill is to see the sights lift in recoil at the moment the shots breaks, thus knowing exactly where the bullet went with no other required input.

Given this, are you saying the top shooters don't call their shots unless the targets are at distance? Never heard a top shooter say anything but they attempt to call every shot ...

[bigfish]

I at least see the front sight on every shot that has a target more than arms reach away. Hmmmmm, maybe if I extended the range that I didn't use any sights a little farther maybe I could but myself up to G.M.

What I have found is that if you try to point shoot anything more that arms reach away you should get most if not all your hits on the short shots. You don't need the rear sights for a lot of those close shots but if you don't use the front sight you are probably throwing what should be free "A" zone hits away with an occasional Charlie or delta hit

[Chris iliff]

Do I, yes sometimes. Should I, no never.

My absolute best times and runs happen when I simply see everything, .........target, dot, target, dot, target, dot...............

[45dotACP]

If you can call your shot as a good alpha...then you're fine. If you just whip the gun out there and pop off two rounds and don't really know where they went, then you're doing it wrong. Shot calling at very close range is often very easy though, because often a very coarse sight picture will still give you a double alpha providing you don't slap the trigger (like I did on this one 3yd target. Alpha-Mike )

This means you probably shouldn't point shoot. At all. Misses happen even very at very short range.

Edited November 8, 2013 by 45dotACP

[latech15]

I point shoot a lot.

My definition of point shooting is that I am looking at the target only. I pay no attention to the gun other than strictly muscle memory. The distance that I do it is usually 6 feet and under. A good example is when you have a low wall with three or four targets on a 45 where you are basically leaning over and shooting right in front of your feet. Sure, I have thrown a Charlie or two dojng that but it was mathematically worth it for the added speed that I had in doing so.

I have shot with GM open shooters who would literally turn their dot off (or not ever turn it on) for a stage because they claimed that it would slow them down. The targets were nearly all within 10 feet but some were further.

I shot a stage at last years pro am in open without a dot. It was unintentional. It was raining and in my rush to get going before my lens filled with water, I just forgot to turn it on. Those plates were small and far out there and I did ok in the stage. It was still my worst stage but I hit 13-15 or so dojng nothing but looking through a blank cmore and relying on muscle memory. It can be done way more than you would think.

Next time you have your gun out in the living room, draw and aim at a light switch or something small. Don't look at sights, focus in the object and once you are there, look at the sights. If you have some time behind that gun, I bet you will be on the target or really close 9 times out of ten.

[kneelingatlas]

I've shot with the dot off before, but I wouldn't call the point shooting; if the pistol is in my field of vision I'm definetly aiming it, either consciously or subconsciously.

[Magsz]

Im surprised no one has mentioned this yet...

Hard versus soft sight focus.

I dont believe ANY GM out there is forging his sights on any target beyond a very close in, large target.

[Whoops!]

Given this, are you saying the top shooters don't call their shots unless the targets are at distance? Never heard a top shooter say anything but they attempt to call every shot ...

I've personally seen Eric Grauffel and KC Eusebio double tap into no shoots on the second shot. At their blazing speed, it almost isn't even worth it to go back and pick it up because it disrupts the whole rhythm of the stage, in the cases I've seen, they didn't go back and pick it up and they still posted better scores than most of the shooters there on that particular stage. If you ask Grauffel, he will tell you he aims toward the high part of the target for his first shot, because he knows his muzzle will dip for the second shot. Many times, he does not call his second shot even when there is a no shoot partially blocking, until after he has left the target. He has grown enough muscle memory that he knows where the second shot will impact based upon the first for pretty much anything out to 15 yards and doesn't need to waste the time for his brain to process it.

Here's one glaring human factor that many ignore in this sport. The best human reaction time is around .15 seconds. The top competitors are not above this human factor. Very few top competitors are posting .15 second splits and calling their second shot in time for it to be worth going back and picking up. By the time their brain has processed the shot well enough to know where it hit, they are .15 to .3 seconds past the shot. This means they are well into their next target. To transition back to the other target would take another fraction of a second. Then they must rethink the process they had planned for the rest of the stage. A process they had ingrained into their head for about 15 minutes at the make ready command (you all know what I'm talking about). Many of the regular stages they put down are barely above 10 seconds. Lets say the reaction and pick up along with additional transition time takes them 1 second. Boom, 10 percent time penalty to pick up the shot and they still have the negative no shoot points. Lets say the stage is 160 points. They picked up 15 points with the make up shot. Assuming they shot the stage at around 10 seconds instead of 11, it wasn't really worth it for them to pick up the shot and disrupt the plan they had ingrained into their head.

This is another reason transitions are so important. They take time to process and react and the first shot is what matters for the second shot. If you watch one of the top jo's shoot, it's very easy to tell when they see the dot before the second shot. It adds about .10 to .15 to their split.

Edited November 8, 2013 by Whoops!

[BSeevers]

Yes I too have witnessed many top Limited GM shooters remove their

Iron sights on close stages as they would interfere with their point shooting and speed runs.

[BSeevers]

You are aware that Eric at Open Nats 2012 had 1 no shoot. It's was an over the top flopper that was too fast and very few could

Even get 4 shots off. He also only had 3 D's. I think he aims his shots. Or lucky.

[Whoops!]

That was the one I saw, Like I said, he aims his first shot every time. All you have to do is talk to him to get that.

As opposed to luck, I think he is extremely good at knowing his limitations.

Edited November 8, 2013 by Whoops!

[speed]

always see your sights or dot on target

[Rick88]

I have seen many people shoot and win matches without any sights at all. I had a c-more go bad during a stage and shot the next stage just looking thru the lense and it didnt go well, went to the safe area and took it completely off, ran the next two stages just looking down the comp and did very well even cleaned a texas star before it even moved...I put a new one on anyway, but it feels good knowing if it breaks again all I have to do is take it off and still get my hits..

[emjei]

ALWAYS use your sights .... unless you have one of this at home #joke

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[Carmoney]

If you have time to bring the gun to eye level, you have time to use the sights. It doesn't have to be a clear perfect sight picture

I also would not take shooting advice from Ayoob

There is much to be learned from Ayoob. He is an excellent shooter.

[dbooksta]

I point shoot a lot.

My definition of point shooting is that I am looking at the target only. I pay no attention to the gun other than strictly muscle memory. The distance that I do it is usually 6 feet and under. ... Sure, I have thrown a Charlie or two dojng that but it was mathematically worth it for the added speed that I had in doing so.

I have shot with GM open shooters who would literally turn their dot off (or not ever turn it on) for a stage because they claimed that it would slow them down. The targets were nearly all within 10 feet but some were further.

Thanks -- this is the sort of evidence I had been looking for. So sounds like for IPSC-sized targets(?) true point-shooting is often consciously used out to at least 10 feet.

Based on other responses it sounds like "soft-sighting" iron sights -- i.e., seeing the sights on target but keeping focus on the target and not focusing on the front sight -- is consciously done far more. I'd be interested to know to what distances that's intentionally done, whether it varies with sight type, and whether those who consciously practice it suffer penalties or whether they can develop good enough muscle memory that shifting to the front sight provides no benefit in accuracy.

All my guns are traditional notch-and-post, and at least at my level of practice there is a distinct time penalty introduced by the "target, dot ... target, dot ..." transition in focus. Does anybody know of a physiological lower bound on how long it takes to make that focal transition? And maybe does it vary with distance?

[Jshuberg]

I just took a 3 day class from Ron Avery last weekend. He stressed that a person should *always* see their front sight. This was different that how I had been shooting, which was point shooting anything inside of 5 yards. The point of focus may vary depending on distance (the focal continuum), but that a person should *always* see his front sight.

Even when the gun isn't at eye level, when shooting at contact distance or before full presentation during the draw stroke, a person should always see their front sight. It may not appear aligned with the rear if shooting at a level below the eye, but at these distances alignment to the target is accomplished via proprioception, and a person should still see their front sight before making the shot.

Ron's class was absolutely fantastic. I highly encourage anyone who has the opportunity to train with him. It was a real eye-opener on multiple levels!

[OrigamiAK]

 

I point shoot a lot.

My definition of point shooting is that I am looking at the target only. I pay no attention to the gun other than strictly muscle memory. The distance that I do it is usually 6 feet and under. ... Sure, I have thrown a Charlie or two dojng that but it was mathematically worth it for the added speed that I had in doing so.

I have shot with GM open shooters who would literally turn their dot off (or not ever turn it on) for a stage because they claimed that it would slow them down. The targets were nearly all within 10 feet but some were further.

Thanks -- this is the sort of evidence I had been looking for. So sounds like for IPSC-sized targets(?) true point-shooting is often consciously used out to at least 10 feet.

Based on other responses it sounds like "soft-sighting" iron sights -- i.e., seeing the sights on target but keeping focus on the target and not focusing on the front sight -- is consciously done far more. I'd be interested to know to what distances that's intentionally done, whether it varies with sight type, and whether those who consciously practice it suffer penalties or whether they can develop good enough muscle memory that shifting to the front sight provides no benefit in accuracy.

All my guns are traditional notch-and-post, and at least at my level of practice there is a distinct time penalty introduced by the "target, dot ... target, dot ..." transition in focus. Does anybody know of a physiological lower bound on how long it takes to make that focal transition? And maybe does it vary with distance?

 

I think target focusing can be gotten away with better when using some kind of 'high visibility' front sight. I think some good shooting can be done that way. I prefer to get sharp and clear front sight focus for just about every shot. Simply based on feel, I think it takes a couple of tenths to shift focus from the target to the front sight, or from the front sight to the target. I have no doubt that I shoot more accurately, call shots much better, and am more aware of the gun and the sights by focusing on the front sight. Then the trick is to not let that focal shift cost any time (or as little time as possible.)

[thermobollocks]

I always use my sights. The question is how much displacement is acceptable before I crank off a shot. A target 15 yards off may get a hard front sight focus while ignoring the green fiber and instead favoring a notch and post alignment. A target 10 yards off may get hard front sight focused on the green blob. A target 5 yards off may get a green blob centered somewhere on the top of the gun. A target 2 yards off may get a bouncing green blur.

[cpa5oh]

Here's my opinion - when I shoot, I have to see first and then let shots go once I'm satisfied that what I see is going to get me an alpha. So I present, see, confirm/decide, adjust/confirm (if necessary - hopefully not that often,) and shoot while trying to call the shot.

I think when the very best guys shoot they know they are so good at presenting perfectly and controlling their gun through recoil that they're timing their trigger pulls to happen the instant the gun is presented to the target and returned from recoil. So they present and shoot while calling the shot all in the same step. I think they're so good at presenting and controlling the gun that they know they're almost never going to need to adjust so they just watch/confirm while letting shots go as fast as humanly possible. I think that if us mere mortals were to try that we'd be dropping points left and right because unlike them we don't present perfectly and have our gun return from recoil in perfect alignment consistently enough.

That could be completely wrong - they could be going through the same steps every shot just like I do but doing it so fast that it looks like they're not...

[bountyhunter]

My definition of point shooting is that I am looking at the target only. I pay no attention to the gun other than strictly muscle memory.

Me too. I have a laser dry fire training device that goes in the guns bore to practice this skill. I did it for a while and found some things which may be comforting or alarming:

1) At ranges of 7 yards or less, I was hitting a torso silouette target 100% of the time after only a couple of minutes of practice shooting "from the hip". The good news is: in a close range gun fight, the chances of me hitting my target are very high. The bad news: the chances of my armed target hitting me are also very high. MORAL: don't engage in gunfights at close range with an armed target.

2) One thing I noticed is that the higher the gun was when I fired (getting closer to normal sight line) the more accurately I was hitting even though I was intentionally not looking at the sights. Musle memory seems to work better as the muscles get closer to where they are when they usually fire.

Interesting debate: my dad was LE, and he always said the philosophy in life threat (close range) was that the instant the gun cleared leather and was level YOU SHOOT. You keep shooting as you keep bringing the gun up to eye level but you don't wait until you see the sights.

Edited November 16, 2013 by bountyhunter

[TerryT]

I just had a class with a top production GM. He uses a target focus for anything 10 yards and less. He sees the sights, but the focus is on the target. His choice of yardage was based upon how much the sights could be misaligned and still produce an "A" along with how well he could see the sights while maintaining a target focus.

[NicVerAZ]

The last IDPA match I went to, there was a stage with all the targets at less than 5 yards and in the open. One guy on my squad missed one shot on a target. He couldn't believe he missed the hole target at 2 yards.

I bet he didn't see his sights.

He pulled the trigger too fast, that's all.

[Brazos Custom]

Now I just saw Bob Londrigan's article in the current FRONT SIGHT in which he advocates competitors train to point shoot (though not in those words).

I am surprised you got that out of the article, that is not the point I was trying to make at all. What I was saying is that you want your gun to be setup to point naturally to where you want it to hit. You will then use your sights to adjust point of aim if needed. If you set your gun up properly to fit you, you will have to adjust your aim less.

[kneelingatlas]

This forum is awesome!