Vision vs. Visual Patience ?

[spook]

Perhaps...we might think in terms of seeing what we need to see to call the shot?

Yes, but if the sights are on the target, the gun is on the target. And if you keep it there while the gun fires, the shot is made. Doesn't calling the shot imply a hole in the target right where you called it?

Or even shorter: isn't "seeing what you need to see to make the shot" the same as "calling your shot"?

[Jake Di Vita]

Not necessarily. There is a difference between calling the shot and making the shot. Making the shot implies a hit to A box, plate, popper whatever. Calling the shot means you knew if it hit or did not hit and exactly where it went.

Therefor seeing what you need to see to make the shot could take more time than seeing what you need to see to call the shot.

[spook]

Making the shot implies a hit to A box, plate, popper whatever. Calling the shot means you knew if it hit or did not hit and exactly where it went.

Sounds logical Jake, but I still don't understand how you can see what you need to see to make a shot without calling it

Can you perhaps give me an example?

[Loves2Shoot]

I'll chime in, sometimes shooting steel I use a foucs where I just know I'll hit the plate, I really don't care where, just that I hit it. I've shoot steel plates at 25 yards when I don't recall seeing anything, I just heard the shots hit the plates, without that feed back I would have been clueless I hit the target. That isn't shot calling.

When shooting paper I (try) to use a focus to hit the A box, and that focus usually requires that I know where in the A box the shot is. That is shot calling.

Similiar but very different.

[Flexmoney]

(spook)

You can point shoot with a target focus...that is one way that pops to mind.

In fact, I'd bet that just about everybody posting on this thread could step into the start box, close their eyes, draw and shoot...putting two good scoring hits on the target. (And, with the talent here...probably at a distance greater than just a few yards)

[Flexmoney]

As an example (with a video from Ron)...

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=89&st=30

We shoot the above stage at the local, monthly steel match. Target at 8y.

I can shoot this target/stage from my index. Heck, I know I can shoot it without sights on my gun.

I can see what I need to see to make the shot. But, it is slower than it would be if I had my vision collecting the maximum data to give me feedback on calling the shot. Calling the shot lets me go faster.

[spook]

I've shoot steel plates at 25 yards when I don't recall seeing anything, I just heard the shots hit the plates, without that feed back I would have been clueless I hit the target. That isn't shot calling.

L2S, but when you're hearing the steel for feedback, you're still not seeing what you need to see to make the shot (SWYNTSTMTS). When you're SWYNTSTMTS, it implies that before the bullet left the barrel, you saw something that made you conclude the shot was going to hit the target. You knew the bullet would hit the target.

If you make a distinction between SWYNTSTMTS and SWYNTSTCTS it implies that in SWYNTSTMTS, you see enough, but not the sights with great precision.

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of calling your shots all the time. But I'm just trying to figure out the difference between SWYNTSTMTS and SWYNTSTCTS.

I can see what I need to see to make the shot. But, it is slower than it would be if I had my vision collecting the maximum data to give me feedback on calling the shot. Calling the shot lets me go faster.

Flex, I know what you mean. Could it be that you shoot it faster because you're not "consciously" pulling the trigger? You're shifting your attention to your sights/vision, leading it away from your trigger finger. Your subconsciously pull the trigger. Resulting in relaxed (read: faster) triggering.

Focussing on pulling the trigger fast, leads to tense slow triggering.

When I think of close-by stuff that you could point shoot, I think relaxed shooting is the key. Could it be that because we have nothing else to focus on on those targets, we automatically focus on triggering and speed? If this is true, I'd say calling your shots on those targets is just a distraction with the goal of being relaxed.

[benos]

To me it helps to keep "calling the shot" and "making the shot" as far apart as heaven and earth. They may meet, or they may not.

Calling the shot only means seeing what you needed to see to know precisely where the bullet went before it hits the target. Then... Did the shot hit the target?

Knowing the shot did not hit the target before it didn't is as valuable as knowing it did.

"Making the shot" has to do with your will or intention, and is known by way of your call. Why I've learned it's good to distinguish the two (willing and calling) is because too much will can detract from your ability to call shots. We're so used to wanting and trying, after some time we don't even notice we are doing it let alone that it is not doing us much good.

Often our attention is used up by wanting to have a good score, or wanting to shoot a fast time. Experiment with a few practice sessions by having your goal be to know where each shot went (before you score the target or hear the steel) instead of the customary "shoot a good score" routine. Before you shoot each string, visualize the scoring area of each target, then what the sights are going to look like as they arrive in the scoring area. Then completely forget that. Then, before the buzzer, set your resolve to know where each shot is going as it fires. Give over 100% of your attention to calling and knowing, as opposed to trying or rushing. Try it for a while and see how it works. Lose yourself in knowing...

be

[spook]

OK, I gave this thing some thought.

The big advantage of calling the shot to me seems:

You can cut away everything from the moment the sights lift. That's when you can move on. I think this should be the fastest thing in every situation where you use your sights the "traditional" way.

But still, moving away from an array where the last target is an arm's lenght away, I'd never use my sights and "call" my shot. It would take more time to aquire the sights than to just shoot the target (although the strange thing is that in big matches, I tend to use my sights even on the closest targets)

[Loves2Shoot]

I've shoot steel plates at 25 yards when I don't recall seeing anything, I just heard the shots hit the plates, without that feed back I would have been clueless I hit the target. That isn't shot calling.

L2S, but when you're hearing the steel for feedback, you're still not seeing what you need to see to make the shot (SWYNTSTMTS). When you're SWYNTSTMTS, it implies that before the bullet left the barrel, you saw something that made you conclude the shot was going to hit the target. You knew the bullet would hit the target.

If you make a distinction between SWYNTSTMTS and SWYNTSTCTS it implies that in SWYNTSTMTS, you see enough, but not the sights with great precision.

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of calling your shots all the time. But I'm just trying to figure out the difference between SWYNTSTMTS and SWYNTSTCTS.

I'm sorry if I confused you with my description, I meant to say I didn't know where on the target I hit, only that I knew I hit the target. I'm long gone by the time I hear the sound.

BE described it much better

[mcoliver]

This has been bugging me lately because I "caught myself" doing it.

I noticed most of my misses or uncalled shots were due to incorrectly applying the type of focus I need to correctly see what I needed to see. I may think the sights are right, but the sight picture (with the target) may not be what I thought it was?

[spook]

I'm sorry if I confused you with my description, I meant to say I didn't know where on the target I hit, only that I knew I hit the target. I'm long gone by the time I hear the sound.

No confusion here L2S. I know what you mean. I think that just knowing you've hit the target, but you cannot say where precisely, will still leave you with an uncertain feeling when you move on to the next one.

"Making the shot" has to do with your will or intention, and is known by way of your call. Why I've learned it's good to distinguish the two (willing and calling) is because too much will can detract from your ability to call shots. We're so used to wanting and trying, after some time we don't even notice we are doing it let alone that it is not doing us much good.

I'm going to take this to the range Thanks!

[Loves2Shoot]

I'm sorry if I confused you with my description, I meant to say I didn't know where on the target I hit, only that I knew I hit the target. I'm long gone by the time I hear the sound.

No confusion here L2S. I know what you mean. I think that just knowing you've hit the target, but you cannot say where precisely, will still leave you with an uncertain feeling when you move on to the next one.

"Making the shot" has to do with your will or intention, and is known by way of your call. Why I've learned it's good to distinguish the two (willing and calling) is because too much will can detract from your ability to call shots. We're so used to wanting and trying, after some time we don't even notice we are doing it let alone that it is not doing us much good.

I'm going to take this to the range Thanks!

Precisely

When I feel hurried I am usually slower than when I am an observer and precise in each shot.

[Flexmoney]

btt

[JThompson]

Not necessarily. There is a difference between calling the shot and making the shot. Making the shot implies a hit to A box, plate, popper whatever. Calling the shot means you knew if it hit or did not hit and exactly where it went.

Therefor seeing what you need to see to make the shot could take more time than seeing what you need to see to call the shot.

That's me... I often don't have the patience to wait or I see I jerked it off when it broke I seldom take a mike because I'm good at calling, but still need work on the patience side.

Edited September 27, 2008 by JThompson

[38supPat]

btt

Lol...looking up some old threads huh?

[benos]

Many IPSC shooters do everything rushing around or in a hurry. It's in their blood - it's what draws them to IPSC shooting as opposed to Bullseye shooting.

I continue to apply the lessons I learned in shooting to the things I do every day. All mistakes I make while working on my computer are all corrected by not rushing. As time goes by I'm getting more and more effecient - seldom ever looking at the keyboard to type any key.

In the computer analogy, rushing in the beginning of the learning curve built in some bad habits. I learned to touch type all the letters, but I never took the time to learn to touch type the numbers above the letters, or the number keypad, or the arrow keys. It always seemed faster just to look or quickly glance for those. But now, once I trained myself to touch type everything on the keyboard - I'm so much faster overall. And with less effort.

It's the same with making coffee, washing the dishes, or sweeping the floor. Everything gets done better if I'm calm, aware, and not rushing.

be

[STI2011]

I don't think that I have any semblance of visual patience. I think that when I get into the shooting box my brain shuts off any consious thought of sights, sight picture or calling any shots and I run through the stage as quickly as functionally possible rather than visually possible and my scores certainly reflect it (I should change my name to Mike). I know this and I tell myself that I need to slow down and get my hits but, I guess I have a mental defect that will not allow me to slow down.

What is the most effective way of reversing this? [short of seeking psychiatric help ]

What training methods are there to increase/enforce visual patience?

Edited December 7, 2008 by glockman2000

[Flexmoney]

I don't think that I have any semblance of visual patience. I think that when I get into the shooting box my brain shuts off any consious thought of sights, sight picture or calling any shots and I run through the stage as quickly as functionally possible rather than visually possible and my scores certainly reflect it (I should change my name to Mike). I know this,

What you said realize above...is in complete conflict with what you say next...

I tell myself that I need to slow down and get my hits but, I guess I have a mental defect that will not allow me to slow down.

"Slowing down" is still a focus on speed.

You aren't missing because of how fast (slow) you shoot. You are missing because you aren't looking. You are glazed over with the pedal to the metal.

What is the most effective way of reversing this? [short of seeking psychiatric help ]

What training methods are there to increase/enforce visual patience?

Change your mindset. Make seeing you ONLY priority. Fast or slow has nothing to do with it. Put your vision in control.

[STI2011]

After posting my comments, I remembered that I had an autographed copy of Brian's book around here somewhere that I had partially read about 10 years ago. I've now found it and am going to read the entire book this time.

Thanks for posting this topic and thanks to everyone for taking their time to share their knowledge. This is a great Forum.

[el pres]

Lots of good stuff in this thread!

Applying visual patience (calling the shot) became massively important to me after I realized that it was the most erroded skill - of all the physical and mental skills we practice – in competition.

And that is the big question ?? To me, in my shooting right now, I'm debating weather this is an acual physical skill for

me or is it all a mental skill. Is it something that I can physically practice like a transition or is it something that I just

need to "mentally/pysically" practice by deliberatley doing.

I, like most of use, find myself constanly in the speed trap. If I say to myself, "ok, all A's", I do it but I get beat by three hosers with C's and D's. So I bring out the go fast mindset and the consistancy goes out the window. One run the sights are crystal clear, I win the stage, and the next they are a speeding mess and I throw in a Mike, or two, but it was fast .

What I'm saying is that I'm seeing this in a different way now. The skill is always there but it's not the gun I need to be controling it's myself, which is "much" more difficult then the gun !! Controlling not the acual act of seeing or calling or whatever but controlling myself from getting in the way of these skills...

[Jake Di Vita]

The widely accepted 10 general physical skills are: Cariovascular endurance, strength, stamina, flexibility, power, speed, coordination, accuracy, agility, and balance. The first 4 are organic (measurable). The last 4 are neurological. Power and speed are equal parts both.

In terms of what we do in practical shooting, I believe that the vast majority of our skill level and improvement comes from neurological gains.

I'll probably get a lot of flak for this one, but I'll put myself on record here and now saying that I don't think it is possible to improve your shooting ability if you are calling 100% of your shots accurately. In matches, that's exactly what you should be doing. In practice, you need to be pushing the envelope if you want to grow and adapt.

[j1b]

I agree Jake. Though I also am one that believes there's even balance in a match. When I was super active it was evident that everyone was pushing, everyone was getting as close as they could to their LOHF. Backing off meant better hits but lower placement in the match.

One thing that I wanted to emphasize in this thread is that this stuff is hard. I mean really hard.

I did a quick snapshot of the last two years nationals. In 08 of the lim, lim10, prod, and open champions nobody escaped without at least one miss or no-shoot. Sevigny was the cleanest with 1 no-shoot and 7 D's. That's pretty flawless. Still, I'd say that a commonly held belief in the upper ranks of the game is that many D's are lucky misses. Yes they count, but it indicates being on the edge at least for that specific shot. I'd hazard a guess and say a great deal of the D's shot in competition aren't called, or at least indicate that the shooter is really hanging it out there.

In 07 the results were similar. Leatham's Lim10 match was probably cleanest with 5 D's and 1 no-shoot. Again I'd call that flawless. Max's open match is a prime example of how tough the game is. He had 8 d's, 3 misses, and 2 no-shoots. And won.

This vision thing is tough. And there isn't a tangible answer. But any and all improvement yields exponential results. There was a statistic out there that I think relates similarly to the rewards of vision and seeing. In the last 10 years at the indy 500 the total summed difference between first place and second place is something like .96 seconds. So that's roughly less than a tenth of a second per year. Over hours and hours of racing. The payout difference between first and second isn't quite as small. Millions of dollars difference.

That to me is how this vision thing works. First, you gotta keep pushing because the smallest difference results in the biggest rewards. Second, it isn't defined in terms of when you have "arrived" so don't approach this journey as if there's a destination. There isn't. You can be better - always. Finally, that one little thing you see better today than you did yesterday makes a huge difference.

For those that struggle with this idea I'd like to present an interesting idea to you. What if a shooter is struggling so much with their shooting, but a little camera was installed in their head and then the same camera was installed in TGO's head - what if the difference in what they saw couldn't be perceived it was so small?? Cause I suspect that's an exageration, but not a huge one.

ETA: I re-read this last sentence and it sounds stupid. What I intended to say is that we may be closer than we think to what the best in the game are doing. But because little improvements pay off in such huge dividends that the appearance (scores) may be that we are way off.

Jack

Edited December 7, 2008 by j1b

[Duane Thomas]

ETA: I re-read this last sentence and it sounds stupid.

Not at all! Overall I think that's one of the best posts I've read in the history of the forums. And that's not an insult to many other great posts, just an indication of the level of quality of this one.

[benos]

And that is the big question ?? To me, in my shooting right now, I'm debating weather this is an acual physical skill for

me or is it all a mental skill. Is it something that I can physically practice like a transition or is it something that I just

need to "mentally/pysically" practice by deliberatley doing.

Yes.

Don't separate vision, visual patience, or shot calling into "mental" or physical, go practice and see what you learn.

I'll probably get a lot of flak for this one, but I'll put myself on record here and now saying that I don't think it is possible to improve your shooting ability if you are calling 100% of your shots accurately. In matches, that's exactly what you should be doing. In practice, you need to be pushing the envelope if you want to grow and adapt.

I agree totally. In practice, the only thing I'd add is that you should always be at least reading the sights. And if you can't make the call based on what you saw, when you check the hit on the target, you will have learned. Without any effort.

In a match, of course you need to always be calling.

be