Draw Target choice

[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

[CHA-LEE]

After looking at your Dill Drawing, I would assume that the time difference between the two runs is more associated with the how "Aggressive" or "Sloppy" you can be when transitioning from T4 to T5, verses transitioning from the last plate to T4. There is a lot more fudge factor in executing an aggressive transition from the plates back towards the close paper, verses doing it the other way around. You yourself showed that there is only a 0.10 - 0.15 time difference between drawing to T1 or T5. So the "Magic" isn't in the draw time. My money is on the bulk of the time savings coming from the transition aggressiveness/sloppiness difference you can get away with by doing it one way verses another.

To me, when I look at a stage like this I am always looking for a target engagement order sequence that allows me to transition as aggressively as possible. If that means eating a tenth or two on the draw by drawing to a more difficult target but gaining half a second in a large transition or it allows me to exit the position sooner on easier targets, then I will do it because the time savings will usually be a lot more than a slightly slower first shot. Or more often than not, I am looking for what targets are easier to engage while entering or exiting the shooting position. This allows me to shoot as soon or as late as needed to minimize my time in the shooting position.

Edited February 24, 2015 by CHA-LEE

[Robco]

After looking at your Dill Drawing, I would assume that the time difference between the two runs is more associated with the how "Aggressive" or "Sloppy" you can be when transitioning from T4 to T5, verses transitioning from the last plate to T4. There is a lot more fudge factor in executing an aggressive transition from the plates back towards the close paper, verses doing it the other way around. You yourself showed that there is only a 0.10 - 0.15 time difference between drawing to T1 or T5. So the "Magic" isn't in the draw time. My money is on the bulk of the time savings coming from the transition aggressiveness/sloppiness difference you can get away with by doing it one way verses another.

Absolutely correct Charlie.

Very fast transition from the last plate to T4 - about .46 if I recall correctly. Then it sped up as I progressed right. Down to .14 to .16 splits on T2 and T3.

I was surprised at the small amount of time difference in the draw, which I should have already known, based on my own database, etc. And the split on T5 was only .34 for 2A. My C hits were usually on T4 and T2.

Amazing stuff when we open our eyes. I was literally thinking about you Charlie, while doing this drill. Using my legs for the transitions!

Thanks

Rob

[cnote]

Tag

[38supPat]

Set up and run the Accelerator drill and see what the difference is on starting near to far vs far to near.

[Ultimo-Hombre]

I have a similar finding to Rob. I execute better HF's if I draw to the difficult target first for many arrays.

Charlie's point is well taken also, that transition flow is an important consideration as well.

All things being equal, if I have a tight or no shoot guarded target from the draw along with an "easy" target I take the harder shot first. Of course this means squat for other shooters as I arrived at this personally thru testing.

[Robco]

I have a similar finding to Rob. I execute better HF's if I draw to the difficult target first for many arrays.

Charlie's point is well taken also, that transition flow is an important consideration as well.

All things being equal, if I have a tight or no shoot guarded target from the draw along with an "easy" target I take the harder shot first. Of course this means squat for other shooters as I arrived at this personally thru testing.

Exactly. It is individual to some extent. And stage/array specific. But being able to engage a second or third target while moving out of the start/draw location is one of my favorite time savers. Not usually going to try that on a partial or risky N/S target.

[Robco]

Set up and run the Accelerator drill and see what the difference is on starting near to far vs far to near.

Yes, I am familiar with the drill. And it is very familiar. In fact, watching the Accelerator portion on Stoeger's video yesterday is what gave me the final idea to try it on my already set up array. I was amazed seeing how much faster both guys shooting with Ben (Matt Hopkins for one) on the video could do it starting on farthest first. Ben said that something was wrong with Matt's situation because there should not have been such a big difference in time, one way or the other? Interesting. But my array was much more involved than the 3 target Accelerator. So as Charlie pointed out, it was the ability to really burn down the transitions after the steel which allowed me to make the big delta gains.

[motosapiens]

I have a similar finding to Rob. I execute better HF's if I draw to the difficult target first for many arrays.

Charlie's point is well taken also, that transition flow is an important consideration as well.

All things being equal, if I have a tight or no shoot guarded target from the draw along with an "easy" target I take the harder shot first. Of course this means squat for other shooters as I arrived at this personally thru testing.

Interesting. We had a classifier earlier this winter with 4 zebra-stripe hardcover targets at 6,8,10,12 yards, and I stayed after to practice since it was a short match due to weather. I was consistently faster and had better hits starting on the easy target.

Oddly enough, in dry-fire, it doesn't seem to make a heckuva lot of difference for me. In general, my strategy is to be able to shoot everything every way, and base my stage strategy on what lets me move fastest. I think it's much more important to be able to leave on an easy target than to be able to draw to an easy target.

Edited February 25, 2015 by motosapiens

[Robco]

I have a similar finding to Rob. I execute better HF's if I draw to the difficult target first for many arrays.

Charlie's point is well taken also, that transition flow is an important consideration as well.

All things being equal, if I have a tight or no shoot guarded target from the draw along with an "easy" target I take the harder shot first. Of course this means squat for other shooters as I arrived at this personally thru testing.

Interesting. We had a classifier earlier this winter with 4 zebra-stripe hardcover targets at 6,8,10,12 yards, and I stayed after to practice since it was a short match due to weather. I was consistently faster and had better hits starting on the easy target.

Oddly enough, in dry-fire, it doesn't seem to make a heckuva lot of difference for me. In general, my strategy is to be able to shoot everything every way, and base my stage strategy on what lets me move fastest. I think it's much more important to be able to leave on an easy target than to be able to draw to an easy target.

Yeah, I have shot that classifier twice (Down the Middle CM 13-02) 50% and 83.48%. Interesting design just to force a shooter to "Know" whether it is best for them to start on the long or close one. VA count too, so cannot be sloppy.

Shot this other one 3 times (Pucker Factor CM09-04). 82%, 80.5% and 90.7%. It was basically designed so each target was equal difficulty, where the farthest was open, and the closest was much tighter, making the transitions and splits all the same on each of the 4. So probably not a good example since it was designed to eliminate the affect and potential speed difference we are discussing.

As I said above, leaving on an easy target is a favorite move for me, which I use often. If done correctly it can gain a half second or more easily.

Down the Middle CM 13-02.pdf

Pucker Factor CM 09-04.pdf

Edited February 25, 2015 by Robco

[Robco]

I should add that when I did the drill above, drawing, instead on the plates, I had a hard time. The plates and T5 are essentially at the same distance, but I think that the height advantage of the A zone on T4 offerred an easier target than the 8 in plate. And of course, possibly a little bit of mental baggage making me more comfortable drawing on a full paper at 16 yard than on a plate at 17 yards.

Just letting all know I DID consider and try that permutation.

[gng4life]

I had a GM show this to me one time. I always drew/shot at the easiest/closest target and went from there. We did a drill at the range one time that I could not believe. I actually shot better times and scores when drawing to a distant target and speeding up to the close arrays. I still don't want to believe it sometimes but I still have to force myself to take the distant target first now instead of vice-versa. Thanks for posting your findings!

[Robco]

I had a GM show this to me one time. I always drew/shot at the easiest/closest target and went from there. We did a drill at the range one time that I could not believe. I actually shot better times and scores when drawing to a distant target and speeding up to the close arrays. I still don't want to believe it sometimes but I still have to force myself to take the distant target first now instead of vice-versa. Thanks for posting your findings!

Sounds precisely like my experience!

I just made a new TOPIC post in a related subject. I need feedback and help with the subject and research. Please visit it and post to it! This is going to be my primary focus for the coming weeks and month in my own shooting and training and development. Target Acquisition Speed enhancement. Link to Post below. Thanks

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=210804#entry2343809

[Robco]

In our club match today at Rio Salado, I shot stage 3 with Eddie Garcia among 18 others and I was running the clock when Eddie shot it. He was shooting Open and me Limited. I was surprised to see how Eddie and many people shot the right up-range 3-target array entering that port and starting on a tight no-shoot covered target when there was a full open target they could have entered on instead. Two of the three were covered by a N/S rendering a neckline aim point - and they were at a range of only 7 yards.

There was no movement/speed advantage to saving the open target till last, as shooting it while moving out was not possible since it was a low target thru this port. Yet the full target was easily shot safely and very quickly as the initial target on entering, while settling into the new position to shoot the two N/S targets safely. I watched shooter after shooter do this, even with iron sights.

Watch this video of me shooting it, and note I shot that array very fast, engaging the full target first, on the move while entering it that location/port with all 6A. In the video, the array being discussed is the one with a port with N/S on each side of the port. I did not video Eddie but no way he could have been faster on that array, even shooting open. I forgot to ask him WHY he did it that way.

Another example of strategic target shooting order choice. It does NOT apply only to Draw targets!

[cnote]

my guess is some people just have a harder time slowing down the shots on partials after wailing away on a wide open target, or maybe it was just a case of follow the leader????

[Robco]

my guess is some people just have a harder time slowing down the shots on partials after wailing away on a wide open target, or maybe it was just a case of follow the leader????

Yep on both. But I should have asked Eddie why he did it. He would probably have said, same thing you did, plus he was shooting open so a little safer to shoot the N/S partial faster. Maybe he wanted to leave on the easy open one?

Anyway, Eddie shuffle hopped to the port, so was not faster than me on that transition, for sure. Interesting.

[Robco]

This weekend, I shot two USPSA matches. In both, I universally applied the tactic of selecting the most difficult shot when one could shoot from the start position draw. It worked well. Of course there was no comparison of alternatives possible, since it was a match. But the basic idea and theory played out as expected - it was easier and more natural to speed up from harder to easier targets. I think it is related to the mental game aspect - if I start off hosing, then that takes over my mentality while shooting, and precludes transitioning back to properly aiming shots thereafter. IF, instead, I have to bear down and focus on seeing what I need to see on the first target and shots, as is REQUIRED of a more difficult draw target, then that puts me and my mentality in the proper mode of seeing what I need to see from the git-go, and that then continues and carries over throughout the stage.

This has served me very well in many stages in the last two days and matches. There will have to be a pretty persuasive situation and reason for me to draw to the easier target from now on.

[BoyGlock]

Very good point and discussion. Appreciate it. Otoh maybe it also depends on skill level. Those in A M Gm class can reap the time savings on going hard target first but not the lower class shooters?

[Robco]

Very good point and discussion. Appreciate it. Otoh maybe it also depends on skill level. Those in A M Gm class can reap the time savings on going hard target first but not the lower class shooters?

Of course, I would say almost ANY tactic or technique or strategy is skill-level dependent. Good point!