boo radley Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 A situation its seems I'm seeing a lot in matches, is a stage where I'm faced with several arrays -- let's say "A" and "B". I cannot shoot "B" from the starting position, and have to move 10, 20 yards, or so, to engage it. But in moving from the starting position, I will also get closer to the targets in array "A" -- does this make any sense? In other words, from the starting box, let's say I have a shot of 20 yards to targets in "A", and these targets are tight -- protected by no-shoots. But if I stop on the way to "B", I'll only have a 10 yard shot. What is the text-book way to handle this? I thought it would be smarter to take the closer shot, since I have to move anyway, but then I was watching other shooters do the same thing, and it looked...slow. Possibly slower than drawing, getting the sight picture needed for the longer shot, and then moving directly to engage B. Just curious. Tx! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Take off like a bat out of hell at the beep. Get there and shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XD Niner Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 The real question is will the presumably increased score from 10 yards compared to 20 yards offset the addtional time needed for a second run/stop sequence. In otherword, it is really which approach would give you the higher overall hit factor. Time by itself is not the primary concern. In my case, I would almost surely score much better from 10 than 20 yards and would likely take the approach you proposed. On the other hand, if you can score just about as well from 20 as 10 yards, you'd be better off to shoot and scoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogmaDog Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Hard to say. If moving toward array A also moves you toward B, then you probably aren't losing any time by moving up to shoot at A--you can get a couple of steps during the draw alone, and if you are good at "entering" and "leaving", you won't lose much time. If you can shoot both arrays from one "seet spot", you should move there, and then get to the shooting. If moving to A requires you to double back or dogleg to get to B, then it probably would be slower. Get to the shooting. DD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mistral404 Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 As a general rule, shooting on the move is what differentiates the M/GM from everyone else. It is a skill I am working towards--I am just a B--. In the situation you described, there is a huge downside risk involved in shooting while moving, ie., no shoots. So I would probably run fast, stop and shoot. Better points and no penalities. If there was no downside risk I would probably try and shoot while moving. The more you force yourself to do the "right way" the better off you are going to be in the long run. By this I mean, in a local match of little consequence, I will try and shoot on the move (where there is no downside risk) because I know the more I practice it in a match environment the better off I will be in future. I accept the fact that I will probably shoot it slower than if I ran and stood still in one spot to get better hits on both arrays A and B. But I am looking to develop or improve my skill level at the cost of not placing higher in the match standings. Eventually, I will speed up. I do like the phrase, accuracy first then speed. But I am taking a long term view of my progress. I like stages with lots of no shoots. It really makes people focus on accuracy. BTW: I did not feel this way the A4 a couple of years ago. At the time I was cursing the no shoots, now I love them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boo radley Posted June 16, 2005 Author Share Posted June 16, 2005 Thx all -- as I figured, there isn't a clear answer; it's a matter of weighing the advantage gained from closing distance, vs. time lost by going slightly out of the way, or needing to stop, shoot, and start moving again. I bring this up only because -- and maybe a 10-yard gap is a bad example -- it seems easier to shoot tight shots from a standing draw, where I've been staring at the target, than from run-stop-shoot. Mistral -- I agree, if it's possible to shoot it moving, that's the best of all. I learned an interesting lesson not so long ago, just by watching a M shooter on our squad. There were three arrays -- left, center, right, and some steel short-center. Only rule was you had to shoot the steel before moving. Most of us would shoot the steel, then aim at the targets behind the steel -- about a 25-yard+ shot, before moving (you had to move up and to the right and left to get at the other targets). This guy hit the steel, then immediately moved, got the targets on the far right, and on his way to the targets on the left, shot those in the center from only a couple yards away, w/out hardly slowing down, as he ran by them. In hindsight: "of course!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 We had a stage in the '98 GA State Section match where you could engage the whole thing from near the starting point, or cruise up a hallway and get closer shots on the targets - but there were very tight engagement points in the hallway, and you had to be in the perfect spot to hit each target, leading to potential herky-jerk if you were positioned wrong. I won the stage, IIRC - I shot it all from the back w/ my Open gun. The fastest time was shot by a Limited shooter who went up the hall, but I took him handily on points. As you see, there are no easy answers. There are some rules of thumb - if you have to move up there anyway, it may very well be quicker (and more accurate) to get up there as quickly as possible and shoot from the closer distance. If you don't have to move, it will generally work out better if you can just stay put - assuming you can hit the targets accurately from there (depending on your skill level). If you can shoot accurately on the move, it will be quicker than stand and shoot, then move, then shoot again. Poor hits don't help anything - so if you have the option to move to where you can shoot accurately, and you can't reliably hit from where you are, do it - and quickly (this is a great reason to practice long range shooting at small targets, BTW). And, generally pick the option that allows you to shoot 95% of the available points - don't do something solely to be faster (in general). Just some thoughts on what works for me, in my head, when I'm working out a stage.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Di Vita Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 I disagree with the moving part. What seperates the great shooters is not shooting on the move (although being proficient at it will help....it is rarely actually worth doing). What REALLY seperates the great from the not-so-great is getting in and out of position. Back on topic....in most situations I will definetely take a couple extra steps if it will make my shots easier and faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusher Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Have to agree with Jake on this one, there are few stages (or portions of) that present themselves to shooting an aray while moving and actually saving any time. Clearly having the ability to shoot while moving on any stage or portion of a stage that presents this opportunity will decrease the run time for the stage. Getting into and out of shooting positions is far more important a skill to master before learing to shoot while moving. Knowing what works best for YOU to score as many points possible in the shortest amount of time, and STICKING with that game plan untill your skills progress (hint dry fire, dry fire, live fire, dry fire) is what will keep you consistant throughout a match be it local level or tournament level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcoliver Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Do what you've practiced or let the match results tell you what to practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ankeny Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 although being proficient at it will help....it is rarely actually worth doing I have watched a video of the 2003 Open Nationals dozens of times. All of the top shooters are shooting on the move when possible. I gotta ask, of it isn't worth doing, why are they doing it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Di Vita Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 I never said it isn't worth doing....I said it is rarely worth doing. Quite frankly most of the time, the points you will drop from shooting on the move (on targets that aren't in your face) does not make up for the time that you save. Take Max for example....He too rarely shoots on the move, yet stomps the crap out of everyone else. The way I look at it....when deciding to shoot an array of targets on the move, there are a few things that need to be known. First...shooting on the move will for the most part greatly increase your time between positions, you will shoot slower, and have sloppier hits. Most of the time this does not offset running to the next position, getting a nice practiced fluid set up, and shooting the targets faster with better hits. Each puzzle has a different solution....sometimes it is worth it, often it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric nielsen Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 A couple of the guys who tried to shoot on the move every stage in the 2003 video were not ones expected to win the match. I can't read their thoughts but to me it looked like Nascar or Indycar where a team will gamble on a strategy to take a driver from 8th up to 2nd or 1st - where the worst thing that can happen is they drop to 11th. I've watched Max shoot and also his walk-thrus and where he doesn't shoot on the move much, he also doesn't shoot static very much either. One or both feet may be planted but his body is leaning or moving. His approach and departure from positions is "one target per foot" sometimes. His natural point of aim [index] is moved from aiming point to aiming point very precisely - probably by design. Thoughts from the peanut gallery... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loves2Shoot Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 To shoot or run needs to be decided before you get to the match. These are the thing that need to be worked out in practice. Then when you get to the match you will know the odds of getting the better hf. Shooting on the move is hard, but it can be worth it. What seperates the best from the rest is accuracy, not shooting on the move, shooting fast, or about anything else. Many lower class shooters will shoot faster, run harder and they will get stomped by those who move less and place their shots where they want them to go. The "small" targets are where big time time can be gained. Just my 2 cents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 I'm with L2S. If you can see it, and you don't *have* to go there to shoot anyway, shoot it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jasonub Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 use your strong points, if its shooting on the move do it, if its static do it. just shoot fast and accurately, max rarely shoots on the move and wins eric on the other hand loves shooting on the move and wins all the time. hopefully someone gives him a run on the upcoming world shoot. If anybody can do it its max or tj. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ankeny Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Maybe we have a failure to communicate. To me shooting on the move means the shooting platform isn't static. A person doesn't need to be in the classical duck walk to shoot on the move. Shooting as you back out of a port is shooting on the move. Shooting as you rolling trhough a position is shooting on the move. Taking those baby steps along an opening between two walls is shooting on the move. FWIW, the tape I have viewed dozens of times is OLN coverage of the 2004 nationals not 2003. I don't want to debate the merits of shooting on the move vs. running from sweet spot to sweet spot. People can watch the better shooters for themselves then decide how valuable the tool is and when they want to take it out of the tool box. Jake: I am not real speedy from spot to spot. It takes me about a second just to overcome inertia, lol. I set two boxes up 8-9 yards apart in front of a plate rack 10 yards away, I can shoot them down on the move faster than I can shoot three plates from one box and three from the second box. In fact, I can shoot three on the move, reload and shoot the remaining three faster than I can shoot three from Box A and three from Box B. I am a sloth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 shooting on the move vs. sweet spot posn. effectiveness depends on the challenge and the balance you have to strike..I have seen stages were you will be much slower and more rushed not shooting on the move..nonetheless as Jake said it is really a rarity.. what happens more often is that the top shooters are so fast into and out of posns. that it appears that they are shooting on the move but their is a pause in their movements..so to cross that divide M/GM we not only need quick and effective gun handling skills but quick and effective body handling skills..the best results come from the coordination of all efforts.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuildSF4 Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 What is the text-book way to handle this? I thought it would be smarter to take the closer shot, since I have to move anyway, but then I was watching other shooters do the same thing, and it looked...slow. Possibly slower than drawing, getting the sight picture needed for the longer shot, and then moving directly to engage B. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Consensus seems to be there is no textbook method. I would agree with the comment that you need to practice it (hypocrite me) and shoot it as you are most comfortable. Try it both ways and see what is faster/ higher HF for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdStevens Posted June 23, 2005 Share Posted June 23, 2005 Would another factor not be reloads? In other words, if you move directly to B to shoot A & B, and a reload is required between the two sets, you have sacrificed the ability to reload during the move and have to do it while static at B. This may (or may not) take longer than shooting from A and reloading while moving to B, depending on the shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyin40 Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Unless I can see an outright advantage of staying further away and shooting I'm moving closer. This has come up at matches 3 or 4 times in the last month or so. Everytime except 1 it was always better to move up. The time saved on transition and splits was faster than staying back and shooting. Flyin40 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L9X25 Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Flyin, This thread is almost 2 years old and (I am not totally sure but) I think that the conventional wisdom may have changed a little. Chris Tilley has been dominating the scene locally and Eric G. has been dominating the rest of the world and both of these guys rarely plant and shoot when the stage requires movement. In general, shooting on the move has increased in importance over the past few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Shooting on the move is slightly different than choosing to shoot an array close up rather than far away. If there is only 1 or 2 targets at the end of a stage, I would have to say stay put. But if there are 3+ targets, or if those -2 targets are in the beginning or middle of a field course that you will approach on your way to other targets ..... conventional wisdom says it is better to get closer. As John said "The time saved on transition and splits was faster than staying back and shooting." But it is truly discovered during practice by doing a little drill of each. Take a timer and try shooting 4 targets from 15 yards stationary Then try shooting the same 4 targets after running up to about 5 yards away from the targets. You will soon learn that the time saved by having faster transitions and splits is not only faster ........ but it adds up with each target. The more targets ... the more time that is saved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Funny this got revived today. We had a stage along these lines today. You started in box A and had to shoot 2 paper and 2 steel. You left the box and engaged 10 paper on the way to box B where you had to engage a final paper. I think I won the stage (results aren't up yet) by stepping out of the box and engaging 6 of the 10 from that position and then engaging the next 4 as I ran past them (within 5 yds) to get to box B and hammered that just as I got in the box. If I'd tried to hit the first 6 while moving I would have had to zigzag as well as worry about going too far and breaking the 180 so it simply didn't make sense. Sometimes both techniques might be appropriate on the same stage. On the stage today, the best bet was to hit the 6 static and then just hammer the next 4 as you ran past them. Everyone that shot all 10 from a static position either lost a lot of time or dropped too many points on the farther targets. Those that tried to shoot them all while moving had to almost stop on the harder shots and spent a lot of time zig zagging around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L9X25 Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Unfortunately there are just too many variations available to develop a consistent rule for staying or going. Sometimes moving give you a better angle or removes obstructions and you could have a significant advantge, or the shots could actually become harder and discourage movement. We have a local shooter that is fast on his feet and always chooses to run up and shoot from a closer distance when possible. Many folks (myself included) and have been amazed that he wins some stages where we all thought it was a bad idea to move. For instance, we had a stage with wide open targets at varying distances up to about 25 yards (mainly inline along a side berm) and he ran along the berm and shot them all at nearly contact distance and was very fast with almost all A's. The folks that were as fast as he was without moving dropped a lot more points or even shots. I guess it is one of those things that you simply have to call on a case by case basis without having a rule of thumb to guide you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now