Wesquire Posted July 28, 2017 Author Share Posted July 28, 2017 1 minute ago, motosapiens said: I disagree with you, at least for my average level of shooting skill (A/M). It is no faster for me to ignore my sights, and often slower. Sure, it *feels* fast to fling the gun around aimlessly pulling the trigger fast, but my splits are at least as fast when I am paying attention to what the gun is doing. In my experienced, paying attention costs zero extra time. OTOH, getting a better sight picture *does* definitely cost time, but that's a whole different discussion. I'm not talking about getting a better sight picture, I'm simply talking about paying attention to the one you have at the speed you are going. It isn't a different discussion. It is the exact thing we are talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 5 hours ago, Wesquire said: It isn't a different discussion. It is the exact thing we are talking about. It doesn't bother me if you believe that. Whatever helps you shoot better is fine with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesquire Posted July 28, 2017 Author Share Posted July 28, 2017 7 hours ago, motosapiens said: It is no faster for me to ignore my sights, and often slower. OTOH, getting a better sight picture *does* definitely cost time These statements are in direct conflict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunBugBit Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 On 7/27/2017 at 8:29 AM, Wesquire said: I think this is unquestionably false. It is self-evident that a more refined sight picture takes more time. I didn't say to get a refined sight picture. I said to watch what's going on with the sights. Big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesquire Posted July 28, 2017 Author Share Posted July 28, 2017 Just now, GunBugBit said: I didn't say to get a refined sight picture. I said to watch what's going on with the sights. Big difference. And it is still a waste of time at close range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunBugBit Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) 1 minute ago, Wesquire said: And it is still a waste of time at close range. It doesn't take extra time, so none is wasted. Or I could argue that ignoring your sights is just as big a waste of time. Edited July 28, 2017 by GunBugBit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesquire Posted July 28, 2017 Author Share Posted July 28, 2017 Just now, GunBugBit said: It doesn't take extra time, so none is wasted. It does. You can see the outline of the gun faster than you can see the sights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunBugBit Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Just now, Wesquire said: It does. You can see the outline of the gun faster than you can see the sights. The sights are right there. It seems you're arguing for intentionally ignoring them in favor of looking at the outline of the gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesquire Posted July 28, 2017 Author Share Posted July 28, 2017 Just now, GunBugBit said: The sights are right there. It seems you're arguing for intentionally ignoring them in favor of looking at the outline of the gun. You are aiming too much if you have time to find the sights at 3 yards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waktasz Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Can I get you guys to sign your posts with your classification so I can decide which of the answers are wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunBugBit Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Wesquire said: You are aiming too much if you have time to find the sights at 3 yards. If you've got the sights right there in your face because your countless reps of dry fire automatically put them there every single time you draw, might as well look at 'em. No one stands there at a match and tells you what to look at as you shoot a stage. You want to ignore your sights, you're perfectly free to do so. Edited July 28, 2017 by GunBugBit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 56 minutes ago, Wesquire said: These statements are in direct conflict. no they aren't. you just don't understand what they mean. which doesn't bother me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 36 minutes ago, Wesquire said: You are aiming too much if you have time to find the sights at 3 yards. you don't have to find the sights to have a 'sight picture'. that has been said like 30 times, but it seems to be going over your head. you just need to be visually aware of what the gun is doing, with whatever level of refinement is necessary to reliably call the shot. That takes no more time than just shooting without looking at the gun, and often it's faster (and helps prevent trigger-freeze). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 36 minutes ago, waktasz said: Can I get you guys to sign your posts with your classification so I can decide which of the answers are wrong? we know your classification. why don't you chime in and agree with me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesquire Posted July 28, 2017 Author Share Posted July 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, motosapiens said: you don't have to find the sights to have a 'sight picture'. that has been said like 30 times, but it seems to be going over your head. you just need to be visually aware of what the gun is doing, with whatever level of refinement is necessary to reliably call the shot. That takes no more time than just shooting without looking at the gun, and often it's faster (and helps prevent trigger-freeze). GunBugBit is specifically saying that you always see your SIGHTS. I agree that sight picture is more broad. It isn't going over my head, you are just ignoring that not everyone is using the same definition or making the same argument as you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 44 minutes ago, Wesquire said: It does. You can see the outline of the gun faster than you can see the sights. that's the whole point. seeing the outline of the gun on a close target is all the sight picture you need. it's all the visual awareness of what the gun is doing that is generally required. Sight picture doesn't necessarily mean you are refining the sight picture to where you are aware of the actual sights themselves, or their alignment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesquire Posted July 28, 2017 Author Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) 15 hours ago, motosapiens said: that's the whole point. seeing the outline of the gun on a close target is all the sight picture you need. it's all the visual awareness of what the gun is doing that is generally required. Sight picture doesn't necessarily mean you are refining the sight picture to where you are aware of the actual sights themselves, or their alignment. No ****. No one is arguing differently. You seem to be very lost. Edited July 29, 2017 by RangerTrace Watch the language please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Wesquire said: GunBugBit is specifically saying that you always see your SIGHTS. I agree that sight picture is more broad. It isn't going over my head, you are just ignoring that not everyone is using the same definition or making the same argument as you. well fine, he's exaggerating if that's what he's saying. I guess I wasn't carefully reading his posts, so thank you for thumping me on the head there. I was interpreting some of your responses to him as responses to me, and you seem to have been interpreting my posts using his overly strict definition of sight picture. beers for everyone, group hug for people that are into that stuff. Edited July 28, 2017 by motosapiens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssanders224 Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 (edited) I almost feel like I should copy and paste my previous post again. But really, you guys are arguing over something that is super hard to quantify. It varies a lot shooter to shooter. Ill say this though... "seeing" your sights is a little like calling shots. It's almost impossible to realize how much and often you can see them until the light bulb comes on one day. In a similar fashion, I think a lot of shooters think they can call shots, but they don't REALLY understand what their vision and brain is capable of doing (with more experience or practice). I dont like not seeing my SIGHTS. It immediately bugs me when I break shots at a target (even close ones) and don't have a somewhat good snap shot of the relationship of the sights. I do it from time to time, but not necessarily on purpose. (I'm not talking about "muzzle on cardboard shots). Throwing a blurry gun in front of a target and slapping a couple off because it's "faster" is a great way to shoot C/Ds. Im hesistant these days to say "doing that is slower", or "you don't need to do that at that distance", because I realize now some things that I "didn't know I didn't know" earlier on in my shooting. Edited July 29, 2017 by Ssanders224 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MemphisMechanic Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, waktasz said: Can I get you guys to sign your posts with your classification so I can decide which of the answers are wrong? Middling A class peon here. I gave up saying the same thing over and over and having it deliberately misinterpreted to suit his argument. Edited July 29, 2017 by MemphisMechanic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKorn Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 http://andersonshooting.libsyn.com/visual-patience-is-measured-in-hundredths-of-a-second This episode of That Shooting Show does a pretty good job of addressing what's being discussed here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesquire Posted July 29, 2017 Author Share Posted July 29, 2017 5 hours ago, MemphisMechanic said: Middling A class peon here. I gave up saying the same thing over and over and having it deliberately misinterpreted to suit his argument. I didn't misinterpret you, you are just wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MemphisMechanic Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 2 hours ago, Wesquire said: I didn't misinterpret you, you are just wrong. You think you're contradicting me, the rest of us see you validating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssanders224 Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesquire Posted July 29, 2017 Author Share Posted July 29, 2017 9 minutes ago, MemphisMechanic said: You think you're contradicting me, the rest of us see you validating. Nope. You think you need to see the sights at 5 yards. Waste of time. 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