Trigger Pull Speed Questions

[Farmer]

Had a .256, .268, .277 but those were the exceptions to mostly .3’s. At the local bar they used to have a similar game with a drag race tree and a push button. Was fun to test your times when you first got there and then later in the evening.  What was interesting was after one or two beers my times would actually get faster, but after a few more it would quickly fall off.  Sort of makes me wonder if the audio reaction is faster because of a startling response that squirts a little adrenaline VS the visual that sort of dazzles you. Like when you see people that are in the line of danger, ie, tornado, on coming vehicle ect and they’ll just stand there and stare. Where if there’s a loud Bang or sound it makes you jump immediately. 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Farmer

[MikeBurgess]

9 minutes ago, Farmer said:

Had a .256, .268, .277 but those were the exceptions to mostly .3’s. At the local bar they used to have a similar game with a drag race tree and a push button. Was fun to test your times when you first got there and then later in the evening.  What was interesting was after one or two beers my times would actually get faster, but after a few more it would quickly fall off.  Sort of makes me wonder if the audio reaction is faster because of a startling response that squirts a little adrenaline VS the visual that sort of dazzles you. Like when you see people that are in the line of danger, ie, tornado, on coming vehicle ect and they’ll just stand there and stare. Where if there’s a loud Bang or sound it makes you jump immediately. 

I would be willing to bet the audible is faster than visual because with audible you are waiting for any spike in input, vs visual where your brain has to decode a continuous stream of visual data and then react to the change in that data.

 

think about what happens if your amped up for a audible start signal and you hear anything "loud" most will start going then later realize it wasn't the signal they were waiting for.

[Vic]

It's an interesting subject; but in the grand scheme of things relating to how well you shoot a stage or a complete match, it's possibly the least important bit of minutia to consider?

[MikeBurgess]

on the larger topic of training reaction time I think that's a good thing, training trigger pull reaction time to audible signal is likely less useful. I want my trigger pull to be driven by my vision not my ears. 

[Makicjf]

35 minutes ago, MWP said:

I would think that 100ms or .10 seems about right, maybe even a hair slower and that’s why the Olympics set it at that. This explains the trigger pulls I had at .14 with trigger staged.

 

I personally haven’t spend much time training or thinking about the conscious reaction to the buzzer, but I have spent time with the unconscious reactions to things during shooting. I think there are huge gains to be had there. 

 

 

My exact thought.

  Hitting an MLB fastball on visual input alone would be impossible unless you start early and recognize at the release point what is going to happen .

It's essentially predictive.

 Those predictive responses to stimuli are what make people exceed the "possible".

JMO

[pskys2]

30 minutes ago, Vic said:

It's an interesting subject; but in the grand scheme of things relating to how well you shoot a stage or a complete match, it's possibly the least important bit of minutia to consider?

Oh so true.

[pskys2]

28 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

on the larger topic of training reaction time I think that's a good thing, training trigger pull reaction time to audible signal is likely less useful. I want my trigger pull to be driven by my vision not my ears. 

But it needs to be subconscious.

[pskys2]

23 hours ago, MikeBurgess said:

This discussion is why good ROs do not use the same cadence for every shooter, its very easy to cut this time well down if you know the guy an the clock has a cadence, you can even go early and get away with it because he will have a lag in his ability to know it was actually early

 

Unless it's sc then the ro is supposed to keep the same cadence for all runs.

[gargoil66]

25 minutes ago, MWP said:

I would think that 100ms or .10 seems about right, maybe even a hair slower and that’s why the Olympics set it at that. This explains the trigger pulls I had at .14 with trigger staged.

 

I personally haven’t spend much time training or thinking about the conscious reaction to the buzzer, but I have spent time with the unconscious reactions to things during shooting. I think there are huge gains to be had there. 

 

 

MP:

 

I know that PK has worked on starting to move at the beginning of the buzzer and won't criticize that a bit.  Just that if a guy is consciously doing something like identifying the first instant of the buzzer, he is putting conscious effort into it and thus will probably take more time.  Just don't know.

 

I think the differences in reaction time between visual and audible are due to how the brain processes pictures as opposed to noise.  I would think that the brain uses more time to figure out what a noise is and if it is a threat or not than something seen.  Unless we can't identify what we are seeing of course.

 

A huge difference between elite athletes and those who aren't is that the elite athletes know what to tune into and what to ignore.  And their senses are very well tuned into those factors that guide their decisions and actions.  They know what to focus on and when.  Situational Awareness in its purest form.  Probably what you are saying about the "unconscious reactions to things during shooting"?  

 

GG

 

 

[Farmer]

1 hour ago, MikeBurgess said:

I would be willing to bet the audible is faster than visual because with audible you are waiting for any spike in input, vs visual where your brain has to decode a continuous stream of visual data and then react to the change in that data.

 

think about what happens if your amped up for a audible start signal and you hear anything "loud" most will start going then later realize it wasn't the signal they were waiting for.

That’s kinda what I was getting at, you just described it better. 

[MWP]

1 hour ago, Vic said:

It's an interesting subject; but in the grand scheme of things relating to how well you shoot a stage or a complete match, it's possibly the least important bit of minutia to consider?

I agree 

[Fishbreath]

I got some numbers as I was wrapping up dry fire earlier tonight, starting with the finger resting on the trigger but no staging. (And with the Ruger, I have a long way to go.)

 

10y USPSA A-zone

0.19

0.21

0.22

0.20

0.22

 

25y IPSC A-zone

0.26

0.25

0.27

0.26

0.24

 

Staged trigger on the 10y A was 0.15-0.18, SA trigger was 0.12.

 

One of the more interesting things that happened to me as I developed my speed of sight in 2020-2021 was that I started noticing I would react to an auditory stimulus before I perceived the associated visual stimulus—say, if I knocked a spoon onto the floor, I would jump, and then at a very small delay, I would see it hit.

 

I'm not sure the time matters, but I do the drill a lot for grip and trigger mechanics.