Wide Transition Technique

[EricW]

I've had a couple people now suggest that when performing a wide transition (which I'll define as 120 degrees or more for now) that one should retract the gun inward then turret over to the next target. I've been playing with it a bit in the backyard. I'm still sort of wishy-washy about whether I should pursue it enough to make it a technique.

Upsides:

- Extremely precise transitioning.

- Virtually eliminates the tendency to overrun a target. It has that same smooth precision of driving toward a target with a rifle. I do like that.

Downsides:

- I have to think about it. I have to decide which targets merit the retract and which I want to do "bump" transitions on. I don't particularly like thinking about the shooting while I'm shooting. It seems antithetical to the goal of "driving the gun."

- It *seems* slower (but I think in reality the time is a wash when you consider the consistent precision that you arrive on the next target with). I haven't got out the timer yet, because I don't want to start pushing to meet times until I actually have the technique dialed in more.

- It replaces one technique with two. This is what bothers me most. Pulling the gun in on short transitions is too slow, so you're committed to two techniques.

Any qualified opinions? Does choosing which targets to retract the gun on become more natural over time? It would be a technique I'd jump all over if I didn't get the sensation that I'd be learning to shoot all over again......again.

[Jake Di Vita]

I definetely do retract the gun in a wide transition.

The first two of your downsides aren't actual downsides tot he technique...you just aren't familiar with it enough yet.

It replaces 1 technique with 2, but there is a lot of stuff we have 2 techniques for. Surrender and Hands at sides draw. Reload to freestyle, weakhand, strong hand. Entering a box on an easy shot or a hard shot. Leaving the box on an easy shot or a hard shot.

With practice it will become 2nd nature just like any other technique. Just make sure you program it well during the walk through.

[Loves2Shoot]

On a large swing, what is the most efficient way to drive your gun to the target?

If the technique is different than close targets, wouldn't it be worth learning?

If you do most of your presentations from the high ready, it really isn't different anyway is it?

[benos]

Erik,

I started doing that unintentionally; so there were no "downsides."

But since you're consciously "experimenting with it," you may analyze it more than necessary. Which is okay. Just know that, after some time, it will happen, when necessary, automatically, just like the rest of your techniques.

be

[EricW]

Brian,

If you would quit sending me all that Zen stuff, I wouldn't think so much!

Thanks for the advice all! I'll stop thinking and start doing tonight.

[davidball]

Downsides:

- It replaces one technique with two. This is what bothers me most. Pulling the gun in on short transitions is too slow, so you're committed to two techniques.

Doesn't two techniques instead of one mean more tools in the toolbox? More weapons in the arsenal? I like Jake's easy entry / hard entry and easy exit / hard exit comparison.

[EricW]

Downsides:

- It replaces one technique with two. This is what bothers me most. Pulling the gun in on short transitions is too slow, so you're committed to two techniques.

Doesn't two techniques instead of one mean more tools in the toolbox? More weapons in the arsenal? I like Jake's easy entry / hard entry and easy exit / hard exit comparison.

Are 100 techniques better than 10? A wise person recently wrote to me, "There are no advanced techniques, only advanced applications of basic techniques." I'm very cautious about adding techniques because I think it's pretty easy to start fooling yourself that technique #139 is that much different than #138.

I guess my question should have read, "is pulling the gun in on transitions a basic technique." I now have my answer: yes. It is a basic technique that I shall set forth and master.

[Pierruiggi]

- I have to think about it. I have to decide which targets merit the retract and which I want to do "bump" transitions on. I don't particularly like thinking about the shooting while I'm shooting. It seems antithetical to the goal of "driving the gun."

Any qualified opinions? Does choosing which targets to retract the gun on become more natural over time? It would be a technique I'd jump all over if I didn't get the sensation that I'd be learning to shoot all over again......again.

I'll disregard that bit about "qualified" opinions and give you mine anyway.

One thing about deciding which target merit the retract and which ones don't... Don't we have the stage walkthorugh for that?

If it helps, I also got used to retracting the gun in a natural way; like when running... If there's a few steps between me and my destination, I keep the gun extended, but if there's more than that... I retract the gun towards me, while keeping it high nevertheless... I don't think there's a defined "line" like "3 steps gun extended, more than that gun comes back", it just happens...

I think it's the same when transitioning wide. Also, there's different levels of "retraction". For example, when transitioning to a target at 120 degrees from the one I just shot, the gun comes to the index point it reaches when drawing, where the hands meet together. However, when transitioning to a target that is... say 70 degrees, I notice I also pull the gun back a bit inside my line of sight, but it's just a bit... I don't know why I do it, but it does give me a sense of "security" or "certainty" when driving the sights to the next target.

I also noticed that I start to retract the gun when the angle to the next target is wide enough that I need to move my head to aquire it.

In a few words, I think this is as fluid as vision/focus types; I don't consider it gun retracted-not retracted; I think it's something I do as I need it.

BTW; I think a one can learn a lot by watching Todd Jarrett use this technique.

[Loves2Shoot]

The Burner video series ingrains this into you. I wish he would do it on DVD.

[Skywalker]

Eric,

not sure if I got it completely right, but here it is what I do on my wide (>90°) transitions when shooting from a standing position.

My "turret" platform doesn't change, in facts it's pretty much like I'm locked from the waist up; what I do to swing to the next target is to bend the knee opposite to the target I'm turning to, pivoting on it pushing and straightening the other leg (when I shoot from standing, I always do it with knees sligthly bent).

This allows me to precisely index on the next target, eliminating most of the overswing I might get by simply rotating my "turret".

I guess this way I just slow down that minimal fraction of a second that helps in stopping the gun precisely on target.

From a mechanical point of view, what you say makes sense, since you're bringing mass closer to the rotation axis, thus diminishing the inertia momentum.

[davidball]

Downsides:

- It replaces one technique with two. This is what bothers me most. Pulling the gun in on short transitions is too slow, so you're committed to two techniques.

Doesn't two techniques instead of one mean more tools in the toolbox? More weapons in the arsenal? I like Jake's easy entry / hard entry and easy exit / hard exit comparison.

Are 100 techniques better than 10? A wise person recently wrote to me, "There are no advanced techniques, only advanced applications of basic techniques." I'm very cautious about adding techniques because I think it's pretty easy to start fooling yourself that technique #139 is that much different than #138.

I guess my question should have read, "is pulling the gun in on transitions a basic technique." I now have my answer: yes. It is a basic technique that I shall set forth and master.

Excellent claification. To refine my metaphor: Only quality, necessary tools should be in the toolbox. But two quality, necessary tools are better than one. Yes?

[Mo Hepworth]

who am I?,

No one special.

If the targets were far apart, I would set up on one target as if I was drawing fast on it; then I would turn my body to the farthest target from that point. THAT is were I would start.

When you unwind, you can turn naturally to the target you want to end up on, instead of looking for a target after you start.

[ryan45kim]

I’m still a lowly master in limited but I’ll put my 2cents in.

I took Matt Trout’s class and this is one of the best gems (pulling the gun back) I picked up, it’s not so much speed I gain but accuracy. When starting a stage with huge transitions I can really push without overrunning my target and now I get consistent As.

[outerlimits]

definitely the way to go with a long gun...

[Flexmoney]

Speaking of retracting the gun during rotation, don't forget this on your turn and draw stages.

[XRe]

When you unwind, you can turn naturally to the target you want to end up on, instead of looking for a target after you start.

On transitions as wide as we're talking, though, that can set you up in a very awkward position for that first target. Think about splitting the difference. Set up with your NPA in the dead middle of the widest targets, and then index to one or the other. Point your toes as close to the widest targets as possible, making it easier to index to them. Obviously, its highly dependant on whether there's movement involved, etc, etc, etc, but... try not to screw yourself up into really awkward positions for one or two targets just to get a real no-brainer stance on another - you'll tend to pull off the uncomfortable ones before you've really called the appropriate number of shots on it....