Technicians and Feelers?

[badchad]

Whenever I tried to shoot a tricky stage like Todd or Jerry did, I'd usually blow it. I gotta shoot it how it feels best to me. (But that only works for "feelers." Technical guys don't notice or care how shooting a stage "feels.")

Brian (and others), I singled this out from another thread because I didn’t want to cause a drift, but your post got me wondering about “technical” shooters vs. “feelers.” I’m not exactly sure what the difference is, and I want to make sure I have it right. Please let me know if I’m missing something.

What also got me thinking about it is I just watched the Burner Series DVDs and Jerry seemed very, very meticulous about (I’m paraphrasing) “it takes .2 seconds to do this, .15 seconds to do that, I expect a .15 split here, a .18 transition and it should take 1.2 seconds to move from this box to that” etc. It seemed a little extreme to me and I’m not sure if I can see myself doing that, but maybe I should work on it. I seem to recall Saul Kirsch and Matt Burkett talking about similar breakdowns in their materials but I don’t recall it being quite that detailed.

My question; is breaking down a stage like that, and/or the ability to do so, a necessary prerequisite to reaching the upper levels of shooting or is it more of a personality thing?

I’m assuming an example of a “feel” being more to just shoot alphas as fast as you can using an order that instinctively seems smooth , and using intuition as opposed to a stopwatch to tell how many targets to go for between hitting an activator and a swinger, etc.

[Anon]

In an anology from other activities....

An auto racer can "drive by the seat of his pants". He may not even know what an apex is, or oversteer, but he can still have the fastest lap times, because he did what it takes to get the job done.

A tiger never knows how fast he can run (in mph), but he can still accelerate, and manuever to a changing scenario, with the ability to take down his prey.

You don't NEED to know the specific measurements or tasks, do be able to DO the things needed to accomplish a goal. For example, describe to me all the muscles you will use, in what order, and what percent of their maximum force you will use.... to stand up out of your chair.

You don't know, but that doesn't keep you from standing up. Even if you did know, the knowing wouldn't help you stand up any better.

Breaking things down the way you describe can help you analyze consistency. that is valuable in a timed event. But I don't think you need to know, to be able to do.

Edited September 5, 2008 by Anon

[scribble]

I shoot with several guys who can do exactly that. It appears to come from enough shooting and figuring your splits, transitions, draws, with the timer.

I watched 2 M class shooters shoot the same stage with very close targets and some distant targets that could be seen from the start position but you could also run up close to them. The first shooter ran all the numbers in his head and figured he would be better off shooting close targets and then run up for the remaining longer ones. The other shooter took all the targets from the start position and was 6 seconds slower. It took more time to focus and get a good aim on the long shots than to take the time to run up closer and hose away.

[wide45]

I shoot with several guys who can do exactly that. It appears to come from enough shooting and figuring your splits, transitions, draws, with the timer.

I watched 2 M class shooters shoot the same stage with very close targets and some distant targets that could be seen from the start position but you could also run up close to them. The first shooter ran all the numbers in his head and figured he would be better off shooting close targets and then run up for the remaining longer ones. The other shooter took all the targets from the start position and was 6 seconds slower. It took more time to focus and get a good aim on the long shots than to take the time to run up closer and hose away.

That illustrates a point right there. To make it at the top level, you need to know what kind of time, all those little tasks will take you.

The first shooter knew how to figure out the fast way to run the stage. That came from knowing what he could do.

Nothing to do with "feeling".

"feeling" from the quote, was more about internalizing the plan. A need to feel good about it, beyond just knowing you could do it. Might be a trust thing.

[Jake Di Vita]

FWIW, I used to be very technical in my stage analysis and shooting. I have since let go of that and my shooting relies only on feel. I learned that instinct is much more accurate than thought through playing golf.

[eerw]

from my understanding of the two.

the technical shooter will break the stages down on known performances..they will make determinations on shooting a left array first over a right array based on numbers and technique.

the feeling shooter will put more weight into what feels more natural or flowing to go into a specific array vs another.

both shooters will know what their strengths and weaknesses are and make breakdowns based on those also.

[Jake Di Vita]

I should add that I'm still very technical in breaking stages down - but that's where it stops.

[Ben Stoeger]

My question; is breaking down a stage like that, and/or the ability to do so, a necessary prerequisite to reaching the upper levels of shooting or is it more of a personality thing?

I think being able to know your time to perform all these different actions is a result of working on them individually.

It is a symptom of being a good shooter, not the cause.

[nashvillebill]

Well said, Ben.

[38supPat]

The difference between the two will be mostly from their personality types. However, technical or not you need to know how to plan in precise detail and exactly what you can do, whether that is knowing exactly what splits to expect (definitely not your LOHF, but a real doable number) or if you can make the shot you are asking yourself to perform when it matters. For the record I am definitly more of a 'feel' type of shooter.

[shred]

A "feeler" reacts to "that shot didn't feel right, I'll make it up". A "technician" reacts to "I pulled the trigger a little hard on that shot, and the sights weren't good. I'll make it up".

[benos]

Yes, the Burner, Kirsch, and Burkett are all very technical shooters.

My question; is breaking down a stage like that, and/or the ability to do so, a necessary prerequisite to reaching the upper levels of shooting?

Absolutely not. Robbie is a "feeler," or an ISFP. Gross motored skilled, tough-minded and confident, and for sure he doesn't do all "tenth to do this and two tenths to do that" routine. He looks over the stage, figures out the best way for him to shoot it, and does that. (I've posted this a time or two) but it's worth repeating here. Once I asked TGO what he his plan was and what he sees when he's shooting a stage. (We were practicing a stage.) His answer - he put his arms in his shooing position, and pointed them at each target, and as he pointed at each target he said the same thing: "I'm going to find the middle of this target and shoot it, I'm going to find the middle of this target and shoot it, ..."

[How beautiful that approach is gave me the chills when I read it again after I posted it.]

... or is it more of a personality thing?

Absolutely.

I’m assuming an example of a “feel” being more to just shoot alphas as fast as you can using an order that instinctively seems smooth , and using intuition as opposed to a stopwatch to tell how many targets to go for between hitting an activator and a swinger, etc.

Perfect.

Do you know you're Temperament type?

be

[badchad]

Do you know you're Temperament type?

be

Thanks to you and others for the response. I just did a search and took the Jung Typology Test, which I think is what you are referring to. The test said I’m ENTJ saying:

You are:

slightly expressed extravert: 1%

moderately expressed intuitive personality: 50%

very expressed thinking personality: 100%

slightly expressed judging personality: 22%

Though I'm not sure how to relate that to how I shoot/practice.

I was thinking the same thing Ben Stoeger said, and others alluded to, that knowing the details was a result of being a good shooter rather than the cause. I was also thinking time spent timing particular components of shooting might be better spent just practicing skills more, so it's good to get some confirmation that I’m not way off base. Though I must admit, I do sometimes wonder whether it’s best for me to run and shoot targets up close to stay put and shoot them from afar (usually I run up and shoot fast), and based on some past match errors I think I shoot better going to an easy target first and finish on the hard one’s rather than vice versa, though I have never scored myself both ways. It’s funny, I don’t mind spending 2 hours doing dryfire, I mind a little more driving to an indoor range to do ball and dummy drills, but I can’t bring myself to drive to the outdoor range to set up various drills to test things out. I should probably put a little more of the latter into my program to test out some of the bigger concepts that are idiosyncratic for shooters to give me a little better “feel” for how to plan a stage. So I guess I’m a “feeler” that would improve by being a little more of a “technician” but I’m glad to know I don’t have to be an extremist technician.

[boz1911]

I guess I'm a technician. I always look for ways to save steps and move in one direction. You fit guys don't understand how difficult it is to start/stop 270 lbs.....

I do love the simplicity of "looking for the center of a target and shoot it".

[benos]

...I can’t bring myself to drive to the outdoor range to set up various drills to test things out.

That's exactly what you need to do. If you don't, you'll lack confidence in the decisions you have to make when doping and then shooting a stage.

Every stage you'll face has its own set of challenges. Eventually, the goal of your range training is to reach a place where you can look a stage over and have no doubts about the best way to shoot it, for yourself. And you'll never arrive at that place if you don't spend countless hours at the range testing and experimenting with every scenario there is.

be

[Xfactor]

...Robbie is a "feeler," or an ISFP. Gross motored skilled, tough-minded and confident, and for sure he doesn't do all "tenth to do this and two tenths to do that" routine. He looks over the stage, figures out the best way for him to shoot it, and does that. (I've posted this a time or two) but it's worth repeating here. Once I asked TGO what he his plan was and what he sees when he's shooting a stage. (We were practicing a stage.) His answer - he put his arms in his shooing position, and pointed them at each target, and as he pointed at each target he said the same thing: "I'm going to find the middle of this target and shoot it, I'm going to find the middle of this target and shoot it, ..."

be

Brian, has Rob always been that much of a "feeler", or has he evolved into more of one (similar to Jake) after mastering the fundamentals of stage breakdown and execution, and progressing to GM?

Even though I'm more of a "feeler", I think at my current level of shooting, it's still helpful for me to be very analytical in memorizing/planning a stage. But to the extent shooting is like golf (going back to Jake's analogy again), as my skills progress, I'd be happier to let go of some of the analytical component of the execution, and just "feel" the shots... (which helped my golf game as well )

[badchad]

That's exactly what you need to do. If you don't, you'll lack confidence in the decisions you have to make when doping and then shooting a stage.

Every stage you'll face has its own set of challenges. Eventually, the goal of your range training is to reach a place where you can look a stage over and have no doubts about the best way to shoot it, for yourself. And you'll never arrive at that place if you don't spend countless hours at the range testing and experimenting with every scenario there is.

be

I guess part of my problem with going to the range, is I feel like I get so much more efficiency out of my dryfire. Since my closest outdoor range is 20 minutes away and the drive time alone would make for 40 minutes of dryfire, not to mention target set up and loading time. That and I’m already driving to 3 matches a week.

Still I think you are totally correct and while the dryfire is improving my skills, it’s not giving much in the way of testing me on various scenarios. I think the best answer for me is to start bringing extra ammo, my timer, and my notebook to my outdoor club matches and practice and time various scenarios after my scores are turned in. The weather is finally cooling off enough to make that bearable. Thanks again for your input.

[Matt Griffin]

I'm technical when planning the stage, but I can't think fast enough to shoot that way. I plan my major movements, my reloads, and my target order, and that's about it. When I'm shooting, I'm really just trying to get the sights into the target and pull the trigger.

H.

[redmanfixit]

"Thanks to you and others for the response. I just did a search and took the Jung Typology Test, which I think is what you are referring to. The test said I’m ENTJ saying:"

Time passed and Meyers & Briggs a mother daughter psychologist team (Jungian's, obviously) expanded on this work. Thus was born the Meyers-Briggs personality inventory. This instrument was offered to businesses in an effort to help differing personality types in a business setting understand the differences in problem solving approaches based on four continua of personality. Handy tool to understand the basic way, for example, an artist approaches a problem solving task vs an engineer. Team building and efficient member interaction being the idea. This concept is framed by the idea of hemispherical dominance. The continua are indicators of the relationship between approaches to problem solving and the brain hemisphere in which the approach is seated. The implications for this are interesting when illuminated later by studies involving functional MRI in which it was confirmed that indeed, an engineer is left brained and an artist is right brained! (see what lights up on the MRI!) When reflected on, this view leads to an interesting insight as regards the suspicion with which these two seemingly polarized groups view each others processes! Move this into the realm of kinesthetic intelligence. Don't forget what we're up to here at the most fundamental level. We are practicing how to stay alive in a gunfight. These are "stressed" shooting situations designed to challenge your processing equipment (Brain) to handle multiple data streams in real time in less than ideal conditions. Winning at a game is fun and motivates us in a way that the practice warriors must undertake, takes on a less serious side. How to optimize? At a very fundamental level this has to do with a balancing act and how that internal balancing act turns into action. It's fairly obvious here that a balance must be struck between "figuring out" how to shoot a stage (engineering) and trusting intuitively(artistically) your ability to just shoot it.

I contend it is useful to look at the continua on which we are trying to balance. In fact, installing the concept of these continua of action helps to find ways to train that are effective. In Yoga practice, you try to create strength and flexibility between the halves of your body. We have a tendency to "favor" our right or left side, depending on handedness. With that we ultimately develop imbalances that can be shown to lead to physical injuries. By seeking to be strong and flexible on both sides, physically as we move through space we are more balanced, less likely to fall (fail). Train the left hand because of the way it effects your nervous system. Kinesthetic action affects the manifestation of mental processes as mental processes affect physical action in space time. In Aikido as I have been privileged to witness, there is an energetic balance taught between non-engagement and the will of our purpose. Where is the energy directed? Have you "Engaged" your opponent from your energetic center or is your energy directed to your own purpose? By using the model put forth by Jung and Meyers Briggs you can have a frame to look at your own "style" and find ways to make yourself more flexible and stronger. If you are more comfortable "figuring out" how to shoot a stage which is left brained, try teaching yourself to be more intuitive and allowing yourself to access the subconscious intelligence that resides just below consciousness and waking awareness. Conversely, being wholly intuitive is no advantage. Balance between knowing where you intend to go, selecting an optimum path and then allowing it to happen without thinking about it too much. (yeah, I know, this is getting a little fuzzy and Woo Woo, I'm doing the best I can with the symbols I have to work with). We meditate to find a still place where there is not too much noise. Still, we are here to act in the physical world.

OBTW In Meyers Briggs I am an INTJ. I tend to be 50/50 split in my tendency toward disposition on 3 of those continua.

"I'm tryin' to think, but nuthin's happenin!!'"

Curly Joe Howard

Edited October 14, 2008 by redmanfixit

[Flexmoney]

Nice post.

I've been juggling something similar in my mind the last few weeks...or months. You timely post covers more.

I was just going to say that we all have more than half a brain. And, we don't need to train to our strengths nearly as much as our weaknesses.

[Blueridge]

First of all I am an INFP by the Myers-Briggs test that I took several times during the last decade (people can change over time you see ). By the way in the general population only 2% are my personality type, per the information I read in the books, "Please Understand Me" and "Please Understand me II" by Kiersey and Bates.

Basically all I do is during the walk through I simply decide where in the course I will shoot what targets and where I will make reloads. I don't worry about how long reloads or shots take me, I just do them at my most efficient pace. I compete in revolver division with only auto shooters in my squads, so their ideas and discussions about how to approach a stage do not work for me the majority of the time.

Just as an observation it seems that the higher ammo capacity a shooter has, the less they focus on using the least amount of rounds to complete a stage. Now this observation is from the matches that I have personally seen, and I have counted limited and open shooters use nearly twice the number of rounds required on a stage quite often.

[benos]

It's fairly obvious here that a balance must be struck between "figuring out" how to shoot a stage (engineering) and trusting intuitively (artistically) your ability to just shoot it.

Curly Joe Howard

Good one. My natural tendency is to overanalyze something I care about doing well. But with experience, I realized that was a weakness. Especially when planing how to shoot complex stages with random moving/dropping/turning targets that were much better handled by just shooting them as I saw them.

be

[Flexmoney]

I started to re-read The Inner Game of Tennis.

That sounds like a page or two out of the book.