Posted by Paul A. Cianciolo on July 12, 2001 at 20:48:31:
Hello Again,
The title of this post may be a little unclear. What I meant was does the
front sight of your air rifle ever become completely still? There is a lot of
emphasis put on smooth trigger pull and not being exactly sure when the rifle
will fire. That to me means that people out there can keep the rifle still for
the amount of time that the smooth trigger pull needs to occur. At this point I
am not able to do this "yet". Seems like I need to time the trigger pull to the
motion of the rifle. This seems wrong to me. There have been 1 or 2 occasions
when the sites were perfectly still.... but only for a second and then it was
gone. Wish I could repeat that !!
PaulC
Posted by Joseph Tousignant on July 12, 2001 at 22:01:48:
Hi Paul, for
what it's worth, (I shoot more pistol than rifle), in my experience "some"
wobble will always remain. I have yet to get any of the specialized clothing
that is very useful at insulating body function( such as heartbeat influences)
causes of some of the wobble. My scores cannot be competitive against those
wearing shooting jackets, pants, etc. That's why I was grateful when the "High
Noon" postal matches just opened a new category, called REQ30. (Stands for
reduced equipment, 30 shots). Gloves are still allowed (haven't gotten one yet,
either), but at least I have a good shot at being competitive.
In time the
wobble can be controlled thru controlling your emotions (to keep the heartbeat
slower, and lessen adrenaline rushes during match conditions). Controlled
breathing also helps, concluding with a reasonable hold time and trigger
control. In time I’ve found the arc of wobble to become smaller thru practice
and confidence in one's ability. However, it never goes completely away! It does
improve, however, thru persistence. Also, some days nothing seems to work at
getting a reasonably controlled arc of motion. Usually it can be traced to
something we've done wrong, such as not getting proper rest, nutrition, or being
stressed at work or at home. Hopefully those days won't be during a serious
competition. Good luck on your shooting.
Joseph Tousignant
Posted by matt on July 12, 2001 at 22:58:05:
Hi,
Your wobble area
will never go away. Plain and simple. It will get smaller with practice, but it
will always be there. For the top shooters, I can only imagine how big the
wobble area is, but I would love to see it once.
About the shot being a
surprise, the reason for that is when you see a perfect sight picture, you ad
some pressure to the trigger, and it will accumulate until the shot breaks.
Easier said than done, I know. I have been shooting for 8 years, and, while I am
only 18, gained a little experience along the way. Hope the info was at least a
little helpful. Good luck, and good shooting,
Matt
Posted by mako on July 12, 2001 at 23:13:52:
Don Nygord (former World
Champion) told me that when the first electronic trainers came out, he and
Ragnar Skanaker (legendary elite shooter) tried one out. He said that it was
interesting because he had a tighter hold, smaller wobble zone, then Skanaker,
but Skanaker's groups were tighter. So I guess one learns to anticipate
...
When you shoot those horrible rings of nine.... obviously your
anticipation is off.
Apparently you basically have to let your mind "pull
the trigger." You can't really make it happen consciously. That's why you have
to imprint the proper sight picture in your mind and let the subconscious
basically release the shot. This is why they say the shot should come as a
surprise. Just remember to hold after you think the shots gone off. I guess one
area that you can consciously work on is proper, straight back trigger release.
Kind of nice to know that you will never stop moving. Accept it and work on
all the other things. :-)
It might help to make sure you have good bone to
bone shoulder contact. After you raise your arm, let it settle into your arm
socket, take another breath, your arm will raise because of your chest expanding
and then bring it on target. Hold the breath in your throat. In other words make
sure you aren't just using muscle to hold your arm out.
Posted by Grzegorz on July 13, 2001 at 04:45:57:
Hi, I agree with what
has been written by Mako, Matt and Joseph, so just my "two words"...
By
practice you "teach" your subconscious, you create a cause-effect relation that
is coded there. Cause - is a perfect axial symmetry of your sights and the bull,
and the effect - is a signal send to your finger, namely "pull!". That at least
what I understand as “subconscious trigger pull". Squeezing a trigger and
"surprise pull" is not at all the same and should not be used for air rifle in
standing position. Subconscious pull is in my opinion when a signal "pull!" is
sent to your finger out of conscious control. This is what you learn with
practice. I do not remember who gave this example, but it was nice - a driver,
who change a car with a manual gear to a new with an automatic one - he will
still squeeze a non-existing clutch pedal for a long time yet... His
subconscious sends a signal "squeeze" in spite of the fact that conscious mind
knows perfectly that there is nothing to squeeze...
That is known. Now, my
observations. I am able to keep a sights-bull image NEARLY perfectly stable,
let's say allowing me to be sure that if I pull the trigger CORRECTLY I shoot
10. What’s now happening... When the image is "the best of the bests" my finger
pulls the trigger. And... Sometimes a score is 10.9 and sometimes 9, 8 and even
7! Why? I found that concentrating so strongly on the sights-bull image I often
forget about - what I call "a residual muscle-relaxation". It is easy to relax
leg, hand muscles, but shoulder and neck muscles - as you use them just before
sighting stage moving your head - often rest under a residual stress. If I
forgot about it - I see perfectly a fast, rapid movement of the sights left or
right EXACTLY in the moment I pull the trigger. I am pretty sure, that this is a
principal source of those 9/8/7 holes - at last for me, maybe for some other
shooters also, do not know...
Best rgds,
Grzegorz
Posted by Andy Wai on July 13, 2001 at 09:44:01:
Well, where does the
stress come from though? Sounds pretty inefficient to have to "remeber" to
control it...
Anyway, I just had an interesting experience this past
Tuesday. It was the first shot of the session. I did the entire setup blind.
When I opened my eyes, the gun was pointing at the target dead center. No wobble
and no drift. Just pull the trigger and the shot went off. The gun remained dead
center way into follow through. It was a *dead center* 10.9 with a even black
ring around the 9. And it's the easiest thing in the world.
So to answer the
question whether the wobble will go away, I think the body is, in theory,
capable of holding so still that you won't see any wobble for a period of time
long enough to fire a perfect shot. In fact, if you look at some of the files on
Scatt's e-match site, you can imagine what the sight pictures were like when
those files were recorded. In practice, this doesn't happen very often unless
you train heavily to perfect all aspects of your technique.
Just my $.02CAD.
Andy Wai
Posted by michelle on July 13, 2001 at 04:57:42:
Hi Paul
the wobble
zone for air rifle never goes away, but it does get smaller for a short period
of time.
Try this while training
do some dry training, and watch the
foresight carefully. What you should eventually see is the foresight moving
really bad, then getting smaller and stiller and then bad again. After it has
gotten more wobbly it will never come still again so you need to put the rifle
down and start again
Although the rifle never comes still, if you watch and
watch you should be able to see when the rifle comes at its stillest, then you
should training while shooting to be conscious of the stillest point so you can
see it every time so you can fire there.
Hope this helps if not e-mail me
Remember soon as it has passed the good point put the rifle down as it will
never come back to being goods again
michelle
Posted by STL William on July 13, 2001 at 05:23:39:
Aside from the
momentary appearance of perfection I have found that it just does not happen and
if it did there would be more than one person who has shot a 600/600. I believe
that the key is shooting inside your wobble. I for example feel I have a 9.5
wobble at the present time, and this means that when I'm holding still with the
rifle ready to take the shot my hold varies between 9.5 right and 9.5 left and
actually 10.0 and 10.0 up and down but that's not my problem. So at the present
time I seek to shoot at *my* perfection level which is inside this wobble.
Instead of frustrating myself with snap-shooting or waiting forever for
something that happens maybe 3 times a match. I always seek through practice and
conditioning to decrease my wobble but when I have the gun ready and I know that
the sight picture can get not much better I pull slowly and let it surprise me
so it goes off somewhere in that 9.5 to 9.5 range. I really cannot control it
inside that but I can call it.
I feel that this will help in improving
fundamentals and in evening out (and hopefully improving) the scores. I used to
have a lot more deep tens but also many lower shots. While using this method my
scores are up and while the deep tens are not as plentiful I have shot seven 8's
in my last five matches with nothing lower.
I know, I know, it's a game of
perfection. But I think that the perfection in rhythm and execution is more
important to firing the shot and you should work elsewhere to get the pedestal
type hold so that as you improve what is *your* perfect hold, be it 7 to 7 or
10.5 to 10.5, you will be able to let it off with consistency and accuracy. So
pull it when it’s perfect, but perfect to you.
Posted by Pat McCoy on July 13, 2001 at 20:45:48:
Paul,
The wobble
can eventually be eliminated, as was shown with electronic equipment hooked up
to one of the National Team members at the USAS Coach College a couple years
ago. Anna Marie (Pfifner at that time, but since married I think) held dead
still on the 10 dot for nearly three seconds before firing a ten. Her problem
was "overholding" and they were trying to get her to shoot sooner when the sight
was on the ten.
The big problem is keeping you in the "Zone" or subconscious
state while shooting. As soon as you consciously recognize the perfect hold you
are no longer using a subconscious trigger let off, and are back to conscious
action (which is about two times slower than subconscious reaction, again
according to data presented at the Coaches College by researchers from I believe
Maryland and Arizona).
Try to keep your conscious out of shooting by
focusing on a picture (perfect sight picture or pellet going perfectly through
the ten dot) and your subconscious will eventually trip the trigger at the
correct moment for whatever amount of movement you have (this presupposing
consistency, and not moving your position during the shot in an abnormal
way).
Hope this helps, and I look forward to other coaches views.
Posted by STL William on July 14, 2001 at 02:27:09:
That is fascinating
if I understand what you are saying. Was it a true 10.9 rock solid hold that the
girl had for 3 seconds or was it a 10 hold for 3 seconds? And if so I have had
discussions with people regarding if it is actually possible for your eye to
resolute the difference between a 10.9 and a 10.8 or even a 10.7 because if you
cannot see it there is no hope of holding it.
Is there a location where this
example could be viewed?
Posted by JP O'Connor on July 14, 2001 at 11:34:01:
Pat and William's
comments are very interesting.
Pat talks about the subconscious vs. the
conscious shot. Most of the US shooters seem to use a fairly conscious release.
Yet, the subconscious release (shot program really) yields fantastic results for
those that understand it and trust that kind of process.
Anne-Marie's
"overholding" is common among shooters who want to "make the shot perfect". It
is also very common when the front aperture is too small... as is usually the
case.
Holding "still" for 3 seconds? Yes, and longer. In a past QuickShots
article I mentioned another Olympian having the same problem (overholding and
"perfection"). She could hold an area of aim about 2mm (yes, two millimeters)
across for however long you wanted... 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 seconds. This is because
she had developed and trained (and trusted) a good inner position and technique.
One can even do this (usually for only a second or so) without boots, pants, and
coat if they understand and use inner position techniques. Yet her desire to
visually control and direct the shot - along with her need for "perfection" -
held back her performance.
Can we see the difference between a 10.9 and
10.8? The human visual system is not capable of seeing that fine a difference -
the receptors in the eye are not small enough. Rather than using the visual
system and conscious mind to control everything in an effort for a "perfect"
shot (as most do in this country), the visual system should be used as one input
into a technique that primarily depends upon "feel" (inner position and
subconscious) for fine control of the entire shot process/plan/program. These
methods have been proven to generate more tens, deeper tens, and a more relaxed
performance on a more consistent basis.
Can't see a 10.9 so can't ever hope
to hold it? You don't need to see it - indeed, can't see it - to hold it! Even
at its worst, the 2mm hold mentioned above is a 10.4... At it's best (much,
much, much less than 2mm) it was always 10.7 or usually better which cannot be
resolved by the human eye. The eye only makes sure it's a decent ten - the body
and subconscious ensure it's a deep ten. The best hold is NOT visually directed!
(...and the very best hold happens approximately a half to 2 seconds after
arriving on the target and deteriorates from there.)
So, if the shot *is*
visually directed, one wants the tightest front aperture they are comfortable
with... or so they think. But this accentuates the hold movement which
encourages long holds, flutter finger, jerked triggers, no follow through, and
general deterioration of self-confidence. If one uses the inner position
technique, a larger aperture is actually easier to use, facilitates an
appropriate level of visual input (some is still required!), "cures" the
problems just mentioned (or at least goes a long, long way toward their cure),
and allows for a much easier and better performance.
As mentioned in an
earlier TT post, it is an entirely different way to approach the delivery of a
shot... one cannot take a piece from one puzzle and put it into another
puzzle... it requires all the pieces!
Some of these themes keep popping up
in TT questions and discussions and there seems to be some interest in the
topic. Several of my students are also running into these same issues. So, I
should prepare an article on this topic that puts the pieces together. It is
rather in depth so I will likely first do a longer article for Scott to post on
the Pilkguns site. Then a shorter one for QuickShots.
Now you have a tiny
bit more insight into part of the reason for my usual closing:
"Feel
Center!"
-JP
Posted by Dave Suitor on July 16, 2001 at 11:20:54:
Could you expand on
the concept of "inner position".
thanks,
dms
Posted by JP O'Connor on July 17, 2001 at 01:27:31:
It is very late, I'm
tired, etc. - but I'll try to give a *short* introduction to the topic. We will
then see how the thread develops!
The external position is something that a
coach or another athlete can see. Even the athlete him/herself can see it in a
mirror or via still photographs or video.
The inner position is something
that only the athlete in question can become aware of. It is an awareness of
muscle tension, relaxation, balance, and state of mind. It is a kinesthetic
awareness of the body - that is the position and other aspects of the body. It
is what allows the athlete to get in *exactly* the same position for each shot.
While not a formal definition - and others may say I've included or excluded
certain aspects of a correct and formal definition - this should give you a
quick idea of the "area" we are discussing.
Example: Sometimes, pistol
shooters (and an occasional new rifle shooter) will chalk the firing point with
their footprints in order to return to the "same" position after a break.
Hogwash! The body changes during a match. Get into position and feel what is
natural. Your natural point of aim *will* change during a match. Whether one has
developed fine enough awareness to sense this or not is the question!
Your
awareness of the body can be developed over time through training, just as your
hold or other aspects of the game are mastered.
This topic deserves much
more coverage since it is so critical to ultimate performance and so few coaches
in the USA actually teach it. (A number will talk about it or have heard of it,
though I'm told only about 5 or 6 of us actually teach it - which surprised me.)
I will return to this topic in my usual in depth style soon. Hopefully this
provided a bit of understanding of the topic.
"Feel Center!"
-JP
Posted by STL William on July 15, 2001 at 11:40:02:
Now I think that I
read your last post JP pretty well and a couple of times over to make sure that
I got it. But I cannot understand how that if you cannot see the difference in
between a 10.9 and a 10.8 how you could consistently shot or hold that value.
Because you would not know where the center of the target is located at and
could think that the center is at 10.8 right and therefore would be setting your
inner position to that point. I think that you must be able to see it to be able
to set your inner position on target. Because realistically sight is the
fundamental input into your shooting cycle, if it weren't than you would see
blind shooters dominating the competition because they would not have to deal
with the other distractions that your vision gives you while you are
shooting.(don't take that as flaming, just an example) And what if someone had
bad vision, could your inner position take over for someone who could only see
7.0 left and right.
I fully agree with you that the shot should be
controlled by the mind and not over held or worried about while struggling for
over perfection. The sight size is absolutely correct! I for years used a small
one, actually tiny, in the logic of better visualization of my movement
therefore better ability to control it. And about a year and a half ago I tried
a larger aperture for a length of time and over time felt the benefits. Now my
aperture is huge and I'm a preacher of bigger is better to everyone.
Anyway,
I know that the best shot is not visually directed totally but there is nothing
magical in your head that will center the hold and shot when if you perceive the
center of the target to be 10.8 left.
Posted by JP O'Connor on July 16, 2001 at 23:31:59:
: Now I think
that I read your last post JP pretty well and a couple of times over to make
sure that I got it.
Wow! Excellent post!!!
Based on your question and
comments, it appears that you did indeed study my earlier post carefully and it
appears that you understood it quite well. But I cannot understand
how that if you cannot see the difference in between a 10.9 and a 10.8 how you
could consistently shot or hold that value. Because you would not know where the
center of the target is located at and could think that the center is at 10.8
right and therefore would be setting your inner position to that point. I think
that you must be able to see it to be able to set your inner position on target.
Because realistically sight is the fundamental input into your shooting cycle,
if it weren't than you would see blind shooters dominating the competition
because they would not have to deal with the other distractions that your vision
gives you while you are shooting.(don't take that as flaming, just an example)
And what if someone had bad vision, could your inner position take over for
someone who could only see 7.0 left and right.
No flames felt...
excellent points. Discussion below:
I fully agree with you that the
shot should be controlled by the mind and not over held or worried about while
struggling for over perfection. The sight size is absolutely correct! I for
years used a small one, actually tiny, in the logic of better visualization of
my movement therefore better ability to control it. And about a year and a half
ago I tried a larger aperture for a length of time and over time felt the
benefits. Now my aperture is huge and I'm a preacher of bigger is better to
everyone.
Aha! Bigger apertures - and a good rationale for them.
The visually directed shot theory calls for smaller apertures. The inner
directed shot with visual information as an important input calls for the
somewhat larger apertures.
Anyway, I know that the best shot is not
visually directed totally but there is nothing magical in your head that will
center the your hold and shot when if you perceive the center of the target to
be 10.8 left.
First, I will not pretend to have a satisfactory answer.
Let's explore the topic.
No, there isn't an internal "10.9 sensor" is there.
The laws of physics (optics in this case) dictate that we cannot see the
difference between a 10.8 and 10.9. So, how do we know if our NPA is set up
correctly? (i.e. on 10.9 and not 10.8) Truth be told, we don't! However, we sure
don't want our NPA set up at 9.5! We can see that difference so let's be sure to
correct that error.
Our area of hold is much larger than the 10.9 area. Even
an Olympian with a 2mm hold is going all the way out to about 10.6 or so in her
steadiest moments - and farther in the less steady times. But, she will take all
the 10.7 and 10.8 shots she can earn... her competitors aren't usually getting
as many so she can beat them with these deep tens while they are busy trying to
stay in the ten ring. Of course, the 10.9 will also appear at times.
The
visual input is *not* the dominant input for ultimate performance. Well, it
shouldn't be. Visual input is critical to ultimate performance of course -
(where is the target!) - but not nearly as important as a consistent inner
position and precisely correct and consistent shot process. Yes, I really said
that! :-)
Many pistol shooters have sharp front sight, clear rear sight, and
pretty fuzzy target. How can they shoot well if the target is fuzzy? How can
they shoot well with that wide white area between the sight and the (often
fuzzy) bull in a sub-six hold? They "feel" it of course! (Dang it, there he goes
again with that inner position stuff!)
So, I suppose the answer is that we
can't see a 10.9, we can't hold a 10.9, and so we can't "always" shoot a 10.9!
The ISSF is happy about that! (That was part of the point, actually. Spicing up
the medal race for TV was the big part.) We can use techniques that get us to a
smaller amount of error with greater consistency... more tens, and less nines!
After all, we aren't all shooting perfect scores - tens - on every shot. Let's
get to that point first!
Yet, these techniques can yield deep tens when the
chips are down. The "2mm hold Olympian", for example, has fired 104+ in a 10m
final (several times) and a very impressive 102.8 in a 50m final. Both with
rifle in the standing position and both in tough competitions.
Vision is
clearly important to ensure that we aren't shooting the backstop! It is clearly
important to ensure that we are "on target". Yet, it becomes a detriment if we
rely on it too heavily as we are inclined to do. Shooting blind? One of my
intermediate students shoots groups 8-10mm across (edge to edge - air rifle),
and often smaller, when her eyes are closed. We allow her to line up normally
(with the eyes involved) and then, instead of breaking the shot, she closes her
eyes. She then waits for another steady state (using techniques taught to her
related to inner position and balance) and then cleanly breaks the shot.
Want
an even tougher "blind" test? Blindfold a shooter and have them do the entire
shot process! We do this with unloaded guns right now! Very few athletes in this
country can successfully do this drill. It is not impossible.
Well... enough
for now. While possibly not answering the original question - and quite possibly
raising even more questions - I hope this has been thought provoking in a
positive way.
"Feel Center!" -JP
Posted by Joseph Tousignant on July 15, 2001 at 01:43:10:
Concratulations
on Mr. Cianciolo starting such an informative discussion! I also learned a great
deal from the comments of Pat, William, and JP in their contributions.
Isn't
what this forum was meant to insite, instead of the "riot-like" moronic
meanderings over the most recent past, over who will remain a unmuttered
"personality" by me! (At least in this thread!) (Yeah, i got a few e-mails from
him too.)
Now, for my 2 cents worth........
I didn't even know there
were instruments capable of measuring movement,(or lack thereof in this case!)
of a rifle shooter. A completely movement-free hold of almost 3 seconds is
certainly impressive, especially from someone like me who hasn't had benefit of
using the specialized jackets, pants, gloves, and shoes most likely "mandatory"
for achieving it.
It does bring up(at least in my mind)a few questions,
however. If a movement-free hold is achievable for a well trained and equipped
athlete, for a "reasonably" sufficient length of time to get a shot off, why
aren't we seeing these individuals shooting "perfect" scores? As was already
pointed out, the hold time might be too long or some other reason negates the
10.9 happening thru-out the match.
So....is an athlete better off working
on, and perfecting, an "automatic" or subconscious trigger release while
achieving a reasonably steady hold? (Still in a tight circular "arc", not sloppy
and wide). Or...., should the "perfectly" still hold be the primary objective
from which to build a superior technique?
The prior threads didn't mention
it, but I’m bound to wonder if the completely motionless hold by Anna
Marie(Pfifner) was achieved during a simple test, wherein the sole goal was
seeing if it could be done? This would be in stark contrast to a test being
conducted on an athlete during a serious match, where the shooter would be
subjected to the usual stress related, (and heart racing, movement contributing)
reactions of the human body. No test will ever be complete unless conducted
under the conditions of an actual match, yet conducting it during one would seem
to me be putting the athlete under "additional" stress, hurting his/her chances
of achieving the very goal the test was designed to measure.
Any volunteers?
Since this fellow shooter has learned that it is no longer an impossibility
(motionless hold over a reasonably lengthy time frame over the "deep 10" area),
looks like I have a lot of work to do in this area. (And some additional
equipment to buy!)Also nice to know I won't be alone in my struggle here! LOL.
Joe T.
Posted by JP O'Connor on July 16, 2001 at 22:46:00:
Concratulations on
Mr. Cianciolo starting such an informative discussion! I also learned a great
deal from the comments of Pat, William, and JP in their contributions.
: Now, for my 2 cents worth........
: I didn't even know there were
instruments capable of measuring movement,(or lack thereof in this case!) of a
rifle shooter. A completely movement-free hold of almost 3 seconds is certainly
impressive, especially from someone like me who hasn't had benefit of using the
specialized jackets, pants, gloves, and shoes most likely "mandatory" for
achieving it.
I suspect that the hold was not *completely* movement
free. Human physiology suggests that there is always a bit of movement! The
Olympic athlete I mentioned in an earlier post had a movement area about 2mm
across when in her steadiest states. Still, a very impressive hold. Sometimes
the gun would stop for a moment.
The jacket, pants, and boots are not
*mandatory* per se. Many shooters use them as props or crutches with a position
that is not fundamentally sound. We often will have rifle athletes training
without the stiff clothing! Of course, these clothing items are of benefit but
are not a correction for unsound position fundamentals or lack of balance.
I
once picked up an air rifle to look through the sights and a moment later an
advanced student exclaimed: "JP, the gun stopped!" He was shocked because he
could see that I was in street clothes and he knew I hadn't fired an air rifle
for some time. Of course, the gun didn't stop for long and there was a small
area of movement. Regardless, I was just using the body's physiology and had
been training my balance mechanism for a few months. The topic of inner position
will be expanded in my (forthcoming) response to David's TT sub-thread question
on "Inner Position" just above.
As for "instruments"... the Noptel (which I
import) and the more affordable Rika (from Scott Pilkington) and SCATT (from
Center Shot Sports) all are capable of showing the area of hold... and do a
whole lot more. That's another topic entirely! Do a "find" on TT for previous
posts, look in the TT archives, and on pilkguns.com for Warren's articles on
electronic trainers.
It does bring up(at least in my mind)a few
questions, however. If a movement-free hold is achievable for a well trained and
equipped athlete, for a "reasonably" sufficient length of time to get a shot
off, why aren't we seeing these individuals shooting "perfect" scores? As was
already pointed out, the hold time might be too long or some other reason
negates the 10.9 happening thru-out the match.
The hold is only one
part of the dynamic system and shot process that must take place. Important and
critical to be sure, but only one part. Most errors by advanced and elite
shooters happen in the mental arena... not the physical!
The physical and
technical components of the game are primarily foundational... the mental and
emotional aspects make up the bulk of the "upper floors". Subtle, advanced
details of the technical game do play a part... but are not the whole story.
Want to win consistently on the world stage? The foundational parts are required
- but not sufficient!
So....is an athlete better off working on, and
perfecting, an "automatic" or subconscious trigger release while achieving a
reasonably steady hold? (Still in a tight circular "arc", not sloppy and wide).
Or...., should the "perfectly" still hold be the primary objective from which to
build a superior technique?
Forget the "perfect" hold! Continually
refine your hold over time through training drills, cross training, and shooting
practice because it is a very important component. However, based on my previous
paragraph, you can see that I will strongly suggest working on the subconscious
shot.
Granted, many excellent shooters do not use a 100% subconscious
technique... but it is not 100% conscious either. There are those (myself
included) who believe the evidence (theoretical and practical) is clearly on the
side of the (primarily or totally) subconscious shot. What we as a country (USA)
have not done on whole is understand how to achieve this... nor how to teach it
effectively to a "Western" society... nor even what needs to be done to
facilitate an athlete easing in to it or learning it. Hmmm... Korea, China...
Germany... and some others! A few people know... but not enough.
The
prior threads didn't mention it, but I’m bound to wonder if the completely
motionless hold by Anna Marie(Pfifner) was achieved during a simple test,
wherein the sole goal was seeing if it could be done? This would be in stark
contrast to a test being conducted on an athlete during a serious match, where
the shooter would be subjected to the usual stress related, (and heart racing,
movement contributing) reactions of the human body. No test will ever be
complete unless conducted under the conditions of an actual match, yet
conducting it during one would seem to me be putting the athlete under
"additional" stress, hurting his/her chances of achieving the very goal the test
was designed to measure. Any volunteers?
Again, it likely wasn't truly
motionless, per the above discussion. There certainly could have been moments of
motionlessness since many have observed this in their own shooting, but not
total stillness for consecutive seconds. I do not know the circumstances of the
test mentioned nor the *actual* amount of hold movement.
In my own shooting,
I have had instances where the gun came to a complete stop just as the gun shot
"by itself" while pointed at the center of the area of aim. I felt as a detached
spectator. It is an unreal feeling. In other instances, the gun will stop
without a subconscious shot delivery and will then quickly resume its normal
movement. If one tries to consciously take such a shot... it is never as deep as
the subconscious shot. We see these on the electronic trainers all the time! As
Frank Briggs (AMU International Pistol Coach) says: "Once you see it, it's too
late." - referring to the stopped or very steady gun on the correct point of
aim.
As for what constitutes a "real" test... you raise an excellent point.
In the calm of a training session we can be very self-aware, relaxed, zoned out,
and so on. And in an Olympic final... or even in an "important" local match...?
Maybe not as relaxed. :-) One elite athlete we know has a racing pulse in
finals... in spite of the fact that she is mentally and otherwise physically
calm. But this happens only in competition... not in training! We have no idea
(from a hard science point of view) what this does to her hold.
I found a
way to measure pulse, respiration, and other factors using remote sensing. In a
lab environment using prototype equipment, we were able to measure my pulse and
respiration from a distance... in spite of the thick, stiff rifle coat and
sweater I was wearing. Dan Durben and I are exploring the feasibility of
applying this to practical training and coaching within our sport.
Since this fellow shooter has learned that it is no longer an impossibility
(motionless hold over a reasonably lengthy time frame over the "deep 10" area),
looks like i have a lot of work to do in this area. (and some additional
equipment to buy!)Also nice to know i won't be alone in my struggle here! LOL.
-- Enjoy your "journey", Joe!
Joe T.
This and similar
threads beg for a detailed discussion which treats a number of critical and
inter-related topics in depth. Someday...! (Soon?) The comments above are rather
brief and high level.
"Feel Center!"-JP
by: Joseph Tousignant
Thanks again JP, you certainly put a lot of thought and effort into your
response here. MANY THANKS, my friend! It seems i still have a lot of work to
do, and even more time to think about how to accomplish it.
BTW, this might
be a good place to personally say how much i truly enjoy the total effort you
put into your posts. Though we may not agree totally on every point, certainly
the message board here would be a lesser place to visit, were you to decide to
stop posting. Hope that never happens, and that any influences or "individuals"
that caused you to consider such drastic action settle their way out. We need
you, JP. Hang in there!
proud to consider you a friend,
Joseph
Tousignant
Posted by JP O'Connor on July 17, 2001 at 00:50:16:
Many thanks to you and
others who replied to my post of Sunday. I'm overwhelmed! I suspect there may be
some emails (of various flavors!) waiting me at home as well which I will see
when I return. So, I'm a bit behind with emails and even some TT responses until
a get home and settle back in.
Your posts and others have helped me a great
deal as well. For example, Ken Johnson's impassioned post regarding follow
through helped clarify in my mind a number of things that I had been thinking
about... in effect, it caused the jello to set! I've known Ken for a few years
and always enjoy it when we get a chance to chat. I always learn something from
him. It would be hard to find a nicer person as well.
Yes, you have much to
learn and work on. So do all of us! So do I! Man, so do I! Enjoy your journey
and be patient with it... it really is a lot of fun isn't it!
Whether we
agree or disagree isn't really the point I suppose... it's about seeing things
from different frames of reference in order to enhance our own understanding.
Sort of like the wonderful "Plato and Socrates" post!
I will not "disappear"
from TT!
In fact, some have contacted me directly and - time permitting -
I've attempted to help with individual questions and issues. Regardless, I very
much appreciate the response I've had from you and many others whom I am proud
to count as friends even though we've not had the opportunity yet to meet. Next
year, we need to schedule the TT dinner at the USAS Nationals farther in
advance... I don't want to miss it like I did this year.
Thank you again.
"Feel Center!"
-JP
Sponsored by Pilkington Competition Equipment