Yes but the old school way of teaching focuses on the trigger pull. Focus should always be on keeping the sights on target when the gun fires, despite anything else going on. It just takes a new approach on teaching what to pay attention to.
Can't hit S**t
- Thread starter maka
- Start date
Okay....I guess I'm old school then, as I believe that an understanding of correct form is an asset to diagnosis when things go off the rails. I never claimed to advocate a slavish adherence to form over results; shoot any way you want if you can get the hits. If it works, use it. That was one of many valuable lessons I took from Bruce Lee's book, "The Tao of Jeet Kune Do." But if it doesn't work and you have no idea why, returning to basics is pretty much always going to solve it for you. Telling someone to merely keep the sights on the target while they fire the shot doesn't help them understand what is actually happening when they are unable to hit the target despite their best efforts, and may in fact be fighting a simple body mechanics issue that is easily fixed.
I think it is pretty much a given that the whole idea is to keep the sights on the target while the gun fires. I never said otherwise and didn't really think it needed mentioning. I have always taught in my classes, "Above all else, see the sights lift in recoil and call every shot. Technique is only a guide-line. In IPSC they only score the hits; not how good you look." I think that's a fairly credible if not modern approach to the concept of follow-through.
I'm not really interested in starting a huge debate on this point and hijacking this thread. I'm only in trying to offer some help to someone who requested assistance. It's up to the individual whether or not they find the information useful and I'll leave it at that. FWIW: in the 18 years or so that I have been teaching this stuff to people, 99% of everyone who was pushing shots off to low left was doing so because of a technique issue, and 100% of the time it was corrected in just a few minutes with a couple of simple adjustments. So maybe "Old School" isn't such a bad thing...?
Actually if you see the sights, they will tell you what is happening before you fire the shot. If the sight starts to move, before the shot fires, you know something you are doing is causing that. But if you are not paying attention to the sights, or seeing in spurts, you will not understand what is happening.
On the otherhand, if you are intently focused on keeping the sight still on target, the other stuff takes care of itself. I've demonstrated this in many courses, the easiest way to see this is to take someone who is flinching, balance a coin on the front sight, and have them dry fire the gun. Once the focus is so intent on not dropping the coin, the gun stays still.
Seeing the sight lift is one possible type of focus. But in itself can be limting. It will tell you where the shot went, but what led up to where the sight ended up before it broke? Ideally you want to "look the shot off" which is a fancy way of seeing what you need to see for the type of shot you are shooting. A 30 yard steel target may require a different focus from what you'd want if you are benching the gun, which is different from what you need to see on a five yard full target. For a benched shot like the origional poster was shooting, for groups, I'd want an intense front sight focus with an awareness of the trigger as I fire each shot, but the awareness of the trigger is only what it's effect on the sights is. I'd also want to see the sight track through it's entire motion until it settles back for the next shot. How the sight tracks throughout it's arc will also show any flaws in the grip.
It's just a rethinking of the old methods of teaching the sight picture and trigger pull as seperate items, where really the sights are the main thing of importance and everything else is only important insofar as it's effect on the sights.
The benefits are that it is much easier to teach shooters, later on, that they don't need a perfect sight picture, or anything other than a sight "awareness" to make some shots. Also this can be done without firing a shot, which makes learning to shoot accurately much cheaper.
On the otherhand, if you are intently focused on keeping the sight still on target, the other stuff takes care of itself. I've demonstrated this in many courses, the easiest way to see this is to take someone who is flinching, balance a coin on the front sight, and have them dry fire the gun. Once the focus is so intent on not dropping the coin, the gun stays still.
Seeing the sight lift is one possible type of focus. But in itself can be limting. It will tell you where the shot went, but what led up to where the sight ended up before it broke? Ideally you want to "look the shot off" which is a fancy way of seeing what you need to see for the type of shot you are shooting. A 30 yard steel target may require a different focus from what you'd want if you are benching the gun, which is different from what you need to see on a five yard full target. For a benched shot like the origional poster was shooting, for groups, I'd want an intense front sight focus with an awareness of the trigger as I fire each shot, but the awareness of the trigger is only what it's effect on the sights is. I'd also want to see the sight track through it's entire motion until it settles back for the next shot. How the sight tracks throughout it's arc will also show any flaws in the grip.
It's just a rethinking of the old methods of teaching the sight picture and trigger pull as seperate items, where really the sights are the main thing of importance and everything else is only important insofar as it's effect on the sights.
The benefits are that it is much easier to teach shooters, later on, that they don't need a perfect sight picture, or anything other than a sight "awareness" to make some shots. Also this can be done without firing a shot, which makes learning to shoot accurately much cheaper.
Brian has a different take on it:
http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=1&t=5353
But since the origional poster said he benched the gun, perhaps instead of assuming it's a technique flaw, it really could be just a gun or ammo issue...
http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=1&t=5353
But since the origional poster said he benched the gun, perhaps instead of assuming it's a technique flaw, it really could be just a gun or ammo issue...
I'm not assuming anything; I'm merely offering some advice. It's worth whatever an individual wants to read into it and I won't be insulted if he doesn't care for it at all or it simply doesn't apply to his situation. It's up to him. He did imply that he benched the gun as well as shot it off-hand so sure, it could be ammo or sights or whatever. He could also be wacking trigger hard enough, even when benched, to move the Sights. Or maybe he's milking it; I have no clue. Since I haven't seen his benching technique or his off-hand technique or his gun or his ammo or his group consistency I have no idea what the situation is. I merely gave him a couple of possible variables that he can look to eliminate...or not if he so chooses.
NorthernPF
Regular
- Location
- Ramore, Ontario
Last night I went out shooting with Gard from the boards here and I found that I was hiting about 4-5" low on my 25yrd target using AE 9mm ammo in his SIG 226. I might be me but I saw other people had the same problem.
