press out or punch out? AFHF class question.

[Zhurdan]

After taking AFHF in Utah this fall, I've been trying to reconcile a lifelong training issue with what I learned at the class. I've always been taught to "punch" the gun out to full extension. Versus the press out. I've been focusing on changing, but my accuracy on first shot is failing. I always try to listen to and apply class related material on the fly, but when do you do something for so long that your body can't break the "habit", at what point do you trade current efficiency for possible speed advantage? I can pound away at 7 yards all day on two or three steel targets at 7 yards from the draw, yet I can't seem to put one round into a 3x5 card. I can draw and fire without thinking too much, right up until I try to do a press out. Is there a point where you've done something too much to get rid of it, or is it simply me accepting the easier path?

[DocGKR]

Carefully dry fire/blue gun the press out very slowly 100 times a day for a year, then let us know how it is going...

[fuse]

I am in the same boat as the OP.

The one suggestion I would make, is commit to either method.

A half press out and half punch out does not work well at all, especially given a lower probability target.

[JV_]

When I learned the pressout, I spent day after day at the range practicing on a 3x5 @ 7 yards. I would go at half speed, focusing on sight alignment.

With 250 rounds per session, it doesn't take long for it to sink in. For me, the key was practicing SLOWLY, not at full speed.

My press-out is still a work in progress.

[CCT125US]

I began working on my dry fire press out with my TLR2, I would activate the laser and drive the FS into a light switch frm 15ft over and over again. Even with a hard focus on the FS you can still see the laser on the target as the shot breaks. If I screwed up and lost the FS I still had the reference of the laser. I found by using this method I was able to make sure I was still driving the gun through the target after the shot broke, and not firing at full extension....

[TCinVA]

Press out is one of those things you'll work on from now on. I've been working on it for a couple of years and when I actually remember to do it, I do fairly well. Put me on line against JV trying to clear plates and I do a pretty good press out and if I can remember to actually pull the trigger properly I do fairly well. Give me a Triple Nickel target and I try to use The Force to aim.

All you can do is practice, practice, practice. It may even seem like you're making no progress...but keep at it. I've spent entire range sessions working on press-outs on 2" circles and thinking the whole time that I was utterly wasting my time. Then I show up at a course or at one of the Culpepper sessions and I'll find myself picking up the sight and firing a very accurate shot PDQ.

Don't tell the other guys this, but sometimes when I beat them on a drill and I look as if it's no big deal I'm secretly thinking "Holy @$#&! Did I just do that?" When I have that thought it has always been after doing a good press-out. It's worth the effort.

[irishshooter]

i picked up one of these for just this purpose and have been using it for dry fire and it seems to be helping. alwyas a student is my motto.
http://www.laserlyte.com/products/lts-cartridge
http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0095/1612/products/lt_9_3_large.jpeg?937

[TGS]

The press-out is a lot of work to get perfect for me as well. It's not easy to do 100%. I still wonder if it's even worth practicing given how much practice it takes to do it proficiently, whereas a punch-out takes very little effort to get "almost there."

At one of the classes I took with ToddG, we were clearing a rack of plates. While I was standing around, he noted that only the people who did a press-out hit the first plate on drawing. <<<<Proof is in the pudding.

[jetfire]

The thing about a good press-out that's been difficult for me is that it's contraindicated in a lot of competition shooting. But at the same time, it's also the best technique for hitting low probably targets at speed.

Plus, for most shooters the press-out when practiced will deliver more consistent results than just about any other technique. I really do believe that it's worth practicing and developing as a part of your draw.

[JohnO]

I feel your pain. Suffice it to say I am one of the Three Caballeros mentioned here: http://pistol-training.com/archives/4804

All three of use devoted a significant amount of time to trying transition to the Press Out. I have to admit in my case not as much as the other two guys. I guess it really comes down to what you want out of your training. In our cases we don't compete or 'play' IDPA but we want to be good if the need arises to defend ourselves. When you have been doing something for a long time and it is ingrained to the point of unconscious competence it is awful difficult to do something different. That in-between phase of old style vs new in my opinion can get a little murky in a real life scenario. Well that is my opinion only and I base it on how discombobulated I became trying to Press Out.

I draw to the ready and bring the gun up from there. My wrist locks as I obtain a firing grip in the holster. Press Outs didn't go so well with my wrist locked. I ended up with the gun out at extension pointed at the sky. Plus I like the technique of drawing to and through the ready up to the point. That gives you an consistent draw that if required the gun can stop at the ready and never be pointed 'down range'. Lets just say for social situations you just may want to 'get it out' but not point it at anyone. All these punch out or Press Out techniques really do not allow a draw to the ready. More of a gamesmanship technique in my mind. Oh I'm talking about a single ready position where the gun is below eye level and pointed down at approximately 45 degrees.

Digressing a bit I found the AFHF class to be a great experience and I did enjoy all the drills. Again though my prior training just kept showing itself. I have ingrained through training that multiple targets should be engaged with a single shot each then readdressed individually on a failure to stop basis. Well along came the Triple Nickle Drill. I watched Todd demo the drill and a few other guys go before me. I knew what to do, right? When Todd set off the timer in my ear I plugged the first three targets with one shot each and stopped and called a Mulligan. It just wasn't natural for me to put two on each.

[jetfire]

One of the things that I think gets missed in the discussion is that the press-out is used when the decision has been made to fire the gun, not just draw it. You wouldn't do a press out if you were drawing administratively or in a situation where you'd want the gun in your hand but not start shooting.

You do a press out when you're drawing the gun because it's time to shoot RIGHT NOW and you want to get bullets on target most rickey-tick.

[Zhurdan]

Carefully dry fire/blue gun the press out very slowly 100 times a day for a year, then let us know how it is going...

Been doing 50 draws per night. For some reason, my wrists (both have been broken in the past) don't want to cock over "soon" enough. Been working on flexibility overall so maybe I can get a little more motion in the upper body to make it easier. I realize it's not a transition that will happen quickly, but what is bothering me is that my shooting overall has degraded because of the change in dynamics.


I am in the same boat as the OP.

The one suggestion I would make, is commit to either method.

A half press out and half punch out does not work well at all, especially given a lower probability target.

After seeing the results possible at the class, I'm going to put much of my attention to the press out, it's probably just a mental block because I can't do it well. I'd actually considered melding the two in order to make the transition more "fluid". Perhaps that's a bad idea.


i picked up one of these for just this purpose and have been using it for dry fire and it seems to be helping. alwyas a student is my motto.
http://www.laserlyte.com/products/lts-cartridge
http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0095/1612/products/lt_9_3_large.jpeg?937

Nice, kinda spendy at $100+. How's the quality? Does it seem that it'll hold up over time?

[LOKNLOD]

Been doing 50 draws per night. For some reason, my wrists (both have been broken in the past) don't want to cock over "soon" enough. Been working on flexibility overall so maybe I can get a little more motion in the upper body to make it easier. I realize it's not a transition that will happen quickly, but what is bothering me is that my shooting overall has degraded because of the change in dynamics.


Overall upper body positioning and posture have a major impact on the ability to get the press out motion optimized. Try a more aggressive forward leaning squat fighting type stance. If I'm straight up its hard to get my sight leveled until the very last second. If I am squatted/leaned (the "my reptile brain took over and I'm about to fight you with my teeth" stance) then I can level off the gun right in front of my face and have the sights aligned all the way out to full extension. For me this is the key to the press out.

[TCinVA]

Generally speaking, the lower and more forward you can get, the easier it is to do a press-out. Watch Todd's videos...notice how far forward he leans and how much he bends at the waist.

[JV_]

Elbow position also makes a difference. If you shoot with your elbows low and close together, it'll be hard to get the gun level early.

If you shoot with your elbows out to the side, and elevated, you can get the gun level much faster.

[TCinVA]

Elbow position also makes a difference. If you shoot with your elbows low and close together, it'll be hard to get the gun level early.

If you shoot with your elbows out to the side, and elevated, you can get the gun level much faster.

...plus it tends to allow for more pec activation, which helps with recoil control. Win/win.

[YVK]

Few random points:

1. You saw me do it in that class. It took 18 months or so to get where I am now with press out. It didn't go well. I've had a bunch of NDs over the target's top. I posted similar threads on other boards, one of them was titled "Disillusioned with pressout". I am using myself as an example not because I am awesome at it, but because I am a regular shooter dude like you. Expect that much time investment and that much frustration at times.

2. Go really slow to get the mechanics down. Turtle slow.

3. A big break for me was to realize how high gun is brought up during the draw. Watch Todd's videos and see where the gun is in reference to his face/eyes before he starts pressing it out. It is really an L-shape motion. As an example: I am very cognizant of my strong thumb position because I often engage slide stops with it, causing no-lock on empty. I try to stick it wide out until I get my support hand placed. As a result I've scratched my face with that thumb more than once - that is is how high and close to face I draw my pistol. I actually can pressout even from a lower position but my best times are when I bring it up high.

4. This could be considered a blasphemy here, but think carefully if you really need it. Nobody said you must press out to hit fast and accurately. There is a bunch of instructors who don't teach it and many strong shooters who don't do it. They won't be able to shoot TDA or LEM-like triggers well, but if you're committed to Glock, 1911 etc then there is no big loss. If you remember, Todd said it in the class that punching out straight on target can be faster - if you have your index. DocGKR may prove me wrong, but from my limited experience, presentation of RDS-equipped pistols that are so popular now is mostly about indexing. This is not to dissuade you, I personally think that press out is a way to go and makes you a better all-around; I am just posting this 'cause I like playing devil's advocate...

[jetfire]

4. This could be considered a blasphemy here, but think carefully if you really need it. Nobody said you must press out to hit fast and accurately. There is a bunch of instructors who don't teach it and many strong shooters who don't do it. They won't be able to shoot TDA or LEM-like triggers well, but if you're committed to Glock, 1911 etc then there is no big loss. If you remember, Todd said it in the class that punching out straight on target can be faster - if you have your index. DocGKR may prove me wrong, but from my limited experience, presentation of RDS-equipped pistols that are so popular now is mostly about indexing. This is not to dissuade you, I personally think that press out is a way to go and makes you a better all-around; I am just posting this 'cause I like playing devil's advocate...

Not blasphemy, just hard honest truth. I've been working on my shooting with some USPSA GMs (not the paper kind) and universally they've all recommended I abandon the press-out for most USPSA/IDPA shooting. Since I'm running a Glock with a 4-ish lb trigger, it's actually faster for me to draw straight to the target and then go to work. The reason is that most of the time in USPSA or IDPA you're drawing to a high probability target, a big ol' piece of cardboard at 7-10ish yards.

The reason I say "most" USPSA/IDPA shooting though is that sometimes a COF is set up so that your only options to draw to are a lower probability target. That's why I practice both the press-out and driving straight to the target as options. Low prob target = press-out, high prop target = go for it.

[Serpico1985]

While on the topic of the press-out can anyone offer info on the history of it? Just curious.

Also, what is meant by a punch-out? Just throw the gun to full extension then start looking for the sights?

Thanks

[Zhurdan]

I think, through this discussion, that I've pinned down part of the problem. High Prob targets vs. Low Prob targets. Most of what I've learned/trained/done is defensive shooting. As in, put the little pills in the bad guy, center mass. I can shoot decent when I take my time on LP targets, but that's not what the press out is about, no doubt (green eggs and ham). Time on target fast (appropriate amount), rather than taking time(copious amount) .

The thought of a LP target isn't foreign to me, it's just that I haven't spent a whole lot of time on it compared to the "ohhh look, a relatively giant target" kind of shooting. Like I said earlier, I can hit an 8" steel target all day long, but make that a 3x5 target, it just hasn't been in my training for defensive type shooting.

Been thinking all day since I posted this last night and reading all your comments, and I'm finding myself wondering if it's the press out that is the issue, or if it's the fact that I've done very little LP target shooting with the pistol. ... ... Eureka!

I'm sure the press out will take quite a long time to get right, but I think I'll spend time on LP targets a bit more in the process.

[Zhurdan]

While on the topic of the press-out can anyone offer info on the history of it? Just curious.

Also, what is meant by a punch-out? Just throw the gun to full extension then start looking for the sights?

Thanks

For me, the punch out is more about indexing the gun to the same point each time (where your eyes go to on the target). Draw, bring up to meet the other hand, and punch that sucker at the target... if you index it properly, the sights will be where you're looking and easy (theoretically) to pick up.

[ToddG]

The press-out was developed to accomplish two things. First, it evened the playing field for folks using long/heavy first shot trigger pulls (e.g., M9 and SIG P226) compared to shooters with 1911s and later Glocks. It blew away the myth that DA/SA or DAO guns were slower on the first shot. Second, it dramatically improved first shot speed when blind/index type draws were inadequate to guarantee an easy hit.

As caleb pointed out, in most competitions the draw will almost always be to a close, big, stationary target that obviously isn't trying to hurt you and your draw will be from a standing position. With practice, plenty of people can develop an adequate body index to get hit that target very fast from the holster.

As soon as you change some of those parameters -- it's moving, you're moving, it's small, it's distant, it's obscured, it's throwing a machete at you -- body index becomes less reliable. As such, under those circumstances you see index draw adherents punch the gun out and then begin the aiming process. Obviously, that's substantially slower. Or, alternatively, those folks try their index draw and just hope they get hits.

I see the index draw fail at the F.A.S.T. all the time, even from incredibly skilled shooters. As discussed in the F.A.S.T. thread, a lot of guys will shoot the test over and over again and only record their best time. So when they get lucky and their index was good enough for a first shot hit, it's wicked fast. But they don't remember that they also missed that first shot 2/3 of the time.

For me, it boils down to a pretty simple decision. I can either develop a draw that will give me a slight edge under best case conditions (index), or I can develop a draw that will give me an edge under less than ideal conditions (press-out).

[CCT125US]

At what skill level should someone be introduced to the press out? I can certainly think of many a shooter who is simply not safe, let alone be showed a technique that has them bring the gun up close to the face at a upward angle. I am a strong believer in the press out and find it extremely useful, Speed Kills / GET SOM was a very eye opening class for me. However I was taught long to keep my finger off the trigger untill sights are on target.... The press out is meant to be done that way. Thinking back to older posts here, I can see how tryng to break the shot before extension can be a gray / mis understood skill. Have any proponents of the press out ever told a shooter they are not ready for the press out? How about simply not sharing it with someone when they can't keep their finger off the trigger? I understand in a class situation when a student is paying to learn the technique... So in lines with the OP's question press out or punch out based on skill level??

[JV_]

when they can't keep their finger off the trigger?

If the person can't follow the 4 safety rules, they don't need to learn the press-out.

[ToddG]

If a person cannot follow the four safety rules, he doesn't need to be on the range with me, period.

[JohnN]

The press out is the only way I can shoot the LEM system quickly. Using any other method tends to make me pull quickly through the light take-up, hold at sear engagement and of course yank the trigger. Continually pulling the trigger in one motion while performing a proper press out (as if Todd was watching) provides much better results.

As others have stated an aggressive forward crouch really helps to get the gun leveled out quicker with less stress on your wrists.

[rsa-otc]

Still working on this, After 30 plus years of just clearing the holster and then a straight line to the target breaking the shot when acquiring the sight, using a DAO revolver or TDA auto it takes a bit of getting use to. I've only been practicing the press out about 12 to 15 months. I'm finding that when under tight time constrictions the 30 year old muscle memory kicks in and I punch out. When there's distance or I know I have to slow down and make the shot I press out just fine. So this high probability vs low probability will certainly work for me.

[JAD]

I clearly need to work an AFHF class in next year. I'm very intrigued by the press out, and I am almost certain that I won't get it -- even to the point of being able to evaluate whether it's worth it for me, as a person who's comfortable with the 1911 platform -- until I spend time in class learning it. It seems to have many similarities to the four-count draw I've used since working with Crews in '97; he had us draw to a very high position and start tracking the front sight in our peripheral vision starting at smack, which for me is very close to retention. I already prep the trigger from that point, so I think that the difference would primarily lie in how high the gun comes up before I start working it forward. Hrm. I wonder if I would get more out of the class if I worked it with a revolver?

[Odin Bravo One]

At what skill level should someone be introduced to the press out? ... So in lines with the OP's question press out or punch out based on skill level??

I introduced the press out to a brand new shooter, after about a grand total of 1 hour of range time.

The press out part still needs work, but so does mine and I have been using the press out for a few weeks longer. The level of skill with this shooter was weak at best, but the understanding and application of the safety rules were understood and practiced without exception. The flip side is that I have attended intermediate and advanced courses where there were shooters I would not introduce the press out to, as they lacked the main skill necessary to safely accomplish the task.........the simple ability to use their brain and a gun at the same time. Many could shoot well, and had years of experience. But total slip knots when it came to safety. The new shooter demonstrated that ability the moment a gun was put in hand.

[LeeC]

(question about the Laserlyte Pistol Trainer)



Nice, kinda spendy at $100+. How's the quality? Does it seem that it'll hold up over time?

I just got one a few days ago for $81 here (http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/2LLLT9-1.html). Seems pretty well made and I expect will hold up well. Works better than advertised in that you don't have to remove the batteries to turn it off as the instructions state, like you do with some bore sight lasers. I was using it along with mag drop drills and forgot that I had it in the chamber. Later when I stopped drilling and went to reload, I racked a hollow point into the back of it and put only a very slight ding on the edge. The instructions say to push out of the chamber with the eraser end of a pencil, but my wooden chop stick works fine. Overall, I'm happy with the purchase, but haven't been to the range yet to see if there is any improvement as a result of increased dry firing drills. I expect improvement over the long run though.


If you have $450 to get really "spendy", maybe get one of the NLT SIRTs (http://pistol-training.com/archives/4387).

[Zhurdan]

I wanted to revisit this post after some time.

I re-read the whole string and noticed that it may have sounded like I do not like/believe in the press out. This is not the case. I saw with my own two eyes that it's faster and I want to incorporate it. I was simply more concerned about "what if the excrement hits the oscillator tomorrow?" and there being a degradation in my first hit on target due to the changeover.

I've put much more dry fire work into the press out and it's getting much better. The more aggressive stance helped a ton. Unfortunately, my live round trigger time has dropped significantly this past month as it hasn't gotten much over 12 degrees outside as of late and our indoor range will not budge on the "no drawing from the holster" rule. I have put a lot more time into LP targets though and have seen a jump in performance so far from low ready.

I've also notice that the press out is muuuuuch easier with the correct gear to begin with. I'd been using an IWB leather holster and removing gun from leather was a "sticking point" I'm now using a home brewed Kydex holster and I've shaved a few tenths off the draw during the few times I've gotten out to the frozen tundra to do some life fire work.

In closing, I took a lot away from Todds class in Utah and it is being put to use. Thanks Todd.

[GJM]

Could someone please define press out and punch out?

Having taken AFHF at the same time as Zhurdan, then gone to Rogers two weeks later, and discussed this with Bill Rogers, I have some opinions, but would like to be certain that I clearly understand what people mean by press out and punch out.

[Ray Keith]

I attended AFHF last summer in Oklahoma City. For some reason I feel compelled to describe my experience. I came to the class profoundly ignorant of a "press out" but was determined to see what it was all about. I am a decent shooter, nothing special, and have had a significant amount of other training. In two days at OKC I shot like a complete noob. I was horrible, FAR and away the worst shooter in the class-I felt certain people wondered why I was even there. I have never left a class embarrassed because I always left smarter than when I arrived but I shot so horribly, I talked to myself all the way home for an 8 hour drive. I finally had to call a mentor a few days later to be talked off the shooters ledge.

I could not and with the clarity of hindsight should not have expected to change something so fundamental in one 2 day session and have it go well, nonetheless it was beyond humbling. One important component of my ignorance was how significant the change would be from what I had wired previously.

I simply could not get a press out done. I could not level the pistol before nearly full extension and ended up then still trying to find the sight after having gone slow working the press out. To approach level in the way Todd looks in his video, I had to chicken wing my elbows severely and even then it was hit and miss. So what I ended up with was real mess of a performance.

I think it is important to add, that I got real benefit from this class and the process. Todd suggested a weak hand adjustment to my grip which I have maintained and has improved my follow through and recoil management dramatically. I also left with a new set of sights courtesy of Prdator that I really like.

Shortly after class I lost a bout with a kitchen appliance and managed to remove a significant chunk of the end of my strong hand index finger. So within a week of class I was on the shelf for shooting activities. A dose of malpractice later I made it to a hand surgeon and it has healed remarkably well. The sensation and feel is changed I suspect permanently. Long story short, I did not continue working the press out and reverted to what I had previously been taught. This is no comment on the method, just a comment on me.

All this to say that I think AFHF is well worth attending, you will leave a better shooter, even if you suck while you are there.

Ray

[Zhurdan]

Could someone please define press out and punch out?

Having taken AFHF at the same time as Zhurdan, then gone to Rogers two weeks later, and discussed this with Bill Rogers, I have some opinions, but would like to be certain that I clearly understand what people mean by press out and punch out.

GJM,
I attempted to define punch out on page three, top post.

Zhur

[GJM]

I think the more interesting question is not press out versus punch out, but rather should the press out happen on a direct line from holster to the target or as Todd teaches.

[YVK]

I think the more interesting question is not press out versus punch out, but rather should the press out happen on a direct line from holster to the target or as Todd teaches.

Part of it is gear, part of it is philosophy.

If one runs a pistol with a long trigger pull, then the only way is a pressout the way it is taught by Todd, Ernest Langdon, etc. To work these pistols on a direct line of holster and shoot fast, one would have to start pressing a trigger without any ascertainment of sight picture, which most agree is a bad thing.

If one runs a short pull trigger, then direct presentation from holster is faster. The question is if relying on index, or present-pause-press presentation, or however one calls it, gives consistent enough results for the user under wide range of circumstances. The answer could be "yes" for some and "no" for others. Advanced shooters with consistent index may not necessarily benefit from pressout; looking at the video of Sevigny's record FAST run, I don't see a pressout.

For me personally, pressout works better. I don't have a consistent index. I once ran a test where I sort of "point-shot", or shot relying on index, at 3x5 at 7 yards, presenting as fast as I could possibly do. I hit the card 8 out of 10 times with speed that was unreal for me. Problem was that with each shot I had no clue if I hit it or missed. When I go into a speed where I can reasonably guarantee my hits, I do faster with pressout. Others may have different experience.

[Zhurdan]

Part of it is gear, part of it is philosophy.

If one runs a pistol with a long trigger pull, then the only way is a pressout the way it is taught by Todd, Ernest Langdon, etc. To work these pistols on a direct line of holster and shoot fast, one would have to start pressing a trigger without any ascertainment of sight picture, which most agree is a bad thing.

If one runs a short pull trigger, then direct presentation from holster is faster. The question is if relying on index, or present-pause-press presentation, or however one calls it, gives consistent enough results for the user under wide range of circumstances. The answer could be "yes" for some and "no" for others. Advanced shooters with consistent index may not necessarily benefit from pressout; looking at the video of Sevigny's record FAST run, I don't see a pressout.

For me personally, pressout works better. I don't have a consistent index. I once ran a test where I sort of "point-shot", or shot relying on index, at 3x5 at 7 yards, presenting as fast as I could possibly do. I hit the card 8 out of 10 times with speed that was unreal for me. Problem was that with each shot I had no clue if I hit it or missed. When I go into a speed where I can reasonably guarantee my hits, I do faster with pressout. Others may have different experience.

Being a long time 1911 guy, the punch out was what I've learned and was the genesis of this post. I've done it for so long that it seems counter productive to do something different even though I see that it is faster. Case in point....

Keep in mind, my draw was less than perfect at this point (this was a couple of years ago), but this was index or "punch out" shooting with the same 1911 I shot in Todds class.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg3M6w-wv10

Now, just a bit faster with the Glock 32C .357Sig that I shot on day two of Todds class.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVJilyFzpJk

Also indexing on target. Notice the impacts on the steel. I had a bit of over travel on the 4th shot but the elevations were all pretty much the same.

Which one is right? Yes, the targets were close, but the point being... I can do it pretty well, and repeatedly so.

Not to take away from the press out at all, it's just that this is the result of many years of practicing a "punch out" vs. press out. The degradation I saw in trying to switch over was almost to the point of wanting to give up... at first. As soon as I can get the old camera and some not sub-freezing range time, I'll do it again with the press out to compare.

[Mr_White]

one would have to start pressing a trigger without any ascertainment of sight picture, which most agree is a bad thing.

Tangent: How do you reconcile the above idea with the necessity of retention shooting, where it's not possible to visually verify sight picture?

[joshs]

To work these pistols on a direct line of holster and shoot fast, one would have to start pressing a trigger without any ascertainment of sight picture, which most agree is a bad thing.

This is how most of the IPSC/USPSA shooters that shoot TDA guns perform a "press-out." Personally, I don't like it, but I don't think you can say "most agree [it's] a bad thing." I think the "upside down L" press-out has two major benefits.

1. Aiming
2. The draw is very compact, and it's easier to shoot from along the draw-stroke if needed.

I guess that really three, but math is hard.

I also think that, if you are using AIWB, then there is no reason to even consider the straight line "press-out." By the time you get the gun clear of the holster and the muzzle oriented forward, the gun is almost in the high-ready position anyways.

[ToddG]

Tangent: How do you reconcile the above idea with the necessity of retention shooting, where it's not possible to visually verify sight picture?

Retention shooting is done because you cannot safely extend the gun. It's not an ideal, it's a necessity.

[Mr_White]

Retention shooting is done because you cannot safely extend the gun. It's not an ideal, it's a necessity.

I appreciate that that is how you personally reconcile advocacy of visually verified fire with the necessity of retention shooting, and it well describes the priorities that give rise to us generally advocating sighted fire, but allowing for unsighted fire in certain circumstances.

When words to the effect of "one would have to start pressing a trigger without any ascertainment of sight picture, which most agree is a bad thing" are used, it makes me wonder how that person would allow for retention shooting of any kind under any circumstances, which would require modification or refinement or addition to the original statement.

I was asking how YVK reconciles those issues, but I am also grateful to hear your answer too. I know how I reconcile those two issues; I was just curious how YVK does since he brought it up (not at all trying to attack or criticize YVK.)

It's a tangent to this discussion when we examine our general or total advocacy of visually verified sighted fire vs. the necessity of retention shooting. But it can also apply directly to the discussion the same way that YVK brought it up. Whether using the pressout or the punchout, is anyone actually seeing the sights sufficiently aligned with the target (to hit) before the trigger is touched at all?

[CCT125US]

Whether using the pressout or the punchout, is anyone actually seeing the sights sufficiently aligned with the target (to hit) before the trigger is touched at all?

Yes. My site is visually being driven into the target before my finger touches the trigger. It may be in acceptable focus or a softer (needs cleaned up) focus: but the target is behind the sites before I am on the trigger.

In regards to retention shooting the cone of deviation vs. size of target is so large and the threat so urgent that the attempted use of sites would lead to bad things.

[JV_]

Yes. My site is visually being driven into the target before my finger touches the trigger.Yup, same for me.

[YVK]

I was asking how YVK reconciles those issues, but I am also grateful to hear your answer too. I know how I reconcile those two issues; I was just curious how YVK does since he brought it up (not at all trying to attack or criticize YVK.)


Origami, I didn't perceive anything as an attack or critique. My answer/reconciliation is similar to Todd's: I believe that this entire thread had to do with sighted fire only, not unsighted techniques such as retention shooting, shooting from transitional positions, or point shooting. So, when I said "one would have to start pressing a trigger without any ascertainment of sight picture, which most agree is a bad thing", that was in reference to intention to use sights, not necessity to squeeze the shot before you can get a sight picture.




Whether using the pressout or the punchout, is anyone actually seeing the sights sufficiently aligned with the target (to hit) before the trigger is touched at all?

That is a loaded question. I've inundated Todd with questions in this regard in a long thread that happened on another board. I have ND'd 5 times over target's head during last two years when I was pushing the speed. I guarantee you I saw the front sight over the target, but it is rather obvious the sights were not aligned. Subsequently, I've spent some time with a laser-enabled pistol to understand at what point of presentation my muzzle is reasonably aligned. That in turn resulted in change of technique.
Answering your question directly, I think a lot of people, in both technique groups, at least touch the trigger before the sights are aligned sufficiently. I think this happens especially when we're pushing the speed envelope on standardized timed tests. I also think that pressout group people get their sights aligned earlier in presentation, which should lead to at least theoretical advantage of being able to start trigger press earlier in presentation. Just to make sure we're still on the same page, I am not talking about retention shooting.

[EVP]

I also agree with CCT125US

I shall first preface this by saying I am more of a novice shooter but I kinda had a mini breakthrough when I brought the gun up higher then I was originally. I also have the gun pretty much horizontal when it is at its high point at my eye level. I found that I can start pressing the trigger earlier due to the sights being already roughly lined up and pressing the gun to the target as I refine the sight picture.

The way I was doing it before caused me to put my finger on and start the trigger press late in the press out process and almost rushing the trigger press. Now I can start that process earlier and roll the trigger more gradually.


It helped when I recorded myself and could see the difference.

[ToddG]

... is anyone actually seeing the sights sufficiently aligned with the target (to hit) before the trigger is touched at all?

That's sort of the point...

[LOKNLOD]

Terminology is a funny thing, because to me a "punch out" is just a "press out" without trigger manipulation before reaching full extension. Am I way off, or using incorrect jargon?

Before I'd ever heard of a press-out, ToddG, or pistol-training.com, I was taught a "punch out" that was intended to get your sights aligned on the target as quickly as possible and punch as straight out toward the target as you could. The goal of the "upside down L" motion wasn't as emphasized as highly as in the press-out, since there wasn't as much issue with finger on a trigger before sight alignment, but still, the "idealized" drawstroke involved getting the gun up and level early and pushing out with the sights lining up.

As a matter of fact, the visualization used to describe the motion has helped me a lot on the pressout motion working for me (the other piece of that puzzle was the body positioning I learned later at AFHF) -- visualize a plane of glass between your eyes and the target, with the goal being to bring the gun up, sights flat against the glass, and scrape it along the bottom of the glass to the target. Don't shatter the glass by bringing the front sight up and then back down like a whale breaching or by "bowling" the gun out and up.

I've got a long way to go to make the most of the pressout, but I think it has less to do with not understanding the mechanics than with having the motor control of a 8-month-old and the practice regimen of the pre-"Cool Runnings" Jamaican bobsled team.

ETA: A clarification: "Before I'd ever heard of..." means just that, not that it predated Todd but just that I hadn't been exposed so I wasn't predisposed to framing the concept in terms of the press out.

[jthhapkido]

Yes. My site is visually being driven into the target before my finger touches the trigger. It may be in acceptable focus or a softer (needs cleaned up) focus: but the target is behind the sites before I am on the trigger.

Hm. So, for example, if you were shooting the last drill-of-the-week, you are saying that with your particular draw, the sights would be on the 3x5 card at 15 yards before your finger touched the trigger?

[GJM]

Bill Rogers teaches, and clearly describes on pages 94 and 101 of his book, that you are working the trigger as you extend the pistol, and prior to having visual sight alignment. For example, "just as the muzzle intercepts the spot, the dominant eye transitions from the spot to the front sight and the handgun fires."

[JAD]

I was taught both with a crews four count and a gunsite five count to start prepping the trigger during extension (my finger goes there right after smack). With the crews four count I was specifically taught to pick up the front sight during extension. I get visual confirmation via a flash sight picture before the shot breaks, and with a lot of rounds down range I have yet to break a shot early.

[CCT125US]

Hm. So, for example, if you were shooting the last drill-of-the-week, you are saying that with your particular draw, the sights would be on the 3x5 card at 15 yards before your finger touched the trigger?

Yes. Exactly. Now if the sights actually stayed there during the trigger press and the shortened time frame, well that is another story :) But that is why we practice..

[ToddG]

If you're going to push the envelope, you sometimes have to check yourself.

Today, motivated by this thread, I performed two tests. One was on 2" circles and one on 8" circles. Range was 7yd. In both cases, I drew and fired one round to get a hit (hopefully) as fast as I could. I repeated this fifteen times each using three methods:

a true press-out as perfect as I could get it
a hybrid press-out that was more of a visually referenced punch-out "index" with final sight correction (if necessary) performed once the gun was extended, followed by the last bit of trigger press
total target focused "point" shooting


Here are the results.



2" circle
press-out
index
target focus


average time
1.67
1.67
1.23


fastest time
1.44
1.56
1.16

slowest time
1.77
1.92
1.37


hits
8
13
2



Those numbers are a bit misleading. The "index" shots were generally faster, but a couple of slow shots skewed the result. The "press-out" average was similarly skewed by a couple of much faster than average shots.

Furthermore, the misses from the "press-out" string were all within an inch of the target and mostly low which tends to be the problem that plagues me on slow precise press-outs with the Glock. I attribute it to anticipation because the break is much harder/distinct than an LEM or DA pistol. The misses on the "index" string of fire were inches off and ironically usually associated with the slower times. Again, it was basically a trigger control failure this time brought on by the sense of taking too long to finish the shot.

The target focus string was essentially a waste of time and ammunition. About half the misses were within an inch or so of the target, but the other half ranged as much as 8" from the target.



8" circle
press-out
index
target focus


average time
1.20
1.39
1.09


fastest time
1.12
1.18
0.98

slowest time
1.30
1.62
1.20


hits
13
15
11



Basically, the "index" approach of extend, verify, press was just unnecessarily slow with the high% target. Yes, on a couple of shots it forced me to stop and make an otherwise bad shot a hit but at the cost of a significant amount of time... more time than a followup shot would have taken.

Next time I'm at the range I will probably run this again to get more datapoints. I'd also like to do it against the 3x5 at 7yd to see where that falls (for me) in the spectrum.

[YVK]

These results run counter to what I what I would've expected. I would've thought that pressout would be faster and more accurate on small-prob target (unless 8 hits and 7 close misses are indicative of higher accuracy that 13 hits and two big misses), and index would've been faster on high-prob target. Go figure.

I may run this test too, pretty interesting stuff.

[GJM]

1) Todd, how many yards -- 7?

2) I hope Head Hunter chimes in on this.

3) I wish you had tested what Bill Rogers refers to as spot shooting, from the extended confirmed ready, where there is a transition to the front sight just prior to the shot being broken, as opposed to point shooting.

4) I would like to see data from the press out you teach, along with the Rogers style press out, which starts from the side of the chest in, more or less , retention and then presses out directly to extension.

5) Like to discuss technique for dominant and support hand only shooting.

[ToddG]

YVK -- My expectations mirrored yours. JV was at the range with me and can attest to my surprise.

The 2" circle @ 7yd has been the bane of my press-out experience lately. I can think of a number of possible reasons:

It causes me to extend so slowly that it's not worth it.
I get muzzle dip at full extension (related to pressing forward slowly).
It becomes more of a timing-on-purpose exercise, which is bad, than just breaking the shot naturally. When the shot breaks early because I'm aggressive on the trigger, it's almost always a hit.
The anticipation/break issue mentioned in my previous post

When I'm doing the hybrid press/index, I'm definitely getting on my sights before full extension and very rarely did I need to make a correction even on the 2" at 7yd. I attribute this to having a few reps under my belt at drawing to low% targets... essentially, I've got a really good index. However, I did the target focus string specifically to test how good my "index" was and it wasn't good enough to hit blind. That's meaningful.

While it's too early to draw conclusions, the data so far suggests to me that:

When shooting targets that are high% enough that I can make a hit with the press-out, the press-out is faster.
Once the target becomes low% enough that a traditional press-out is artificially slow or results in misses, doing a faster less precise press-out then making a final correction before finishing the trigger stroke is more accurate and possibly faster.

Like I said, on some level that's really what I've always taught. "Do a press-out but if you're not ready to make a hit at extension, fix it." But I've always looked at the failure to "be ready" as a fault in technique. Now I'm wondering if it's just a line between two slightly different requirements.

[ToddG]

1) Todd, how many yards -- 7?

Yes. I edited the post to include that now. Thanks.


3) I wish you had tested what Bill Rogers refers to as spot shooting, from the extended confirmed ready, where there is a transition to the front sight just prior to the shot being broken, as opposed to point shooting.

I've done that at Rogers before and find it slower than a press-out. I'm sure for someone who practices it a lot -- someone who uses an extended low ready -- the index becomes better trained. The "index" I was using for this test still had a visual reference component.


4) I would like to see data from the press out you teach, along with the Rogers style press out, which starts from the side of the chest in, more or less , retention and then presses out directly to extension.

I did something similar earlier this year based on a discussion at TPI. Some of the folks here at PF participated. Short version is that the high ready/visual press-out tended to be superior in terms of speed to first hit. However, we only had half a dozen or so people do it.


5) Like to discuss technique for dominant and support hand only shooting.

That raises a particularly interesting point.

I think most folks can probably do some kind of index-to-sights-to-trigger approach better than a press-out when we're talking about SHO/WHO. But does practicing the SHO/WHO press-out improve your ability faster? My guess is that it does because it builds an index simultaneous to training a good visual track and trigger movement throughout the press-out.

As I've said before, I've seen a lot of folks who use a traditional "blind" index extension fail at hitting a 3x5 at 7yd at speed on demand.

[GJM]

1) We start most every range session with five single shots from the extended, confirmed ready to the spot at 7 yards, followed by five more shots from the transition. As you know, Rogers par time is .50 from the extended, confirmed ready and .75 from the transition. I agree that the extended, confirmed ready definitely takes some repetitions. I started about .60 comfortably, when we got back from the first trip to Rogers last April, worked it to .50, then to the .40's, and finally with a number at .35 with one .32 on film. Since that was over a relatively short period of time, I attribute that to practice/comfort. This is one place where the M&P shines over the Glock, as I think the larger trigger guard of the M&P allows me to get the finger to the trigger with less finesse than is required by the Glock. On the par .75 from the transition, best times are around .55, and again faster with the M&P than the Glock. Interestingly, I am slower with the RDS from the extended confirmed ready, but just as fast with the RDS as irons from the transition.

2) I have spent a LOT of time working on my one hand shooting. For me, especially support hand only, the best results with a tight time constraint on the first shot come from extending the pistol in a direct line to the target, working the trigger during that extension, and breaking the shot as I reach extension. Whenever I get my arm extended and then need to break the shot RIGHT then, I pull the shot with my left hand to the right. Don't know why, but the arrival of the RDS has seemed to help my support hand only shooting greatly, or I just started to get better about the same time.

For old times sake, I shot a P30, P2000 and HK 45C quickly this evening just before dark. I spent 50 per cent of my time on support hand only, and I still feel the LEM trigger is much slower to shoot accurately with just my support hand. Todd, I would be curious if you and others have timed your first shot from the transition support hand only and compared that to your same performance with a Glock/M&P?

[BaiHu]

a true press-out as perfect as I could get it
a hybrid press-out that was more of a visually referenced punch-out "index" with final sight correction (if necessary) performed once the gun was extended, followed by the last bit of trigger press
total target focused "point" shooting



Can you point to a video that can show a noob what the difference is between these 3 methods.

I think I get the last one, which makes sense for a high % target, b/c it seems that you are less worried about the sights and more worried about pressing out quickly at that target, correct?

The 'true press-out' I'm assuming is from the strong side pectoral and coming across to the sternum and meeting the support hand, correct?

The hybrid is between the point and true??

Help this noob understand :confused:

[YVK]

Can you point to a video that can show a noob what the difference is between these 3 methods.

I think I get the last one, which makes sense for a high % target, b/c it seems that you are less worried about the sights and more worried about pressing out quickly at that target, correct?

The 'true press-out' I'm assuming is from the strong side pectoral and coming across to the sternum and meeting the support hand, correct?

The hybrid is between the point and true??

Help this noob understand :confused:

True pressout http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCXmZD-Rym4

Punch out with final visual reference http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU3jceN4JAc

P.S. I did little testing today, not as involved as Todd's, 20 rounds from high ready on 3x5 at 7 yards, evenly split between pressout and punch + verification, and couldn't come to a meaningful conclusion. Will have to redo it later.

[Mr_White]

Wow, really interesting developments here.

Thanks very much for posting all that Todd. I think that is some very good exploration.

Coincidentally, I have been working on a hybrid method lately, having been trained in the ‘punch-out’ but being intrigued by my reading and viewing of the ‘press-out.’ My hybrid method sounds similar to what you are describing as your hybrid method, but I am not trying to stop the gun (I think you are, but am not certain from what I read in your posts.)

This way subjectively feels like it is helping my hit percentage, by deliberately keeping the gun moving forward when it’s on the last 10% of horizontal extension instead of trying to stop the gun. The draw is full speed, except near the very end I radically slow the forward movement of the gun but do not stop it, as I continuously improve the sight alignment and apply ever-increasing pressure to the trigger while still pushing the gun forward very slowly.

Keeping the gun moving forward is a point you’ve cited in your explanations of the pressout as helpful for mitigating anticipation issues, right? I am finding that to be exactly the case for me, at least for right now, and that’s why I think it’s helping me. This is purely my subjective impression of things, without any real data to reference.

Tomorrow, I’ll probably feel differently.

[ToddG]

Tried it with the 3x5 at 7yd today. The most honest assessment is that it became very difficult to distinguish between a true press-out and a hybrid. When I didn't need more time to perfect the hybrid, the shot broke like a press-out. When the press-out wasn't quite right, I paused enough to fix it and it became a hybrid.

Trying to do them as a press-out, I was 11/15 averaging 1.48s to the shot.
Trying to do the hybrid, I was 13/15 averaging 1.44s to the shot.
Between the two, I'd say it's too close to call with the limited data.

Point shooting averaged an awesome 1.13s but accuracy suffered a tiny bit (2 out of 15 hits).

[YVK]

Pretend you're shooting P30 now; would you consider such testing? You would either need to negotiate almost entire pull at the end of extension, or start pressing a trigger before seeing the sights over your target.

[ToddG]

The LEM was practically designed with a press-out in mind, or at least it seems that way. The technique obviously has its roots in DA/SA guns and DA revolvers. With the shorter more distinct break triggers, at least right now my feeling is that the envelope for my press-out is not as big so I find more instances where I need to make a minor correction before finishing the trigger press.

[jetfire]

After shooting almost all press-out in 2011, I started switching to the hybrid method on the suggestion of a GM. For my purposes I've seen a significant decrease in my FAST times as well as better times on draw to first shot hits in practice.

[rsa-otc]

After reviewing some practice video the other night I found that when I thought I was doing a strict pressout live fire, I really wasn't bringing the gun fully into my line of sight until much later in the extension process. So I seem to be doing a Hybrid as been discussed. :cool:

My video results on 8" plates at 10 yards were 100% at much faster speed than in the past. I just may have to stay with the hybrid. I need to shoot the FAST or 3x5 card drills and compare those results for a final determination.

[BaiHu]

True pressout http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCXmZD-Rym4

Punch out with final visual reference http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU3jceN4JAc

P.S. I did little testing today, not as involved as Todd's, 20 rounds from high ready on 3x5 at 7 yards, evenly split between pressout and punch + verification, and couldn't come to a meaningful conclusion. Will have to redo it later.

Thanks YVK and here is my follow up:

It seems that Todd's method of the 'true press out' requires the aiwb, b/c that's how I see it done and Dave's is more what I'm working towards with the holster on the strong side. Can you do the 'true' with a strong side? If so, is there a video for that?

I think with my limited skills, it is even difficult to see some of the 'things' I'm supposed to see as 'different'.

[ToddG]

I think there are different "hybrid" methods being discussed here.

My pistol is moving in the exact same L-shaped arc regardless. I'm seeing my sights and pressing the trigger as the gun moves straight at the target along a high line (the "glass ceiling" as someone else brilliantly described it). The difference between a proper press-out and the "hybrid" as I'm using it is that when things go right, the shot breaks at or just before extension while the "hybrid" is really little more than a conscious decision to verify and/or perfect the sights and trigger at the very end.

If you don't begin aligning your sights until you've reached extension, you're still doing an index draw and that's precisely why I did the point-shooting string of fire for each test. It demonstrates just how well I can rely on just a body index.

[SouthNarc]

With the shorter more distinct break triggers, at least right now my feeling is that the envelope for my press-out is not as big so I find more instances where I need to make a minor correction before finishing the trigger press.

That's a really interesting observation.

[LOKNLOD]

Thanks YVK and here is my follow up:

It seems that Todd's method of the 'true press out' requires the aiwb, b/c that's how I see it done and Dave's is more what I'm working towards with the holster on the strong side. Can you do the 'true' with a strong side? If so, is there a video for that?

I think with my limited skills, it is even difficult to see some of the 'things' I'm supposed to see as 'different'.

Don't focus on the part between the gun leaving the holster and the hands meeting to both achieve the grip on the pistol -- the actions being discussed are all from that point onward so whether the gun starts at 12:30 or at 3:30 isn't the critical part. You can certainly do either pressout or hybrid/punchout from any holster position, and you can practice them from the ready to take the draw out of the equation if you're making comparisons.

It's hard to make the most of the Sevigny video to compare since he's so fast, even in slow mo, and the angle is from behind like that.

[ToddG]

That's a really interesting observation.

Trying not to split atoms here, but more observations along these lines:


When I practice a press-out very slowly with a DA/SA, DAO, DA revoler, or LEM it gets better because I'm taking more time to be precise with both my sights and my trigger.
When I practice a press-out very slowly with a Glock or 1911, it gets worse because eventually I reach that hard break point and need to crush through it if I'm going to break the shot at/before extension. This is why I prefer a setup with my Glock that gives me a more rolling trigger than stock.
If I release myself from the commandment to break the shot at extension regardless of whether I'm really ready for the finish of the trigger pull, I can stop and get a better break. That simultaneously means I don't have to be as slow during the extension.


Plenty of instructors I respect highly poo-poo the press-out and to a man, they were all brought up thinking the 1911 was the only worthwhile handgun ever made. With a light enough, short enough trigger stroke the trigger portion of the press-out becomes far less important.

From my own testing over the past couple of evenings, I'm more convinced than ever that being on the sights as early as possible is beneficial to breaking low% shots at speed. But I'm beginning to think that something I've taught for years as "good enough if it's all you can do, but not ideal" -- namely, finishing the shot break after extension -- might actually have some benefits, at least for guns that have a harder, more distinct trigger break.

I decided to skip going to the range today specifically so I could play with this in dry fire with both my Glock and my SIRT (which, ironically, has more of a rolling trigger than my Glock) as well as one of my LEM guns.

Right now, the question I'm dealing with is this: is it my emotional investment in the press-out or my emotional investment in my own shooting ability that is wrong? :cool:

In other words, is the press-perfect-break method really better at least for some guns, or is it that I'm just not doing a good enough press-out with my Glock?

[NickA]

I'm dog paddling in the deep end on this topic, but I'm sure I'm losing lots of time by trying to do a press out, but really doing more of a hybrid at the last second. This discussion is giving me lots to work on when my SIRT gets here, thanks for experimenting and explaining the details.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

[Ray Keith]

I decided to skip going to the range today specifically so I could play with this in dry fire with both my Glock and my SIRT (which, ironically, has more of a rolling trigger than my Glock) as well as one of my LEM guns.



Not to sidetrack you, but are the trigger parts in the SIRT changeable to run the same as your Glock?

[ToddG]

Not to sidetrack you, but are the trigger parts in the SIRT changeable to run the same as your Glock?

No.

[SouthNarc]

I'm more convinced than ever that being on the sights as early as possible is beneficial to breaking low% shots at speed. But I'm beginning to think that something I've taught for years as "good enough if it's all you can do, but not ideal" -- namely, finishing the shot break after extension -- might actually have some benefits, at least for guns that have a harder, more distinct trigger break.



I agree with you on getting on the sights as early and as quickly as possible.

Here's another question Todd. Can you track the sights forward in the horizontal line of presentation as quickly as you move the gun? The reason I'm asking this is because I think you can move the gun forward alot quicker than your eyes can refine the sights for a low-probability shot. Right now it seems like the best comparison would be to compare the press-out and the hybrid with three different trigger systems; striker, LEM, and DA. Does that make sense?

[YVK]

Thanks YVK and here is my follow up:

It seems that Todd's method of the 'true press out' requires the aiwb, b/c that's how I see it done and Dave's is more what I'm working towards with the holster on the strong side. Can you do the 'true' with a strong side? If so, is there a video for that?

I think with my limited skills, it is even difficult to see some of the 'things' I'm supposed to see as 'different'.

You can certainly do it from IWB, I shot clean 6.53 FAST yesterday from Versa Max IWB and closed front garment, with traditional pressout. Go to p-t.com, go to drills section, under FAST you'll see Todd shoot it from strong-side.

[Mr_White]

Tried it with the 3x5 at 7yd today. The most honest assessment is that it became very difficult to distinguish between a true press-out and a hybrid. When I didn't need more time to perfect the hybrid, the shot broke like a press-out. When the press-out wasn't quite right, I paused enough to fix it and it became a hybrid.

What you say above sounds an awful lot to me like a variation of the old "see what you need to see to get the hit."


Right now, the question I'm dealing with is this: is it my emotional investment in the press-out or my emotional investment in my own shooting ability that is wrong? :cool:

In other words, is the press-perfect-break method really better at least for some guns, or is it that I'm just not doing a good enough press-out with my Glock?

I have not found it easy to come to terms with my own emotional investment in my skill or technique choices. It's always hard to leave what I know that works very well, in a mere attempt to find something better, that may not actually be better.

I've done plenty of tests like these before, trying different guns, triggers, sights, techniques, etc. I think I notice that my own human performance variation often overshadows the little gear or technique difference I am trying to test. I still like doing these kinds of things, and I still do pay attention to the results, but I think my personal variation confounds clear or valid results a lot of the time.

I tend to agree with what Flexmoney said in the TPI thread when he said that he's found that the clear intention in your mind (in this case of committing to hit a difficult target) outweighs the importance of the exact technique you used to get there, especially when it comes to a hit versus a miss.

There are bad, good, better, and possibly best ways to do things, drawstroke included. So I do not at all discount the quest for the best. I believe in that. But once you get to the 'better ways' it can become very difficult to tell the difference between a better way, another better way, and the best way, especially when clouded by human performance variation.


I agree with you on getting on the sights as early and as quickly as possible.

Here's another question Todd. Can you track the sights forward in the horizontal line of presentation as quickly as you move the gun? The reason I'm asking this is because I think you can move the gun forward alot quicker than your eyes can refine the sights for a low-probability shot. Right now it seems like the best comparison would be to compare the press-out and the hybrid with three different trigger systems; striker, LEM, and DA. Does that make sense?

I agree with this, and SN's point above is why I am currently doing the whole draw at max speed, except the last 10% or so of extension is done in slow motion. Whether the shot breaks at the point of rapidly decelerating the gun, or after decelerating the gun and continuing to push it forward slowly while further refining sights and pressing the trigger, depends on the difficulty of the target. Before the point of slowing down, I do not have a refined sight picture, I think because the gun is moving forward too quickly to maintain sharp and clear focus on them - but I do have coarse alignment from seeing the black streak of Glock lancing to the spot I want to hit, and before that, I had kinesthetic awareness that the gun was pointed toward the target.

I am not sure whether I am going to stick with this method or not. Prior to this, I pretty much did the "extend, stop, finish the sights and trigger" method. It may be that this thing of deliberately continuing to extend the gun just amounts to a 'trick of the day' that is only momentarily helpful in avoiding anticipation issues. We'll see how it continues to work out, or doesn't.

Todd, a question I have for you about your hybrid way: is the form the same as your pressout, just faster on the 'out' part? Do you still incorporate the muzzle tilted up position, or is the hybrid method muzzle level/forward at all times?

[ToddG]

Here's another question Todd. Can you track the sights forward in the horizontal line of presentation as quickly as you move the gun? The reason I'm asking this is because I think you can move the gun forward alot quicker than your eyes can refine the sights for a low-probability shot.

I think part of this stirs up the old hornet's nest about muzzle-up versus muzzle-straight presentation. I can track the front sight straight to the target at full speed, and I can get an alignment of the rear that is coarse or fine depending on how fast I move the gun forward.

The question becomes, if one is taking an extra tenth (let's say) to perfect the trigger press at extension, can he simultaneously perfect his sight picture? Or will trying to improve the sight picture require additional time. When I did the low% 2" circle test, I was moving the gun forward at a speed where I was almost always confidently on target when I reached extension. Any time I was not on target, it was because I did something wrong during the extension.

The big issue I have with refining the sight picture at the end is that it's deceptively simple under nice conditions. But when you're moving, the target is moving, there are things moving around/behind/in front of the target that can't be shot, you're stressed, you're cold, it's dark, etc. that refinement can't happen in a static way. Getting a mediocre sight picture and then turning it into a good one "when everything has stopped moving" presumes that everything will, in fact, stop moving.


What you say above sounds an awful lot to me like a variation of the old "see what you need to see to get the hit."

Sort of. In my case, it's more of a "use the right amount of finesse on the trigger." It may all just boil down to trigger manipulation at speed.


I tend to agree with what Flexmoney said in the TPI thread when he said that he's found that the clear intention in your mind (in this case of committing to hit a difficult target) outweighs the importance of the exact technique you used to get there, especially when it comes to a hit versus a miss.

While I'm all for good zen, my experience tells me that technique definitely makes a difference when you're talking about hitting a low% target at speed. Maybe the differences are smaller than some people care about, but there are differences. I'm continuously bombarded with examples of outstanding IPSC/IDPA shooters who, when forced to make an on-demand low% shot under strict time constraints, miss... a lot.


Todd, a question I have for you about your hybrid way: is the form the same as your pressout, just faster on the 'out' part? Do you still incorporate the muzzle tilted up position, or is the hybrid method muzzle level/forward at all times?

The motion is exactly the same. For the moment, based on both these tests and the muzzle angle stuff I did earlier this year, I remain convinced that it's a better approach. However, if I change the way I do my press-out to have greater acceptance of a tiny pause at the end for finishing the trigger stroke, it may be fair to readdress the sight alignment issue.

[Mr_White]

The question becomes, if one is taking an extra tenth (let's say) to perfect the trigger press at extension, can he simultaneously perfect his sight picture? Or will trying to improve the sight picture require additional time. When I did the low% 2" circle test, I was moving the gun forward at a speed where I was almost always confidently on target when I reached extension. Any time I was not on target, it was because I did something wrong during the extension.

I hear you. This is where I am liking the 'keep the gun moving forward at the end of the draw stroke' thing. I am specifically attempting, and having at least some success with, exactly this - continuously improving the sight picture while continuously adding pressure to the trigger at the same time. Then the gun fires, mostly accurately. When it doesn't I also tend to blame myself for having executed the technique poorly, rather than pin it on the technique itself. Now I haven't timed it and compiled data, but that is precisely what I am doing/trying to do with the slow motion part at the end.

The big issue I have with refining the sight picture at the end is that it's deceptively simple under nice conditions. But when you're moving, the target is moving, there are things moving around/behind/in front of the target that can't be shot, you're stressed, you're cold, it's dark, etc. that refinement can't happen in a static way. Getting a mediocre sight picture and then turning it into a good one "when everything has stopped moving" presumes that everything will, in fact, stop moving.

I tend to think it can still be improved while all is in motion, but I will have to think on and experiment with this. Maybe I can get back to this later. I'll try to do some work on this over the coming weekend.



Sort of. In my case, it's more of a "use the right amount of finesse on the trigger." It may all just boil down to trigger manipulation at speed.



While I'm all for good zen, my experience tells me that technique definitely makes a difference when you're talking about hitting a low% target at speed. Maybe the differences are smaller than some people care about, but there are differences. I'm continuously bombarded with examples of outstanding IPSC/IDPA shooters who, when forced to make an on-demand low% shot under strict time constraints, miss... a lot.

You and Flex both have much wider perspective on this than I do. Though I have not really agreed with you in the past that the press-out is truly more conducive to hitting if the competing technique of punching out is done as well as the press-out is and with as much of a commitment to hit the target, your perspective does give me pause and this point is a lot of why I am very interested in this area of discussion and experimentation.

The motion is exactly the same. For the moment, based on both these tests and the muzzle angle stuff I did earlier this year, I remain convinced that it's a better approach. However, if I change the way I do my press-out to have greater acceptance of a tiny pause at the end for finishing the trigger stroke, it may be fair to readdress the sight alignment issue.

[Mr_White]

I was talking with someone the other day about the issues addressed in these threads, and I drew these pictures to help illustrate what I think some of the differences are.

I hope these pictures help the discussion and do not further confuse the issues.

Note that these pictures do not characterize how the gun stops or how quickly the gun stops moving forward.

Competition Index Draw – upside is that the shortest distance between two points (in this case the holster and the final firing position of the gun) is a straight line. Downsides are that this draw gets the sights into the true eye-target line at the latest possible time, this draw won’t work well when seated at a table, and it lacks a built-in retention firing position.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7145/6521949681_3f397edc46.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521949681/) 01_Competition_Index_Draw (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521949681/) by OrigamiAK (http://www.flickr.com/people/52790396@N08/), on Flickr

Punch-Out Draw – upside of this variation is that the gun intersects the eye-target line early in the horizontal line of presentation, has a built-in retention firing position, it stays pointed generally at the threat once position 2 is reached, and is suitable when seated at a table. Downside compared to the true press-out is that the front sight doesn’t get in the eye-target line as early as it does in the press-out. Still early, but not as early.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7004/6521983715_fded6e0d9c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521983715/) 02_Punch_Out_Draw (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521983715/) by OrigamiAK (http://www.flickr.com/people/52790396@N08/), on Flickr

Punch-Out Draw Less Efficient – same as above, but not as good because the sights don’t intersect the true eye-target line as early as they could.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7011/6521957875_421988e616.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521957875/) 03_Less_Efficient_Punch_Out_Draw (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521957875/) by OrigamiAK (http://www.flickr.com/people/52790396@N08/), on Flickr

Punch-Out Draw Even Less Efficient – same as above, but even less good because the sights intersect the true eye-target line even later in the horizontal line of presentation.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7162/6521960003_2451e46697.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521960003/) 04_Less_Efficient_Punch_Out_Draw (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521960003/) by OrigamiAK (http://www.flickr.com/people/52790396@N08/), on Flickr

Press-Out Draw – this is my understanding and childish illustration of the press-out as done by ToddG. Todd, I hope I have not done the press-out any more than an artistic injustice! The upside here is the earliest possible intersection of the front sight with the true eye-target line. The front and rear sight become aligned a small distance after the front sight enters the eye-target line. This draw includes a built-in muzzle-averted position.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7164/6521961943_57f0626aaa.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521961943/) 05_Press_Out_Draw (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521961943/) by OrigamiAK (http://www.flickr.com/people/52790396@N08/), on Flickr

Press-Out Draw WRONG – this is an incorrect and inefficient version of the press-out where the front sight rises above the true eye-target line, then descends back down to the eye-target line. This way isn’t promoted by anyone I know of, and is actually the fabled and rightly maligned ‘flyfishing’ draw.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7171/6521963963_7ff5c2f8ca.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521963963/) 06_Press_Out_Draw_Wrong (http://www.flickr.com/photos/52790396@N08/6521963963/) by OrigamiAK (http://www.flickr.com/people/52790396@N08/), on Flickr

Based on my personal priorities and experiences, such as they are, the two worthwhile draws from the above are the Punch-Out and the Press-Out. The rest are less optimal.

[BaiHu]

You can certainly do it from IWB, I shot clean 6.53 FAST yesterday from Versa Max IWB and closed front garment, with traditional pressout. Go to p-t.com, go to drills section, under FAST you'll see Todd shoot it from strong-side.

Thanks YVK, but I don't see Todd :( I see Dave, Jody, and others, but not Todd. Am I more dense than usual today?

[BaiHu]

I think there are different "hybrid" methods being discussed here.

My pistol is moving in the exact same L-shaped arc regardless. I'm seeing my sights and pressing the trigger as the gun moves straight at the target along a high line (the "glass ceiling" as someone else brilliantly described it). The difference between a proper press-out and the "hybrid" as I'm using it is that when things go right, the shot breaks at or just before extension while the "hybrid" is really little more than a conscious decision to verify and/or perfect the sights and trigger at the very end.

If you don't begin aligning your sights until you've reached extension, you're still doing an index draw and that's precisely why I did the point-shooting string of fire for each test. It demonstrates just how well I can rely on just a body index.

So, if I understand this right, the main difference is when you're breaking the shot (before or at the end of extension) and whether or not you are 'visually' making the shot (watching the front sight enter the rear notch) or using your muscle memory to get you to the shot w/o or very little visual confirmation?

The proper press-out has your sights being aligned via the glass ceiling the whole way during extension and your shot is breaking at or near full extension.

The hybrid is moving at speed with the muscle memory taking you to the shot and making an adjustment as the extension finishes and the shot is breaking?

Hope I'm getting closer-don't mean to regress the groups progress on this topic. BTW, OrigamiAK's pictures are starting to help too, but I'll have more questions after I get back from the range and practice a bit.

[ToddG]

Ori -- The pics are actually pretty good. The only thing I would change would be an intermediate image for each draw that shows when the gun-eye-target line is achieved.

Bai -- He's referring to this (http://pistol-training.com/drills/fast-fundamentals-accuracy-speed-test) page. It's interesting to watch that video almost four years later. Ironically, it looks like I was doing the press-pause-perfect there without even realizing it. I'm not thrilled with that reload, either!

[YVK]

...Too tired, didn't notice Todd's post above.

http://pistol-training.com/drills/fast-fundamentals-accuracy-speed-test

Origami, those are good pics and do help with keeping everybody on the same page. When I was referring to punch-out (and what I did at the range), with your nomenclature would be a competition index draw + final visual verification and correction if necessary.

At this point I am utterly confused with all these minor details. To me, how slide is positioned at the beginning of extension, angled up as on your pressout pic or more flat as on punch out pic, doesn't really differentiate between the techniques. The way I understand this discussion now, we're talking if it is better to do a slower pressout that [hopefully] won't require any additional sight picture correction prior to shot break, or to do a faster pressout that might require pause, correction and break.

[Mr_White]

Ori -- The pics are actually pretty good. The only thing I would change would be an intermediate image for each draw that shows when the gun-eye-target line is achieved.

Thanks Todd, and I agree that an intermediate image would help. I was a bit pressed for time when making those pictures the other day and instead tried to suggest the gun-eye-target line with the blue line. But, there are even more details not contained in the pictures...

[BaiHu]

The way I understand this discussion now, we're talking if it is better to do a slower pressout that [hopefully] won't require any additional sight picture correction prior to shot break, or to do a faster pressout that might require pause, correction and break.

Thanks YVK, I think, if this statement is correct, I understand what all of you are talking about. This gives me a much better understanding of what I'm looking at and what I can do about picking apart my own press out.

I just got back from the range and worked through 140 press outs with only the last 10 rounds from holster mimicking the first 2 shots of FAST. I'll be posting pics/details/vid on my journal, b/c I don't want to clog this thread up.

Todd, thanks for the link.

[ToddG]

I spent a few 10-15 minute sessions working this in dry fire today using my Glock, my SIRT, and my P30. Target was a 3/4" circle at 7ft.

First... man, I miss my P30. :(

With the P30, the issue is non-existant. The length and break of the trigger are such that it's easy to move the gun and trigger both fast enough and continuously to break the shot accurately at extension.

With the SIRT, which has a softer break and lighter trigger, it was much the same.

With my gen4 G17 (LWD 3.5 connector, standard coil trigger spring), the very short trigger travel and relatively hard break are tripping me up. That's something I've been reporting since I started shooting the gun. As I've said many times in the past, the harder the break the easier it is to anticipate the shot or otherwise move the gun at the moment of discharge. I think that is the major culprit here. When I stop the gun's movement before finishing the trigger break, I'm locked out and it's harder for the gun to come off target, even a small target.

The most telling test was shooting SHO and WHO. Doing a fast press-out with the P30 was easy, while the Glock basically requires me to stop momentarily before finishing the press or I get a lot of sight movement.

Moving at what I felt was normal speed I also did some more runs with no or minor sight alignment verification until the very end and I was much more likely to need further sight picture refinement before being able to break the shot.

I'm repeating myself, but what I think it's coming down to is the trigger, not the sights, and a need either (a) to refine my pull throughout the press-out or (b) to accept a pause before breaking low% shots. I'm not happy about option B for reasons stated earlier, but after more than 50k rounds through my Glock this year I'm not sure how much more improvement I can make on my trigger press.

[Mr_White]

At this point I am utterly confused with all these minor details. To me, how slide is positioned at the beginning of extension, angled up as on your pressout pic or more flat as on punch out pic, doesn't really differentiate between the techniques. The way I understand this discussion now, we're talking if it is better to do a slower pressout that [hopefully] won't require any additional sight picture correction prior to shot break, or to do a faster pressout that might require pause, correction and break.

I think you've pretty much got it.

There is the structure of the technique. That’s what is shown in the pictures I drew.

With regard to the structure of the technique, it sounds like Todd was and is doing the press out. (I am doing the punch-out.)

Independent of the structure of the technique, there are also the issues of:

how quickly the gun is extended through the horizontal line of presentation

when and how quickly the trigger is pressed

whether and when we are using a degree of kinesthetic alignment, coarse visual verification of the sights, and/or fine visual verification of the sights

when the sights become fully aligned and are available for visual verification (that is, at what point they are aligned and in the true eye-target line so we can know, with certainty, that they are aligned)

when and how the gun slows and/or stops

the timing between the above elements of the drawstroke.

It seems like these are the aspects Todd is experimenting with, not the structure.

[Mr_White]

Tried it with the 3x5 at 7yd today. The most honest assessment is that it became very difficult to distinguish between a true press-out and a hybrid. When I didn't need more time to perfect the hybrid, the shot broke like a press-out. When the press-out wasn't quite right, I paused enough to fix it and it became a hybrid.


With my gen4 G17 (LWD 3.5 connector, standard coil trigger spring), the very short trigger travel and relatively hard break are tripping me up. That's something I've been reporting since I started shooting the gun. As I've said many times in the past, the harder the break the easier it is to anticipate the shot or otherwise move the gun at the moment of discharge. I think that is the major culprit here. When I stop the gun's movement before finishing the trigger break, I'm locked out and it's harder for the gun to come off target, even a small target.

I'm prone to this anticipation too. You know, I love the Glock pistol, and I do believe the trigger to have a lot of potential for excellent use and control, but I thoroughly agree that the Glock has an anti-surprise-trigger-break-trigger.

Moving at what I felt was normal speed I also did some more runs with no or minor sight alignment verification until the very end and I was much more likely to need further sight picture refinement before being able to break the shot.

I am currently liking the 'keep the gun moving forward very slowly at the end of the drawstroke' thing as a solution the above problem.

I'm repeating myself, but what I think it's coming down to is the trigger, not the sights, and a need either (a) to refine my pull throughout the press-out or (b) to accept a pause before breaking low% shots. I'm not happy about option B for reasons stated earlier, but after more than 50k rounds through my Glock this year I'm not sure how much more improvement I can make on my trigger press.

I really like your very first paragraph I quoted at the top as a solution to this last paragraph.

[YVK]

Todd: since we are seemingly coming to a conclusion that trigger properties may dictate an optimal way of presenting a pistol, I'd be really interested in you trying this with a 1911 one day. One would think that results should be similar to Glock's, but for a lot of shooters that 4.5 lbs (vs 5.5-6) makes a difference between anticipation vs no anticipation.

Origami: a currently popular instructor of SFOD-D roots teaches to slow down with gun's presentation as it is extended towards the target, rather than maintain constant speed. I believe the trigger break point for him is conventional, at the end of extension. Owing to his background, he primarily shoots 1911 and Glock.

[GJM]

The most telling test was shooting SHO and WHO. Doing a fast press-out with the P30 was easy, while the Glock basically requires me to stop momentarily before finishing the press or I get a lot of sight movement.



My experience is 180 degrees different -- I find the Glock the single easiest pistol I shoot, to break the shot support hand only as I reach extension, and with the P30 I need the pause.

[JodyH]

I try to present from the holster to just in front of my face at the same speed (as fast as possible).
I then attempt to throttle the speed down to where I complete the trigger press at the moment I hit full extension (H&K LEM).
But, as the saying goes "there's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip".

One of my initial problems was I often slowed my entire presentation down on distant low percentage targets.
I attempted to address this in my "99 drill" (with the 3 in 3.5sec 10 yard stage) and have been fairly successful in getting the pistol out and up to my face at a consistent speed.
I'm still working on throttling down on extension, and that is the hardest part to get right IMO.
It's difficult to slow down from a full speed draw, the natural inclination is to just throw the pistol out there are then line everything up.

[David S.]

Coming late to this discussion so I'm digging this discussion up from the grave. I don't know if this is fleshed out in the class or in other threads/posts, but hope this might be helpful to some.


I’ll borrow an explanation that Ernest Langdon uses: pretend you had a string tied to your trigger, and the other end is tied to a button on your shirt. As you press the gun forward, the string pulls the trigger. Press forward slowly, and the trigger is pulled rearward slowly. At full extension, the trigger breaks and the shot is fired.DOTW: Press Out (http://pistol-training.com/archives/108)

The way I read this, extension movement is proportional to trigger movement. So if the shooter is at zero extension, he is at zero trigger movement. If the student is at half extension, the trigger has taken up half of its travel. When the student is at 3/4 extension, the trigger is at 3/4 of its travel. At full extension, the trigger has taken up all of it's travel and the trigger breaks. Extension movement is proportional to trigger movement. This makes sense for trigger systems, such as TDA in DA, with no pressure wall at the break.

It doesn't make sense with a Glock-style or 1911 trigger with slack, hard pressure wall, trigger break, then over travel. When I was taught the press-out technique, the instructors modified it slightly for the striker and single-action students. In our case, extension movement is proportional to trigger pressure.

At zero extension (sights aligned, finger on trigger), you have zero trigger pressure (zero movement). At 10% extension, you'll have 10% pressure on trigger (1/2 lb, lets say, in the case of my 5lb Glock trigger) which is enough pressure to take up 99% of trigger movement (pre-travel). As we move through 50% extension, the shooter is applying 2.5 lbs of force. Depending on creep, little no trigger movement takes place here. At at full extension, we want to be applying full (5lb) pressure; just enough to break the trigger. Again, in that last 50%, almost no movement takes place.

All movement happened very early in the press-out. So, lets say, for 95% of the extension, no trigger movement is taking place. Just adding trigger pressure.

This obviously takes a fair amount of finesse to get the timing right. You'll ND early and late as you work it out. Of course, it's OK to ND early, because you're following the 4 rules in the process, right?. You're pointed at the target. We spent quite a bit of time working bump and wall drills to get to the point where we had enough trigger finger finesse to do this. The lighter the trigger, the more finesse is required.

I'm still very much a novice that learned the press-out technique on a Glock. With this modification, I don't see why learning the striker trigger is any more troublesome than learning any other system. (This is not to knock anybody.)

Please correct me if I'm missing a point here. I hope this helps.

Cheers,
D

[Zhurdan]

Not at all from my understanding. Break the shot as soon as the sights are alighned. Harder with a light trigger. Shot a 1911 the first day of Todd's class an G32 the second day. Why? Because the 1911 choked twice. Shot the glock the second day, but it took time to transition. Break the shot when the shot is ON.

[ToddG]

JollyGreen: I think that is a fair reading of the explanation given, but it's not meant that literally. The fault lies with me for as it was written.

I teach people to think about weight, not distance. It's not about how far the trigger moves per unit of time, it's about consistently adding weight per unit of time. The slack might come out quickly and then the trigger moves very little through the rest of the press out, but I'm constantly adding more weight to the trigger press until it breaks.

Does that make better sense?

[David S.]

I may basically be saying the same thing here, but I would say trigger weight per unit of distance (arm extension). Either way, nice job condensing 5 paragraphs into two sentences. :)

Cheers,
David

[Shellback]

As a matter of fact, the visualization used to describe the motion has helped me a lot on the pressout motion working for me (the other piece of that puzzle was the body positioning I learned later at AFHF) -- visualize a plane of glass between your eyes and the target, with the goal being to bring the gun up, sights flat against the glass, and scrape it along the bottom of the glass to the target. Don't shatter the glass by bringing the front sight up and then back down like a whale breaching or by "bowling" the gun out and up.

After reading the whole thread this still sticks out to me as a great way to describe and visualize a proper press out.

I need to work on the "whale breaching" myself.

[bdcheung]

Todd: since we are seemingly coming to a conclusion that trigger properties may dictate an optimal way of presenting a pistol, I'd be really interested in you trying this with a 1911 one day. One would think that results should be similar to Glock's, but for a lot of shooters that 4.5 lbs (vs 5.5-6) makes a difference between anticipation vs no anticipation.

i'm necro-threading a little bit, but with the 2012 endurance test gun announced, I wanted to bring this thread full circle to make sure we incorporated any new data points into this existing discussion.

[Luke]

Bump.


With all the talk about press out I figured some might enjoy it