Precise looking vs precise aiming

[Clusterfrack]

One thing has made the biggest difference in my shooting this year and I want to share it here and discuss.

Some definitions so we are all on the same page:

Aiming: Aligning the front and rear sights (or dot) with the target, and maintaining that alignment until the gun has fired.
Looking: visual perception of where you want the bullet to go.
Target focus: looking with eyes focused on the target, while at the same time seeing the sights (or dot).
Front sight focus: looking with eyes focused on the front sight, while at the same time seeing the target.


On PSTG (https://www.practicalshootingtraininggroup.com) and elsewhere, there has been a lot of discussion about how and why to use target focus with iron sights (also obviously with RDS). Front sight focus requires looking at and focusing on the target, shifting the focal plane back to the front sight, and then breaking the shot. This is slower than target focus because there is no focal plane shift.

I have been shooting target focus with irons for the past year, and it's taken a while to trust it --especially at distance.

My biggest recent improvement in shooting has come from improving my precision of looking at the intended POI. It's just like "aim small / miss small" in rifle shooting. For me it requires a ton of mental focus to create an appropriately small "sub-target" on a much larger target (e.g. image below).

My focus has shifted (so to speak) from primarily confirming the alignment of the sights, to primarily looking precisely at where I want the bullets to go. I'm looking forward to discussing this. Maybe it's something you've been doing for a long time?

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210428/d3d0a70668893bb72ab98f1ea591ee1f.jpg

Red dot added to represent where I am looking. Hits: 2A, AC to the upper A zone at match pace.

[Eyesquared]

Regarding target focus I had something come to mind recently. With the now-common training method of taping up the front of a red dot, that really tests whether your eyes are converging at the optic. If you see the dot on the tape and no target you converged your eyes when you didn't mean to. In theory you could have your eyes converge at the target but have your visual focus set at a difference distance although with a dot there's no reason to do that.

I thought that was interesting because people used to discuss the difference between convergence and accommodation (eye focus at a given distance) with irons here and at the time the consensus was to converge at the target and accommodate at the front sight. At the time that seemed reasonable to me, while total target focus also seems perfectly reasonable. Any thoughts on why total target focus (convergence+accommodation at the target) gives better results?

[JCN]

As I’m adding in iron revolver work, I’m treating it exactly like I do my dot gun.

If we shoot irons like we shoot dots... why train on irons?

[Clusterfrack]

Regarding target focus I had something come to mind recently. With the now-common training method of taping up the front of a red dot, that really tests whether your eyes are converging at the optic. If you see the dot on the tape and no target you converged your eyes when you didn't mean to. In theory you could have your eyes converge at the target but have your visual focus set at a difference distance although with a dot there's no reason to do that.

I thought that was interesting because people used to discuss the difference between convergence and accommodation (eye focus at a given distance) with irons here and at the time the consensus was to converge at the target and accommodate at the front sight. At the time that seemed reasonable to me, while total target focus also seems perfectly reasonable. Any thoughts on why total target focus (convergence+accommodation at the target) gives better results?

Great question! I'll take a shot at an answer based on my experience. Here are some definitions:

Convergence is where the lines perpendicular to the optical center of each lens intersect.
Accommodation is where the plane of focus is.


See @Mr_white's excellent thread (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?10210-Vision) on this topic.

Looking at a precise in-focus point on the target maximizes eye-hand coordination.

Let's flip the question: why do we need to shift focus back to the front and rear sights? We do that to confirm or adjust alignment. However, if we adjust alignment, we may alter the POI from where we were looking at the target. And it is slower.

On the other hand, if the front and rear sights are misaligned, we will not hit the spot we are looking at. I have found that a well-developed index, combined with a somewhat blurry picture of the front and rear sights is sufficient for confirming A-zone shots out to 25-30 yds. Beyond that, I have to do multiple cycles of looking precisely at the target, shifting focus back to the sights, aligning them, confirming alignment with the intended POI, etc. The time difference for me is significant: ~1.5-1.7s for pure target focus vs. >>2s for carefully aimed sight focus. And the split times are even more different.

[MickAK]

Maybe it's something you've been doing for a long time?


This is something I did involuntarily for a long time, because it felt like I was sliding back into the way I was taught, point shooting (yeah). I couldn't understand how people were getting fsf that quickly. I felt like I was getting lazy and getting lucky and I shouldn't trust it. Finally decided that hits are hits.

As far as trusting it at distance I've noticed that different light conditions/target colors seem to matter more than the actual distance. I think that's probably highly personal and vision dependent. Having someone place a target at an unknown distance/location then turning and running the drill with two known targets and an unknown target has helped me the most.

[Clusterfrack]

This is something I did involuntarily for a long time, because it felt like I was sliding back into the way I was taught, point shooting (yeah). I couldn't understand how people were getting fsf that quickly. I felt like I was getting lazy and getting lucky and I shouldn't trust it. Finally decided that hits are hits.

As far as trusting it at distance I've noticed that different light conditions/target colors seem to matter more than the actual distance. I think that's probably highly personal and vision dependent. Having someone place a target at an unknown distance/location then turning and running the drill with two known targets and an unknown target has helped me the most.

That's a great insight--because it is possible to be lazy and lucky, and we should not shoot like that.

Personally, I have to DO something in order to trust, and thinking really hard about a tiny spot on the target is helping me with that.

I wonder if your observation about lighting has to do with what you can see on the target?

[MickAK]

I wonder if your observation about lighting has to do with what you can see on the target?

I think so. I make a little mental PING! noise when I have my spot picked out and focused then break the trigger right after that. If I struggle to focus on my spot I either rush it and miss or have to drop the gun slightly and refocus.

[YVK]

Yes, Stoeger has been talking about looking at the exact spot regardless of target size for the longesttime. Easier said than done, been working on this for some time too.

[Duces Tecum]

Following.

[octagon]

This is something I did involuntarily for a long time, because it felt like I was sliding back into the way I was taught, point shooting (yeah). I couldn't understand how people were getting fsf that quickly. I felt like I was getting lazy and getting lucky and I shouldn't trust it. Finally decided that hits are hits.

As far as trusting it at distance I've noticed that different light conditions/target colors seem to matter more than the actual distance. I think that's probably highly personal and vision dependent. Having someone place a target at an unknown distance/location then turning and running the drill with two known targets and an unknown target has helped me the most.

I have similar experience and results. I too was focused on and trained with point shooting for a number of years using various techniques from Jim Cirillo, Mike Rayburn, Lou Chiodo and Chuck Klein. I trained with all but Chuck Klein but used his technique with good results. All of the hard target focus was done at shorter ranges (8 yards or so) and farther than that I moved toward more and more sights focus. In my evolutionary training development I moved toward trying to have a front sight focus on closer targets and never could get the speed of hits I could with target focus even if accuracy was slightly better speed was always down. I found Brian Enos's idea of "See what you need to see" and mostly stopped worrying about where my focus was. This was really confirmed when I took the World Class pistols skills with Robert Vogel and he had us run a course with a swinging popper at approx 12-15 yards. I was the only one to get the 2 hits. We ran it twice with the same results. The thing was that I remember my focus was on the target in the spot I wanted to hit but it was farther than I practiced with target focus ever before. It just clicked since then but only at distances within 10-12 yards. After that I have to move towards more front sight focus or the accuracy of A zone hits is not consistent.

Beyond 10-15 yards with target focus is amazing to me and if there is a way to learn to do it with speed and consistency I am open to hearing it. I'm curious as much as the target color,lighting effects along with possibly sights size and brightness or maybe contrast to the target have to do with it. MickAK what sights are you using with what targets?

[jbrimlow]

Clusterfrack, thank you for defining your terms early. Great thread.

[Zincwarrior]

Excellent points, although I have found it gets problematic with bad vision.

[MickAK]

MickAK what sights are you using with what targets?

Heinie Ledge. I start out with a pack of neon 3x5 cards (Orange,Yellow,Red,Blue), then once that's going smooth I go to 3x5 cutouts of the thin cardboard packing material that comes in T-shirt packs and the like to make the color match the target more closely. Once that's going well I trace out the 3x5 with a light pencil.

[Archer1440]

My biggest recent improvement in shooting has come from improving my precision of looking at the intended POI.

This is a fundamental of archery, particularly bowhunting on game. “Pick a spot” is an absolutely fundamental aspect of placing accurate shots on animals.

And humans have been doing that successfully for many thousands of years.

[Archer1440]

how can i focus on the target and dot at the same time?

You don’t. You focus on the spot on the target and allow the dot (or streak) to appear on the spot.

On a somewhat related point, I’ve been switching between dot and irons quite a bit lately and have found that target focus works pretty well out to 25 yards with the irons- I think, partly because my index has improved over the years of shooting a dot. It’s not *quite* as precise as the dot, of course, but quite serviceable for me.

[Clusterfrack]

how can i focus on the target and dot at the same time?

The dot is actually a beam of collimated light (laser), so it can appear to be “in focus” when your eye is focused on distant objects.

[Archer1440]

Sorry to be pedantic about this, but most pistol-mounted RDS don’t actually use a laser emitter- they use a small regular LED emitter reflecting from a convex lens precisely tuned to focus the emitter very precisely at “infinity”. Generally these are actually set to a specific distance, inside and outside of which there will be a certain (usually small) degree of parallax.

Holosights use a laser that shoots vertically into the photo-etched holographic film between the lenses to illuminate the holograph image. Laser LEDs generally use a great deal more power than the regular LED emitters used in RDS.

It’s noteworthy to point out that an actual pistol or rifle laser should be treated the same as an RDS- target focused.

[Bratch]

I’ve been a front sight guy but decided to play around with target focus tonight with the Sirt. I had a target focus on the PT but could
see a silhouette of the front and rear sight. I was consistently high but overall not too bad, if ammo didn’t cost a kidney I’d try live fire.



13 yards from pressout

71270

7 yards low ready

71269

13 yards aimed in on target

71271

I’ll probably play with it some more as I also flirt with a RDS.

[Clusterfrack]

Good shooting, Bratch. Maybe try it while moving? I think that’s the type of shooting where looking at the spot you need to hit really pays off. Group shooting on static targets less so.

[Bratch]

I’ll play with it. I’m working down a hallway so will be more forward and back movement at distance. The room opens up around 5 yds so I should be able to do some lateral movements and angels at closer ranges.

I did some presentations at 7 yards and would launch the occasional “round” over the target. For me every miss was high, I noticed if I presented the gun way high into the eye line before starting the pressout the hits were better. If I started pressout a low I tended to look over the top and push high.

[Bratch]

With movement...

This is my target setup. I was moving laterally at a normal walk pace and tried to maintain pace. I would start far enough off line to have no view of the target, start movement with a low ready and present when the target became visible. Distance was 5-6 yards.

71289


Looking at the 8” circle
71288

Looking at the 3x5. As mentioned previously everything is tracking high but moving from the 8” to 3x5” focus did noticeably shrink the grouping. I may have moved slightly slower with the 3x5 but tried not to

71287

[Bratch]

All right I keep playing with this more...

Disclaimers working with a M&P Sirt with F/O front. Have not tried anything live or with a different gun, I’ll try my laser bullet in my 365 at some point and see how it holds up. As mentioned up thread I’ve always been a hard front sight one eye closed shooter.

I felt like I had a big change tonight. I’m starting with a target focus but not trying to burn a hole in it, on the target I’m looking at the PT, both eyes open. I presented the pistol to the target while maintaining target focus, at full pressout I’m consciously moving to the front sight to make sure it’s in the 3x5. I’m not trying to do a hard focus on the front sight and not attempting any type of line up in the rear. I’m seeing the front sight superimposed in the 3x5 and breaking the shot. A couple of times I got a little cross eyed trying to shift to the front sight but on the really good runs the movement at the end of the pressout caught my eyes picked up the front sight and broke the shot.

Previously I was hard focused on the target and did not try to acknowledge the front sight at all, with this I’m consciously finding it but not trying for any type of equal height and light.

I didn’t get to play with a timer but it felt faster than a hard front sight focus and trying to get good alignment. Hits were as good or better. I’ll try to run it with a par or some way to get times.

This was 7 yards from concealment with the hybrid target focus
71363

[Steve m]

Bratch,

That looks like a superb training tool, what is it and what program/app are you using?

Thanks
Steve

[Edster]

I’ll play with it. I’m working down a hallway so will be more forward and back movement at distance. The room opens up around 5 yds so I should be able to do some lateral movements and angels at closer ranges.

I did some presentations at 7 yards and would launch the occasional “round” over the target. For me every miss was high, I noticed if I presented the gun way high into the eye line before starting the pressout the hits were better. If I started pressout a low I tended to look over the top and push high.

FWIW, I've been working a lot on press out lately. Something I noticed that made a big difference for me was striving to get the gun horizontal as I'm bringing it up to eye level.

I've seen footage of trainers saying it's ok to have the front sight a little high as it comes up. For me, it has been faster and more accurate to get both front and rear sights in front of my eyes at the same time. With a good grip and decent physical indexing, they frequently come into view nearly aligned.

I'm wondering if others have had a similar experience.

[Bratch]

Bratch,

That looks like a superb training tool, what is it and what program/app are you using?

Thanks
Steve

It’s GSight training on IPhone. Works with any laser gun, I’m using a Sirt but also have a 9mm drop in laser.

71456

[Steve m]

Bratch,

Thanks for the info, i see a laser dry fire with that app in my future

[octagon]

FWIW, I've been working a lot on press out lately. Something I noticed that made a big difference for me was striving to get the gun horizontal as I'm bringing it up to eye level.

I've seen footage of trainers saying it's ok to have the front sight a little high as it comes up. For me, it has been faster and more accurate to get both front and rear sights in front of my eyes at the same time. With a good grip and decent physical indexing, they frequently come into view nearly aligned.

I'm wondering if others have had a similar experience.

That is how I learned it. Early on in my practice(before cell phones and related training aids) I used a laser and worked at getting it on target and keeping it there through the draw and presentation. This way even before the sights were at eye level I had verification that the gun was level and sights aligned. It is a bit of a crutch but early in it helped me.

[Ivantheterrible]

This mirrors my evolution in iron sight shooting over the years (I'm 58). For many years, I was a traditional bullseye "front sight focus" guy. For whatever reason, as I grow older, I have more issues with not trusting where my pistol is when my focus goes to the front sight. Over the past year, I've been working on mentally picking out the spot on the target then bringing the sights to that point. I only use the sights for confirmation of alignment while keeping the focus on the intended point of impact.

Now this technique may not win high X counts at the bullseye match (which I don't shoot anymore) but I do make more consistent "A zone" hits out to 50 yards this way.

[rdtompki]

I'd like to offer a different spin on this discussion in case there are old folks still shooting irons post cataract surgery hereabouts. I'm an average shooter but wife and I, both in our mid-70's, are still dedicated to steel challenge. Some of the lighting conditions are very challenging. When I developed cataracts 4 years ago I tried every manner of lens color to no avail and for a time used my non-dominant eye (ugh!). Following cataract surgery I'm better than 20/20 and have been using prescription glasses, distance left eye and 26"/front sight focus right eye.

Obviously, I can't refocus my right eye and when poor contrast plates are out past 20 yards I really loose lock on the sights struggling to discern the aim point. I had been considering trying a more distant focus to improve target contrast at the expense of front sight clarity. I was at the range today helping my wife sight in one of her nefarious 22lr competition guns (invention of the devil I say) and at the end I got out my 9mm 1911 and ran through 2 magazines at an 18 yard target wearing my PCC glasses which are distant focus in both eyes. The target was crystal clear and despite a very slight fuzz on the sights I had no trouble aligning same. Granted, the target contrast was pretty good, but I'm always able to clearly see even poor contrast targets at distance with my left eye with monovision a distant focus. Monday's match at 4pm with some horrible backgrounds and no over the shoulder sun will tell the tale, but I see this as a potential breakthrough.

I think what I'm doing with external means (the glasses) has a parallel in early parts of this discussion, the difference being that you relative youngsters are using software while I need hardware assist (the glasses).

[Clusterfrack]

Excellent post @rtompki. My corrected vision is actually similar to yours with glasses. I’m nearsighted in my dominant right eye, and farsighted in my left eye.

[Pistol Pete 10]

IF you need to shoot at a long distance or small target, with open sights focus on the front sight just like if you are shooting bullseye. With a dot focus on the target regardless. Close range at a larger target it doesn't matter, I usually don't even notice the rear sight, front sight more as a reference, kind of point shooting but I do see the front sight. Easy peasy.

[JCS]

I do believe that precise aiming is a fundamental to practical pistol shooting. I have been working on this a lot in dry fire. Currently I’m taping the front of my dot and it seems to help me focus more on a specific point and not the dot. I’ll also practice this without a gun sometimes while I’m at a stop light. I’ll pick 4 or 5 objects and points on those objects and switch my vision between them as fast as I can. I do believe this is a skill that has to be trained. It doesn’t come natural for me.

[Bratch]

. I’ll pick 4 or 5 objects and points on those objects and switch my vision between them as fast as I can. I do believe this is a skill that has to be trained. It doesn’t come natural for me.

Gabe talks about this in class as part of his eye training. I did it around the office a little after class but haven’t in ages.

[rdtompki]

I'd like to offer a different spin on this discussion in case there are old folks still shooting irons post cataract surgery hereabouts. I'm an average shooter but wife and I, both in our mid-70's, are still dedicated to steel challenge. Some of the lighting conditions are very challenging. When I developed cataracts 4 years ago I tried every manner of lens color to no avail and for a time used my non-dominant eye (ugh!). Following cataract surgery I'm better than 20/20 and have been using prescription glasses, distance left eye and 26"/front sight focus right eye.

Obviously, I can't refocus my right eye and when poor contrast plates are out past 20 yards I really loose lock on the sights struggling to discern the aim point. I had been considering trying a more distant focus to improve target contrast at the expense of front sight clarity. I was at the range today helping my wife sight in one of her nefarious 22lr competition guns (invention of the devil I say) and at the end I got out my 9mm 1911 and ran through 2 magazines at an 18 yard target wearing my PCC glasses which are distant focus in both eyes. The target was crystal clear and despite a very slight fuzz on the sights I had no trouble aligning same. Granted, the target contrast was pretty good, but I'm always able to clearly see even poor contrast targets at distance with my left eye with monovision a distant focus. Monday's match at 4pm with some horrible backgrounds and no over the shoulder sun will tell the tale, but I see this as a potential breakthrough.

I think what I'm doing with external means (the glasses) has a parallel in early parts of this discussion, the difference being that you relative youngsters are using software while I need hardware assist (the glasses).
Update (since I can't edit): The experiment is over having confirmed the hypothesis. Even under bad lighting conditions I can see the targets clearly and despite a slight loss of resolution at the iron sight distance I have no trouble aligning the sights and getting hits. Why the improvement? I could see the targets prior to this change. I could hit the targets reliably in static engagement. I believe increased target contrast greatly improves the accuracy of my transitions. There's a control loop involved that uses vision to drive the gun to the target; it isn't all muscle memory even in Steel Challenge. Human visual acuity decreases fairly rapidly as a function of angle relative to the center of the eye's visual field. Couple that with low contrast targets and this wonderful control loop doesn't produce a good sight picture when the gun arrives on target. I'm experiencing better sight pictures as I arrive on target and naturally a better focus on the POI due to improved target resolution. Now only one set of specialty glasses to buy for both irons and optics!

[Clusterfrack]

Here's a good Instagram video (https://www.instagram.com/tv/CQGtepADrGW/) by Ben Stoeger that discusses some of the things in this thread.

[octagon]

I thought this was appropriate to the discussion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9AYcRox-Ts

[Clusterfrack]

I thought this was appropriate to the discussion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9AYcRox-Ts

I liked some of that video. But I didn’t understand what he was talking about with using the rear sight as the primary aiming device. I also wish he would have talked more about the importance of looking at a small spot on the target. Just being target focused isn’t enough.

[octagon]

Yeah not very detailed or how to but interesting take from an experienced competitor with some discussion on various ways some use focus and sights together. Hopefully there will be more detailed discussions in the future. It is just another data point in confirmation of the validity of the technique.

[Clusterfrack]

This approach continues to yield excellent results for me. Yesterday at practice I shot the USPSA classifier CM18-07. For Production, the hit factors needed are: HHF: 8.66HF; GM: 8.23HF. M: 7.36HF.

36 pts (-2C) in 4.25s or 34 points (3C) 4.13s are good goals for GM runs, and in the past I’ve struggled to do this—let alone consistently. I was either too many points down, or took too long guaranteeing A's. This time, I was focused intensely on a small spot on each target and consistently shot 36 to 38 points on each run. Precise looking yielded especially good results for me on the partial target, with at least 1 A on each run and no hits in the white. I found the exercise mentally/visually fatiguing, and I wasn't able to keep it up very long. I think that's a side effect of doing 'precise looking'.

Here are 6 runs. I started on the left steel, and reloaded on the right open target:
.93, .26, 1.24, .19, .46, .24, .36, .27: 3.95s -1C. 38pts. 9.62HF 111%
1.04, .32, 1.40, .17, .48, .23, .36, .41: 4.41s -1C. 8.6HF 99.4%
8.03HF 93%
8.74HF 101%
8.20HF 94.6%
8.144HF 94%
Fucked 2 reloads in a row. Getting visually fatigued… time to stop.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210715/3521b5a80b865caeb754cf1ea716232f.jpg

[MickAK]

I found the exercise mentally/visually fatiguing, and I wasn't able to keep it up very long. I think that's a side effect of doing 'precise looking'.


I find closing my eyes and rolling them back in my head during an in breath helpful. There are a bunch of different vision relaxation techniques that are probably highly personal in effectiveness.

[JCN]

Clusterfrack

Visually and mentally fatiguing means you’re doing it right, IMO.

I generally only run classifiers in practice twice for that reason. I treat them as a test / proof of concept rather than practice.

You passed the test with flying colors. Best to stop after two successful runs otherwise you burn in bad runs and sloppy runs.

Celebrate the successes on the tests but don’t get greedy.

Fatigue is real and should be respected.

So consider stopping earlier and convert to partial drills that augment the concepts you’re working on.

All IMO.

[Clusterfrack]

ClusterfrackSo consider stopping earlier and convert to partial drills that augment the concepts you’re working on.


This is good advice, and something I do often. A good run CM18-07 likely requires calling a hit predictively on steel and immediately initiating a reload. At least that's what I identified as the weakest part of my runs (1.2-1.40s reload). So I spent some practice time starting with a shot on steel, and then reload to the open target. That led me back to dryfire to work on getting my grip done earlier after the reload.

I think what we're both talking about is how to use a drill most effectively, and that includes a lot more than hit factor or par time.


Best to stop after two successful runs otherwise you burn in bad runs and sloppy runs.

This is an interesting thing to discuss. I don't agree. I like to train to failure, and find that the ways I fail tell me a lot. I don't worry about 'burning in' bad technique.

[JCN]

This is an interesting thing to discuss. I don't agree. I like to train to failure, and find that the ways I fail tell me a lot. I don't worry about 'burning in' bad technique.

I am happy to discuss.

I think training to failure is a good thing. But in the general sense for training and matches. You want to have a broad training so you can perform under any circumstance.

HOWEVER… for something like a classifier or if you were competing perhaps for a national title in steel challenge you wouldn’t necessarily practice after chopping wood for 3 hours beforehand, right?

So my burn in advice is strictly limited to ultimate timing and mind’s eye “perfect best life run” visualization for Hundos for classifiers and other stylized runs.

Practice and dry fire for sure I train to failure. But I don’t have expectations of performance for those scenarios.

[Caballoflaco]

Clusterfrack

Visually and mentally fatiguing means you’re doing it right, IMO.

I generally only run classifiers in practice twice for that reason. I treat them as a test / proof of concept rather than practice.

You passed the test with flying colors. Best to stop after two successful runs otherwise you burn in bad runs and sloppy runs.

Celebrate the successes on the tests but don’t get greedy.

Fatigue is real and should be respected.

So consider stopping earlier and convert to partial drills that augment the concepts you’re working on.

All IMO.



This is an interesting thing to discuss. I don't agree. I like to train to failure, and find that the ways I fail tell me a lot. I don't worry about 'burning in' bad technique.

This should be is a new thread. I’m somewhere between both of y’all in my thoughts on this.

[Clusterfrack]

This should be is a new thread. I’m somewhere between both of y’all in my thoughts on this.

New thread on this topic (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?49023-Training-to-failure) created.

[JCN]

I shot several runs of Front Sight followed by three runs of Lighting and Thunder with my Production rig today. After shooting CO for the last few months, I need to refresh my iron sight shooting in preparation for the major match season. It was pretty interesting. For both classifiers, I found my visual cues were lagging for the first run or two, and I was dropping too many points. After that, it was game on. Shooting CO has improved my speed and precision with irons, as long as I'm looking for the right cues. High M scores on Front Sight, and 97% & 100% on Lighting & Thunder, shooting relaxed.

85693

Working with Mike C and curious if you’ve found need for less front sight focus after shooting dots?

IIRC you were a target focused iron shooter before, but have you noticed any further shift.

After shooting dots, I found I was able to notice more from my hands and contextualize the irons better rather than depending on the irons to tell me what my hands were doing if that makes sense.

[Clusterfrack]

Working with Mike C and curious if you’ve found need for less front sight focus after shooting dots?

IIRC you were a target focused iron shooter before, but have you noticed any further shift.

After shooting dots, I found I was able to notice more from my hands and contextualize the irons better rather than depending on the irons to tell me what my hands were doing if that makes sense.

Good question. Yes, I've been target focused with irons on pretty much everything. Today, my initial tendency was to pay less attention to the front (and rear sight on the 25yd string), and that was not helpful at all. My eye-hand coordination process requires paying full attention to vision, grip, and trigger, and the vision part is just easier with a dot.

To shoot irons at the level I'm trying to achieve, I need to be hard target focused on a tiny spot AND also very keenly aware of the irons. On Front Sight, that keen awareness is a blur of green fiber. On 25yd targets, that means keen awareness of blurry front and really blurry rear. I finished up my session with some draws to 2x 25yd heads just to make sure my brain understood that. The best run 1.46, 0.35s broke my normal times by > 0.2s. The lighting was just right to see holes as the hits came in. I don't think I could do that without confirming/trimming front and rear sights.

[Leroy Suggs]

Clusterfrack. Good post topic and thread.
The spinoff Training to failure is good too.

These discussions are what makes P-F #1.