POI Shift with Occluded Optic

[Mark D]

There was actually a video on Instagram that Mike Pannone posted a little while back where he was teaching an LE optics class. He was discussing occluded optic shooting and then demonstrated it. I was impressed because he doesn’t have binocular vision due to the loss of his right eye.

POI shifts while shooting occluded is also the big clue I’ve seen that someone might not have binocular vision even if they have two eyes and they might not know they have a vision issue.

Not to derail the thread, but I get a POI shift with an occluded pistol optic. I'm right handed and right-eye dominant, and bullet impact is significantly left when my optic is occluded. Any idea why this happens for some shooters?

[WobblyPossum]

Not to derail the thread, but I get a POI shift with an occluded pistol optic. I'm right handed and right-eye dominant, and bullet impact is significantly left when my optic is occluded. Any idea why this happens for some shooters?

Has an eye doctor ever told you that you might now have binocular vision? Like your right eye sees things and your left eye sees things, but your brain doesn’t merge the two images together? At closer ranges like 3-5y, is the distance between your POA and POI about the same as the distance between your eyes?

[GJM]

Not to derail the thread, but I get a POI shift with an occluded pistol optic. I'm right handed and right-eye dominant, and bullet impact is significantly left when my optic is occluded. Any idea why this happens for some shooters?

I also experience this intermittently, especially if tired. I had a retina tear nearly ten years ago in my right dominant eye, still have significant floaters, and in some lower light conditions, my left eye fights for dominance.

Back to the SRO, a squad mate who is a lead red dot trainer for a major department, had his SRO occluded on the first stage. I meant to ask him, but didn't get the chance, how the department would feel about an occluded SRO on duty. The false SRO dot is such a problem, because rather than being splatter that you know is a problem, it is a single deceptive dot.

[Clusterfrack]

Not to derail the thread, but I get a POI shift with an occluded pistol optic. I'm right handed and right-eye dominant, and bullet impact is significantly left when my optic is occluded. Any idea why this happens for some shooters?

I was playing around with a PVS-14 night vision tube on my left eye and aiming with a visible dot on my right eye. Same problem. It's a convergence issue, and can cause big deviations in POI. See this article by Gabe White: http://www.gabewhitetraining.com/vision/

[Mark D]

Has an eye doctor ever told you that you might now have binocular vision? Like your right eye sees things and your left eye sees things, but your brain doesn’t merge the two images together? At closer ranges like 3-5y, is the distance between your POA and POI about the same as the distance between your eyes?

I've never had an eye doctor tell me that I have binocular vision. But my eyes are kind of wonky, so I could well have it. My POI shift is 1.5" left at 7 yard, which is near to the distance between my eyes. Interestingly, the POI is also about 1" low with the optic occluded.


I also experience this intermittently, especially if tired. I had a retina tear nearly ten years ago in my right dominant eye, still have significant floaters, and in some lower light conditions, my left eye fights for dominance.

Back to the SRO, a squad mate who is a lead red dot trainer for a major department, had his SRO occluded on the first stage. I meant to ask him, but didn't get the chance, how the department would feel about an occluded SRO on duty. The false SRO dot is such a problem, because rather than being splatter that you know is a problem, it is a single deceptive dot.

I have a torn vitreous in my left eye, and tons of floaters. And both eyes have had cataract surgery due to early-onset cataracts. BTW - thanks for your ongoing discussion and photos of false dots - it's valuable information.


I was playing around with a PVS-14 night vision tube on my left eye and aiming with a visible dot on my right eye. Same problem. It's a convergence issue, and can cause big deviations in POI. See this article by Gabe White: http://www.gabewhitetraining.com/vision/

I've read that article a few times over the years, while trying to figure out why Gabe is such great shooter. I'll re-read it again, within the context of occluded optic POI shift. And please feel free to break this out into a separate thread, if you think it makes sense.

[Quantrill]

You know, that running it occluded prevents false dot….

Yep, but before I went occluded I didn’t have the issue either.

[JCN]

Yep, but before I went occluded I didn’t have the issue either.

You didn’t shoot enough low sun angles.

It wasn’t an issue for me either… for years.

But then I started doing weeknight league and setting sun fucked me up.

In your case, it would suck to have your first experience with it in a self defense situation…

[Quantrill]

You didn’t shoot enough low sun angles.

It wasn’t an issue for me either… for years.

But then I started doing weeknight league and setting sun fucked me up.

In your case, it would suck to have your first experience with it in a self defense situation…

I appreciate your input. I got into my circumstances and all that upstream.

I’d carry a SRO, if I did, it would be occluded, and I’d be ok with that.

I have an aimpoint P2 inbound that I was fortunate enough to get a great deal on. So I guess I won’t be killed on the street at sundown after all. Ha

[JCN]

I appreciate your input. I got into my circumstances and all that upstream.

I’d carry a SRO, if I did, it would be occluded, and I’d be ok with that.

I have an aimpoint P2 inbound that I was fortunate enough to get a great deal on. So I guess I won’t be killed on the street at sundown after all. Ha

It’s okay. I’m carrying a left handed pocket snub so I’m a dead man walking anyway. :D

[WobblyPossum]

I've never had an eye doctor tell me that I have binocular vision. But my eyes are kind of wonky, so I could well have it. My POI shift is 1.5" left at 7 yard, which is near to the distance between my eyes. Interestingly, the POI is also about 1" low with the optic occluded.



I have a torn vitreous in my left eye, and tons of floaters. And both eyes have had cataract surgery due to early-onset cataracts. BTW - thanks for your ongoing discussion and photos of false dots - it's valuable information.



I've read that article a few times over the years, while trying to figure out why Gabe is such great shooter. I'll re-read it again, within the context of occluded optic POI shift. And please feel free to break this out into a separate thread, if you think it makes sense.

Apologies, my post should have read “has an eye doctor ever told said you don’t have binocular vision?” Autocorrect.

As others have mentioned, it’s usually related to some eye issue.

[JCN]

Clusterfrack

I did an experiment a while ago where I taped my dominant eye lens and did a max speed draw with an RDS on a 7 yard target.

I definitely had POI shift.

[Caballoflaco]

Mark JCN The Brock String and it’s exercises will help identify lack of 3D vision and also also can help you train convergence at a specific distance. If anyone tries this and and can’t get any Xs or Vs then occluded sights won’t work for you either. I still haven’t been able to train more than momentary convergence myself, but other people claim to have had success.

I know this video is a bit long, but it’s the best one I’ve found as far as explanations and showing what you should be seeing.

https://youtu.be/4rDygaF3Dog


Written instructions with illustrated examples.

https://www.matheson-optometrists.com/PDFs/Eye%20Exercises.pdf

[Archer1440]

One tool I have used to better understand the effect of various aiming systems and less than ideal eye alignment is a bore laser cowitnessed with the red dot. This quickly identifies the deviation and parallax for any given sighting system, and allows one to determine the effects of various permutations of eye alignment without needing to use live fire.

(Also a useful learning tool with working on irons with both eyes open)

[Erick Gelhaus]

What little I understand on this comes from Freddie Blish (former head of Mil sales at Aimpoint, Robar, & current Gunsite instructor).

He has relayed that there is about 8-10% of the population that has difficultly working occluded optics on carbines. I have seen validated, numbers-wise, in a couple, three carbine classes since he brought it up to me.

However, I have not seen it to near those numbers in pistol-mounted optics classes. Either at Gunsite or with my own teaching. While I have seen it happen, it is maybe one class that has significant problems working an occluded optic.

There is something that doesn't connect, doesn't connect "right" in the nervous system, but I cannot go into it beyond that.

If anyone has a pointer to the research, I'd be really interested in it.

[JCN]

What little I understand on this comes from Freddie Blish (former head of Mil sales at Aimpoint, Robar, & current Gunsite instructor).

He has relayed that there is about 8-10% of the population that has difficultly working occluded optics on carbines. I have seen validated, numbers-wise, in a couple, three carbine classes since he brought it up to me.

However, I have not seen it to near those numbers in pistol-mounted optics classes. Either at Gunsite or with my own teaching. While I have seen it happen, it is maybe one class that has significant problems working an occluded optic.

There is something that doesn't connect, doesn't connect "right" in the nervous system, but I cannot go into it beyond that.

If anyone has a pointer to the research, I'd be really interested in it.

As a clarifying question, do you think the difference in carbine versus pistol have something to do with the target size and distance requirements of those two classes… because that by itself could explain the difference in what you’re seeing in the classes.

That’s just my WAG from training PCC and pistol.

The other thing that could contribute is that in pistol, you can see the outline of the whole pistol with either eye and for carbine you don’t have the same cuing.

[Mark D]

Lots of good input here, and fodder for experimentation. Much appreciated, folks.

[SoCalDep]

Not to derail the thread, but I get a POI shift with an occluded pistol optic. I'm right handed and right-eye dominant, and bullet impact is significantly left when my optic is occluded. Any idea why this happens for some shooters?

There is a possibility you have phoria. Aaron Cowan talks about it in his report, and we’ve seen it several times in our class. It’s an uncommon but not unheard of condition and other than things like occluded optics doesn’t really matter for most people, but for those shooting an optic, understanding whether they have it is important.

Besides phoria, we find some people have such a strong habit of one-eye-open and front-sight focus that as a new optic shooter they have a really hard time shooting occluded. So it becomes a diagnosis issue of determining whether their trouble is psychological (habit) or physiological (Phoria). We’ve developed a couple experiments based on the cover/uncover test used by doctors to diagnose phoria... When someone is having an issue shooting occluded we’ll have them focus on the target with the pistol/optic just below and dot in view. I’ll have them (while focusing on the target) bring the pistol up and immediately fire as soon as the dot is on the target. Then I’ll have them do the same thing but wait a few seconds before shooting. If they make the immediate hit but miss after a few seconds, I’ll suggest they get checked. If they miss with both it’s a possibility they can’t break the habit of focusing on the pistol.

As for glare and false dots, I think it’s essential to train in environments where the glare occurs to know what glare looks like and what the actual dot looks like. Knowing how the reflected light from both behaves will help in knowing which is right and which is wrong. Running a consistent brightness level helps too because I know what to expect in my dot vs false dots. I prefer that rather than occluding the optic, I learn to immediately determine which dot is the correct one.

Of course, I have the benefit of multiple ranges so I can get glare just about every morning on a couple and every evening on a few more.

[Q5shooter]

Hi everyone, I'm new to this thread, but I had a recent experience with occluding the dot at a USPSA match that I thought was really interesting and worth sharing. It's kind of long, so I hope this doesn't mess up this thread.

Bottom Line Up Front: Running an occluded dot in live fire caused my POI to be significantly laterally shifted from my POA, just like it has for others in this thread.

What Happened: For background, I am a cross-eye dominant shooter who shot Production Division in USPSA on and off for a few years, making it to A class, before switching to Carry Optics a few months ago. I have been dry firing a fair amount recently, all of which has been with an occluded optic (Sig Romeo3 Max). This training seemed to have been going pretty well, though it had Not been confirmed thoroughly in live fire prior to my most recent match. I decided to run the dot occluded for the match.

So that brings me to my recent enlightenment. I was the first shooter on my first stage of the day, and shot far worse than I expected. It was substantially worse than most of my previous matches. The stage had a number of no-shoots in line with shoot targets (in a few horizontal arrays), and I had several shots land deep inside those no-shoots. I knew that the first-stage-first-shooter jitters got the best of me and I shot too fast for my vision, but I also didn't call Any of my shots as quite so far into the no-shoots as they were. The second stage had the exact same issue, and I became worried I had bumped my optic out of zero. It seemed to be hitting to the right of my POA by around 5 or 6 inches at maybe 10 yards. On my third or fourth stage, I had to hold my dot completely off to the left of a mini popper in order for it to hit.

I adjusted my dot by several clicks, hoping at this point to just get somewhere in the ballpark (which kind of worked, but not well). It was at this time that a more experienced shooter (someone on this thread) suggested something to me that ended up being the fix: he told me to adjust my dot back, because it probably was Not off, and remove the dot occlusion. He said it's possible that the way my vision superimposes the dot on the target when the dot is occluded - particularly at longer distances - might not match up with how the dot was zeroed (with no occlusion) due to some of the peculiarities of my binocular vision. For the rest of the stages, I adjusted my dot back to how it was originally, took the occlusion off, and all of a sudden I was hitting where I was looking.

Now I'm wondering if there's a way I can still practice with the dot occluded in dry fire and then take it off when I live fire, or will that make for bad habits?

Further analysis: as soon as I got home after the match, I placed the cover back on the dot and placed the gun upright in a rest (i.e. two couch cushions). I looked at where the dot was superimposed on a target, and determined it was my left (dominant) eye that was looking through the optic. When I moved my head to have my right (non-dominant) eye in line with the optic, the location of the dot relative to the target shifted drastically to the right. Based on this, it would make sense that I kept having issues hitting left or right of my POA if my eyes kept switching behind the optic, especially around leans ot other obstructions. While I wish I hadn't discovered this during a match, I think it's an important thing to know and test before running a match with the dot occluded, especially considering how popular it is in the competitive shooting community right now.

I would love to hear if any of you think I can or should still train with my dot occluded, as well as any advice on future training. Thanks!

[Clusterfrack]

Hi everyone, I'm new to this thread, but I had a recent experience with occluding the dot at a USPSA match that I thought was really interesting and worth sharing.
...
I would love to hear if any of you think I can or should still train with my dot occluded, as well as any advice on future training. Thanks!

Welcome to Pistol-Forum, buddy! That was a rough match for you, and I was impressed by how you kept your composure when you weren't sure what was going on.

I'm hoping some of our experienced RDS shooters and instructors can help put you on the right track. SoCalDep, AsianJedi, 1Rangemaster, Erick Gelhaus, JCN, GJM, who else am I forgetting to tag?

Summary (please correct if needed):


Very skilled iron sight shooter; relatively new to RDS
Cross-dominant (right handed, left eye dominant)
Shooting a Romeo Max with the optic fully covered
Aiming mostly with R eye, but sometimes switching to L eye
Large POI shift to R on some shots

[JCN]

I would love to hear if any of you think I can or should still train with my dot occluded, as well as any advice on future training. Thanks!

Welcome to the site and thanks for sharing your experiences!

As context, I’m a fairly high level USPSA shooter and have spent almost all my handgun and competition time with red dots. I love dry fire. It’s meditative for me.

I have never found a reason or need to run dot occluded in training.

I do find myself getting dot focused if the dot is too bright or if I’m moving too slowly.

Usually at MOVE NOW! speeds there’s no time to dot focus and I am hyper aware and processing of the targets so no opportunity to shift to dot focus from my usual target focus.

I also take it that Max Michel and JJ Racaza are not occluded dot fans as an indication that it’s not a necessary training adjunct (for me).

I’m kind of a “train like you fight” kind of guy so I never considered occluded dot practicing, I focused on the performance in dry and live and whatever my eyes were doing is whatever they were doing.

As a training regimen, I like dry plate racks and Texas stars in various pattern engagements to train eye movement and target focus.


https://youtu.be/i-nollyUFtc

If you look carefully, you can see my eyes/head leading the gun.

[Doc_Glock]

I definitely have that phoria thing and significant shifts laterally when shooting an occluded optic.

[Erick Gelhaus]

I'll use occluded optics, both dry & live, to help with the transition to both eyes open and shifting the visual attention and focus from the front sight to the target, threat, etc. But this is in class and my own practice, not for a match.

You are focusing on the target rather than the dot? And working with both eyes open?

While you can buy covers for your optic (who knew), I do it with painter's tape.

In dry practice, you could do it while you work on the steps of the presentation. Courtesy of Scott J, I dry practice (and teach) the steps in reverse. Dot on target, both hands on the gun, bring it back to below the jaw line, then work your presentation to see the optic housing then the glass & finally the dot. Then work your presentation from where your hands meet to seeing the dot. Finally, from the holster through seeing the dot. Do the same thing from your preferred ready position as well.

You can run any drill with them. Generally, I will run a standard string of fire at charging distances - like Gunsite's 250 & 350 school drills - with the tape on. During a class, do it once in the AM and once in the PM every day. In the last class I taught at Gunsite, a couple weeks ago, had one student who wanted a lot more occluded optic work and one who wanted none.

The longer you have been front-sight focused, the more effort it can take to re-wire the visual attention.

I would suspect that changing eyes may be interfering with wiring this new thing in.

Thinking out loud & typing it too ... maybe not a good idea ... So I just taped over my optic. I worked presentations with both eyes open, dominant only & non-dominant only. While the non-dominant eye has issues & requires work, I have not "seeing" what you are describing. It re-affirms for me, not going back and forth between eyes. As well as not doing that to participants in matches.

I started using occluded optics (on carbines) when I worked for Aimpoint in the latter half of the 00s, based on input from Blish. Maybe earlier from Pat Rogers as well. The pistol-mounted optics classes at Gunsite have been using it since '20 with those it works for.

Let me know if I can be clearer, explain it better.

Clusterfrack thanks for including me.

[JCN]

The longer you have been front-sight focused, the more effort it can take to re-wire the visual attention.

Bumping up this nugget of wisdom for emphasis. Good stuff.

[GJM]

I understand the occluded optic as a diagnostic tool, to help understand target focus. I am not sure how that morphed into live firing and expecting the point of impact to be exactly the same occluded as not, and using that technique in matches. If someone's point of impact is sometimes different occluded than not, does it mean they are not target focused?

The R3 Max is awesome in low sun angles, and I am pretty sure Sig didn't spec that beautiful glass to cover it up with tape!

[SoCalDep]

Q5shooter - First off I appreciate the detailed post describing your issues. I think your situation is complicated so anything I post may be a solution or may make things worse. Take it all with a grain of salt.

First, I understand that some competitive shooters occlude their optic to reduce/eliminate the effects of glare. I don’t understand the utility of doing it as an all-the-time thing and feel it’s counter-productive. I know lots of departments that include lots of occluded training, especially early, and while I think it can benefit people I think it’s unnecessary once it’s established that the shooter is using both eyes. In fact, I think it’s useless most of the time. It can hurt some shooters.

I’m a fan of knowing how to shoot occluded in case I have to. I’m a fan of knowing how to shoot with glare if I have to. I’m not a fan of inducing one handicap “in case” another occurs. Clear window... learn to deal with glare. If occluded learn to deal with that separately.

As for the cause, you described several things that could contribute to your issue. Since you haven’t done much/any live fire practice with the dot I think phoria is a strong possibility. Add to that the fact you may have been switching eyes and that’s another issue. I don’t advocate switching eyes and I’m a cross dominant (right handed/left eyed) shooter who has worse vision and a worse astigmatism in my dominant eye. Additionally, the stress of a match situation makes things even more complicated because small errors can become compounded, especially when you don’t know what is causing the error, so I don’t think any diagnoses by me is going to help. What i will do is offer some tests for you to help you diagnose things on the range in a non-match setting:


With optic un-occluded shoot five shots at a small target - maybe a 2” circle at 4-5 yards. Go slow. Make sure you’re on target for two-three seconds per shot. This is your control group.
With optic un-occluded start from a low-ready or other ready position and Brian the gun on target to fire a single shot relatively quickly (though still under control enough to hit the circle with each shot) This is another control group.
Occlude the optic and fire five rounds with both eyes open. Go slow. Make sure you’re on target for two-three seconds per shot.
Repeat as before with single shots starting from a (barely) low ready. These shots should be pretty quick... you should have the pistol in view while you look at the target with both eyes, but the dot should be visible in your peripheral vision. Focus on the target, prep your trigger, and bring the dot to the target. As soon as the dot is there press the shot. There should be maybe 1 second or less that the occluded dot is on target.


If the five occluded shots are off and the five rapid shots are off you may have a problem OTHER than phoria. This can include a “dot” focus for people who are used to front-sight focus (successful occluded aiming needs a target focus), or issues with presentation and potentially switching eyes.

If the five occluded shots are off and the rapid shots are on then you likely have phoria.

If all shots are on then maybe you’re getting more used to shooting with a target focus which is a good thing.

You can repeat the five rounds slow and then five single rounds fast with each eye to try to isolate that as well. I find that if I’m shooting without corrective vision, I’ll actually close my left (dominant) eye occasionally to force my right eye to pick up the dot for some purely marksmanship stuff (zeroing, Pat Mac 500 Agggregate and similar courses of fire). I certainly don’t advocate that and one day I’ll suck it up and buy a couple sets of corrective shooting glasses.

[Moylan]

If you look carefully, you can see my eyes/head leading the gun.

As always, thanks for the great stuff! I believe I can see the head move before the gun around 14 seconds when you transition to the "classic" target, but on the smaller transitions I am not sure I'm seeing it. Am I missing it, or are the motions of the eyes before the gun just too small to pick up on the video?

[GJM]

Q5shooter - First off I appreciate the detailed post describing your issues. I think your situation is complicated so anything I post may be a solution or may make things worse. Take it all with a grain of salt.

First, I understand that some competitive shooters occlude their optic to reduce/eliminate the effects of glare. I don’t understand the utility of doing it as an all-the-time thing and feel it’s counter-productive. I know lots of departments that include lots of occluded training, especially early, and while I think it can benefit people I think it’s unnecessary once it’s established that the shooter is using both eyes. In fact, I think it’s useless most of the time. It can hurt some shooters.

I’m a fan of knowing how to shoot occluded in case I have to. I’m a fan of knowing how to shoot with glare if I have to. I’m not a fan of inducing one handicap “in case” another occurs. Clear window... learn to deal with glare. If occluded learn to deal with that separately.

As for the cause, you described several things that could contribute to your issue. Since you haven’t done much/any live fire practice with the dot I think phoria is a strong possibility. Add to that the fact you may have been switching eyes and that’s another issue. I don’t advocate switching eyes and I’m a cross dominant (right handed/left eyed) shooter who has worse vision and a worse astigmatism in my dominant eye. Additionally, the stress of a match situation makes things even more complicated because small errors can become compounded, especially when you don’t know what is causing the error, so I don’t think any diagnoses by me is going to help. What i will do is offer some tests for you to help you diagnose things on the range in a non-match setting:


With optic un-occluded shoot five shots at a small target - maybe a 2” circle at 4-5 yards. Go slow. Make sure you’re on target for two-three seconds per shot. This is your control group.
With optic un-occluded start from a low-ready or other ready position and Brian the gun on target to fire a single shot relatively quickly (though still under control enough to hit the circle with each shot) This is another control group.
Occlude the optic and fire five rounds with both eyes open. Go slow. Make sure you’re on target for two-three seconds per shot.
Repeat as before with single shots starting from a (barely) low ready. These shots should be pretty quick... you should have the pistol in view while you look at the target with both eyes, but the dot should be visible in your peripheral vision. Focus on the target, prep your trigger, and bring the dot to the target. As soon as the dot is there press the shot. There should be maybe 1 second or less that the occluded dot is on target.


If the five occluded shots are off and the five rapid shots are off you may have a problem OTHER than phoria. This can include a “dot” focus for people who are used to front-sight focus (successful occluded aiming needs a target focus), or issues with presentation and potentially switching eyes.

If the five occluded shots are off and the rapid shots are on then you likely have phoria.

If all shots are on then maybe you’re getting more used to shooting with a target focus which is a good thing.

You can repeat the five rounds slow and then five single rounds fast with each eye to try to isolate that as well. I find that if I’m shooting without corrective vision, I’ll actually close my left (dominant) eye occasionally to force my right eye to pick up the dot for some purely marksmanship stuff (zeroing, Pat Mac 500 Agggregate and similar courses of fire). I certainly don’t advocate that and one day I’ll suck it up and buy a couple sets of corrective shooting glasses.

I am not sure that phoria is binary as in yes/no. I experience it at times that I associate with tired (eyes). So occluded mostly works until it doesn't. Googling phoria, it can come on when tired.

So depending on your state at the time you do your test, you might have an answer that differs. That is the insidious part of occluded shooting for me, do you encounter something about your physiology, the target arrangement, or something about your body position (hard lean) that introduces a change in POI at that moment.

[SoCalDep]

I am not sure that phoria is binary as in yes/no. I experience it at times that I associate with tired (eyes). So occluded mostly works until it doesn't. Googling phoria, it can come on when tired.

So depending on your state at the time you do your test, you might have an answer that differs. That is the insidious part of occluded shooting for me, do you encounter something about your physiology, the target arrangement, or something about your body position (hard lean) that introduces a change in POI at that moment.

Very true. The “tests” I described will pick up the clear cases but I’m glad you pointed that out .

[JCN]

As always, thanks for the great stuff! I believe I can see the head move before the gun around 14 seconds when you transition to the "classic" target, but on the smaller transitions I am not sure I'm seeing it. Am I missing it, or are the motions of the eyes before the gun just too small to pick up on the video?

You’re missing it and it’s subtle for the smaller movements from the camera point of view. :)

Play the video at 1/4 speed and you can see the head start moving before the gun does for each transition. If I were fancy and had a second camera pointed at my face you could appreciate it better, but when I played it in slow motion just now it was subtle but noticeable.

EDIT: the other hallmark of good target focus is that there isn’t overtransitioning.

When people gun focus or dot focus they tend to over or undertransition at full speed because they’re not seeing and calculating the stable full approach.

[Q5shooter]

Wow, I can't thank you all enough for your quick and insightful responses! I am definitely impressed with the transitions in the aimcam video... I am definitely finding that I have to give myself cues before I shoot/dry fire to lead with my eyes from target to target, otherwise I inevitably find myself tracking the dot during the transition. It works as it should even I give myself the cue, but it's not completely automatic yet.

I also really appreciate the live fire drills to test the effects of the occluded dot on my performance. This seems like a good way to isolate the variables and truly diagnose the problem. I have a range session coming up next Monday and will give them a shot then report back on what I find. In the meantime, I'm going to do some dry fire with the dot occluded and not occluded just to explore the differences. However, you've all convinced me that it's not so cut and dry to just Always run the dot occluded as a way to ensure target focus. It may serve that purpose, but if it comes at the expense of my shots not hitting where the dot is, then that's a very big problem.

Again, thank you all for your many nuggets of wisdom. I'll keep up with this thread and will post more next week after my range trip.

[Clusterfrack]

Playing with this now, in between dryfire reps. Aiming with my dominant eye, the occluded dot is always the same as the laser. However, aiming with my non-dominant eye, the occluded dot is a target width to the right of the laser.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20221129/98b17a366fba155d75af74b44c21c618.jpg

Also, the occluded dot was >0.25s slower for me than a non occluded dot on this 3.25s string.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20221129/304df340929d3d337a0fd7c37163b6cd.jpg

[JCN]

Q5shooter
Clusterfrack
HCM

Made a video for Q5shooter to try and explain why I don’t like occluded optics and what I’m doing with my dominant eye.

This may not work with cross dominant shooters but I suspect it would because when I shoot left sided carbine, the same properties hold.

Target focus means focal plane of the target, not just stare at the target and ignore the dot.


https://youtu.be/x0nq791xnLQ

[Doc_Glock]

Bumping up this nugget of wisdom for emphasis. Good stuff.

I think that is truly my issue. I was a pretty decent iron shooter before trying the dot and the fact that I was missing a target five yards away by 3-4 inches and at 25 yards completely wiffing the target by like feet was a real mystery til I started learning about phoria.

I was trying to train around it and lost interest and went back to a non occluded optic. I could never make the Bindon Aiming concept work with an ACOG either.

I am sure it is an issue that can be trained out with some work.

[Doc_Glock]

So I just taped over my optic. I worked presentations with both eyes open, dominant only & non-dominant only. While the non-dominant eye has issues & requires work, I have not "seeing" what you are describing.

I also found this is something I didn't notice at all visually until I was doing live fire and completely missing the target. In dry fire it is easy to convince yourself everything is lined up and indeed in one's brain it "looks" perfect. But it isn't. After the live fire reality check I could then go to dry and actually see the dot start to move laterally if I worked the muscles just so. It almost helps to have the pistol in some sort of rest so you know the aim is true and then move your head and eyes back and forth. I need to try again using the Wheeler bore laser simultaneous with an occluded optic as that would give great visual feedback for training.

[Erick Gelhaus]

... I need to try again using the Wheeler bore laser simultaneous with an occluded optic as that would give great visual feedback for training.

I'll have to give this a try.

[Q5shooter]

Clusterfrack
Using the laser boresight really was a great idea to show the effects this would have in live fire if you switch to your non-dominant eye. It's strange, because every time I bring the gun up, it seems like it always goes to my dominant eye, but I guess that's one of the things about shooting in matches that I wasn't doing in dry fire... Awkward positions and stress. They cause the body to do unusual things.

Also, the fact that you were slower in practice with the occluded dot could alone be reason enough to be wary of using the occlusion.

JCN
I found your video to be extremely interesting. Of all the hours of videos I've watched about training transitions, I've never heard of switching your visual attention back to the dot for a moment as it approaches (on wide transitions) in order to gauge its relative position to the target then make corrections before switching focus back to the target. It makes perfect sense, and I appreciate the analogy to racing. I think a problem I have had is to shift my focus back to the dot as it approaches, just like you describe, but then it takes me too long to shift back to the target. That last step seems crucial for maintaining the speed of the transition, and I can definitely see how this whole process can be hampered - if not made impossible - by occluding the dot.

Doc_Glock
It sounds like we've experienced the exact same thing. It's nice to know we're not alone in this world;) You mention that it's an issue that can be trained out with work, but I think there's much more low hanging fruit (at least for me) that would be better served training on than working on changing how my eyes align and take over simply for the benefit of being able to shoot occluded consistently.

It seems like it can be a good training tool to throw into the mix every now and then (in dry fire only) just to make sure I'm not getting sucked into the dot without realizing it, but that may be the extent of its usefulness to me for the time being.

[Clusterfrack]

Great video!

I do a similar thing, but with a significant difference. Once my eyes are aimed and focused on the center of the target, I don't move them (other than to continue to track the target if there's motion). I pick up the dot, track it in peripheral vision, and break the shot when appropriate.

A couple things about both eyes open and seeing the targets:

1) I believe there are data showing that vision is faster and more precise with both eyes. Glenn E. Meyer, anything from your field you can contribute?
2) When the transitions are very short in angle, the next target can be hidden behind the optic. And even if it's a wide transition, the optic will occlude the target for a moment. I believe that's what slowed me down in the drill above when the optic was occluded. With a scoped long gun, I prefer to transition from R to L because my left eye isn't blocked by the scope.


[MENTION=22565]Made a video for Q5shooter to try and explain why I don’t like occluded optics and what I’m doing with my dominant eye.

This may not work with cross dominant shooters but I suspect it would because when I shoot left sided carbine, the same properties hold.

Target focus means focal plane of the target, not just stare at the target and ignore the dot.


https://youtu.be/x0nq791xnLQ

[Glenn E. Meyer]

If you compare visual performance with two eyes, vs. one eye - the standard figure is that two eye performance is the SQRT of Two (1.414) times the performance of one eye. At least that was the number on various tasks the last time, I read about this.

[Clusterfrack]

Just saying... when Pistol-Forum puts its collective mind toward a shooting related topic, we get after it! Thanks everyone for a great discussion so far. Let's keep this thread alive as we explore further.

[JCN]

I do a similar thing, but with a significant difference. Once my eyes are aimed and focused on the center of the target, I don't move them (other than to continue to track the target if there's motion). I pick up the dot, track it in peripheral vision, and break the shot when appropriate.

So a couple things about that. I believe a quick glance at the dot for milliseconds is more effective and then bringing the eyes back to the target is better for a couple of reasons. It’s only a quick eye saccade and my eyes are back on target well before the dot gets there (so still accomplishing the terminal aspect of what you’re doing). What it allows me to do is calculate the velocity and rate of approach so I am more ready for it by the time it comes into my primary vision.

The target isn’t moving. I don’t need to stare at it. And truly, even if I closed my eyes after the point where I track my velocity blanked out the last few hundred milliseconds I would still be able to hit the target with my eyes closed.

I’m getting additional information earlier about the tracking that is very important for calculating velocity and approach timing.

Basically, if someone were throwing a football in an arc, I would be tracking the football partially, and not just my hands.

If I know where my hands are, I don’t need to stare at them until the final approach.

Same thing with a target. If I know where the target is in space, don’t actually need to stare at it. Most of the time the target difficulty is not such that we need to make a microprecision shot at speed. So what is the point of staring at the target. As important as it is, it’s really not that important.

What I care about is how is my gun approaching the target and that information I want as the center of my focus for at least a split second so I can calculate the approach rate to preset my intended timing for the trigger.

Q5shooter it takes a LOT of practice to get efficient at doing this. Don’t expect to be able to do it yet. There’s a reason why some people can rip steel challenge and plate racks after practicing.

[JCN]

Clusterfrack

97803

So this graph is a little hard to follow. It represents the total time spent in what you’re looking at.

So if you are at the line above, where are you spend the entire time looking at the target, and I am the lower graph where I flick my eyes to the dot and then back on the target, what additional information are you getting from staring at the target the whole time. It costs nothing to dart the eyes quickly back and forth and significantly improves my accuracy in predicting the rate and angle of approach.

You could see it in the flipside, and say why not to do it that way. If it affects your ability to get back onto the target in time, then, sure. But really with stationary targets, you know where they are in space. The thing that’s moving is the gun.

[Clusterfrack]

Ok, crow tastes pretty good. A little feathery, but not too bad.

Dryfiring just now, I paid closer attention to my dot transitions. Especially on wider transitions, I'm doing exactly what JCN is describing. Crazy that I didn't notice it until now, and actually rejected the idea. As always, it's good to be reminded how important an open mind is for learning.

One thing I want to clarify: my focal depth does not change as I track the last few degrees of dot trajectory as it arrives on target. Focal depth is on the target, always. Of course with a laser-based optic, the dot remains crisp at all focal depths. It would be super cool to use an eye-tracking device to measure this.


I do a similar thing, but with a significant difference. Once my eyes are aimed and focused on the center of the target, I don't move them (other than to continue to track the target if there's motion). I pick up the dot, track it in peripheral vision, and break the shot when appropriate.



So a couple things about that. I believe a quick glance at the dot for milliseconds is more effective and then bringing the eyes back to the target is better for a couple of reasons. It’s only a quick eye saccade and my eyes are back on target well before the dot gets there (so still accomplishing the terminal aspect of what you’re doing). What it allows me to do is calculate the velocity and rate of approach so I am more ready for it by the time it comes into my primary vision.

The target isn’t moving. I don’t need to stare at it. And truly, even if I closed my eyes after the point where I track my velocity blanked out the last few hundred milliseconds I would still be able to hit the target with my eyes closed.

I’m getting additional information earlier about the tracking that is very important for calculating velocity and approach timing.

Basically, if someone were throwing a football in an arc, I would be tracking the football partially, and not just my hands.

If I know where my hands are, I don’t need to stare at them until the final approach.

Same thing with a target. If I know where the target is in space, don’t actually need to stare at it. Most of the time the target difficulty is not such that we need to make a microprecision shot at speed. So what is the point of staring at the target. As important as it is, it’s really not that important.

What I care about is how is my gun approaching the target and that information I want as the center of my focus for at least a split second so I can calculate the approach rate to preset my intended timing for the trigger.

Q5shooter it takes a LOT of practice to get efficient at doing this. Don’t expect to be able to do it yet. There’s a reason why some people can rip steel challenge and plate racks after practicing.

[JCN]

Ok, crow tastes pretty good. At little feathery, but not too bad.

Dryfiring just now, I paid closer attention to my dot transitions. Especially on wider transitions, I'm doing exactly what JCN is describing. Crazy that I didn't notice it until now, and actually rejected the idea. As always, it's good to be reminded how important an open mind is for learning.

One thing I want to clarify: my focal depth does not change as I track the last few degrees of dot trajectory as it arrives on target. Focal depth is on the target, always. Of course with a laser-based optic, the dot remains crisp at all focal depths. It would be super cool to use an eye-tracking device to measure this.

Agreed that focal depth does not change. Target focal depth (which is what keeps the dot clear as well).

But some people misinterpret “target focus” as only center on the target, which isn’t the case. It’s just about accommodation and focal distance. You’re supposed to look at a whole bunch of stuff in order to get the most information to make the most educated and efficient movement.

I’m happy that you trusted me enough to go one step further, and actually test out what I was saying with an open mind.

As we said in our sidebar, the wonderful thing about efficiency is convergent evolution. In order to do something fast and accurate, certain things have to hold. At medium or slow speeds, all kinds of inefficiencies can be tolerated. But to get to the highest levels of performance, with speed and accuracy, certain things have to be present.

People talk about M or GM, but when I reference it I’m not talking about what our paper USPSA cards say. I’m talking about a certain level of performance that’s very fast and very accurate.

I’ll post it up again for Q5shooter since he probably has not seen the video of the Jason Bradley shotshell challenge, but that’s an example of what I am talking about with fast and accurate transition without over transition or insufficiency in the approach to the final press.


https://youtu.be/TYSYp6580oc

[Q5shooter]

JCN and Clusterfrack, I'm really enjoying this discussion. It's really interesting to see how such a simple concept of might the gun from one target to the next can involve so many processes that we're not even aware of.

You were right that I had not seen that video before. Being able to transition to such a small target that accurately and quickly is extremely impressive and very motivating. It reminds me of a video I saw of Jerry Miculek shooting a grape with an AR from low ready in some blistering speed... The efficiency of movement and the controlled stop/timing of the shot is definitely going to be a focus of my dry fire for a while, and I'll report back as I gauge my progress and begin to figure out what my eyes are actually doing during my transitions. Until then, I'm going to enjoy reading this discussion play out!

[Q5shooter]

JCN Clusterfrack
I wanted to update you guys on my very brief range session yesterday. It was cold and I wanted to conserve some ammo, but I did the 4-step test that you (JCN) suggested with shooting groups at various speeds occluded vs not occluded. Based on the results, I'm inclined to say that I don't actually have a true vision problem/abnormality, but that I instead just lined up my optic in front of the wrong eye while doing hard leans...

I believe this, because my groups for occluded and non-occluded were almost the exact same. There was no apparent POA/POI shift in any of the scenarios from 5-7 yards, and all shots were either touching each other or were at least within an inch. I tried a few other tests, all with the optic occluded, just to see if I could replicate the problem I had at the match, but every shot was hitting exactly where I was aiming. I had an issue where my pasters absolutely would not stick to the target, so it was hard maintaining accountability for all my shots. Regardless, I spent around 100 rounds on Ben Stoeger's Doubles drill with the optic occluded from around 8 yards. My splits ranged from around .15 to .18 and I was mostly able to call my shots. Throughout the drill, my POI seemed to be holding properly.

So basically, I just screwed up at the match. I still think it's strange that as soon as I took off the occlusion I started hitting where I saw the dot, though I didn't seem to have any problems with the occluded dot yesterday. I guess more experimenting is in order, particularly with hard leans.

[JCN]

Q5shooter sometimes in rain or when pasters don’t stick I’ll staple brown index cards over the group, kind of like replacing the center on a distance rifle target.

I carry a bunch of different sized brown paper rectangles in the trunk to use as scaled targets and transitions when I’m lane limited at a structured range.

I’m not so sure I buy the explanation of using the wrong eye during a lean because with an occluded dot I would think that would be very noticeable.

I wonder if it’s something to do with what you did with your zero at the match.

Typically people don’t change their zero when changing from dot open to dot occluded (and cluster was saying you did for the match).

The other thing buried in the discussion or maybe it was in texts to Cluster but as context:

For me, I’m pretty much using my dominant (right) eye to see the target and to pick up the dot and to track. The left eye is just there to place the target in space while moving to help triangulate.

So whatever the goal of dot occlusion (training the non-dominant eye to look at the target?) it doesn’t apply to me.

Basically even if I patch my left eye, I can shoot and transition about the same as both eyes open. The only place I suffer is if I’m moving or the target is moving and thats where depth perception and binocular vision come into play for me.

[Q5shooter]

JCN That's a great idea about the brown paper and index cards, I'll have to pick some up before my next range trip. Also, as far as changing my zero, I think I changed it for a single stage, then changed it right back afterward, so I'm not sure how much of an impact it would have had beyond that one stage. In all honesty, I also think I have to be honest with myself and accept that Maybe the stress of being in a match after so long away caused some firing hand tension that caused me to miss so much. It feels strange to consider that as an option, since I had dry fired a decent bit the previous weeks and felt pretty good. I also know that firing hand tension for a righty more often than not causes rounds to go left, not right, which doesn't quite match up, but I'm still considering it a possibility.

That's really interesting that you can shoot with the dot more or less the same with one eye patched as with both eyes open, except for when there's a moving element. I didn't get to do any moving and shooting this session, but that's something I'll throw into the mix next time. Regardless, since I don't seem to have too much trouble with being target focused (which, to my understanding, is the whole reason for running an occluded dot), there's no reason to risk running the dot occluded in live fire.

[GJM]

I don't think one practice session is definitive. My issues with the occluded dot come and go, as phoria is not necessarily binary as in yes/no.

[JCN]

That's really interesting that you can shoot with the dot more or less the same with one eye patched as with both eyes open, except for when there's a moving element. I didn't get to do any moving and shooting this session, but that's something I'll throw into the mix next time. Regardless, since I don't seem to have too much trouble with being target focused (which, to my understanding, is the whole reason for running an occluded dot), there's no reason to risk running the dot occluded in live fire.

Agreed. There’s also probably not much point in running the dot occluded in dry fire, either… :D

[BK14]

Back to the SRO, a squad mate who is a lead red dot trainer for a major department, had his SRO occluded on the first stage. I meant to ask him, but didn't get the chance, how the department would feel about an occluded SRO on duty. The false SRO dot is such a problem, because rather than being splatter that you know is a problem, it is a single deceptive dot.

If it’s the guy I assume it is, I just asked him about it last night. He said he’d never run an SRO occluded on duty. He runs occluded for most of his training, dry-fire, and live fire. His philosophy for running it occluded at matches, is that he generally views a match as an extension of his training. If he was in the running for a win at nationals (just a hypothetical example), he’d run it un-occluded, same thing for working. The visual information for processing the bad guy is too important to run occluded. However, he’s seen an improvement in true target focus with his vision by running occluded, and helps him diagnose when he’s shifting focus. Or something like that. We don’t have a policy on running occluded or not on duty, but that’s probably because there’s only a tiny handful that actually practice occluded anyways.

[Caballoflaco]

Quick and interesting personal update here. While doing a bit of dry fire with a carbine and occluded aimpoint this morning I was actually able to briefly merge the visual images and experience the bindon aiming concept for the first time in my 40 years on this planet. It definitely took too much concentration/strain for it to be something I would try to use in a competition or defensive scenario right now, but at least for me some of the eye exercises I’ve been doing seem to have had some effect. It’s exciting enough to motivate me to up the work and see what happens over the next few months.

[cheby]

https://youtu.be/UNQzB-Qci-8

[Disciple]

It’s exciting enough to motivate me to up the work and see what happens over the next few months.

Anything to report?