Precise looking vs precise aiming

[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 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.

Attachment 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.