Interesting article in Clay Shooting Magazine

Just read an interesting article in the magazine written by James Marchington 'Learning to shoot Digweed Sryle' whilst it is a very well written article , it credits George with a few things that The Guild of Shooting Instructors have been teaching for over 30 years ,  interestingly the article poo poo's the 'Stanbury' and 'Churchill' method  but includes a photograph  of Richard Faulds watching George shoot? Richard is possibly one of the finest exponents of the 'Stanbury ' method and I don't think there is much wrong with his ability.

As long as we realise that Sporting Clays is evolving and we need to adopt all forms of style we will not go far wrong , but to ridicule other methods I think is a little short sighted and as far as I know Pilla don't do a lense to correct that.

Oh,come on Big George can do no wrong...he is busy programming the E.J instructors to forget everything they know and have been teaching for years to shoot "his" way,apparently according to articles its a wonderful new style that nobody has ever used but him and they are in awe at how wonderful it is...

Salopian said:

Just read an interesting article in the magazine written by James Marchington 'Learning to shoot Digweed Sryle' whilst it is a very well written article , it credits George with a few things that The Guild of Shooting Instructors have been teaching for over 30 years ,  interestingly the article poo poo's the 'Stanbury' and 'Churchill' method  but includes a photograph  of Richard Faulds watching George shoot? Richard is possibly one of the finest exponents of the 'Stanbury ' method and I don't think there is much wrong with his ability.

As long as we realise that Sporting Clays is evolving and we need to adopt all forms of style we will not go far wrong , but to ridicule other methods I think is a little short sighted and as far as I know Pilla don't do a lense to correct that.

Click to expand...

Just briefly what's the Stanbury shooting method ? 

Hamster said:

Just briefly what's the Stanbury shooting method ? 

Click to expand...

Was Stanbury pull away from the front foot and Churchill swing through from the back foot?

Doug Pinnegar said:

Was Stanbury pull away from the front foot and Churchill swing through from the back foot?

Click to expand...

All this talk of swinging and pulling...its a shooting forum! 

I am trying to adopt the Digweed style,.  I am just working on the physique at present  !   :angel:

westley said:

I am trying to adopt the Digweed style,.  I am just working on the physique at present  !   :angel:

Click to expand...

It's called the doughnut method. Takes a good many years to perfect, but you can quite literally measure your progress.

Salopian said:

Just read an interesting article in the magazine written by James Marchington 'Learning to shoot Digweed Sryle' whilst it is a very well written article , it credits George with a few things that The Guild of Shooting Instructors have been teaching for over 30 years ,  interestingly the article poo poo's the 'Stanbury' and 'Churchill' method  but includes a photograph  of Richard Faulds watching George shoot? Richard is possibly one of the finest exponents of the 'Stanbury ' method and I don't think there is much wrong with his ability.

As long as we realise that Sporting Clays is evolving and we need to adopt all forms of style we will not go far wrong , but to ridicule other methods I think is a little short sighted and as far as I know Pilla don't do a lense to correct that.

Click to expand...

Am one who does not purchase this mag, think this the same “non-shooter chap” who had a column in Pull a few years back? 

Glawster , correct , James Marchington a none shooting shooting journalist aka 'freeloader' free meals , free travel. free anything, etc.

Hamster & Doug Pinnegar you can Google both methods , if still in doubt I will write an article , but I want the same fee as George.

Salopian said:

Glawster , correct , James Marchington a none shooting shooting journalist aka 'freeloader' free meals , free travel. free anything, etc.

Hamster & Doug Pinnegar you can Google both methods , if still in doubt I will write an article , but I want the same fee as George.

Click to expand...

I did google it but just found lots of articles that said little more than it's founded on a slightly forward stance, (hardly ground breaking) I was hoping to find out what methods of lead or pick up it offered. 

Westward said:

It's called the doughnut method. Takes a good many years to perfect, but you can quite literally measure your progress.

Click to expand...

Oh I know...............I have 2 shooting coats on fleabay  !       :???:

Hamster said:

I did google it but just found lots of articles that said little more than it's founded on a slightly forward stance, (hardly ground breaking) I was hoping to find out what methods of lead or pick up it offered. 

Click to expand...

Churchill book is a very interesting read all be it rather dated. The jist of the churchill method is quite simply that the shot is taken instinctively and with no measured lead, it relies on the set up, the pre shot routine if you like and presumably good gun fit.

From what I can gather like IPS says the Churchill method is weight on back foot, quick gun movement from behind through the bird, pull the trigger as you come past.

Stanbury looks to be weight on front foot, mount on the bird and pull away to lead.

Cpsa or current methods seem to be a combination of them both depending on the target. 

I can understand Churchill's giving his name to the method because together with recommending a certain (rather short by even those days standards) gun and standing squarely etc, it is clearly very different to what they did then or do now. But weight on the front foot with a slight forward lean to counteract the effects of recoil and pulling away from the clay is what you would evolve into and do anyway so what makes it  Stanbury ? 

ips said:

Churchill book is a very interesting read all be it rather dated. The jist of the churchill method is quite simply that the shot is taken instinctively and with no measured lead, it relies on the set up, the pre shot routine if you like and presumably good gun fit.

Click to expand...

And I never saw anything in there about weight on the back foot except for that vertical shot at the cherished high phez - a shot I suspect that would be difficult with the front foot weighted.  Churchill catered to the pigeon shooter crowd and he had to be well aware of controlling recoil.  The only thing I see dated in his books are the terrific tweeds he wears in the pix and I could even be wrong about that - those tweeds could well be the height of fashion with Ian and his mates.  Every couple years someone new discovers a super kill every target method of shooting and even the most casual observer will discern that it is nothing more than revisited Churchill.  And prolly every fast target shooter in the world shoots the Churchill method whether they realize it or not.  And likely far the majority of shooters period that shoot with both eyes open.  Whether they know it or not.  That is, if they hit anything.

I agree wonko, have to be very flexible to take a bird at 12 o clock off front foot. Also totally agree about trap shooters using churchil. The only time i ever take a contrived shot is on certain pigeon presentations on driven or crossing birds its very much a swing through with no conscious lead... Having said that i am still pretty sh*te at crossers and don't pretend to be "that" ,good at driven

ips said:

I agree wonko, have to be very flexible to take a bird at 12 o clock off front foot. Also totally agree about trap shooters using churchil. The only time i ever take a contrived shot is on certain pigeon presentations on driven or crossing birds its very much a swing through with no conscious lead... Having said that i am still pretty sh*te at crossers and don't pretend to be "that" ,good at driven

Click to expand...

I love this forum, you can have a really crap day and come on a read a post like this (thanks IPS) and suddenly ain't so bad after all.

Hamster, ( and anyone else interested).

Have a look at 'Shooting Style ' by Michael Yardley on his website 'Postive Shooting ' ( Google it) although promoting himself he does touch lightly on both Stanbury & Churchill.

Churchill was a well built man ( George ?) Stanbury was a slim elegant man ( Richard?) 

Stanbury taught at West London , all types with the emphasis on Game and Sporting Clays , Churchill was a renowned Trap & Live Pigeon shooter who developed an instinctive style as he knew where the bird was being presented from , so needed a square balanced stance required to shoot quickly and instinctively at Trap type targets .

Possibly one of the finest books written on Instruction is now 140 years old , ' The Art of Shooting ' by gunmaker Charles Lancaster but actually written by H A A Thorn .

The method adopted by the CPSA & BASC is 'The Method ' actually promoted by Clarence  'Clarrie' Wilson  a disabled shooter who owned and ran Little Mill Shooting Ground  near Stockport.

The Method is as follows , establish the visual pick up point , determine your gun hold point , lock onto the target , move with the target, slightly pull away (to create lead) and shoot, continue to swing ahead to avoid stopping the gun , gun down and unload.

I think it may be correct to say that all other methods have evolved to allow us to get a a more positive relationship with the target .

As for eye dominance and its effect ! Well that is a whole new can of worms .

Salopian said:

Churchill was a renowned Trap & Live Pigeon shooter who developed an instinctive style as he knew where the bird was being presented from , so needed a square balanced stance required to shoot quickly and instinctively at Trap type targets .

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that embodies the actual randomness and difficulty of live bird competitions.  The field encompasses a quite large area and the released birds can  go just anywhere. Add in the fact that your first shot is at +30 yards and who know what for the second.  The same can be said for helice and I can't even imagine the alien nervous system that could shoot pigeons or helice or OT related games in any manner other than instinctive.  Game shooting, and particularly driven have far less randomness and generally, in my experience, a rather longer window of opportunity.  Sporting certainly has it's own demands but there is that predictability to soften the blow.

JMO of course and for me Churchill is The Man who put it all together for one and all to see.