Shooting Technique

[Les53]

Well Pete, As you know I only shoot trap, mainly OT, I only see the clay, no muzzles, no bead , no rib. If I see anything other than the clay I will miss just as sure as god made little green apples. Yes I've met quite a few American trap shooters that do things as I do, but I've met even more Italians that do it that way, much of my early trap training was in fact provided by an Italian. OK I've heard it said that the subconscious brain sees the muzzles, but I cannot confirm that of course. On the rare occaisions that I have shot skeet or sporting I have not shot in my usual way, on skeet and crossers I tended to use maintained lead and I used swing through for everything else as far as I can remember, it was all so long ago, in fact possibly in about 1987 maybe! Oh yes, and I shot the skeet and sporting with a trap gun, 3/4 & full. :hunter:

 

[Andy S]

Well Pete, As you know I only shoot trap, mainly OT, I only see the clay, no muzzles, no bead , no rib. If I see anything other than the clay I will miss just as sure as god made little green apples. OK I've heard it said that the subconscious brain sees the muzzles, but I cannot confirm that of course.  :hunter:

I shoot the same way at DTL, Helice close sporting clays, infact the best kills I've had at Helice, where a say target from trap 1 has gone right towards the centre trap 3,I have shot as the gun is moving left, from my central starting position, I have not been aware of anything other than the target. Afterwards there is a moment of thinking how on earth did I just do that, as it was a total subconscious action, saw the target and reacted to it.

At sporting I am only aware of how much lead i've given a clay after pulling the trigger.

 

[Les53]

I shoot the same way at DTL, Helice close sporting clays, infact the best kills I've had at Helice, where a say target from trap 1 has gone right towards the centre trap 3,I have shot as the gun is moving left, from my central starting position, I have not been aware of anything other than the target. Afterwards there is a moment of thinking how on earth did I just do that, as it was a total subconscious action, saw the target and reacted to it.

At sporting I am only aware of how much lead i've given a clay after pulling the trigger.

Getting to grips with seeing only the target can be a little difficult for a lot of people, it took me several lessons! The other issue is when you start having problems and need to visit a coach, some of them simply do not understand such a method of shooting, so it is always best to use a coach that understands it.

 

[Salopian]

Clever, no problems I asked the question, so I will listen to the answers, many of the American 'experts' (anonymous as usual) say that you should never see barrel, rib, bead, muzzle, ever.

If a coach teaches lead they say change your coach.

Les, Good point about your shooting method. But it's a pity we cannot eyecam it all? Because as you say I think most competent trap shooters do move to the target and shoot with focus BUT, when at the ready position we can see the hold point and the bead / muzzle, on the call, as the target appears, we move  to the correct kill point and fire , but because we are locked into the mount our gun does not have to move into our vision as it would whilst shooting gun down, so there is no visual disturbance, we thus firmly believe we do not see the relationship gun to target . But I think we must do subconsciously. 

 

[Les53]

Clever, no problems I asked the question, so I will listen to the answers, many of the American 'experts' (anonymous as usual) say that you should never see barrel, rib, bead, muzzle, ever.

If a coach teaches lead they say change your coach.

Les, Good point about your shooting method. But it's a pity we cannot eyecam it all? Because as you say I think most competent trap shooters do move to the target and shoot with focus BUT, when at the ready position we can see the hold point and the bead / muzzle, on the call, as the target appears, we move  to the correct kill point and fire , but because we are locked into the mount our gun does not have to move into our vision as it would whilst shooting gun down, so there is no visual disturbance, we thus firmly believe we do not see the relationship gun to target . But I think we must do subconsciously. 

Yep that's about it Pete, I can see the gun until I call for the bird, then once the bird is in the air I no longer consciously see anything but the clay. In fact it can be almost eerie because I often do not even recall moving the gun or pulling the trigger, it seems to happen without my intervention, well that's how it is on a good day Pete, unfortunately the older I get, the less good days I seem to have!!!   :laugh:

 

[Will Hewland]

Yep that's about it Pete, I can see the gun until I call for the bird, then once the bird is in the air I no longer consciously see anything but the clay. In fact it can be almost eerie because I often do not even recall moving the gun or pulling the trigger, it seems to happen without my intervention,

As I said before, might be fine on trap. Try that on a 70 yard battue..

 

[Hawkeye]

I cannot remember if I have raised this subject before, hence the question.

When you call and move for a target, what do you see? What is your technique?

One of the reasons for asking is there is often heated debate on American forums about total focus on the clay, you never ever look at the barrels, you are not aware of the muzzles, you don't see lead off the end of your barrels, you don't see lead out at the target because you never see your muzzles or the gap. You only see the target or more precisely the front edge of the target or even more precisely the rings or dimples on the clay surface ( remember Yanks are prone to exaggeration).

So think about it before you answer, " What do you see"?

Let me talk you through a shot, you know where you are going to break it, BREAK POINT, you know where your gun hold will be HOLD POINT, you know the visual pick up point of the target and you know it's flight line.

Now do you just look at the visual pickup point, watch the clay on its line concentrate hard on the clay and never seeing the gun it glides to the  break point and smashes the clay. 

 I would be interested to know how many of you see the barrels, the rib, the muzzle and if you relate any of them to the clay and sight picture.

It may sound perfect to you or it may sound crazy, opinions please 

Also factor in both eyes open or squint one, or mount with one eye closed and you will see how heated it can get .

Do the Yanks teach the gun down , both eyes open , move mount shoot? With no awareness of anything but the target and complete trust in the shooter's eyes and instinct to put the shot in the right place .

 

[Salopian]

Bryan, they teach and they buy into everything in the search for excellence.

But even Mr Bidwell doesn't shoot MMS all of the time.

The bit that raises their hackles is mentioning seeing muzzles, barrels, and target relationship.

 

[Les53]

Bryan, they teach and they buy into everything in the search for excellence.

But even Mr Bidwell doesn't shoot MMS all of the time.

The bit that raises their hackles is mentioning seeing muzzles, barrels, and target relationship.

Yes Pete the yanks do buy into just about anything they think will do it for them. As for the muzzle thing, many years ago I sometimes used to shoot on a US air base, at one time I met one of those American trick shooter blokes, I don't remember his name but he was bloody amazing. We discussed the bit about seeing muzzles etc, he told me that it simply was not necessary and told me he would prove it! He shot 25 straight, all first barrel at DTL, he shot them all from the hip!!!!! I have never seen it done before or since. After he did it he asked me if that proved the bit about muzzle awareness!!!!! Well obviouisly it did because the gun was not even in his cheek and he was looking out at the clay only, if he had looked at the gun he would have been looking towards the floor. OK it's rather extreme, but he got the point across to me though. The gun he used was a Remy 1100.

 

[Growl]

I used to shoot an 1100, from what you say and speaking from experience it was obviously the gun and not down to the shooter, the remmies did that straight off the shelf.....

 

[Les53]

I used to shoot an 1100, from what you say and speaking from experience it was obviously the gun and not down to the shooter, the remmies did that straight off the shelf.....

Well I'm glad yours did! I tried a couple many years ago and they shot sh*te, well when they were not jamming up that is! :fie: :laugh:

 

[Growl]

I did write that with my tongue firmly in my cheek, I sold it when it became so unreliable I'd have been better of throwing the shells at the clay! I did however used to shoot fairly well with it and remember it with fondness and a wry smile.

 

[Hamster]

The bit that raises their hackles is mentioning seeing muzzles, barrels, and target relationship.

Yes I've noticed that too and they are wrong. Basically there are lots of people out there who are in love with soundbites and quips that sound right but aren't.

 

[Wonko the Sane]

OK - here's an American.  The only formal lessons I've had were with Dan Carlisle and that was a loooong time ago.  His suggestion was that total target focus was prime.  The lessons were at sporting so a prior target path analysis was in order too.  But what I took from that was the body knows where the gun is just like it knows where a bat or racket is.  I've noticed tho that as the target slows I become more aware of the gun.  Fast to slow - flyers, helice, bunker, DTL, skeet.  Don't do sporting anymore but it would prolly be just before DTL.  Depending on how lazy I am, I can be anything down to seeing leads at skeet, but I'm best if I just shoot the target.  When I shoot the best at any game I do not consciously see or consider the gun.

For me the methods set out by Robert Churchill (sudden tweeds aside) are really the core info.  Every few years someone else "discovers" the methods he set down 50-60 years ago.  Well, actually in the 1920's most likely.  And of course the methods are still effective.

JMO of course as well

Charlie

 

[Salopian]

Charlie,

 We don't regard you as an American, because we have taken you to our hearts, in fact you are very nearly anglicised.

But yes I know exactly what you mean, nothing at all wrong with instinctive shooting using a smooth flow onto with and through the bird just like a cricket, tennis shot, nothing at all.

 

[ips]

I am with you on this many talk of never looking at the bead or barrel but i believe that although you may not conciously look at it you are certainly aware of it. What we think we do and what we actually do are two different things

 

[Macc Ladd]

I focus on the clay, but am aware of what my barrels are doing and where they are in relation to the clay.

 

[Wonko the Sane]

Charlie,

 We don't regard you as an American, because we have taken you to our hearts, in fact you are very nearly anglicised.

But yes I know exactly what you mean, nothing at all wrong with instinctive shooting using a smooth flow onto with and through the bird just like a cricket, tennis shot, nothing at all.

That's really very kind of you to say.  The family gossip is that we were run out of Shropshire.  I'll have to check on that someday hahaha

I'm not sure I can agree w/ IPS tho that is a common view.  It seems to me that the stick and ball games are still the best analogy.  The ball is directed long before it is visible for that instant to the thrower, and the bat in motion is dedicated to its path long before it is visible to the person swinging it.  If I'm looking out over the gun, and not looking along it, and focus on acquiring the emerging target, the gun movement is dedicated to a path before it is in my vision conscious or otherwise.  And I've noticed that in flyers and helice, getting the gun out of the way is to me central to acquiring the target faster.

Like I've mentioned before, I'm not Mr. Wonderful, and I suppose it could very well be that nothing more than my technique is holding me back - or not.  I just cannot believe that Dan Carlisle would be so evil as to mislead every shooter he could to remove competition.  And Mr. Churchill would certainly not have promoted a methodology that would hinder the performance of his beloved 25's.  So I think I'll just hang w/ them and not worry about not seeing the gun.

Charlie

 

[ips]

Charlie

i totally agree with your analogy and definately agree that focus on target is paramount. However my point is that at the critical point things are brought together the target and the gun therefore at this critical point target and barrel must be visible at some point. But i believe one must remember that our personal perception of what is going on is exactly that, personal and only a perception not neccasarily fact.

Have a good day.

 

[Wonko the Sane]

Charlie

i totally agree with your analogy and definately agree that focus on target is paramount. However my point is that at the critical point things are brought together the target and the gun therefore at this critical point target and barrel must be visible at some point. But i believe one must remember that our personal perception of what is going on is exactly that, personal and only a perception not neccasarily fact.

Have a good day.

The bit that nags me is the time interval / dynamics of the situation and kind of corrections are possible in that framework.  I know I correct for target movement, like clays in the wind, but I don't seem to have much conscious consideration of that muzzle-target thing even then.

What you say about personal perception is only about 100% right.  I long ago gave up trying to reconcile my reality with that of those around me hahaha

Charlie