Failure psychology

https://competitions.nra.org/media/8917/2023-precision-pistol-rules.pdf

PAGE 13.  The rings are exactly the same size.  Look at the rulebook from the NRA

you seem to be comparing two different things

The 25y and 50y slow fire targets are comparable  (B6 vs B16)

The 25y T/R target and the 50y slow fire target are the same size, therefore the 50y slow would be twice as difficult 
(B8  vs B6)

Logan186 wrote:https://competitions.nra.org/media/8917/2023-precision-pistol-rules.pdf

PAGE 13.  The rings are exactly the same size.  Look at the rulebook from the NRA

Only in angular measurement:

https://postimg.cc/gwQtnQDG

JH, for outdoor, we use the B-6 at 50 yards, and the B-8 at 25 yards. We do not use the B-16, which is what you're referring to. Jon is talking about shooting on the B-8 target at 25 yards, hence why it is "easier".

Dave

Well, last week we shot SF at 25 on B16 targets.  I found my wobble on the B16 to be about the 8 ring about the same as my wobble at 50.  But the score was 10% higher than I get normally at 50.  Part of it is the error caused by angularity.  In theory angularity is accommodated by the reduced size scoring rings.  But guns don’t shoot a “normal” (single modal) distribution.  If you shoot enough, you find the shot distribution is a ring or “bi-modal” distribution.  Fancy words, but what this means is that if your gun is pointed at the 8 ring line it has a distribution that has a bigger chance of being on the outside of the 8 than being inside.  Double the distance and this randomness looms larger.  Shots will be further away because the distribution gets larger.  The difference appears to be about equivalent to 10%, more if your gun/ammo doesn’t shoot well. 

This is why guns don’t appear to shoot similar distributions when tested at 25 and 50 yards.  To determine these distributions, you have to shoot a lot…25-50 rounds minimum.

Thanks Wobbly. Could you elaborate on shot distribution having two modes?  Something like the most common scores being (say) 9s and 10s? Also how would this affect angular displacement over different distances?

A successful coach/shooter relationship is first and foremost about the relationship long before it's about the competency of the coach.

I supervise a good number of mediocre coaches at my tennis facility that continue to produce solid players. Plenty of people say it's against all odds, but these coaches are excellent at promoting the sport, making their players want to play more, and they commit to each other. That allows the relationship to build exponentially.

Many of the examples mentioned here have little to no relationship either mentioned or implied. Even if the advice given is perfect for the question asked, what is known about the rest of that shooter? Are their fundamentals good enough to understand it? Are they motivated enough to really listen? Are they going to go practice the advice and learn it's ins and outs?

I deal with this all the time at work. Adults are WAY different to teach than kids. A significantly higher proportion of kids want to get better and they have a parent that can help reinforce the work and focus necessary to get better. Sports can easily be #1 or #2 priority for them.

A significantly higher proportion of adults already have the majority of their time each week spoken for between family and work. They are left to self motivate for something that is likely 3rd or worst on their priority list.

I think you're misinterpreting the targets.  The B16 is a 25 yard "semi-equivalent" target to the 50 yard target.  The B6 is the 50 yard Slow Fire target and the B8 is the 25 yard Timed and Rapid Fire target.  As Jon mentioned, the rings are the same size, but the 8-ring is also black on the B6.

As for, "Failure Philosophy", this guy has an interesting angle that is used by successful folks-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrIS_RQJmCU

Forget scores- put your effort in shooting X's, and better scores will happen.

jwax wrote:As for, "Failure Philosophy", this guy has an interesting angle that is used by successful folks-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrIS_RQJmCU

Forget scores- put your effort in shooting X's, and better scores will happen.

This from Dr Huberman is superb, and recalls one's bicycle racing / training days when the thought was "there is nothing they could pay me to do this".  Because the training was so hard that it's pain was the reward

Bruce 

I think there is a lot more to a person being receptive or not to coaching than "having seen you fail". Congratulations again on the trip to the stage this year. 
Most of my experience is in High Power, but it's relevant. For quite a few years I shot match rifle, read books, got a few suggestions but mostly kept to myself. Yes, I saw improvement but not what I should have for the effort, and my results were erratic. 
For fun at a regional I shot my AR, that I didn't like at all at the time. Won my first leg points and got invited to join the NY State team. Great weekend. That was a turning point. Not only did I have coaching, but I was also around some very high end shooters. Part of it is hearing what P110 and NIT winners say, looking at there positions. But possibly, it's even more important to personally have high expectations of yourself, and not just at a superficial level, but deeply believing it. This is who I am. 
Long way around to get to the point. My opinion is that a person has to have their mind and emotions in the right state to be receptive. Not only to the physical actions but also to believing.

Best, 
Arthur

Ya…

Removing to clean up thread.