What's going on?

First topic message reminder :

Why is it that so many gravitate towards run n' gun sorts and not Precision Pistol? I'm 28 years old and I fear this sport and others like it won't be as active when I'm older. Heck they aren't as active now compared to years ago. I work at the range on the weekends as a range safety officer and often shooters ask me for help or advice to improve. But they don't want to shoot Precision Pistol they just want to shoot 15 yards or closer and move around and work from the holster. It looks fun but I feel there's more to be said about a pistol shooters marksmanship and his abilities when challenged at 50 yards.

CR10X wrote:A red dot scope is NOT needed to be competitive.  As a matter of fact, the availability and ease of installing red dots by shooters that have not mastered the fundamentals of how to align the gun and hold it parallel to the line of sight during the trigger operation; as opposed to trying to aim at a point and trying to pick off the shot; has probably led to more eternal Experts than about any other equipment issues. It's very hard to see how the grip and trigger operation are affecting the sight alignment with a dot versus using open sights. Learning to shoot an open sight Ruger .22 to Master scores will require learning the fundamentals completely and will take a shooter further than a red dot by itself ever will.

I don't think that the "average" Bullseye shooter is all that interested in making Master, or even perfecting their pistol shooting skills. And that's alright. Most folks just want to have a good time, and shoot as well as they can at the moment.

Likewise, I don't think that switching to a 'dot cripples one's advance. Switching to a 'dot and then using it badly--snatching shots and the like--is bad news, but if you're going to do that, then sticking with irons isn't going to help you much, either. But to be frank, if a shooter isn't interested in a multi-year training plan, and especially if they have less-than-perfect eyesight, telling them they have to stick to iron sights isn't doing them any favors. Can you imagine being told that--walking up to a shooter you respect, mentioning that you're thinking about getting a red dot for your humble Ruger, and being told "you're not ready"?

I shoot with some guys that can't break 220 indoor. But they're good guys to shoot with and they come back every week. They're not interested in being me, just the same as I'm not terribly interested in being a High Master. Who am I to tell them they're doing it wrong? Does anyone want to tell me that I'm doing it wrong?

The original comment was "...And let's be honest, dudes--if you want to be competitive in Bullseye, a red dot makes a big difference."


I sincerely disagree and stated my opinion and the reasons why.  I did not say anything about making Master, if people are just shooting for fun, or make shooting irons a requirement.  But "competitive" would seem to mean "perfecting (or at least bettering) their pistol shooting skills".  Less than perfect eyesight is not an issue either, they have specialists and equipment for most of that as well. (I know, I wear special glasses for open sights too.) 

I did not say anything about shooter's that do not want to improve, just shoot for fun, or show up every match and just shoot.  And if you have read any of my previous posts, you will see that I am a proponent of using both Dot and Open sights to improve.  

I do take exception to the statement that a red dot makes a difference in being "competitive" and implies that they are needed to shoot good or even great scores (be competitive).  I do think that using a dot sight makes it more difficult to learn to keep the gun aligned throughout the shot process and harder to learn to call the shot.  Almost everything (99.999%) of what determines where the bullet lands happens at the gun and is dependent on the orientation of the gun with respect to the intended line of flight.  Saying that a dot is needed to be "competitive" is a mindset that that I would question.

And isn't saying "if you want to be competitive in Bullseye" you need to use a dot; kinda like telling iron shooters what they are doing is "wrong" too? 

Respectively, 

Cecil

I think that I shoot iron sights better then my dot.  I think it is because I don't see that dot wobbling all over the place and try to get the shot off as it passes through the X ring.  I don't see that wobble as much with irons but I just don't like them.  I can one thing for irons they are far less hassle then my Matchdots with not having to worry if something is loose or not mounted level.  A little cant of the gun doesn't effect POI as much as a dot sitting high above the bore.  Do I want to make Master or High Master.  Sure but I don't think at my age I will.  Sure there are old High Masters but I suspect most have been shooting far more years then I have left.  There for I just challenge myself and have fun learning.  Don

Ed Hall wrote:
[Everything that Ed said]

+1 for Ed.  I think the main thing holding me back is not a piece of equipment.  It is attitude.  Last week I was at the range practicing Rapid Fire (I listen to the range commands via electronic ear muffs) and shot four 5 shot strings (see image).  When I retrieved the target, my first thoughts were on the three nines and how did I screw those up.  Then I berated myself for thinking negatively and said 'well, at least 17 are in the ten ring and of those 17, 13 are in the X ring' as though it was a consolation prize.

I have read and will re-read the book 'Bullseye Mind - Mental Toughness for Sport Shooting' and listen to the sound advice found on this forum to help me over this hurdle.  (For some reason, Lanny Bassham's books don't resonate with me as much as the other.)

Everyone here makes me feel so young, lol. I am only 21 and just started shooting bullseye, and plan on it for the rest of my shooting career. Action pistol really has no interest for me.

VolScorpion wrote:Everyone here makes me feel so young, lol.  I am only 21 and just started shooting bullseye, and plan on it for the rest of my shooting career.  Action pistol really has no interest for me.

Looking at your user name you didn't happen to shoot that target with a Volquartsen Scorpion?

Im not sure what target you are talking about? But I do shoot a volquartsen scorpion

VolScorpion wrote:Im not sure what target you are talking about?  But I do shoot a volquartsen scorpion

Woops my error that wasn't your target above.  I been looking at that gun or sending them a Mark II or III frame to get a conversion.  I am shooting their SS flutes barrel with the forward blow comp on my Victory and really like it.  Don

Wasn't the National record in Bullseye Pistol shot with iron sights? If so, a red dot sight may help some people, but not all. Personally, I shoot better with iron sights. I have a bad habit (mental problem) with snatching the shot with a dot sight. My cure was to go back to irons. Not that I'm good either way, just better with irons.

Irons let me judge my hold better than does a dot.  With a front and rear solid reference, I can see angular movements better and can train them out.  And the front rear sight alignment can be seen as more a separate thing from total sight picture.  And seeing/focusing on the front sight is a more precise thing than seeing dot or target in almost the same focus conditions.

CR10X wrote:I do take exception to the statement that a red dot makes a difference in being "competitive" and implies that they are needed to shoot good or even great scores (be competitive).

Well, if you want to finely split hairs, you quoted it yourself--"a dot makes a big difference". You're claiming I spoke in absolutes when I didn't.

That said--between shooters of equal skill and commitment, yes. There is an advantage to using a dot, and its drawbacks can be overcome. Even just not being as dependent on lighting conditions is an advantage. I can shoot a dot well, and I can shoot iron sights well, but not all the time. I bet we know a lot more national match shooters using a 'dot than iron sights.

Are there drawbacks? Sure. But learning to use a 'dot is no easier than learning to use iron sights, just different. You can still call shots, and tell without looking when your trigger pull threw a shot out--even where it went to. It just takes practice and scoping. I know that if the dot jumps up, I threw it to 1 o'clock, 6 ring (breaking the line on 7 if I'm lucky) on an indoor target. If I see a U-shaped movement, then I tensed my grip and broke my wrist down slightly, which comes from forcing the shot (the bottom of the U will point to the place on the 7 ring where I threw the shot). If I don't see anything, then I closed my stupid eyes and flinched and the shot could be anywhere.

The challenges are different, too. Like trying to "snatch" the shot. It introduces and exacerbates a whole host of "mental" complications.

I do agree that probably 80% of the people that switch to a dot do it for the wrong reasons, and use it badly. I also agree that the "non-apparent" intricacies of dot use aren't as obvious as iron sights.

I would submit that most casual shooters aren't really all that good with iron sights, either, and that--see if this makes sense--using a dot badly is easier than using iron sights well!

I find that I can sometimes focus on trigger pull more clearly with iron sights--sometimes I get just as distracted watching the front sight! When using a dot, I instead focus on the mental aspects of the game.