Hi Rich,

Hi Garrison,

I hate to advertise directly to the list (If lots of people were to want
these, I'd have to build more and then I couldn't shoot as much), but in
response to your question, I do make a hobby/craft quality controller which
has the commands from, "Is the line ready?" through, "Ready on the firing
line."  The unit has a relay and controls designed to work with turning
targets or other target controllers.  Although requested by some, and I have
designed a solution, I have not implemented any form of tone for start and
stop.  The controller is designed to initiate or control the timing of
another system, be it the turning mechanism itself or a pre-existing
timer/controller.

Although the one your club has is (close to) white, the current ones are
black and excluding the buttons measure about 4.7 x 2.6 x 1.6 inches.

Take Care,
Ed Hall

----- Original Message -----
From: Johns, Garrison <Garrison.Johns@hp.com>
To: bullseye list <bullseye-l@lava.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 12:33 PM
Subject: [bullseye-l] Range Commands- Recorded and controllers

Speaking of recorded callers,

You don't have to haul that PC around.  Our own Ed Hall makes and sells (or
at least used to) equipment that hooks into range systems to call the line.
His wife has a very pleasant voice (I think that is who he recorded) :-)  I
think he still makes them, because I just saw a portable target turning
system he invented and he used his own box to control it.

Our range uses one of his and I THINK that it is a little white box about 6"
X 2" X 1"
Anyway, how about it Ed?  What do have these days?

Garrison

Hi Mike,

Hi Norm,

You're going to be close. (I'll explain below.) The NRA bulletin is still
only "preliminary" in regards to the CMP matches.  The official CMP bulletin
will be out after they do all the verifying of ALL the CMP matches.  It will
take some time.  As a look to the past, I checked the last three
years to compare the NTI (preliminary) scores listed in the official NRA
bulletin to the official CMP bulletin and the results are:

                     NRA     CMP
     1999       266-0x   264-3x
     2000       265-3x   260-6x
     2001       264-5x   262-3x

I predict your score to be the cutoff, plus or minus one position.  I base
this on the number of shooters in the medals area that I believe are already
distinguished but labeled differently, as well as how far the overall number
of non-distiguished will drop once all the verification is accomplished.
Yours is a tough call.  I wish you luck that you've made it...

Take Care,
Ed Hall

----- Original Message -----
From: The Glitz Family <nglitz@optonline.net>
To: Bullseye List <bullseye-l@lava.net>
Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 2:43 PM
Subject: [bullseye-l] Perry Results

Thanks Garrison,

It is true, I was issued a brand new HM card to use at Perry, but after they
saw how I treated it, they sent an official out onto the field to find me
and tear it up... %^)

Indeed, I have attained HM.  I suppose the next step is 2650...

Thanks for the notice...

Take Care,
Ed

----- Original Message -----
From: Johns, Garrison <Garrison.Johns@hp.com>
To: <bullseye-l@lava.net>
Cc: <bullseye-l@lava.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 2:40 PM
Subject: [bullseye-l] Ed Hall !

Hey Ed,

I just noticed you were listed in the HIGH MASTER ranks at Perry!!

Is there something you haven't told us??

Congratulations!!
Garrison

Hi Benjamin,

It was good to see you at Perry.

If you look back into your question below, there is a partial answer,
"National champion class shooters expect to get 100 in timed fire and nearly
that good in rapid fire on almost every target. I am a long way from such
scores, especially with center fire guns."

The question becomes, "What does it take to build the confidence to expect
100 on your sustained fire targets?"

As you also noted, confidence in your equipment is a must.  You won't get
there if you wonder whether your gun cycled with each shot.

On to the pertinent part:  In order to achieve 100s, it is necessary to
break the routine down to its smallest fraction, the individual shots.  A
100 is made up of two strings of five individual shots.  Each string is
broken into those five shots.  Remember that if your first shot isn't a ten,
the result will not be 100.  Therefore, if you are solely practicing strings
of fire, and you're not shooting 100s, then you need to break your practice
down into training for the individual shots.  I suggest that you work on
firing just one shot at the turn of the target until you achieve a ten for
that first shot every time.  Then add a second shot.  If it messes up the
first, go back to the first and work it back to a ten, and then try again
with the second shot.  Work with two shots until they are both solid tens
and then progress further.  Once you get to all five, practice it over and
over until you "know" that's the way you shoot.  Then you too will, "expect
to get 100 in timed fire and nearly that good in rapid fire on almost every
target."

Now to add in a little extra.  We always hear the words, "accept the shot,
race the dot, keep the trigger moving," etc.  But do we really study what
that means to us individually?  Even when I describe something, and am told
by the listener (or reader) that they understand, I have no guarantee that
what they "understand" is what I meant.  That's why our definitions of
things are in constant change.  Because of this, we grow.  One of the things
that made a difference to me was realizing that, "accepting my hold" meant
not fixing anything and that it is extremely important to break the link
between what we see and the operation of the trigger.  If we can interupt
the trigger based on what we see, and we can't accept our hold, we can't
achieve a good trigger manipulation.  Keith Sanderson recently described
this in a very good way.  He said to pull the trigger as though your eyes
are closed.  I would suggest actully performing this only in dry fire or
with a safety observer.  If your trigger takes a lot longer to come back
with your eyes open, it is because you're mentally interfering with it.  So
work on pointing the aligned sights at the aiming area and then, without
fixing anything, bring the trigger back.  "Without fixing anything," means
allow the natural movement (hold) to occur without placing the sights back
to a point on the target.  In sustained fire, this will come to mean,
starting the trigger before the sights are back on target, but "knowing"
they will arrive before the hammer falls.  You must achieve the "knowing"
part of this procedure before you can allow yourself to start the trigger
early.  And you must really "accept" your hold, and don't "fix" anything.

Take Care,
Ed

----- Original Message -----
From: Benjamin McLeod <bennnancy@erols.com>
To: <bullseye-l@lava.net>
Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2002 6:50 PM
Subject: [bullseye-l] How to learn rapid fire?

> To: David Rodgers and others...
>
> I am doing fairly well in slow fire. My center fire slow fire score of 188
> with my revolver at Camp Perry beat a lot of really good shooters, even if
> the guy next to me did get a 191 to win the Expert class.
>
> I know how to shoot sustained fire, having been told several times by
> national champions. Which does not imply that I am actually able to do it.
I
> had a timed fire 50 on one .45 target, although that was partly the gun's
> fault for jamming so much and I only had 6 shots at the target. I'm
working
> on the gun, but the consistent problem is my own skill level.
>
> So my question is, not "how should I do sustained fire", but "what do I
need
> to do to actually put into practice what everyone has been telling me
about
> sustained fire"? National champion class shooters expect to get 100 in
timed
> fire and nearly that good in rapid fire on almost every target. I am a
long
> way from such scores, especially with center fire guns.
>
> - Benjamin

Hi List,

Let me toss some conceptual material out into the mix.  This is something
I've been working on for awhile:

Since everything we perceive has already happened and reactions take time to
initiate and complete, it is virtually impossible to consistently yank the
trigger when we see everything is perfect, and have the shots hit the
middle.  Then how can we find a way to hit the middle?  In our very old
description of the perfect shot we can find the clues, "Align the sights and
manipulate the trigger so as to not disturb this alignment."  In my personal
analysis of this statement and the study of the activity that goes on during
a shot, I've formed my own interpretation.  I call it creating the best
environment for a good shot.  Let's take portions of the whole and then look
at the entire picture.  For the first portion, let's analyze the visual
input.  What we see is not a perfect picture as in the books.  But everyone
already knows that.  Some of us less than others, but all of us see
movement.  What is the movement?  It is our body trying to align the sights
and place them at a specific point.  The reason we can't hold perfectly
still is because we have all these muscles contradicting each other's pulls
in varying amounts.  What we end up with is an error-correcting routine
which keeps moving around trying to keep us centered where we're pointing.
Let's call this the natural arc of movement.  If we let this arc proceed it
will gently move around the center of the target.  Where we have trouble is
when we don't like where it is at some point in time and "adjust" it.  If we
happen to fire while we're adjusting it, the shot will most likely be less
than perfect.  For some of us, this adjusting is actually what we're
constantly doing.  Instead of letting the arc take its course, we keep
"fixing" it.  We need to allow the natural arc of movement to proceed
naturally.

Next let's examine the trigger manipulation.  We're always saying straight
back and steadily increasing and such.  I would like to suggest that the
steadily increasing with no hesitation is more important than the straight
back, but that the more straight you can make it, the better the shot if
your trigger has hesitation.  I hope I'm not too confusing on this issue.
What I'm trying to get to is that the real trouble in obtaining centered
shots comes from a start and stop trigger and is amplified by pressure that
is not straight back.  What causes us to hesitate?  Why would we stop the
trigger once we start it?  Not accepting what we see.  Something even worse,
is trying to correct what we see.  Our conscious self says, "It's not right!
Stop!" and then, "OK, start again."  How do we fix this situation?

The two steps to setting up an environment goes back to the old quote from
above.  First, set up the error-correcting routine that provides our hold
and produces our arc of movement.  Study this process at home and at times
when you're not shooting.  Recognize your personal pattern in this movement.
Second initiate the trigger such that it will complete somewhere within your
minimum arc.  Don't correct anything!  If you drift too far out of your
aiming area to accept, abort the shot.  If you notice that your finger
stopped bringing the trigger back, abort the shot.  Learn to accept the
natural movement of the sights and bring the trigger back as one continuous
motion.  In this way you have the error-correcting routine working to keep
you in the middle and the steadily increasing trigger pressure to cause
ignition during that natural arc.  All this probably sounds like, "Align the
sights and manipulate the trigger so as to not disturb this alignment."

Take Care,
Ed Hall

Hi Paul,

Hi Peter,

I thought I'd chime in on the side for scoring the "five-shot string" as a
group since rule 14.2 says, ". . .  The scorer must be at the target when
scoring."

Since rule 9.7 reads:  ". . . competitors . . . will continue to fire
five-shot strings until a hit is made outside the scoring ring of highest
value."  this means complete five-shot strings are to be evaluated.  This
combined with the above portion of rule 14.2 leads me to conclude that the
scoring is done by the scorekeeper at the target and the count is total x's.
Continuation only occurs if all are x's.

I think the spotter(s) was a (mis)interpretation of the rules based on the
logic that the record should uniquely identify only those x's fired in a
row.  This is not the logic I see in the rules.  When we acquire x's in our
scores, they are based on the total amount we get of the amount available.
When a record is being challenged, why would the challenger not be allowed
the total acquired for the amount available?  IOW, if the challenger is
allowed a string of five shots, why would he not be allowed all the x's he
can get during that string no matter when they occurred?

Take Care,
Ed Hall

Hi List,

I recently had some trouble with CCI-SV lot# J17G09.  Four rounds of 96
failed to fire.  Upon closer inspection I found that the primer material
broke away instead of igniting.  I would like to send an email to CCI.  If
anyone can supply an address they've used I would appreciate it.  I was
using my 208s which has a relatively new firing pin in nearly perfect
condition.

Hi Paul and Garrison,

And yet some more info.  Although I don't have anything handy on 2032 I do
have a catalog I order from that has BR vs CR for Panasonic batteries.  Here
is their statement:

"BR, or (CF) n/Li, batteries provide a more stable voltage particularly
during the last half of discharge, while CR, or Mn02/Li, batteries provide a
higher voltage during the first half.  CR batteries also can provide a
higher current capabilty than BR batteries.  In storage, BR batteries
perform better at high temperatures..."

I'm not sure if this was helpful or produced more questions.  I also wonder
if something is missing in the " (CF) n/Li" above.  It looks as though the
chemical makeup is slightly different even though both are Lithium.

Take Care,
Ed Hall

----- Original Message -----
From: <fehder@mindspring.com>
To: Johns, Garrison <Garrison.Johns@COMPAQ.com>
Cc: Bullseye-L <bullseye-l@lava.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2002 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: [bullseye-l] UltraDot batteries - type? life?

> Garrison ~
>
> It has always been my impression that it's the number (2032) that
specifies
> the "geometry" (shape and dimensions) of these button cells -- while the
> prefix letters are simply manufacturers' identification.
>
> I checked my back-up pack of Duracell 2032s purchased in 09/01, and
they're
> stamped DL2032 ("Duracell Lithium"?) -- but the note at the bottom of the
> card says that they'll replace DL2032 and CR2032.  My suspicion is that
"CR"
> is some other mfg's prefix.
>
> To my knowledge, the 2032s are always lithium cells.  Has anyone seen
2032s
> that are not lithium... maybe silver oxide or some other electrolyte?
>
>   ~ Paul
>

Hi Tony,

OK, I've got the glove for now. %^)

I actually have my own (what might be believed by some as pretty radical)
thoughts on the "practicing" that should be used to accelerate through the
ranks.  And of course as always, these are my opinions, with no flames
intended:

I think training should be approached in steps.  And practice should involve
repetetive performance of "perfect" execution to gain the best result.  What
does that mean?  And more important, what does it mean to you?

What it means to me is that practicing to shoot five shots in 10 or 20
seconds is not necessarily the best approach.  It also means doing this with
a second (bigger) gun is not necesarily the best approach.  But remember
that this is a game and participants want to participate, in the whole game.
So your training/competing will have to have a balance.

First, let's look at what we normally practice.  I'm going to focus on
sustained fire for this.  Our goal is set forth in the description
of the stage, "This will be the Timed Fire Stage...  consisting of two
strings of FIVE ROUNDS, TWENTY SECONDS per string."  Notice the upper case
lettering.  We are mentally poised to ensure we shoot FIVE rounds in the
time limit we're given.  In rapid fire that means we place in our mind the
thought that we must fire those five rounds in the ten seconds we're
allowed.  Getting those five shots off is our primary concern.  Where they
go (although we'll argue to no end this point), is secondary to that "all
five" programming.

So what is the result?  A lot of time the result is the same splatter of
shots that we always get and the same results we embed deeper and deeper
into our subconscious.  This is great if the splatter is a high 90's target.
Or is it?

If we're not shooting perfect targets (at least almost) every time, why
would we want that imprinted into our subconscious?  Wouldn't it be better
to imprint perfect performance?  Wouldn't it be better for us to learn how
to fire the first shot into the center and progress from there.  This is
where training comes into the picture.  If the only shooting you're doing
consists of matches and leagues, to use my suggested approach you will need
a strong determination and vast discipline.  If you have training time away
from the match environment then it may be a better setting, because what I'm
suggesting is to only work on one shot, the first one, until you can place
it in the center every time - you decide what your definition of center is.
Once you can place that first shot where you want it, move to two and stay
there until you have two centered shots.  Then you can move to three, etc.
Never give up the earlier shots to get the next one in on time.  Learn
instead to quicken the earlier ones with them still centered.  If you're
doing this for scored events, you're going to miss out on a lot of points
for your league or matches if you cut back on how many you get off;  a good
reason to move this to the training arena.  But this can work well in the
leagues and matches if you have the discipline to see it through.  Let the
subsequent shots be the carrots for good performance of the early ones.

Back to the .45:  Yes, I am of the opinion (mine, of course) that the .45
will cover up a lot of information when it recoils, that the .22 will not
hide, and that you can use this information to propel yourself into the mid
800's and then start working with the .45.  This also has the added benefit
of allowing the .45 to be the carrot for those mid 800 scores with the .22.

I will not contest that you can start with hardball .45 and work your way in
the other direction.  I started that way.  I didn't even know there was a
.22 involved in the competition when I started.  Nor did I know about
wadcutter ammo.  When I finally found out about the .22, I started picking
that up as well so I could shoot that part, but I still shot double .45
hardball for the rest of the 2700s for quite a while.

Having been there and having worked the .22 issue with some new shooters, I
still think it is better (and less expensive) to get a firm grasp of the
fundamentals through the .22 and then move to the .45.  But as others here
say, YMMV...

Take Care,
Ed Hall

----- Original Message -----
From: <FocaIPoint@aol.com>
To: <Nikonjockey@aol.com>; <anthonydsottile@netzero.net>
Cc: <bullseye-l@lava.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 9:41 AM
Subject: Re: [bullseye-l] 45 Shooting

> I think this thread illustrates the wisdom of what Ed K suggested on list
> some time back re resisting the temptation to pick up that wad gun until
your
> . 22 scores are in the neighborhood of 840 or so. It's all of what has
been
> suggested plus balance and command of the fundamentals.
>
> Question: have you found your .22 scores suffering? That you are having
> difficulty transitioning between the two guns? It may not be a bad idea to
> put up the.45 for a while and focus on the fundamentals with the .22.
Don't
> give up on the .45. To do so is giving up on yourself.  My problem with
the
> .45 is one of strength and stamina. Hopefully, both will be back in a few
> months and I'll be able to shoot a complete 2700.
>
> I'm not going to paraphrase Ed and would hope he would pick the glove up
off
> the floor and explain and expand.
>
> Just a personal opinion of course.
>
> All the best.
>
> David Napierkowski
>

Hi Bob,

There are several electronuic trainers on the market which range quite
widely in cost and what you get for that cost.  The Beamhit which you
mention will give you a limited amount of data and is mostly used to provide
a computer screen representation of where your hits landed.  The latest
version has a little more information, but I'm not familiar with how much
more.  The Beamhit systems are in the range of $200-$400, I believe.

The next group of trainers include the Rika, Curt, Scatt and Sam.  These
actually give you quantities of data which show things like hold over time,
what your actual movement did leading through the shot to include
follow-through and some even show time displacement which can tell you if
you should be shooting faster than you are.  These units range from
$1000~$1700(?).

If money is available, the Noptel is a valued system used by some of the
bigger teams.  It gives all the information the above units have as well as
the ability to use it with full live fire at any reasonable distance for
handgun and some longer ranges for rifle.  Its cost is higher than the other
systems, but I'm not sure of how much.  It might be around $2500 and/up.

Most of the systems have software which you can download and review with
some traces provided by leading shooters.  Even if you don't buy the system
it can be of great help to study the traces of some of those top shooters.
This is a list of the latest URLs I have:

<snip> Is there any ways to improve concentration? <snip>

I'll toss out some comment (opinion) for this one...

What we need to work for is a balance between being focused on the shot at
hand and relaxing when we're not.  But this is actually a very complex
endeavor if we look at the whole of it.

First let's examine the focus needed and a suggested description.  The only
time we need real focus is during the shot (or string) execution, and this
focus needs to be acute.  We need to be so involved in our plan that outside
factors don't enter the picture at all (short of a "cease fire" command).
How do we get there?  We get there by bringing in our peripheral attention,
in stages, until we're solely in the moment.  We need to be definitely in
the now!  We can work at this away from the range.  Take a moment to look
ahead at a bland area of the wall perhaps and think about all the sounds you
hear and all the things you can make out with your peripheral vision.  Next
single out one of the sounds you can hear and think about it while you
glance around and pick out a particular object.  Start to study the object
further and begin to define its details.  Finally study the texture of the
object to such a degree that you lose track of the sound you identified.

Back at the range this focus can be used to study the sighting system; for a
front sight you can look for details of how the surface is contoured and
textured, and then how it mates with the rear notch and for a dot scope you
can study the individual points of light that make up the complete dot.

Now that we've looked at the focus part, let's turn our "attention" to the
relaxed part, which needs to be all the rest of the time.  Several things
come into "focus" here.  The stance has to be relaxed.  The arm has to be
relaxed.  The grip has to be relaxed.  The eye has to be relaxed.  And very
important, the mental relaxation...

For the stance we need to do a full check to make sure we're not locked
anywhere and that our shoulders are relaxed.  For our arm we need to allow
our muscles to relax and the same somewhat for the grip, although most would
contend that for subsequent shots or strings it would be beneficial to keep
the same grip.  You can keep the same grip while relaxing it a bit from what
is used for firing.

Eye relaxation is an interesting subject.  In order to truly rest your eyes,
you need to let them defocus or drift to a relaxed state.  An important
factor is not changing the amount of light when you rest them, especially
not looking toward something considerably brighter than the target.  Closing
your eyes to rest them is not necessarily good.  If your eyes have to adjust
often for different light levels they will fatigue faster and if you go from
bright to dark it can take a considerable amount of time to readjust.

Ah, the mental relaxation.  This part is very individualized.  Only you can
find the thoughts that relax you.  For some it may be the woodland
environment, someone else might relax well to calculating math based word
problems.  One thing that should be avoided is any controversy that hasn't
been solved.  But you can't just push thoughts out of your mind and expect
them to stay.  What you can do is to bargain for time, if you're sincere to
yourself.  If a controversial thought arises at an inopportune time, here's
what you do:  Set a time after the match when you will address the issue.
Very important - address the issue at the agreed upon time.  If you get in a
habit of  addressing the issues you've agreed with yourself to address, this
will work.  If you get in the habit of setting things aside for later and
later never arrives, after a while the issues will cease being put off till
later and they'll bombard you when you don't want to hear about them.

With practice for both the focus and the relaxation, we can learn to move
easily from one to the other and gain the benefit of only expending the
required amount of energy for the task at hand.  This can beome quite an aid
for those long matches, like the one-day full 2700 with fired team matches
and a service pistol match with team thrown in...

Take Care,
Ed Hall

Hi Paul,

I believe the book you described is, "The Inner Game of Tennis" by W.
Timothy Gallwey.  I read it just a few months ago.  It was mentioned to me
by the USAMU coach.  He definitely has some concepts that bear checking out.
Especially, having self-1 become an impartial observer.  IOW, omitting the
judgment of shots.  Instead of good and bad, they're all just shots.  This
is an interesting divergence from my previous beliefs in which I felt that
good shots should be firmly commended.  But his view is that even
highlighting good shots means the rest are bad.  I believe I also got from
the book that the purpose of focus was to give our self-1 something to do to
keep it out of the way of self-2.

Take Care,
Ed Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: <fehder@mindspring.com>
To: Jerry Blinn <support@avisys.net>
Cc: Bullseye-L <bullseye-l@lava.net>
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 5:27 PM
Subject: Re: [bullseye-l] Profundity

> Many years ago, my doctor "prescribed" a book for me called "Inner Tennis:
> Playing the Game".  I'm not sure of the author's name, but I think it was
> something like "Galway".
>
> In any event, the author is a tennis coach that has helped many of the top
> tennis pros out of "slumps" -- and is apparently very well regarded in the
> sport.
>
> His techniques are based on the theory that there are really two "yous".
> One, which he calls "Self-1" is the thinking, reasoning, goal-setting
you --
> and also has control of the senses.  The second, "Self-2" is, in essence,
> the "animal" you.
>
> The problem is that in competition, Self-1 will often interfere with
Self-2.
> You hit a good shot in tennis, or bowl a strike, or put a shot right in
the
> middle of the X-ring... and Self-1 says "I'm gonna' do that again!" (the
> emphasis here in on the "I'm").  The problem is that only Self-2 knows how
> to move all those muscles in exactly the right way to hit another good
shot
> or roll another strike or shoot another X.
>
> What the author did was to develop a set of exercises (again, this is for
> tennis pros) that (1) focus Self-1's attention on something that will
> provide the necessary sensory feedback, but (2) will occupy Self-1 so that
> it doesn't attempt to interfere with Self-2's execution.  And as many of
the
> top tennis pros will attest, they work!
>
> I wonder if we're seeing some of that in some of the techniques that have
> been developed for improving our BE shooting.  For example, some months
ago,
> someone (maybe Ed Hall?) suggested that when shooting with a red dot
scope,
> you focus your attention on trying to keep the little red dot centered in
> the tube.  I've been practicing that technique lately -- and it's
definitely
> tightened my groups.
>
> I think what's happening is that Self-1 is occupied trying to keep the dot
> centered -- while Self-2 knows that it's time to release the shot when the
> dot is in the center of the black.  And it's Self-2 that knows just how
much
> pressure to apply to the trigger to get the shot to go.
>
> 'Just another approach to all the complexities of our game...
>
>   ~ Paul
>

I see a lot of messages about practicing more.  What does this mean to you,
the individual shooter?  Some answers will include:

Shooting more matches
Practicing matches
Shooting National Match Courses (NMC) three times a week
Studying the sights for an hour each night
Studying the trigger for an hour each night
Dry firing for an hour...
Working with an electronic trainer...
Reading as much about shooting as possible
Bringing a new shooter into the game
Thinking about shooting
Visualizing shooting.

I'm sure each of you can relate to an above item.  Each of you can probably
add an item to this list.  But now let's get to the point where you say,
"Ed, that's just semantics!"  And I'll reply, "You're right!  But doesn't
everything about shooting really pertain to our personal definition(s)?"

Under my definition, more practice means practicing more frequently.  My
definition of practice, is to perform the same action over and over again.
As Greg Derr pointed out in a post, "The subconscience takes over from the
conscience mind only after it has been imprinted by repetition."

What if we're a Marksman and our practice is designed to emulate matches?
Let's say that we go to the range three times a week and shoot two NMCs.
Are we not practicing to be a Marksman?  Are we not imprinting our
subconscious self with the repetition of a Marksman's performance?

I'm not saying that practicing is not good.  But practicing things correctly
is paramount.  What you want to imprint is the correct program.  As others
have said many times before, "Perfect practice makes perfect."

So now we move to another definition.  To me training means perfecting those
actions that we want imprinted.  When we get those actions correct, then we
can practice them and try to imprint them.  I know, semantics again!

I've taken newer shooters to the range a few times to work with them and
some have commented that we spent perhaps two hours, but only shot thirty
rounds.  However, they would also add that they really felt they had gotten
a lot from the outing.  What did we do for two hours?  We examined
fundamental definitions.  We discussed trigger control and sight alignment.
We tried different approaches.  We performed shots, but we didn't just
practice what we knew, we worked on perfecting what we would later practice.

Let's say a shooter averages an 89 for Timed Fire.  Now let's take that
shooter and just practice Timed Fire, over and over.  Will they improve?  As
they get comfortable with the routine, yes.  But what they will really be
doing is practicing to be an average 89 shooter.

What if this same shooter decides to perfect their technique and then
practice it correctly?   Hmmm...  Let's say we start from scratch.  How do
we approach learning to shoot Timed Fire?  For most of us we load with five
rounds and when the target turns we try to make sure we fire all our rounds.
Practicing in this method is great if almost all our rounds go in the ten
ring.  But what about our 89 average shooter?  S/he's not too bad.  Almost
as many tens as eights.  But what if we started out training one round at a
time instead of jumping right in.  Let's say we loaded one round and kept
working on that first shot until we found out how to shoot a ten every time.
Then we practiced it enough to imprint it.  OK, now we've got an edge.  We
KNOW our first shot will be a ten.  Now we load with two rounds and still
practicing the first shot, learn how to make the second shot a ten as well.
In this exampe, we're not firing as many rounds as we would if we just kept
shooting Timed strings, but couldn't this be more productive?

Let's look at some other issues.  Would you agee that shooting a 60 shot
league match once a week is good pratice?  Would a person improve with just
this routine?  What if they added in a half-hour dry fire three times a
week?  What if they added in a half-hour of visualization three times a
week?

Let's touch on visualization momentarily so I can invoke some flames.  If
you're going to put the effort into visualizing, put it into visualizing
perfect technique.  Don't try to visualize what you may consider "real
life."  IOW, don't "joke" around visualizing less than perfect shots.
However, don't try to visualize the overall result being something you KNOW
to be unattainable.  Avoid all references to a score.  You're not looking
for numbers.  You're looking for perfect shot performance.

So where was I headed with all this?  Just trying to have you think about
how you want to practice or train and define what they mean to you.

Take Care,
Ed Hall

I recently posted some info from the CMP regarding updates to rules not yet
in their rule book.  There had been some difficulty by some finding the
info.  Here are some direct links for those looking for info on the
following questions.  I am quoting the pistol portions not the entire FAQ
here.  For those intersted in printing out a copy for use at the next match,
it is available at the below .pdf address.   Here are the CMP addresses:

The "old" method for loading a 1911 included pulling the trigger, blocking
the hammer and dropping the slide by using the slide stop.  Pulling the
trigger does not block the hammer, but it does prevent inertia from rattling
the sear engagement.  Explanation:  When the slide is released to travel
forward, if the hammer and trigger are left alone, the shock of the slide
reaching battery, which happens in a forward direction, can cause a rearward
pressure (due to inertia) on the trigger.  In guns with reduced hammer hooks
and modified sear tips, this can cause the sear to disengage from the hooks.
Aluminum triggers do reduce this effect.  By pulling the trigger to the
rear, the inertial component is removed and the disconnector allows the sear
to fully seat against the hammer.  This is actually what is happening during
firing.

However, this loading procedure is not free from problems, and still allows
a few discharges during loading.  The two main reasons for a discharge under
this procedure are from not having a good pull on the trigger (the trigger
is actually loosely held and the shooter lightly manipulates it during the
loading) and not having a good firm depress on the grip safety.  In this
case the trigger is resting against the safety, which is not fully depressed
and as the slide reaches battery the shock completes the unlocking of the
grip safety and the trigger completes its movement, firing the gun.  Neither
of these allow discharge if the shooter has a good hold on the hammer and
pays attention to whether the sear is holding the hammer when they release
it.  The problem occurs when after years of never having trouble the shooter
gets a little lax in holding (or checking) the hammer.

At least some of the armorers are now teaching to block the hammer, but
leave your finger off the trigger.  This is awkward for some of us "older"
taught shooters, but is a better method in most cases.

However, 1911s with Beavertail safeties normally don't allow you to block
the hammer.  In this case, the shooter will have to determine the safest
method for loading their particular gun.

As an additional safety step in loading the 1911, it is also suggested that
the holding arm be fully and firmly extended during the loading process.
This gives an extra margin of safety should the gun go full auto.  If this
happens, the force should take your whole arm upward into the rafters
instead of bending it at the elbow and bringing the muzzle toward your face.

The "new" procedure goes like this:  Firmly grasp the gun with your shooting
hand, with your trigger finger against the side of the frame.  Insert the
magazine.  Extend your arm.  With your nonshooting thumb hold the hammer
back.  Release the slide with your left index finger.  Bring the index
finger of your nonshooting hand (the one with the thumb on the hammer) in
front of the hammer.  Release the pressure with your thumb and verify that
the hammer rests on the sear instead of your index finger.  Remove your
index finger.  You are loaded and ready.

For some left handed shooters the above procedure may prove difficult in
releasing the slide with their index (trigger) finger.  For those shooters
it may be easier to load right handed.

It should be noted that the halfcock safety is the first line of defense
from having a full auto condition.  If the hammer does follow the slide when
loading, the half cock catches it in a properly working gun.  However, a
common trigger job from past years included cutting away all but the central
portion of the half cock hook.  These reduced area hooks can break off
rather easily, especially if they are hit often by the hammer falling on
them.  Shooters should routinely check all the safety features.  Not just to
be legal, but to be safe.

Take Care,
Ed Hall

----- Original Messages -----

> Please explain how pulling the trigger blocks the hammer.
> thanks,
> Bob Fleming
>
-----  and  ------

>It's my opinion that any 1911 that drops the hammer when the slide is
>released is unsafe and should have the trigger reworked. I would offer that
>we should pull the trigger and block the hammer when dropping the slide as
>a safety precaution only, and if it ever does "follow", stop right there
>and get that pistol worked on. I once shot a match next to a guy who had
>his 1911 go full auto, and it was very unnerving, for all of us.

Hi Dwight,

Here's more than you asked, but sometimes I get carried away with numbers
and such:-)

The short answer seems to be slow fire.  For every group below, the slow
fire average is lower than the others.

The longer answer is below.

Here is a breakdown from the 2001 ASNPC.  I have listed the numbers of
competitors for each class with the averages for slow timed and rapid
matches for each gun.

        HM   MA   EX   SS   MK
Number  27   34   36   14   16
.22SF  188  184  177  167  155
.22TF  199  197  192  190  177
.22RF  197  195  189  181  174
 CFSF  186  179  169  163  150
 CFTF  198  193  187  183  159
 CFRF  193  188  178  175  155
.45SF  187  181  171  165  145
.45TF  198  195  184  178  167
.45RF  194  188  177  172  153

Take Care, Happy Holidays,
Ed Hall

----- Original Message -----
From: Dwight L. Brown <n5wrw@delrio.com>
To: <bullseye-l@lava.net>
Cc: Bullseye List <Bullseye-L@lava.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 10:34 PM
Subject: Re: [bullseye-l] Classifications

> I shot a 95 rapid and a 96 timed today with the .22 ( this only proves
> that probability swings both ways ;-)
>
>
> Do Masters and High Masters drop the most points in rapid, timed, or
> slow fire at the long line?
>
>
> Dwight
>

Hi Eagle,

It is based on your average.  If you shoot  270 out of a possible 300, that
would come out to 270/300 = .9 which is 90%.  This would be just breaking
into the Expert class.

>From the rule book:

19.15 Individual Class Averages - Competitors will be classified as follows
and NRA Classification Cards issued accordingly:

TABLE NO. II - INDIVIDUAL,

High Master ....................97.00 and above
Master ............................95.00 to 96.99
Expert ............................ 90.00 to 94.99
Sharpshooter .................. 85.00 to 89.99
Marksman ....................... Below 85.00

19.16 Establishing Classification - A competitor will be officially
classified by the NRA when the total score for a minimum of 360 shots has
been reported for either indoor or outdoor. However, classification averages
will be computed only after the total score for a tournament or league has
been posted and, therefore, the average may be based on a greater number of
shots, but will not be based upon a lesser number. Total scores so reported
to the NRA will be posted to the Classification Record for the competitor
concerned. When the scores for the stated minimum of 360 shots (or more if
this minimum is reached during the scores of any tournament or league) have
been so posted, the average score per 10-shot string will be computed. The
competitor will be sent an Official NRA Classification Card based on the
average so computed and according to the table in Rule 19.15, which
classification will become effective the date shown on the card issued by
NRA.

You may also get a temporary book at your first match to record your average
and compete in your proper class prior to receiving your NRA card.

Take Care, Happy Holidays,
Ed Hall

----- Original Message -----
From: <jjawa3@attbi.com>
To: <bullseye-L@lava.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 4:09 PM
Subject: [bullseye-l] Classifications

> How does one determine your classification for Outdoor
> Pistol? (I'm talking point-wise, BTW)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eagle
>

Hi Steve,

Let's try a detailed description from "my" understanding and see what types
of comments appear:

Takeup - This is the slight amount of movement under very little pressure at
the very beginning of travel .  It is the part of travel where the only
resistance is the trigger return spring.  In autoloading guns, like the
1911, a slight amount of takeup is needed to ensure the disconnector can
reset.  The adding of a shim to the back of the trigger is a method of
decreasing takeup, however some of the newer triggers are adjustable by
small "fingers" cut into the front of the bow in a manner to allow them to
be bent forward slightly so they contact the frame and keep it from
tarvelling as far forward.

Crisp - This means that when the breaking pressure is reached, the sear
releases the hammer in a very quick single motion.  In effect, as you
described, after takeup, the movement stops until the breaking weight is
reached, at which point the rest of the movement occurs.

Roll - After takeup, there is a point on the pressure curve where the
trigger will begin to move again perceptively.  This movement can be felt
for a short time before the hammer is released.  As Ed M. wrote, this gives
the assurance that the trigger is not stopped.  Don Nygord addresses this in
one of his latest "notes."

Creep - This is movement that is felt that provides "jumps" in the travel of
the trigger.  It is normally characterized by small movements in a
start/stop manner as the trigger travels.  This can be caused by rough
mating surfaces between the hammer and sear.

Glasslike - This is a description of how smooth the sear moves across the
hammer hook(s).  It is more noticeable in a roll type trigger.  In this
case, as the sear moves along on its way to the edge, the movement is very
smooth with no "catches."

Breaks-like-glass - This is a representation of a crisp buildup of pressure
and sudden release of the hammer as in the "snapping" of a piece of glass.

Two-stage - These trigger systems have two separate parts to the travel
between takeup and breaking.  In this way, some weight is taken up by the
first stage, which typically has a longer travel, and the rest is taken up
at the second stage.  The difference from a single-stage is that you have a
definite stopping point before the shot is fired.  The best use of this type
is to learn to take up the first stage immediately, stop at the second and
when ready, take up the last bit of the weight to fire.  This gives a
perceived lighter trigger.  Two-stage triggers also have a takeup, so your
description would make these three-stage:-)

Overtravel - This is the amount of physical travel of the trigger after the
hammer is released.  Some overtravel is necessary to keep the sear from
contacting the hammer after release.  An often overlooked problem is the
contact of the sear with the halfcock area of the hammer.  When overtravel
is adjusted, care must be taken to check for this condition by riding the
hammer throughout its arc, with the trigger pulled, and checking for any
"catches" in the smooth hammer swing.  If this condition is left unchecked
it can result in premature wear of a good trigger job.

Corrections/additions please...

Take Care,
Ed Hall

----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Hull <bullseye@steve-hull.com>
To: 'Bullseye List' <bullseye-l@lava.net>
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 11:53 PM
Subject: [bullseye-l] Bullseye Triggers

> All this talk about Bullseye triggers is very timely.  I just installed a
> new hammer, sear, and disconnector and am pretty pleased, but it's not as
> crisp as I would prefer.  I set the trigger pull at just over 3 1/2 lbs,
> and had no problems when I tested it at the range.  It's hard to put in
> words what I feel when I pull the trigger.  I've seen terms used like
creep
> (actually got called one back in high school), take-up, breaking like
> glass, single-stage, two-stage, etc.  Pardon me if I use these terms
> incorrectly, and please feel free to correct me.
>
> When I first start squeezing the trigger, it only requires a light
pressure
> (maybe 1 pound) to move the trigger back the first few fractions of an
> inch.  I want to call this take-up.  I have seen ads for some triggers in
> Brownell's that say they are adjustable for take-up and overtravel.  I
> understand how to use the set screw to adjust the overtravel, but am not
> sure how you would adjust the amount of take-up.  I saw in Hallock's .45
> handbook that you can silver solder a shim to the back of the trigger bow
> (where it hits the disconnector), but I don't think that's what these
> trigger manufacturers are claiming when they say their triggers can be
> adjusted for take-up.
>
> After my trigger moves thru the take-up stage, I have to apply more
> pressure (3.5 lbs) for the trigger to break.  I can't really feel anything
> different as I increase the pressure- I just have to keep tightening my
> trigger finger a little more until the gun fires.  I guess this is a good
> thing, because I don't really know when the gun is going to fire, so I'm
> not going to tense up at the last second in anticipation.  Does the term
> "creep" refer to the movement of the trigger during what I called the
> take-up stage, or does "creep" occur after take-up, while I'm increasing
> pressure, before the hammer is released?
>
> Does the phrase, "breaks like glass" refer to a sudden release of the
> hammer?  I get no feelings of premonition that the sear is about to
release
> the hammer - it sure seems sudden to me when the hammer drops.  Yet, I've
> fired a gun with a Masaki trigger, and it certainly felt different.
>  Different in a good way, but still hard to describe. (Crisp?)
>
> I also read with interest a recent thread discussing one of the Hammerli
> models that had   a two-stage trigger.  Because I feel different trigger
> pressure during the take-up stage and the
> applying-enough-additional-pressure-to-fire-the-gun stage, I guess I could
> say I have a two-stage trigger, but I'm sure I'd be using the term
> incorrectly.
>
> I would greatly appreciate any insights or comments you may have.
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Stev