doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Vision, Focus on the target.

A chandelle from the side is a perfect example of why instinctive methods have limitations.
On the drop it is not unlike a bird settling into decoys outside the spread. Though faster, as ducks don't free fall when they land.
That shot must be taken below, and ahead, or, you shoot inside the arc of the clay. Same as for a settling duck. Below, and ahead of the feet on the way in. Or, you shoot above and inside of their arc. It takes a while to transfer that shot from the clays course out into the duck marsh. It's not a "shoot at their eye" kind of shot.

Jim, wyobirds, that is what Chris Batha said in one of his utube videos, focus on that one thing and it will become larger. Stan said he sees that also.

Respectfully, I think Buzz was asking more about visual concentration and how to optimize that process. It is something elite trapshooters obsess about a lot more than wingshooters - in part because the techniques that improve your concentration on the target don't work as well in the field. Conversely, most wingshooters don't need to hit 99% of their birds to consider themselves successful.

This is a typical target concentration technique from the Quite Eye article I referenced:

1. Plan your shot. Find your break point, mount point and look point with a great deal of accuracy.
2. Visualize the target breaking. Mentally rehearse it appearing, your gun setting up the lead, the shot, and the target breaking.
3. Settle your eye on the look point, a small precise look point. Use a mantra such as "See bird, shoot bird" to focus your concentration; focus and pause for 1+ seconds.
4. Eye on the target. Begin to move your gun as soon as the target appears, focus visual concentration on the leading edge and let your eyes pull the trigger. Let the shot go.

Steps 1, 2 and 4 may sound familiar (Michael Yardley's Positive Shooting approach follows much of this), but it is step 3 that really helps with the visual concentration as it quiets the left side of the brain and eliminates conscious decision-making. If the left side of your brain is telling you where to shoot, you are not fully concentrating on the target. I shot with Chris Batha this spring, and he was really emphasizing the "great deal of accuracy" point in step 1, as well as the efficient gun movement point that Stan raised because shorter gun movements minimize the risk of conscious control of the gun.

In reality, long targets challenge many people because they find it difficult to focus hard on something that appears so small and far away. They think it is a lead calculation issue, but in reality they are not "looking hard enough" - they are missing because they are consciously calculating lead instead of putting all of their concentration on the target. Learning to visually concentrate on a small target takes practice for most people.

For shots that I know are coming, I place my muzzles about 1/3 way long the target path, and then look back, but also past the spot I expect to first see the bird.
I definitely snap-on to a bird that I catch in my periphery faster, and more clearly, than one I try to see come right off the trap.

I think Ashe has a video that suggests looking past where you expect to first see the bird.

Sometimes the target setter plays tricks with you by adding in a different sized target, so seeing the bird clearly, and using good technique really pays off.

But 90% of the time, I clean my glasses, and then find where I see the bird first clearly, and build a look point, hold point, mount point, kill point, etc. from there.

In Gil Ash's video of trap he says his focus point is past where the bird is launched. He states it is easier for the eye to come in than to go out.

I agree, with the exception of woodies down here. When they are coming into a little beaver pond in the morning they aren't free falling, they are powering down. I've never seen something that can "come in hot" like a woodie. You are much better off if they want to land 25 yards from you than if they want to land right where you are. They make teal look like novices. They remind me of a fighter jet making a hot carrier landing and catching the cable.

If a chandelle is the second bird of a true pair, and I have to shoot it coming down, I have learned to intercept it's path, coming from wherever I broke the first bird, and intercept it's path at the proper amount of lead ahead of it. I am really successful on them, shooting them like that. I never shoot a falling chandelle anymore by following the line and pulling away. When I changed my method on them my hit ratio on them skyrocketed. I love chandelles, now, hate rabbits. Too unpredictable.

SRH

Doverham: "The Quiet Eye" was an interesting read. Thank you.

As stated earlier, beyond about ten feet human eyes are already focused at infinity and eye convergence is also at infinity. This means that there is zero effect from Ash's "come in, go out" theory. It just cannot and does not happen. He has no idea of what he is speaking about in this case. Please understand I am not trying to disparage his instruction abilities in any way but, merely pointing out that even the experts can be misinformed.

btdtst; I understand from Dr. Drew that you are an ophthalmologist and therefore you know more about this subject than all the rest, including the shooting gurus. So, what do you think of Chris Batha's statement that humans can only maintain this visual "focus" or as you put it, "concentration" for only one-half a second, or thereabouts? If it is a matter of just concentration, I would not think Batha's argument holds water. Also, does inability of the aging eye to accommodate as well as younger eyes have anything to do with this? Thank you for your opinion.

Buzz,

You are correct, Batha's statement does not hold water. See my comment above about misinformed experts. Consider this: Can a fighter pilot visually concentrate only for a half second on an inbound threat aircraft or missile? Or, is an outfielder able to only concentrate for a half second on a high pop fly? Or George Digweed able to only concentrate that half second when he's whacking crows at 60 to 70 yards? Or, can you only concentrate that same time on an 80mph oncoming car in your lane? Think about it, it is ridiculous. We know what the result would be in all these examples. As far as aging is concerned, effective accommodation is mostly lost to us by age 50, some sooner, some later...but that is totally irrelevant as accommodation only matters at a range of about one meter or less. Another gem I have read/heard from an "expert" is that your dominant eye is determined by which ever eye first sees the object. This is akin to stating that your dominant hand is whichever hand is closer to the hammer you want to pick up.