1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Reading the Breaks, Ch. 4 Low hits (W&B)

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by Neil Winston, Jul 10, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,856
    North Star Clay Target.com is hosting Chapter 4 in our video series about the way trap targets break and what that means for "reading" those breaks for directional information about where the main parts of the patterns were that led to those breaks. The subject of this chapter is breaks when the pattern is centered on the bird, mid-below the target, and far below the target. Now that you have seen so many it is less necessary that you download the video to your own computer. You can get most of the story just by watching the flash videos.

    Click the link above and enjoy the show!

    Neil Winston and Ron Baker

    If you had trouble parking and got to your seat a little late and missed the opening three acts, they are:

    http://www.trapshooters.com/noframes/cfpages/message.cfm?messageid=975894

    http://www.trapshooters.com/noframes/cfpages/message.cfm?messageid=978292

    http://www.trapshooters.com/noframes/cfpages/message.cfm?messageid=979075
     
  2. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    Mid high

    Far high

    What’s going to happen? Specifically. And why?

    Mid high - small pieces left, big right. Since the pattern overlaps the front edge of the target, closest to the shooter, the swarm of pellets will chew that edge up the most and send those smaller pieces left because of the clockwise spin of ze target.

    Far high - same as above except for when the pattern is so high just a pellet or two hits the bird breaking it into 2 or 3 pieces. These will look the same as far low 2 or 3 piece hits.

    Joe
     
  3. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,856
    Well now, Joe, that's just fine and dandy but if that happens how can TBR's discriminate "shot too high" and "shot too low" based on their breaks?

    Neil
     
  4. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    They can't, but they can refer to the "bird/bead relationship" in those last few frames as the target busts up and know where they were thereby adjusting for the next shot. It's called "reading the breaks", but what is actually happening is something very different. And it works.

    Smoke/no smoke reinforces the last frame peekers and makes the definition blur even more. But it works. They're doing something, it's just harder than heck to put it into words accurately - kind of like teaching a new shooter what to do with their eyes. It's very difficult to describe well. I think Phil Kiner does the best job of it, for those who even attempt it.
     
  5. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    Gee, I was off a lot that time and I didn't get any smoke. Better adjust and get on that target - I know how to do that.

    Hey, as I pulled the trigger, I was right where I should have been and I left a nice big black cloud in the sky. Ah, that's better.

    It works.
     
  6. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,856
    But that's not reading the breaks, Joe! That's just experienced and aware shooting. Anyone can learn that. Reading the breaks, in contrast, is only available to the congniceni, the way I see it, the ones who stand at the railing and explain to league shooters as they come off the practice trap what they are doing wrong.

    Neil
     
  7. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    Just like I could learn to read by identifying dipthongs, short vowels and long vowels. My dad had to teach me to 'sound it out' before I made any progress. Almost flunked first grade. I believed my teacher knew what she was talking about.

    Be careful who you listen to.

    My favorite shooter is the guy at the club who doesn't say much, but goes out there and breaks targets like he's a natural. Saw one the other day and I just nodded to him. He nodded back. We have a horse race going at the 25 yard line. The night I missed one, I won, by one. Next time he won by the same score and margin. That, my friend, is a good time.

    Who am I to be saying this? Just another shooter, not even much of an ATA shooter, this year I haven't shot any ATA targets, yet I'm careful who I listen to. If it makes sense to me, I might try it myself. Reading the breaks, nah. I'd rather put my energy into staying alert visually as I call for a fresh one.

    Joe
     
  8. Hap MecTweaks

    Hap MecTweaks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,229
    Location:
    Mesquite, Nevada
    Neil, thanks to you and Ron for sharing all these videos with all of us and for your efforts. What these videos have done for me is to confirm my beliefs I learned years back. Like the patterns I've seen first hand when teaching new shooters, these confirm you can only tell where the patterns went, not which part of that pattern did the actual breaking. Nor can you "read" the breaks with 100 percent accuracy. Some of the more experienced shooters may be relying on something they're not even aware of that happening? Recalling the last nano second recall of the bird and bead relationship when the gun fires?

    I was shooting on a squad of good shooters at Tucson a while back and saw something I'd never seen prior. The clay center piece was smoked (the little quarter size center piece) leaving the remainder of the clay intact!! The scorekeeper also saw it as well as the rest of the squad. We stopped shooting for a few seconds trying to figure out what had just happened! The clay sailed on but didn't travel too far before hitting the ground and shattering. I'd loved to have had that one on video!!

    Hap
     
  9. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    "these confirm you can only tell where the patterns went"

    I don't think Neil is saying that. Neil?

    Since a clockwise spinning clay will give small pieces to the left and large to the right some of the time, you can read the breaks when your pattern is to the left of the target some of the time. When you are left and the pieces are evenly distributed, you'll have to ignore those pieces. When you are right it won't work at all, when you are low it won't work then either.

    Because it works once in a while, the myth will persist.

    We do use feedback from the break, but I contend it's smoke versus no smoke and it's coupled with the point info on the target.
     
  10. Gapper

    Gapper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    823
    In my opinion, target spin has little to do with the read. Anyone who has shot at a club that uses a Laporte twin lap will attest to differences in flight; curvature, trailing off, etc., but there is no difference in technique for reading breaks. For those unfamiliar, the twin machines are a two-in-one set-up; left and right arms, motors, and so on.

    Shot strings exist and vary by load/choke. I generally discount them as a reliable way to break targets, but a 100 straight 27 yarder I know is a firm believer in using the shot string to his advantage.

    If a man was shooting a long crosser, and held 10 feet in front, breaking the bird with a late hit (one chip, falling away), would it be possible for him to extrapolate from that infomation that he was too far ahead? How about his coach, standing behind him? How about if Digweed was standing near, next guy to shoot, but couldn't see the gun, just the break? He'd close up on his lead and smoke the bird because he was able to read someone else's break.

    A thousand years after the cognoscenti knew the truth, "experts" were still trying to prove the earth was flat. GAP
     
  11. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,856
    Eddie and Gapper, much of what these threads is about is the power of our brains to "make sense" of what we see. And how what we think colors the story our minds put together from fragmentary evidence.

    You are about to see a perfect example. In these "far low" videos we see late, late pellets hit the target, yet we do not picture in our minds that it has much to do with shotstrings, since the targets aren't moving "in the right directions" for shot strings to work right.

    But in the next videos the targets _will_ be moving in the right direction and suddenly the shot-string interpretation is so powerful we can't escape it. And yet the visual information is about the same. The shot string is in our heads so deeply we can't see what's really happening, that pellets on the edge of the pattern are late, that's all.

    Remember that shotstings in general are given far, far more credit than they deserve. Only a very, very few pellets can possibly take part, namely those in a long tube of a particular angle, the tube having the cross-sectional shape of the target as presented to the gun. All that was covered in the Ed Lowry article I posted in the Chapter 3 thread.

    Say the area of the target is, as presented in trap, five square inches. And we are talking about a 30-inch pattern, say 700 square inches. If patterns were even, which they aren't, only about one percent of pattern is available to house effective shotstring pellets and in fact far less, since we are talking about the thin edges of the pattern anyway.

    So a hit by a shotstring pellet is a miracle.

    As you view these and future videos think about what they _don't_ show. If you never see a particular effect in the videos it may be because on the field you are imposing "sense" on a visual experience which, at its heart, is random, not ordered, that is, not "caused" by anything we are ever likely to understand.*

    Neil

    *As we will see in Chapter 7, the "big picture" is not random at all and has a startling simplicity, but we are so struck by the interpretation we impose on the random details we can't see it.
     
  12. 870

    870 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,390
    Gap: In your long crosser example, how can you be sure he wasn't just a little behind the bird and just barely caught it with a pellet or two? I don't think you can tell the difference. Either way, the target could be hit by a single pellet in the same spot.
     
  13. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,856
    Gapper, once again the committee is going to have to cite you for "going somewhere else." You have now seen lots and lots of trap targets hit by all (but 1) variations of shot-cloud placement, yet you do not even try to explain or even address what you have seen.

    Instead you tell us what someone else thinks or what George Digweed might think if he were in a particular situation and we knew him.

    What someone else thinks is no evidence. Lots of people, particularly in trap, think a lot of crazy things. The fact that people believe something is no evidence for it.

    The last time someone posted a doubtful "Sir George" opinion regarding recoil and chokes I wrote him and he responded in a few minutes. His response went like this as I recall it;

    "I shoot full choke in both barrels and have and will. Where people get this rubbish I can't imagine."

    I also cannot imagine how involving him in this discussion is supposed to be proof of anything.

    Neil
     
  14. Hap MecTweaks

    Hap MecTweaks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,229
    Location:
    Mesquite, Nevada
    Some bystanders have the ability to see the shot clouds of others as they miss or slightly chip a clay target. What they can't tell you is where the errant pellet/pellets hit that target from the direction that the chips fly off! I personally have seen coaches call the shots on those they were helping and knew they didn't see the shot cloud!! Sometimes called the shot behind when it was actually way too far in front! Reading wads is another no no also!! The only thing for sure a bystander can tell you is this, it's over, under, in front of or behind, IF he can see that shot cloud!!

    Hap
     
  15. Gapper

    Gapper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    823
    Neil, you are spot on about "power of our brains to make sense". Some guys are operating on a different level.

    The shotstring stuff has been done to death, and as I explained they can be (Should be) sort of discounted as being a big factor in target shooting. This is due to the speeds involved, as you know. However shot strings do exist and the effect (of late hits) accounts for broken targets occasionally. As stated the greater the divergence of angle between target and shot the greater the effect. This is all fact.

    I'm pretty sure you have no idea what you're talking about, and the more you expound the more I am convinced. I am not trying to slam you here, but when you state: "only very, very few pellets can take part, . . . only about one percent of pattern is available to house effective shotstring pellets..."

    Unless you discard the first pellet to arrive at the target, 100% of the pellets are in the shotstring. They ARE the shotstring.

    I cannot explain anything in your videos, as they bear little resemblance to what I see in the field.

    Anytime someone refutes your theory, you accuse them of "going somewhere else". Your defensive posture can only been seen as proof of your own doubts. GAP
     
  16. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,856
    Oh for heaven's sake, Gapper! When you demonstrated in that last thread that you were one of the people who invests shot strings with magical powers to save you when you aim wrong, I posted a four-page article by Ed Lowry about shot strings. You never read it, obviously, since only someone who simply didn't know anything would write

    "Unless you discard the first pellet to arrive at the target, 100% of the pellets are in the shotstring. They ARE the shotstring."

    My post was "only very, very few pellets can take part, . . . only about one percent of pattern is available to house effective shotstring pellets..."

    Lowry gave you the math on how to figure that out. I gave you the math on how to figure that out. Why didn't you figure it out?

    Don't you realize that shot strings degrade, not improve patterns? Do you think that more than a few pellets in any pattern are available to first break a bird? Are you really that uninformed? Can anyone be?

    Go back and read the article. Or have someone read it to you.

    Your idea of "refuting a theory" needs serious work as well. My theory, to the extent I have one, is presented in the videos. Since you have not yet said anything I remember about the videos you could not have refuted my theory.

    Neil
     
  17. Gapper

    Gapper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    823
    There you go again Neil, "going somewhere else". When did I write anything about shotstrings saving anyone's aim? I thought we were talking about reading the breaks? Other than recognizing their existence, and therefore their possible effects, I said little about them, until you started on them. Others inquired about them and were curious too, so great minds think alike.

    Please tell me then: what is your description of the shotstring.

    I use the same description as Burrard and Olin and Brister and Roster and Griffiths and many others. And I've read lots of Lowry's stuff. All good. I read pretty good, write pretty good and can cipher at Jethro's level, more than necessary to refute some ramblings.

    Please tell me your discription of the shotstring. What percentage of the pellets are in the shotstring? 100% or about 1%,as you stated?

    Your theories and video give me an idea for a new book - "Reading breaks by sense of smell."

    You're wrong again, and you can't baffle us with your bull. Keep up the obfuscation, since your can't scare me off. Everyone's enjoying this. GAP
     
  18. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,856
    If you read Lowry's article, Gapper, I shouldn't have to explain shot strings to you.

    Go back and read it. He will explain it better than I can.

    If you do read it - and promise you did - then I'll be willing to give you a hand understanding it.

    By the way - did you learn anything from the videos? Can you give an example?

    Neil
     
  19. wayneo

    wayneo Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,002
    Would not a lot of Target Break Reading have a lot to do with your eye-sight and age? Wouldn't an experienced 30 year old trapshooter have a greater advantage of reading the the breaks over an experienced fifty-four year old like me? I still aim the same on every target whether I smoke it, or chip it. I cannot see the targets or breaks like I use to. It's dead or lost. I read the score card.

    Wouldn't wind, temperature, humidity, rpm of the target, size of shot, velocity of shot, would not any change of these variables have an influence on how the target breaks? Were all these test done in perfect conditions, like in a vacuum? Just asking.

    Wayne
     
  20. Gapper

    Gapper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    823
    Yes Wayne, all those variables and more influence target breaking performance. You can't leave them out of your calculation and arrive at the truth.
    Good young eyes are better than old bad ones but I know guys who lost an eye due to stroke and still read breaks, they still shoot very well.

    Was the influence of air disturbance from shot charge considered in the calculation?

    Let's see the calculations please.

    Please define shot string. How it's only "about 1% "of the pattern. You explain it. Not Lowry. Let's see it please.

    Here is more. Lowry says all the pellets act individually on the clay, unless they strike at the same time or (very close) location. I've seen as many as eight holes in a clay without breakage. Who knows how many bounced off leaving no indication. The shot charge has to be biased L-R and U-D, unless perfectly centered. Could not pellets arriving a nano-second early cause stress fractures in the clay before breakage while secondary hits at the same hemisphere (same side of target) influence the bias of breakage. The target isn't spinning that fast. What do you guys out there think? Don't tell me I'm smarter than Lowry too! GAP
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.