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. 7, conclusion (W&B)

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by Neil Winston, Jul 20, 2011.

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

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,854
    North Star Clay Target.com is hosting Chapter 7 – the final chapter – 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 an analysis of the variables controlling breaks, the two phases of target destruction, and what role the pellets and spin play. It ends with a summary of the whole seven chapters - a "Theory of Target Breaks" - based on what we have learned in photographing and writing the series.


    To get the most out of these videos you need a player which can stop, forward, and reverse, frame by frame. Quicktime or Windows media player do fine at this. If you don’t use such a program you are going to miss the heart of the story.


    Click the link above and enjoy the show!


    We hope you have had fun with the whole series and have taken something interesting from them.


    Neil Winston and Ron Baker


    ©Text and videos 2011 NW & RB



    If you had trouble parking and got to your seat a little late and missed the opening six 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


    http://www.trapshooters.com/noframes/cfpages/thread.cfm?threadid=257986&Messages=32#986062


    http://www.trapshooters.com/noframes/cfpages/sthread.cfm?threadid=258144



    http://www.trapshooters.com/noframes/cfpages/sthread.cfm?threadid=258233#988290
     
  2. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,854
  3. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    Neil,

    Seems like this last chapter shores up against the concept that high hits will throw pieces down and proves the upward momentum of the target gets the credit for the upward spray we see in all orientations.

    In spite of this, I went back to the over video to see if I could find any examples of the shot throwing the pieces down. I found one that shows small pieces on top, big on the bottom. Like I found one right side example that fit my prediction of small pieces right, big left. Both are no real proof at all considering the overwhelming examples to the contrary.

    In this mid high shot you can see small pieces on top, big on the bottom (black thing is the wad), but this was the only example I could find. The rest looked pretty much the same as mid bottom hits, small pieces left, big right, spray upwards in general.


    [​IMG]



    Overall, what did it for me is the right side videos that showed small pieces left and big right. That's the best orientation supporting your conclusion.

    Then the left side video shows you can read the breaks, if your eyes worked like a slow motion camera. Too bad they don't.

    The over, then under.

    Right, left, over, under. That sequence of videos brings us to your conclusion. That sequence makes the most sense to me if you're going to instruct folks because it goes "can't read breaks, read breaks, can't read breaks, read breaks". Also the super slow mo from Andrew showing the target looking like a spiral galacy in space. That was very informative.

    I think your videos also help us understand why folks think they can read breaks. When they shoot low, which they do most of the time, don't they, the spray will be upwards. And when they shoot left, they'll see small pieces left, big right. That's half of your orientations giving plenty of reinforcement to the practice. Our brains want it to be true. I certainly did.

    The right side hits and the high hits just don't work, but you can always fall back on your gun point relative to the target. In fact, why not use your point all the time and guage smoke/no smoke for the adjustment. What adjustment? Hey, refer to your bird/bead thingie.

    One of the best things I did recently was try to help a new shooter. I was loosing it, getting pieces instead of smoke and I could feel it particularly on the wide angles. I gave her my little pointing speel (see other thread about teaching new shooters) and then went to the line and practiced what I was preaching. Nice smoke, all angles. Solid.

    Smoke 'em.

    Joe
     
  4. Sportshot

    Sportshot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    530
    Location:
    ... somewhere out west, in the Rockies
    I hope this can be compiled into an e-book that I can purchase and load onto my laptop. I would prefer not to constantly search for the threads on TS.COM and I would like to spend more time studying the films.

    Thank you Neil and Ron!~ Still, I for one am only 50-70% convinced :)

    Ps - these video's were all taken from 16yds and small shot,right? I think I read target breaks better from 27 yards with max loads, tightest chokes and largest shot. The hits I was getting last Saturday defied everything I have seen on your show. I was glancing targets on the left side, and the large remaining solid mass was kicking hard to the right. IMHO.
     
  5. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    Case in point?
     
  6. Sportshot

    Sportshot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    530
    Location:
    ... somewhere out west, in the Rockies
  7. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,854
    Joe, it's important to remember that when the pieces go down, as they certainly sometimes do, that it's _not_ the shot driving them there. It's just that the chance-driven aerodynamics of the shapes and sizes of the pieces you can see (whose configuration and velocity, the determiners of those aerodynamics, are also totally random and unpredictable) which sent them, this time, down instead of up or sideways or half-and-half or whatever random course they might have with equal probability taken.

    The shot doesn't have the momentum to move the target-pieces (in aggregate) anywhere. A pellet has a mass of only 1500th that of a target, and even it's 20x velocity advantage only gives it a 1-to-75 ratio of influence. Add to that that it is going the same way as the shot, and so cannot impart any directional momentum change beyond going the other way itself. If it went straight left after impact and did not slow down at all, a single pellet would move the momentum of the broken pieces a tiny bit to the right, on the average.

    We have one video exception, a case exemplifying what Andrew describes in his book. A pellet hits a bird and a single piece, too small to see from the trapline, is sent straight down. The target doesn't break. This was the only provable instance of a pellet clearly "driving" anything anywhere I saw in all these videos.

    We apparently agree that we see what we are prepared to see. Even though, as a result of a thread here on TS.com prominently featuring yansica1 which ran at about this time last summer, I had done the momentum calculations and determined that it was impossible that the shot was "driving" pieces as it so clearly seemed, I couldn't shake my mental framework that I was, essentially, reading breaks when I saw a piece fly down.

    But I was still counting on spin to do something non-random. When I finally got that straight, that because of spin the target, in the first instant, rips itself apart in an unpredictable manner and the chance-shaped pieces are then distributed through space an a random fashion by their interaction with the air, my mind-set changed _and my perception with it._

    I'm at the Iowa State Shoot and now, when I watch my or my squadmates' breaks, I don't see a trace of "directional cause;" I see "random flight" in every break. It's odd to think that I am likely the only one here who is having that experience; that everyone else is, to some extent, "reading breaks" because, as humans, we just can't help it.

    We have very much appreciated your input in all these threads, Joe. You have played the game hard and fairly and we thank you for it.

    Yours in Sport,

    Neil
     
  8. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,854
    Sportshot, thanks for the suggestion about publishing this; you never know what long Minnesota winters will drive one to do. I don't even know what an e-book is, of course, but there's time for that too.

    Early on we were using non-standard loads and chokes, but V10 convinced us that if we were to find out what shooters were doing we had to use what they were using.

    Yes, this is all 16 yard. The guns are extra-full choked Perazzis of various sorts and the shells are Federal Gold Medal papers, 3-dram 7 1/2's. We wanted, after all, to let "shot" do it's best work possible, and that's about the ideal combination to let that happen, in our opinion.

    Doing this from handicap distances will be much, much harder, but we certainly will do at least a little. The angle of view of the camera is incredibly small at the focal-length we are using and you really have to watch the LCD screen to get what you want. An imperceptible breeze can raise the targets a foot or two and you will shoot a box of shells and not see anything on the film at all. Obviously you can't stand in front of the shooter (though we have put the camera there on occasion) but the results are so unpredictable it hardly seems sustainable. As I said earlier, it's perfectly possible to invest a day and a couple of hundred dollars and come home without a single usable image. No one can do that kind of thing for fun for long, and we are just doing this for fun, after all.

    I think that handicap results are needed since I do think they may be significantly different. The controlling variables, spin-caused destruction followed instantly by aerodynamics taking over, will not change, but I think that the "way" - or more specifically the "why" - targets will break could very well change. That's why we have to go look.

    As with any worthwhile scientific project, this program has raised questions and issues we never even knew existed before we started. But I seriously do think it has solved what it set out to investigate and now our task is just to see how far the results can be generalized. Just as there are two kinds of breaks, "big pieces" and "many more, smaller pieces," I've come to suspect that there are (at least) two ways targets come apart, and the difference between singles and handicap may be just the ticket for finding out whether that's true or not.

    Thanks for participating in our series and your interest in seeing it put together in a more convenient form.

    Yours in Sport,

    Neil
     
  9. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    "...we see what we are prepared to see."

    Yes, and I believe we do so with each shot. Shooters are plenty smart enough to take a view of the target with an overlay of the bead position and anticipate a certain shatter pattern. Pieces that meet that expectation then become the proof that we can read breaks. Careful study proves otherwise.

    Look forward to the future results. Thanks for the interesting threads. Wow.

    (fade out) So the clockwise rotation throws the smaller pieces in front to the left, big pieces...

    Joe
     
  10. sliverbulletexpress

    sliverbulletexpress TS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,645
    Thanks to Neil and Ron for their hard work and dedication. I thought I could read breaks until viewing all these. Now I think it is a fluke if you happen to read a break correctly, too undependable. Knowing where your barrel was pointing when the shot left is the only dependable way of calling your shot, and no I'm not talking about bead checking. If you have a gun that fits and enough experience you should just "know" where the gun was pointing, it would be good to ask several of the top shooters if they can call their shots, I bet they can.

    Edit to add. How many times have you said or heard it said " I knew I missed that one before the shot ever got there"? That would be an example of calling a shot.
     
  11. Twinbirds

    Twinbirds TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,144
    I can't wait to see how much better the avgs are going to be now that everyone is going to quit reading the breaks. The mind sees what you want it to see.
     
  12. Dr A C Jones

    Dr A C Jones Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    367
    Actually, the ramifications for teaching methods are pretty profound. Of course there are a lot of vested interested so don't expect this to get much free press. But then, back in the old days, menthol cigarettes were good for you too . . . .

    Andrew.
     
  13. Hap MecTweaks

    Hap MecTweaks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,229
    Location:
    Mesquite, Nevada
    SBE said, "How many times have you said or heard it said " I knew I missed that one before the shot ever got there"? That would be an example of calling a shot."

    What you've stated plus; how many times when you're on your "A" game did you know that clay was destined for smoke before the shot charge left the barrel? As stated, both examples are calling the shot immediately when the gun was triggered.

    Neil, filming the direct path of the shot charge to the target from long range is going to be a tough chore to accomplish. It seems some refuse to believe what they see when the shot is approaching at an odd angle to the targets. I can only imagine what a gun mounted camera may cost to give the same quality as what you and Ron have produced to date.

    After the Grand, I'll go back to work on the stationary spinning target and see what I can glean from that knowing it fits in with your work here.

    Thank you both for all the effort, time and education in this project.

    Hap
     
  14. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    Doc, the best instruction is consistent with one and only one interpretation - the correct one. I would have preferred to see the patterns on the right first. Then I wouldn't have thought I was reading the breaks of the patterns on the left. I really thought I was doing it and it took me quite a while to give up on the concept. You should have kicked me in the teeth right away (just kidding).

    I used to design instruction so if you need a hand let me know. A story board type of development comes to mind. Something like:

    "Okay, first off we're going to show you some patterns on the right side of a flying trap target."

    Start the video and pause it when the pattern is clearly visible to the right of the target.

    "Where's the pattern? On the right. What do you think will happen when the shot hits the target?"

    Take reasonable answers. If 'small pieces on the right, big left' isn't given, mention it. Give a reason...

    Continue the video and watch it until the target pieces clear the frame.

    "What hapapened?"

    Take reasonable answers and correct any that do no reflect what was shown.

    "So we see that the small pieces were on the left and the big pieces on the right."

    Let the video run. After 3 more breaks say, "Anybody need to see more?"

    Let the video run to the end.

    "Now the question is why."

    Show a video of the target spinning in super slow motion and breaking up (like Andrew's, but not coming at you. Make it a trap target going away."

    "Notice the pieces spiral out from the target and then scatter. Everything in front goes left and everything on top goes right. See it?"

    Restart the video until until there's a consensus.

    "Now the question is 'why are the pieces in the front small and those in back bigger?"

    Take reasonable answers. If no one comes up with it tell them, "Because the front part of the target is closest to the shooter and it takes most of the hit."

    Show video demonstrating.

    Explain how the pattern is a random set of pellets...



    To be fair you need to include an even shatter and explain about the random stuff happening...

    Later,

    Joe
     
  15. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    Neil and Ron,

    The whole purpose behind 'reading the breaks' is to be able to move from pieces to more solid hits and not fall off the other way into a miss.

    Since you have pretty well debunked this practice, at least in my mind, what alternative have you got to offer that's in line with the original purpose?

    Thanks,
    Joe
     
  16. hmb

    hmb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,437
    You will have to learn how to control shot string flight using brain waves. This way you can center up your breaks no matter where your gun is pointed when you pull the trigger. HMB
     
  17. dverna

    dverna Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,717
    Joe,

    Left/right is "easy". Trust the patterning board. If the gun shoots straight left/right you are set in one plane. There is no reason to shoot left or right when firing at a bird unless you are doing something wrong (moving face away from comb, flinching, pulling the shot etc) - in which case changing POI left right is a poor "cure" to the root cause. Once centered left/right, lock the comb in that plane

    Horizontal POI factors in swing speed, the speed someone takes the target and how much the bird "floats" over the bead/barrel. This varies with the shooter. But even there, most shooters can at least start with say a POI 6-8" high at 30 yards and adjust up/down until they make the most smoke. Most of us have a reasonable idea of where that point is so the starting point is going to be close even with a new gun.

    What this study has proven to me is ANYONE who adjusts their gun based on breaks and has shot less than 25 birds at one setting is doomed to make literally scores of "corrections".

    I recall a comment attributed to Frank Little. It takes at least 500 birds to know if a change is worse or better. "Dialing in" in a gun is long process.


    Don Verna
     
  18. Hap MecTweaks

    Hap MecTweaks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,229
    Location:
    Mesquite, Nevada
    Don, I agree and add this also.

    "(moving face away from comb, flinching, pulling the shot etc)"

    Not seeing the target properly can and will do the same things you've written above also!

    In chapter 7s shooting from the 16, I think Neil should raise his POI about 4 or 5 more inches? It would be interesting to see if there could be a difference in the quality of breaks in the same set up with a slightly higher POI for him. I studied those breaks several times!That will be a nickle Neil!

    Hap
     
  19. joe kuhn

    joe kuhn Furry Lives Matter TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,180
    Hi Don - I'm happy with the poi of my gun. It'll do it. I'm mainly asking about the stuff between my ears. HBM has the right general area. In Hap's words - how do you see the target properly?

    And what do you do when you feel yourself slipping because there's less smoke and more pieces? To me targets only ever break two ways: smoke or no smoke.
     
  20. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,854
    Hap, remember, we are often _trying_ not to hit the target squarely. We found out early on the the best hits, even those not "best" but pretty good, didn't offer any chance to "read the breaks." There was little point in challenging our readers with clip-after-clip of hits everyone would agree can't be read. So often we tried to miss a little.

    This project already has made me raise my 16-yard POI. I found that when I tried to shoot too high I found it almost impossible, but a small intended shot low was often a miss. So I raised the POI and it may be better. I'm still not sure about the singles POI but have nailed down my POI for handicap and may just shoot that for singles too.

    Thanks for the suggestion. We will be filming handicap hits on Monday and I'll keep your suggestion in mind.

    Neil
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.