Trapshooters Forum banner

1 - 20 of 117 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
404 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Let's go back to Gunsup's post about the mechanics of TBR (target Break Reading).

"Target analysis becomes one valuable tool. When you break a target the flight of the pieces tell the story. Pieces push down you were above the target-good . Pieces driven back into the center of the field, you're on the money side of the target-better. Nothing but smoke, the target is centered in the pattern. Full chokes put more pellets in the center. "

So far he's been right about centered shots leading to smoke, but what are we to make of this:

Pieces driven back into the center of the field, you're on the money side of the target (which is) better. "

I haven't heard that "money side of the target" phrase since people pretty-much quit playing the options here, but I thought it meant "On the front side of the target, that is, where the bird is flying to, not flying from." OK, this means the pattern center is to the left of left-flying targets and to the right of right-flying target, and the consequence of putting the center of the pattern "in front" is predicted to be that the pieces will be "driven back into the center of the field."

This is a bit different from usual TBR description, which is most often "centering the shot to the left of the bird will drive the big pieces to the right, while centering the shot to the right of the bird will drive the big pieces to the left."

The next few videos will test those two views and we might as well try to fit both those predictions on what 600 fps videos tell us since thy are both, at heart, predictions about the lateral movement of the target pieces being sent differentially right or left by the location of the shot cloud, some part of which hits the target.

Let's start with the shot cloud to the left of the target, in this case, md-left; that is, the shot was moderately to the left of the bird:

june_28_2011_mid_left_hits

...and now let's look at far left:

june_28_2011_far_left_hits

We'll zoom back to get a cleared picture of where the pieces are going.

Left_ hits_mostly_high

My description of what I see in the shot-to-the-left videos:

1. First, the prediction that "the pieces (would be) driven back into the center of the field" was wrong. Pieces fly both toward and away from the center of the field. In general. the smaller pieces fly to the left, the bigger ones to the right as is predicted by the usual rules of TBR.

Now we will move the pattern to the right of the target, first, mid-right:

Clay target breaks mid right

...and far right:

Clay target breaks far right

...and now zoomed back:

high_right_hits

My description of what I see in the shot-to-the-right videos.

1.Again, the prediction that "the pieces (would be) driven back into the center of the field" was wrong. Pieces fly both toward and away from the center of field

2. In general. the smaller pieces fly to the left, the bigger ones to the right is the opposite from what is predicted by the usual rules of TBR.

3, In summary, the location of the shot cloud, right or left, did not change the "form" of the breaks at all. In both cases, the small pieces mostly went to left, the big pieces mostly to the right, without regard to the location of the shot-cloud that occasioned the target-break.

I hope readers here will take the time to tell us if that's what they see or is it something different?

I hope the proponents of TBR, are there are at least three here we know of, will explain these results. My two questions for TBR's which I hope they will answer are:

A. How it TBR supposed to work? What are physical or geometrical or whatever principles which make Target Break Reading work? Please be clear and specific.

B. Why didn't TBR work in these videos? Do you see something we are missing?


The explanation is simple; I'll take a break for readers and TBR's to weigh in and maybe Friday come back with videos of shot above and below. Then non-spinning targets and a couple of treats on Saturday, assuming all goes to plan.

In the meantime, I hope you will tell us what you see, what you think, and what you think is going on in those videos, which I hope you like; Ron Baker and I have a lot of time and work in them.

Yours in Sport,

Neil
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
404 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
The reason for this thread is self-explanatory, but I'll explain it anyway. Buried in a "New Shooter Mod vs. IM" thread is this discussion by Neil Winston regarding reading breaks, a place where few that have any interest in the matter could find it. Now, it is easy enough to see for anyone who is interested in the esoteric mysteries of reading clay breakage.

I think we have given TBR's enough time, and information, to respond to my questions:

'I hope the proponents of TBR, are there are at least three here we know of, will explain these results. My two questions for TBR's which I hope they will answer are:

A. How it TBR supposed to work? What are physical or geometrical or whatever principles which make Target Break Reading work? Please be clear and specific.

B. Why didn't TBR work in these videos? Do you see something we are missing?"

This is no surprise; as many times as I have asked similar questions I've never gotten a word of response. And the reason is clear. There is no logical explanation for target break reading in the sense of telling where the center of the pellet cloud that missed the target was and how the bird was supposed to know that and so break the "right" way.

To review what we have seen so far.

1. When a target is hit with the center of a pattern it shatters into a nice ball of smoke.

2. When a target is hit by a pattern centered to the left of it, in general the small pieces fly to the left, the big pieces to the right, in accordance with TBR theory.

3. When a target is hit by a pattern centered to the right of it, in general the small pieces fly to the left, the big pieces to the right, which is the opposite of what is predicted by TBR theory.

There are two as-yet-unaddressed directions, above and below.

No one here has said what TRP prescribes for the motion of target pieces when the pattern center is below the bird, so I just tell you that we are told the the pieces are "driven up."

Is that what happens? Here are pattern-centers mid-below the target: Right-click on the links below and open them in a new window.

4_July_mid_low

28_June_mid_low

I'd be willing to agree that TRB makes the right prediction here, the preponderant direction of the pieces, the big ones anyway, is up.

And the same holds true when the pattern-center is far below the bird.

28_June_far_low

4_July_far_low

We do have a clear TBR prediction of what happens when the shot clou is above the bird from a post above:

"When you break a target the flight of the pieces tell the story. Pieces push down you were above the target-good . "

Let's see. Here the pellets are centered mid-over. Remember, what you are looking for is "Pieces pushed down."

2July_camera_over_mid_over_V2

And here, far over; again you job is to identify the way in which pieces are pushed down.

2July_camera_over_far_over_V3

Here all the patterns are well over the target. The shells were AA Featherlites, low-recoil (and so lower speed) shells and that accounts for the relatively large number of bird hit with a single pellet that did not break. All other videos were light 8 AA's. It's clear that when you slow shot down a lot, single-pellet hits lead to fewer breaks than usual.

Notice that no "domes" where hit as you so often hear ascribed to the shot going too high. Nor do you see the pieces "driven down."

nodomesbroken

The point is, targets broken by patterns center below and above them break in just the same way. In this video, I've rated the location of the shot in the corner of the clip. Minus 4, where we start, is way below. We move stepwise up through a couple of centered breaks at zero, and continue up to plus 4. See if you can tell any reliable difference between the form of any of the breaks.

TBF_rising_POA breaks

Targets break the way they do because they have two kinds of inertia, linear and rotational, linear and angular momentum. As described by Newton's First Law, targets, after breaking, continue the motions they had before they broke. Linearly, they go straight, which is "up" to us. The part of the target nearest the shooter is most hit by shot (the back being somewhat protected by the front) and the clockwise spin of the bird throws the hard-hit (smaller) pieces to the left, the bigger, protected pieces to the right, both in the direction they were going before the shot got to them. After the break, these randomly shaped, randomly spinning pieces interact with the air and fly every which way - up, down, angled, every direction possible.

That's all that's happening.

Here's a view of targets you don't get in the field. As you see, they are just going in the direction they were before the pellets broke them.

071811_17degree_birds_shooter_post1_camera_post 5_372

Here are a few more things to think about. You have heard that "You can hang a target from a fence post and shoot at it all day and it won't break."


Well, it will, but completely differently than it does on a trapfield, since it doesn't have either of the inertias it has in flight.

TBF_catergories


TBF_shooter_middle

Targets and target pieces are not "driven" anywhere. Here's where you would see that and you don't. The shot it coming from the left side and they just look like regular breaks.

4July_small_angle_low-high

The difference between those breaks and the ones we see on the trapfield is linear motion and spin, linear and angular momentum. They are what make targets break the way they do.

Thank you for your attention. I'll try to answer any questions you may have. And, as always, we would all like to hear from TBR's with different explanations. High-speed videos showing something different from what I have shown here would be particularly effective in proving their point, it seems to me.

Yours in Sport,

Neil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,941 Posts
Thanks, Randy. In that last video, the shot is coming from the right, not the left as I wrote. I regret the error. But the story is unchanged. Target-break reading is a compelling illusion, but just an illusion.

But why do people believe it? Because it seems to work. The break tells you that you were a little high so you shoot a fraction lower and the target breaks fine and so the diagnosis was correct.

But you have to consider that you are breaking in the mid 90's and so the probability that the next target will break is over 9 in 10. So if you had changed nothing the bird would have almost certainly broken, so the apparent "confirmation" is spurious, unrelated to your "reading" of the last break.

Here's how to test that: Read a clearly "directional" break, say a piece "driven down." Don't "correct" for that; just make the following shot as you normally would. Remember the result. Then do it again. And again. And again. Eventually, you will understand that the piece "driven down" was a result of the air randomly interacting with an odd-shaped, spinning chunk of clay which was just trying to make you believe something that seemed so true, but wasn't. In the end, you won't miss your ability to read target breaks at all.

Neil
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
19,215 Posts
Clay target sports will always have a significant number of "TBRs". Main reason is Winston is only "widely read" on the TS.com forum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,941 Posts
About as many as I would guessing the suits of a cards about to be drawn from a canasta deck of 104 cards, Howard.

The contrast is this, Howard:

SITUATION 1: If you were in a casino and came up behind a new player and whispered to him the suit of the card he was about to be dealt, you would be thrown out as soon as he complained to the dealer.

SITUATION 2: If you sit on a bench and tell a new shooter as he walks off the line "You were knocking the domes off all of them; you are shooting over them" he will likely thank you for screwing up his shooting.

Neil
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
404 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
"If you swapped your eyes for an eagle's, you could see an ant crawling on the ground from the roof of a 10-story building. You could make out the expressions on basketball players' faces from the worst seats in the arena. Objects directly in your line of sight would appear magnified, and everything would be brilliantly colored, rendered in an inconceivable array of shades." What If Humans Had Eagle Vision?

Human eyes are comparatively weak: relying on them in an attempt to "read breaks" is also weak, weak to the point of being useless. It isn't that saying what things "look like" is nefarious, it is that eyewitness accounts are horribly unreliable, one of the weakest forms of evidence that there is. People trying to do the right thing in court routinely misidentify a 6 ft. 2 individual as 5 ft. 9, a 165 lb. person as 210 pounds, and even the simplest of observations are testified under oath as being completely different.

Shot leaves the muzzle at over 818 mph or faster. Yet, a comparatively large object of 9 - 9-1/4 inches in circumference (edit) at 100 mph cannot be correctly perceived by humans from a few feet away. That is the size of a baseball and if humans could correctly track it, there would be never be a strike-out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,941 Posts
Back on the other thread tom asked about "picture in picture" and there are probably few here anymore who remember this:

tom, you have but to ask; I thought you knew that...

Ron Baker and I once developed the "Target Break Reading Cyber challenge" which showed 20 target breaks and let readers here, believers and heretics alike, answer a quiz about where the shot-cloud was and why they thought so.

38 played. The scoring was very liberal, for example if a player said "high and ahead" we scored it "correct" if it were either high or ahead.

Two players scored 12 out of 20, the rest centered lower. With the scoring system we used, we gauged "chance" as a bit less than 10 and most didn't even get near that. Analysis of errors made it clear that everyone was just guessing, that's all. Here was a bit of the "Answers" post.

TBF_12_w-pip


TBF_16_PIP


Yours in Sport,

Neil
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
591 Posts
Winston wrote >>> MORE
"Ron Baker and I have a lot of time and work in them." :worthless:and more charts and graphs, and the glued together pieces of each clay that was shot at, together with an objective calculation that "if a big bore barrelled shotgun was used which was throwing a greater surface area diameter of shot would the broken pieces of clay have been pushed into orbit ?"
Still to many questions and not enough forensic answers, need to see the glued together clay with red laser imposed strike angles "like they would do on NCIS"
Far to much spare time spent on was it the WIND or was it the IMPACT ? Did these trails take place on a low air pressure day or was the climate heavy on that day, to many variables, you need help from NASA ask "Trump for a Government Grant"
Mulder & Scully would crack this unknown before the shift was over The truth is out there ?
Phil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,941 Posts
Yes, Randy, but remember that it's not vision that makes Target Break Reading useless. A TBR could see the break very clearly but it wouldn't help. It's that fact that targets break a particular way due to the forces inside them and random interacton with air, rather than where the center of the pattern was, that makes the task of guessing where the shooter shot based on the form of the break impossible.

Neil
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
404 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
One of the problems is of definition: no one actually sees "the break," meaning the initial fractures . . . they can only struggle to absorb the results of the break, and speculate that it means something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,361 Posts
Human eyes are comparatively weak: relying on them in an attempt to "read breaks" is also weak, weak to the point of being useless. It isn't that saying what things "look like" is nefarious, it is that eyewitness accounts are horribly unreliable, one of the weakest forms of evidence that there is.
This is complete garbage Randy. The human eye has less than a 20 degree focal axis and the other 160 degrees is "fuzzy". The focal axis is seen "clearly" and the brain processes the "fuzzy" and makes it clear. The human eyes are far more remarkable and accurate than you give credit.

Now on the other hand, if you are inferring humans brains are weak at processing the data caught by the eyes - I would totally agree with that. It's not the eyes.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
404 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
This is complete garbage Randy. The human eye has less than a 20 degree focal axis and the other 160 degrees is "fuzzy". The focal axis is seen "clearly" and the brain processes the "fuzzy" and makes it clear. The human eyes are far more remarkable and accurate than you give credit.

Now on the other hand, if you are inferring humans brains are weak at processing the data caught by the eyes - I would totally agree with that. It's not the eyes.
You must have missed the "comparatively" part. Raptors have 20/5 vision or better: humans do not: being able to see 4-5 times farther than a human is a good thing, if you are a bird of prey living off of the land. It isn't like riflescopes, binoculars, and other optics have no use . . . or, are going away anytime soon. You may not need to be able to see an ant from 35 yards away as a raptor can. But, how large is a piece of #7-1/2 shot?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
591 Posts
It's that fact that targets break a particular way DUE TO THE FORCES INSIDE THEM AND RANDOM INTERACTION WITH AIR,
Yep nothing to do with a charge of lead shot hurtling at the clay at warp speed, Smoke & Mirrors and a prayer to the "I wish I had dusted that lost clay" ? should get you the high gun trophy
Thanks all
Phil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,500 Posts
Back on the other thread tom asked about "picture in picture" and there are probably few here anymore who remember this:

tom, you have but to ask; I thought you knew that...

Ron Baker and I once developed the "Target Break Reading Cyber challenge" which showed 20 target breaks and let readers here, believers and heretics alike, answer a quiz about where the shot-cloud was and why they thought so.

38 played. The scoring was very liberal, for example if a player said "high and ahead" we scored it "correct" if it were either high or ahead.

Two players scored 12 out of 20, the rest centered lower. With the scoring system we used, we gauged "chance" as a bit less than 10 and most didn't even get near that. Analysis of errors made it clear that everyone was just guessing, that's all. Here was a bit of the "Answers" post.

TBF_12_w-pip


TBF_16_PIP


Yours in Sport,

Neil
And there is the proof of exactly what I was experiencing. Often the target would seem to break and crumble in one spot and the shot cloud was actually on the opposite side of the target.

It is a most powerful and convincing illusion! I dont fault anyone for believing their own eyes, but now I must admit my eyes did deceive me.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
1 - 20 of 117 Posts
Top