Eye-dominance issues ... focusing on the maintained-lead picture

160345 · Mar 20, 2023

You guys couldn’t be further from the truth….. What is your authority really based on?

Jim Tyner · Mar 20, 2023

Notch15 said:
That's not the "see" that I use.

Just like the Pope, we are entitled to our own see.

Finwe · Mar 20, 2023

If you find it difficult to switch sides you can try an old trick used for decades by many shooters in the same position. Add a very small amount of Scotch tape on the surface of the left lens of your shooting glasses in line with the eye. The idea is to obscure the left eye and keep the right clear. It works for some shooters. Good luck.

thor_sen · Mar 20, 2023

Second half of the second video,

Couldn’t help but notice the only person NOT wearing a lick of eye pro on the shooting station was ….

- the ophthalmologist!!!!!

skeeter_ninz · Mar 20, 2023

OP Checkpoint #1:
Hi all, I genuinely appreciate the feedback and conversation - clearly its a pretty 'warm' topic. There are some key summary points already in this discussion that I think may be worth percolating. And I summarize what I am reading/understanding, also acknowledging IMO that there is no such thing as complete consensus, nor should there need to be - "... find what works for you... ". The following are some of the summary key points as I perceive them:

1) An absolute focus on the target (one or both eyes)
2) In achieving 1), there is conjecture about the role of 'peripheral' and/or 'subconscious' awareness of where the barrel is (trust, leap-of-faith for some, myself in the latter may be required) and as such it looks like we need to develop muscle memory to support.
3) That 2) cannot be consistently and reliably achieved without having your swing mechanics in top shape (the eyes are connected to the cheek, which is connected to the stock, which is connected to the upper body, which is connected to the lower body) - the tank turret analogy (is how I think about it), and I am trying to stick to the Bender method of the lower body being part of that turret and driving the upper body through the swing (my personal preference).

One thing that occured to me this morning as I read through all your contributions again is that we have not touched on the role and criticality in the 'seeing' equation of "setting the eyes" which from my training means:
a) Correct hold point (horizontal distance set to suit my reaction time, with the vertical relative to the window on each station)
b) Soft distant focus to the side of the incoming direction of the target (and this is one point where I cannot help but be aware consciously of where the barrel is)

If your hold point is "not right for you", the eye and swing mechanics in points 1) --> 3) above can go to the dogs quickly ..

PS. I am getting a lot out of the exercise of thinking about the differences of experiences and opinions so far - all genuine contributions greatly appreciated - thank-you.

160345 · Mar 20, 2023

All you can possibly focus on is the target!

Notch15 · Mar 20, 2023

skeeter_ninz said:
OP Checkpoint #1:
Hi all, I genuinely appreciate the feedback and conversation - clearly its a pretty 'warm' topic. There are some key summary points already in this discussion that I think may be worth percolating. And I summarize what I am reading/understanding, also acknowledging IMO that there is no such thing as complete consensus, nor should there need to be - "... find what works for you... ". The following are some of the summary key points as I perceive them:

1) An absolute focus on the target (one or both eyes)
2) In achieving 1), there is conjecture about the role of 'peripheral' and/or 'subconscious' awareness of where the barrel is (trust, leap-of-faith for some, myself in the latter may be required) and as such it looks like we need to develop muscle memory to support.
3) That 2) cannot be consistently and reliably achieved without having your swing mechanics in top shape (the eyes are connected to the cheek, which is connected to the stock, which is connected to the upper body, which is connected to the lower body) - the tank turret analogy (is how I think about it), and I am trying to stick to the Bender method of the lower body being part of that turret and driving the upper body through the swing (my personal preference).

One thing that occured to me this morning as I read through all your contributions again is that we have not touched on the role and criticality in the 'seeing' equation of "setting the eyes" which from my training means:
a) Correct hold point (horizontal distance set to suit my reaction time, with the vertical relative to the window on each station)
b) Soft distant focus to the side of the incoming direction of the target (and this is one point where I cannot help but be aware consciously of where the barrel is)

If your hold point is "not right for you", the eye and swing mechanics in points 1) --> 3) above can go to the dogs quickly ..

PS. I am getting a lot out of the exercise of thinking about the differences of experiences and opinions so far - all genuine contributions greatly appreciated - thank-you.

Regarding your 2) above, I will offer that for me there is no conjecture regarding the role of my peripheral vision or that this vision is normally processed in my conscious brain.

272754 · Mar 20, 2023

For me my eyes are focused on the clay and the gun is mounted to the cheek but the center of the eye is not aligned with the barrel at the time the trigger is pulled. The barrel is pointing at intercept point (lead) and the eye is on the target. That lead picture is mostly subconscious.

I think the "gun shoots where you look" concept is taken too literally by some. The gun shoots where it is pointed and only on shoot directly at the target type presentations is it pointed in direction where your eye happens to be perfectly aligned with the rib.

Notch15 · Mar 20, 2023

Lacyb said:
For me my eyes are focused on the clay and the gun is mounted to the cheek but the center of the eye is not aligned with the barrel at the time the trigger is pulled. The barrel is pointing at intercept point (lead) and the eye is on the target. That lead picture is mostly subconscious.

I think the "gun shoots where you look" concept is taken too literally by some. The gun shoots where it is pointed and only on shoot directly at the target type presentations is it pointed in direction where your eye happens to be perfectly aligned with the rib.

I think the phrase "gun shoots where you look" is a holdover urban legion statement that was somehow supposed to identify what a proper gun fit represented.

As you said (and I'm paraphrasing), for those who focus on the target then on those targets that require lead the gun is never pointing where you're looking.

Coach Super-X · Mar 25, 2023

thor_sen said:
Watching the videos now, Thanks Again!

You should not be thanking anybody for those videos. They are an awful thing to do to someone trying to learn to shoot.

Any dunce can tell a learner to occlude his off eye and it will usually immediately make him better, but it makes him better at measuring, and that is a dead end. Ed Solomon is not cross-dominant and does not have a clue how to deal with people who are. The idea that you can be getting "bad information" or "data" from one eye and fix it by occluding that eye is, for the vast majority of people, ridiculous. That isn't the problem. The problem is very few people actually know what to do with their eyes, which is obvious from these threads.

But what is really hilarious is you guys telling BHorne he just doesn't know what he's talking about. If you really want to figure out the "eye dominance" puzzle, I suggest you go back to that (last) closed eye dom thread in the Shotguns - General forum that Jim started are read very, very carefully what Bayne wrote. He is probably the only person you will ever run into, on the Internet or otherwise, who is strongly left-eye dominant, shooting R-handed with both eyes open and no occlusive device AND who has for years scored at the very top level in his game. I don't mean doing well at his local club like Jim does, I mean in national competitions.

Pull up the results of last year's NSCA National Championship, Main Event, and you will see that Zach, who won it, beat Bayne (now in his 50s, by the way) by exactly 6 birds out of 300. The only other guys who out-shot him were Brandon, Anthony, Joe F. and Derrick.

A whole lot of you could learn something if you started listening to the right people, and quit thinking you have this "how to shoot" thing all figured out.

Just sayin'.

skeeter_ninz · Mar 25, 2023

Coach Super-X said:
You should not be thanking anybody for those videos. They are an awful thing to do to someone trying to learn to shoot. Any dunce can tell a learner to occlude his off eye and it will usually immediately make him better, but it makes him better at measuring, and that is a dead end. Ed Solomon is not cross-dominant and does not have a clue how to deal with people who are. The idea that you can be getting "bad information" or "data" from one eye and fix it by occluding that eye is, for the vast majority of people, ridiculous. That isn't the problem. The problem is very few people actually know what to do with their eyes, which is obvious from these threads.

But what is really hilarious is you guys telling BHorne he just doesn't know what he's talking about. If you really want to figure out the "eye dominance" puzzle, I suggest you go back to that (last) closed eye dom thread in the Shotguns - General forum that Jim started are read very, very carefully what Bayne wrote.

OP response:
Super-X, a couple of points from my perspective:

I am not saying any such thing about BHorne - I am genuinely interested in the cross section of views, experience and tips and am somewhat disappointed that this thread is looking like heading down the credibility 'rabbit hole'. I went to the thread I think you were referring to and filtered on BHorne, but could not see (or didn't understand) the advice you are referring to. Could you please pin-point it for me/us?
I believe that 'one size', or one way, does NOT fit all, and I think that is one of the key points Ed S is outlining ... "what works for you" ... and I don't think Ed is advising to occlude either.
Having been a BTR aimer for a while by occluding, I headed back into the 'current' of two-eyes by firstly taking the tangible step of having my eyes opto tested and my right vision corrected (getting the two-eyed baseline as right as I can) - such is the thrust of why I put the two vids back to back ... because I WANT to and CAN shoot with two-eyes - to be clear, I am NOT advocating occluding, NOR am I saying 'do not'.
The practical guidance that would really convert yours and BHorne's advise into practical/real guidance are simply not accessible to a whole bunch of us, including me on the other side of the Pacific (still re-reading your guide BTW) - I think that its very difficult for words on a forum to be translated into practical step-by-step action guides.

Could I pose a practical example question to you and/or BHorne:
Since going back to both-eyes a new problem has arisen for me, I have started missing the 'sitting ducks' (Low 1 and High 7 ... for me honestly, its very humbling if not humiliating (tbh)...). Conversely, I am now much more consistent in powdering High 2 and 3 as well as Low 5 and 6 (I can see them much more clearly now). So I said to myself the other day .. "maybe squint on the sitting ducks" --> BTR aiming.

I would be very interested to understand what words of advice you could offer me on Low 1 and High 7 (as these appear to still bring out the residual of my cross-dom issue).

friend of a friend · Mar 25, 2023

Coach Super-X said:
You should not be thanking anybody for those videos. They are an awful thing to do to someone trying to learn to shoot.

Any dunce can tell a learner to occlude his off eye and it will usually immediately make him better, but it makes him better at measuring, and that is a dead end. Ed Solomon is not cross-dominant and does not have a clue how to deal with people who are. The idea that you can be getting "bad information" or "data" from one eye and fix it by occluding that eye is, for the vast majority of people, ridiculous. That isn't the problem. The problem is very few people actually know what to do with their eyes, which is obvious from these threads.

But what is really hilarious is you guys telling BHorne he just doesn't know what he's talking about. If you really want to figure out the "eye dominance" puzzle, I suggest you go back to that (last) closed eye dom thread in the Shotguns - General forum that Jim started are read very, very carefully what Bayne wrote. He is probably the only person you will ever run into, on the Internet or otherwise, who is strongly left-eye dominant, shooting R-handed with both eyes open and no occlusive device AND who has for years scored at the very top level in his game. I don't mean doing well at his local club like Jim does, I mean in national competitions.

Pull up the results of last year's NSCA National Championship, Main Event, and you will see that Zach, who won it, beat Bayne (now in his 50s, by the way) by exactly 6 birds out of 300. The only other guys who out-shot him were Brandon, Anthony, Joe F. and Derrick.

A whole lot of you could learn something if you started listening to the right people, and quit thinking you have this "how to shoot" thing all figured out.

Just sayin'.

Only in shotgun target shooting is listening to the right people purported to make you a champion player. Not in golf, not in tennis, not in team sports, not in anything else I can think of. This is the only sport I know of where natural talent is given no credit for success. Just doing what you are told to do is all that matters. NOT!

Rooster booster · Mar 25, 2023

There’s no ‘natural talent’ in any game or sport. It’s all learned. I love to hear folks talk about ‘instinctive’ this that or the other.

160345 · Mar 26, 2023

“Could I pose a practical example question to you and/or BHorne:
Since going back to both-eyes a new problem has arisen for me, I have started missing the 'sitting ducks' (Low 1 and High 7 ... for me honestly, its very humbling if not humiliating (tbh)...). Conversely, I am now much more consistent in powdering High 2 and 3 as well as Low 5 and 6 (I can see them much more clearly now). So I said to myself the other day .. "maybe squint on the sitting ducks" --> BTR aiming.

I would be very interested to understand what words of advice you could offer me on Low 1 and High 7 (as these appear to still bring out the residual of my cross-dom issue).”

Great question with a lot of perspective on doing it the right way…..Pointing not aiming.
I believe what is happening on those sitting duck targets is you are seeing your gun and trying to place it where YOU think it needs to go…aiming verses letting sub-c do its work and point.
I struggle with these “easy” targets too in sporting clays. By the way they are ALL easy and can ALL be made hard! What I do on these that have next to no leed is stay out of the gun ever so slightly so I won’t be tempted to connect until the exact second I fire and stay focused only on target. When targets and barrels line up things get tuff.
Bayne

friend of a friend · Mar 26, 2023

BHorne said:
“Could I pose a practical example question to you and/or BHorne:
Since going back to both-eyes a new problem has arisen for me, I have started missing the 'sitting ducks' (Low 1 and High 7 ... for me honestly, its very humbling if not humiliating (tbh)...). Conversely, I am now much more consistent in powdering High 2 and 3 as well as Low 5 and 6 (I can see them much more clearly now). So I said to myself the other day .. "maybe squint on the sitting ducks" --> BTR aiming.

I would be very interested to understand what words of advice you could offer me on Low 1 and High 7 (as these appear to still bring out the residual of my cross-dom issue).”

Great question with a lot of perspective on doing it the right way…..Pointing not aiming.
I believe what is happening on those sitting duck targets is you are seeing your gun and trying to place it where YOU think it needs to go…aiming verses letting sub-c do its work and point.
I struggle with these “easy” targets too in sporting clays. By the way they are ALL easy and can ALL be made hard! What I do on these that have next to no leed is stay out of the gun ever so slightly so I won’t be tempted to connect until the exact second I fire and stay focused only on target. When targets and barrels line up things get tuff.
Bayne

Aiming can be just as subconscious as pointing. Once your subconscious has learned to recognize the lead picture that corresponds to a certain target behavior, aiming at the intersection point is as instinctive as if you had both eyes open. Aimers don't have to calculate the lead consciously every time they shoot a target, just while they are learning how. Let's face it, pointers have to do the same thing, assimilate a certain physical response to what a target is doing based on many iterations of trial and error. After the correct response is learned, with one eye or two, the process is subconscious. What you do is different, but you still just do it. And that is why there is no time penalty to aiming as many claim. They say it takes longer to think about where to aim the gun than just to point it. I think Gil Ash is one of the folks who thinks aiming is slower and quantifies it in milliseconds. It always takes longer when you have to decide what to do whether aiming or pointing. For those who already know what to do, aimers can do it just as fast as pointers do. (Disclaimer: I have no data supporting this. It is totally my opinion with a bow to common sense.)

friend of a friend · Mar 26, 2023

Rooster booster said:
There’s no ‘natural talent’ in any game or sport. It’s all learned. I love to hear folks talk about ‘instinctive’ this that or the other.

We live in a statistically directed universe that says otherwise. With regard to every characteristic everyone occupies a different place on the bell curve. I didn't say anything about instinct, only about some people being more capable of doing something than others. Denying that is to deny reality. Do you really think that anyone with enough work can be as good as Michael Jordan? Tom Brady? That physical and mental differences mean nothing? How could that be possible?

friend of a friend · Mar 26, 2023

Coach Super-X said:
You should not be thanking anybody for those videos. They are an awful thing to do to someone trying to learn to shoot.

Any dunce can tell a learner to occlude his off eye and it will usually immediately make him better, but it makes him better at measuring, and that is a dead end. Ed Solomon is not cross-dominant and does not have a clue how to deal with people who are. The idea that you can be getting "bad information" or "data" from one eye and fix it by occluding that eye is, for the vast majority of people, ridiculous. That isn't the problem. The problem is very few people actually know what to do with their eyes, which is obvious from these threads.

But what is really hilarious is you guys telling BHorne he just doesn't know what he's talking about. If you really want to figure out the "eye dominance" puzzle, I suggest you go back to that (last) closed eye dom thread in the Shotguns - General forum that Jim started are read very, very carefully what Bayne wrote. He is probably the only person you will ever run into, on the Internet or otherwise, who is strongly left-eye dominant, shooting R-handed with both eyes open and no occlusive device AND who has for years scored at the very top level in his game. I don't mean doing well at his local club like Jim does, I mean in national competitions.

Pull up the results of last year's NSCA National Championship, Main Event, and you will see that Zach, who won it, beat Bayne (now in his 50s, by the way) by exactly 6 birds out of 300. The only other guys who out-shot him were Brandon, Anthony, Joe F. and Derrick.

A whole lot of you could learn something if you started listening to the right people, and quit thinking you have this "how to shoot" thing all figured out.

Just sayin'.

The point you are missing is what has BHorne's ability to do something have to do with anyone else? Once again, the oddball nature of shotgun target shooting: the absurd belief that everyone can do it just as well and exactly the same way when there is no other pursuit in human experience for which that is true.

Rooster booster · Mar 26, 2023

friend of a friend said:
We live in a statistically directed universe that says otherwise. With regard to every characteristic everyone occupies a different place on the bell curve. I didn't say anything about instinct, only about some people being more capable of doing something than others. Denying that is to deny reality. Do you really think that anyone with enough work can be as good as Michael Jordan? Tom Brady? That physical and mental differences mean nothing? How could that be possible?

I agree that a 4’11”, 120lb ain’t gonna okay nose tackle in the NFL, nor is that person gonna do well in the NBA. But as you’ve do often pointed out, shooting ain’t a stick and ball sport, so the comparisons won’t work.

Shooting is pretty much not much with regard to physical attributes, other than good eyesight helps, but I know some very fine shots who wear very thick glasses/contacts.

Learning the basics, constant application, and dedication can take most folks very far. I also agree that with anything, not everyone has ‘it’. But the ‘it’ in shooting is for the most part between the ears.

friend of a friend · Mar 26, 2023

Lacyb said:
For me my eyes are focused on the clay and the gun is mounted to the cheek but the center of the eye is not aligned with the barrel at the time the trigger is pulled. The barrel is pointing at intercept point (lead) and the eye is on the target. That lead picture is mostly subconscious.

I think the "gun shoots where you look" concept is taken too literally by some. The gun shoots where it is pointed and only on shoot directly at the target type presentations is it pointed in direction where your eye happens to be perfectly aligned with the rib.

LacyB, well siad and very informative. You have made my day when you stipulate using what I imagine to be one of the most common ways to look one place and point the gun another. Of course the gun doesn't shoot where you look except when your eyes are locked down the rib as in a practice mount. Humor me and consider whether knowing (subconsciously, of course) where the gun is pointing when you are not looking there (propioception) is due to "feeling" the amount the eyes are rolled left or right. Or is there some other sensory input that is assimilated to know this?

Coach Super-X · Mar 26, 2023

skeeter_ninz said:
I believe that 'one size', or one way, does NOT fit all, and I think that is one of the key points Ed S is outlining ... "what works for you" ... and I don't think Ed is advising to occlude either.

Advising learners to find "what works for you" is so warm and fuzzy. It is indeed what most want to hear. But actually chasing that ephemeral nonsense is one of the best ways I know to through away $50,000.

You don't think Ed is advising to occlude? That is exactly what he did in the first video, telling the video-making learner to close his left eye "just to try it." No learner should ever be told to close (or o/wise occlude) an eye.

Compounding the error, after asking Jonny if, after closing the eye, he is "seeing the gun more, or seeing it less," and being told he is seeing it more, Ed acts like that is just wonderful.

It is just about the biggest buffoonery I have ever seen in shotgun coaching.

But you are absolutely right -- "one way does NOT fit all." It works best for only about 99.99% of the people trying it before they have burned in the bad habits.

Actually it would work best even for the other .01% if they could make themselves do it and stick with it, but they can't. Bayne was in that .01% and was able to fight his way out, so he can tell you all about, but right now he is headed for Tucson to shoot the NSCA U.S. Open.

Good shooting, Bayne!

Eye-dominance issues ... focusing on the maintained-lead picture

160345

Jim Tyner

Finwe

thor_sen

skeeter_ninz

160345

Notch15

272754

Notch15

Coach Super-X

skeeter_ninz

friend of a friend

Rooster booster

160345

friend of a friend

friend of a friend

friend of a friend

Rooster booster

friend of a friend

Coach Super-X

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities