OP
OP
Grump
Member
Other than the wintertime don't freeze element in many parts of the country, how important is it to have an indoor range?
What Would it Take to Get YOU out to a Bullseye ("Conventional Pistol" Event?
- Thread starter Grump
- Start date
- Status
Glock Doctor
Member
An act of God! 
Generally, poor weather in any season will impact turnout, assuming the match is not cancelled.
Wind may affect targets and shooters.
Do outdoor ranges have the target turners that some insist upon?
For tactical games, I prefer to shoot outdoors. I've never shot bullseye.
If the range where I'm a member held a match, I'd probably try it. But bullseye has little appeal to me. It seems like a game for those who already have a quiet mind. I, OTOH, shoot to achieve a quiet mind. Too much time lavished on a particular shot, over and over again, would allow me back into the chattering mind that I'm trying to leave behind when I go shooting. But for those who have already achieved inner peace, I'm sure it's a terrific game.
I'm in my late 30's, if that's relevant.
I'm in my late 30's, if that's relevant.
anothernewb
Member
We have a pistol club that shoots bullseye every wed nite for 2 hours. kinda fun.
Frankly, bullseye evokes images of dueling with pistols or regimented volley fire with muskets. Perhaps the perception is that it is a style of shooting with a lot of old school baggage attached to it. So, any thoughts on how Bullseye will fare over the next 20 years? From posts thus far, I'd say the long format (2700?) will die and may already have one foot in the grave.
The Old Fuff, having been there and done that, would suggest that those who for any reason want to be superior handgun shooters, ("superior" in the context of being able to shoot very small and consistant groups out to 50 yards and beyond) would be both wise and fortunate if they could spend some time learning conventional bullseye shooting.
This I suppose in contrary to most of the more popular games and other activities that stress close range/fast shootin at the expense of even moderate accuracy.
But accuracy - especially under stress - is important; and should be the principal objective of early training and practice. Once this is mastered go on to developing faster speed. No less of an authority the Jeff Cooper strongly advocated that one should perfect the above cited basics before venturing in to combat techniques.
When I observe someone at a shooting range blasting away at a target cranked out to 10 yards or less and getting a pattern rather then a group; I can tell that person has put the cart in front of the horse - and is unlikely to get much better.
This I suppose in contrary to most of the more popular games and other activities that stress close range/fast shootin at the expense of even moderate accuracy.
But accuracy - especially under stress - is important; and should be the principal objective of early training and practice. Once this is mastered go on to developing faster speed. No less of an authority the Jeff Cooper strongly advocated that one should perfect the above cited basics before venturing in to combat techniques.
When I observe someone at a shooting range blasting away at a target cranked out to 10 yards or less and getting a pattern rather then a group; I can tell that person has put the cart in front of the horse - and is unlikely to get much better.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
And that certainly is correct, so long as we accept that the purpose of the exercise is to shoot small groups at long range.
For someone who owns a handgun with the purpose of protecting life in realistically anticipated close-range encounters, small groups that would score well in conventional pistol competition would be unnecessary, possibly even detrimental, and pursuing them would not represent that shooter "getting any better."
Some basis in the fundamentals of marksmanship seems wise, but if the goal is not 3" groups at 50 yards, but well-placed 3"-spaced pairs at 7 yards fast, then spending the time and discipline needed to accomplish the former seems to rob rather than support the attainment of the latter.
Some folks do smile knowingly and opine that since they are accomplished bullseye shooters then they possess the right stuff to prevail in the practical/defensive games -- or in a violent encounter. Nothing seems to make that statement any truer than the reverse.
For someone who owns a handgun with the purpose of protecting life in realistically anticipated close-range encounters, small groups that would score well in conventional pistol competition would be unnecessary, possibly even detrimental, and pursuing them would not represent that shooter "getting any better."
Some basis in the fundamentals of marksmanship seems wise, but if the goal is not 3" groups at 50 yards, but well-placed 3"-spaced pairs at 7 yards fast, then spending the time and discipline needed to accomplish the former seems to rob rather than support the attainment of the latter.
Some folks do smile knowingly and opine that since they are accomplished bullseye shooters then they possess the right stuff to prevail in the practical/defensive games -- or in a violent encounter. Nothing seems to make that statement any truer than the reverse.
peacemaker45
Member
More time. More money, but then I repeat myself. There's hardly a shooting game out there that I don't want to try, but quality gear is expensive. I already shoot SASS, and USPSA. Even though I'd like to try Bullseye, High Power, 3 gun, Trap, Skeet, Sporting Clays, 3d archery, actually doing so requires a considerable outlay of funds, and taking one of my precious few weekends, and deciding not to compete in the games I'm already e equipped for, but rather divide my attentions still further.
When your parents played the game and Bullseye was popular, could this have been in the years before the practical shooting games came along?
No, the purpose of the excise is mastery over both the handgun and one’s self. It involves reducing critical basics to habit so that the attentive side of the mind can concentrate on other things.
In my lifetime I have had the pleasure and privilege of meeting a small number of men who had survived a number of shooting situations. These you understand were not games but the real thing. Within the group three stand out; Charles Askins Jr., Bill Jordan and Jeff Cooper.
Askins was a National Champion bullseye shooter many times over. Jordan, while not a noted competitor held gold Distinguished Metals in all of the recognized shooting sports in both rifle and pistol that offered them during his time. I presume that Jeff Cooper needs no further introduction.
All of them told me at one time or another, that the best way for a new shooter to succeed was to learn the basics and self-discipline while participating in classic bullseye shooting. Cooper was emphatic in making the point that one of the biggest problems instructors at his Gunsite Training Facility had were those who were trying to master advanced combat techniques who hadn’t yet learned the basics of marksmanship.
I am not advocating that someone should take up the bullseye game to the exclusion of all others, just saying that it is a great place to start when one has the opportunity to do so.
I put the word “superior” into a specific and limited context for a purpose, and hopefully avoid it being seen as offensive. I will stand on what I posted so long as it isn’t seen outside of that context. Should you attend a tournament and examine the targets being made by Master Class competitors I suspect you will see what I mean.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
I've no doubt that they thought that. Of course, there was little else possible for objective, competitive handgunning back in those days, even for a dedicated shooting enthusiast.
It isn't what very many shooting instructors or top-flite competitors (in any discipline besides traditional pistol), demand, encourage, or suggest now, though. A lot of things seem to devolve over time (hence our many threads on the decline of "quality" in firearms...by whatever internal definition) but I believe they actually evolve and take us to more efficient means -- or even redefined and better understood "ends."
Maybe it is merely a symantic distinction, but...
... sounds a lot like mastery over the handgun and one's self is still being defined as, "to shoot small groups at long range."
To me, mastery over the handgun is highly unlikely to ever involve bullseyes and static targets at 50 yards. Those things are not relevant to my interests, though they may be entertaining as exercises. Now, I haven't mastered the handgun (or myself) and don't believe I ever could or will, but I pursue those goals with some diligence, just with a different focus.
Mauser lover
Member
Unfortunately, three pistols that qualify, a couple of accurate loads, and a range near me...
You still don't get my point:
No matter what you do, basics are still basics. Things like sight alignment and sight picture, how to press the trigger and not disturb either the alignment or picture, and to do all of this one handed. Of course there is much more involved but one advantage is that the learning can be done without the unrelated distractions that are part of the combat game picture.
As much as I’d like to, I don’t think my posts are doing what the O.P. hoped to accomplish. Rather then muddy the water I’ll withdraw.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Ok, I do see that point and agree completely. I was distracted by the concern over practicing and participating in classic bullseye competition for that purpose.
I think there's a fascinating and deep discussion possible in this, but we probably are wandering from the OP's purpose as you said.
I think there's a fascinating and deep discussion possible in this, but we probably are wandering from the OP's purpose as you said.
blarby
Member
An invitation.
It occuring on a day off for me.
Being not more than 2 hours away.
I'm not embarrassed about how poorly or how ell I may shoot. Am I willing to give it a run ? Absolutely. I dont fire one handed particularly well, but I'll do dang near anything for exciting trigger time.
It occuring on a day off for me.
Being not more than 2 hours away.
I'm not embarrassed about how poorly or how ell I may shoot. Am I willing to give it a run ? Absolutely. I dont fire one handed particularly well, but I'll do dang near anything for exciting trigger time.
anothernewb
Member
Our range must be a bit fast and loose with the bullseye rules. We simply do turining and timed target rounds at 50'. you 'choot em with whatever you fancy Nobody cares what you're using, so long as it's range approved (we can't use magnums in our range apparently - something about the backstops and noise limits).
Then we score them up and post the scores for the night. we have 10 lanes. Once I got to #2 with a 93 but that's my best so far.
Then we score them up and post the scores for the night. we have 10 lanes. Once I got to #2 with a 93 but that's my best so far.
Saleen322
Member
It will take someone with a desire to be a better shooter. If you go to a match and talk to the better shooters you will soon discover that they are focused on improving their performance as shooters, much more than how they do in the match. If you want to meet some of the best folks in shooting, you will find them here. If you ask people for advice, they are happy to help you out and even let you shoot their guns.
Conventional will always be around as there are always shooters out there who want to get better. In conventional pistol you can go to a sectional match and some months later you will get a small booklet that shows where you rank in the US. You can track your progress from year to year and set measurable goals for yourself as to where you want your scores to go. Unless it changed from when I did it, you can't take your steel scores, for example, and compare them to other matches as each are set up different to keep it fun. Nothing wrong with that but I didn't feel I was growing as a shooter. I shot steel plate matches one season and figured out quickly that if you keep your sights aligned and press off the shot, it doesn't matter what part of the plate you hit. I won about every match I entered that year, was the club champion in steel plates but my skills dropped off as I could be sloppy and still hit the plates. I never had the urge to shoot steel again. IDPA and steel were the hot matches at some of the old clubs I shot at but they are now being replaced with Cowboy shooting as it is now popular. Conventional seems to have about the same participants. It does seem once someone with the desire to be a good shooter tries conventional, they keep coming back.
Saleen322
Member
The 41s shoot okay but few will out shoot a Ruger for accuracy. The 41 has a better trigger and costs more. Get a Ruger, change the grips and get a trigger job, and you will have spend a LOT more to get more accuracy.
nbkky71
Member
Quite honestly, it's a matter of me getting motivated to start shooting pistol as I'm a CMP/NRA highpower rifle guy. When I start shooting pistol, I'm going to be chasing my distinguished pistol badge.
OP
OP
Grump
Member
One of the first and few IPSC matches I shot had a bank of 3 MilPark or Metric targets at 40 yards, to be engaged from the prone.
A LOT of competitors missed at least 1-4 shots of the 6 required (I think it was two per target).
To simulate the North Hollywood shootout (which had not yet happened), they should have had hard cover and called for head shots only. Put that into your Practical Pipes and smoke it. And yes, I know that in NH, it was closer to 50-70 yards and the perps were moving quite a bit.
That said, back to the topic. I really appreciate all answers, including the ones that are essentially "Nothing, I have no interest in playing that game." That IS part of what I'm wanting to know.
Thank you.
A LOT of competitors missed at least 1-4 shots of the 6 required (I think it was two per target).
To simulate the North Hollywood shootout (which had not yet happened), they should have had hard cover and called for head shots only. Put that into your Practical Pipes and smoke it. And yes, I know that in NH, it was closer to 50-70 yards and the perps were moving quite a bit.
That said, back to the topic. I really appreciate all answers, including the ones that are essentially "Nothing, I have no interest in playing that game." That IS part of what I'm wanting to know.
Thank you.
- Status