Trad Gang
Main Boards => The Shooters FORM Board => Topic started by: Ruff Hewn on August 10, 2012, 07:46:00 PM
-
The other day I was asked if I shoot instictive or gap. I didn't know how to answer, so I told him I shoot an instictive gap. Can anyone comment on that?
-
When gap shooting you have to judge distance in order to set your gap.
When shooting instinctively, you are not setting a gap, but still judging distance somewhat, and are relying on memory to set a site picture from previous experience. Like throwing a basball, you don't aim you just throw it base on previous experience.
I tend to use a combination of the two when shooting less than 20 yards, because my gap is to wide to accurately gauge, so I set a gap to get me in the ball park, and then let my instinct take over.
Hope this helps.
-
My take...if in your sight picture you are conciously using your arrow to help direct it to the mark (seeing both shaft and mark in the horizontal and vertical) then I'd say you are more in the realm of gap shooting. If you are only 'subconciously' aware of where the shaft is (no concious lining up of shaft, no attempt to see or set space between arrow point and mark) then you're closer to instinctive. Lots of variations are possible, but IMO that's pretty close to where the dividing line is.
Another means often described as a test to see if you truly shoot instinctive is to shoot at a lighted spot in a totally dark situation...so that it's impossible to physically see the shaft (laser pointer is a good light source, candle not so much...it lights the area). If you can do this and be consistently and reasonably accurate then it's a good bet that instinctive is how you are forming your sight picture and executing your shot. The main variable under the dark condition is distance, since in the dark and with a 'spot' of unknown size (nothing else to compare it to in what you see) you will lose depth perception (can't tell how far away the light spot is). At fairly close range it won't much matter.
-
I guess I blurr the line between the two as I do both. So how about we coin a term hear and call that "Insitnctive Gap"?
-
Based on the differences described above (which not everyone will agree with, I know), I don't believe you can instinctively gap shoot, nor shoot instinctively using a gap approach. While "instinctive" sighting isn't really a true "instinct" (like gap shooting it's a learned process), that's where the sharing between them ends. One often hears that gap shooting 'becomes' instinctive, but since the basics of how the methods work are so fundamentally different, how can that be? Oil does not mix with water if tossed in the same barrel, even if they might at a glance appear to be one liquid. More likely, it's just that the shooter's level of familiarity with gapping becomes keener with practice, and so 'seems' instinctive. To 'mix' them in theory only serves to provide more fodder for confusion to those wishing to learn the intracacies of one method or the other.
IMO, despite some appearance of similarity, the two disciplines are fundamentally different strategies used to achieve the same result, each with their own pieces, advantages, and disadvantages. Anyhoo, that's my take on it.
-
Ruff, I believe you are identifying a useful category of aiming in between gap and instinctive. Howard Hill called it "split vision." He didn't measure a gap, and he also didn't shoot instinctively. Instead, he saw the arrow tip in his peripheral vision, and used that information as a part of his aiming technique. He always focused his primary vision on the spot he wanted to hit.
You will find that you will ruffle feathers if you use the term "instinctive" in describing this aiming method, and in fact there is no need to, as Howard got there first and has already named it anyway, so we might as well use his term. Many of us use this aiming method.
-
What you just described is exactly how I aim. So I guess what I do is "Split Vision". Haven't read anything by Howard Hill...guess I should.
Thanks.
-
His classic book is "Hunting the Hard Way." Well worth a read.
-
The basis for Hill's sighting method (split vision, secondary vision) was essentially a gap system. He focused on the mark but let the location of the arrow tip (or bow hand) guide his aiming, as they WERE seen in his peripheral vision. He didn't look directly at them, but he did see them and did use the 'space' between the mark and the arrow (or bow hand) as a reference to develop his sight picture. At least, that's how his star pupil John Schulz describes his approach. Practically speaking, split vision is simply a variation of gap shooting.
In the end there isn't any need to attach a label to any method of shooting except to help convey how one method differs from another or teach someone else the basics of how it works. We all have our own variations, nobody is the same. It's making your method work for you, whatever it is, that matters.
Happy shooting.
-
McDave, 100% agree on "Hunting the Hard Way". After years and years of split vision shooting it will eventually become instinctive, meaning you just don't think about it anymore. Everyone that shoots instinctive does a split vision of some kind weather they know it or not, they see the arrow tip in peripheral vision while focusing on their target. I can do that instinctively out to about 10 - 12 yards (when I'm practiced), after that (15 yards and beyond)I have to think about it. Bob Wesley teaches a great course on split vision shooting.
-
Ruff Hewn, I believe that we all, either conciously or sub-conciously,use the instictive gap as you call it. We all try to pick a spot and focus on it; however, that arrow is in our peipheral vision. The brain will take notice and will factor it into the shot whether we realize it or not.
-
Originally posted by Sam McMichael:
Ruff Hewn, I believe that we all, either conciously or sub-conciously,use the instictive gap as you call it. We all try to pick a spot and focus on it; however, that arrow is in our peipheral vision. The brain will take notice and will factor it into the shot whether we realize it or not.
Nuff said!