Noob Again - Lead

[Freddypip]

One day I might read you book again - I don't seem to be able to give it away.

 

[bordergun]

Perhaps shooters are worried your negative vibes will rub off? Maybe you could use it to light the fire?

 

[FESkent]

and George

 

[chippy]

For me this is example of where one statement needs to considered carefully. In my view for the reasons I have set out it's a fact which can, in some cases cause more trouble, than it solves. I do not believe many shooters will find their perceived lead between 3, 5 & 4 is the same and telling them mathematically there is a reason it could be doesn't help.

I shoot a bit of skeet and I certainly don't see the same lead on 3 4 and 5. I see about 3ft on station 3 both targets. 4ft on station 4 both targets. 4ft station 5 high and 2ft 5 low.

 

[bordergun]

Chippy. Just to clarify what I actually said here.

I said because the flight line of the low house target is parallel to #3 and #4 and the flight line of the high house target as parallel to #4 and #5 and the distance to the targets is the same, the lead must be the same. Relative to the shooters position, #3 and #4 are full crossing shots, #4 and #5 are full crossing shots. If we take the speed of the target over the center stake as approximately 40-50 MPH, (it is actually according to a cronograph closer to 46) and the speed of an average shot shell as 1,200 ft /second (which is 800 MPH) that is a ratio of 16:1. That means that as the shot charge travels towards the target, for every 16 yards, during the same time interval, the target will move 1 yard. At 21 yards (ie distance to the center stake) the lead requirement will be one yard and an extra time space to travel the extra 5 feet. The lead is 3'9". But please also bear in mind that your pattern from a skeet choke will be approximately 24"-30 inches at 20 yards. The Unit lead 'Formula" for skeet is as follows:

Low house targets 1,2,4,4,2,1,0.
High house targets 0,1,2,4,4,2,1.

And Chippy, the perceived lead on the high house #3 is about two feet not 3 feet. It is 2 feet the same as you say on the #5 low. 4 feet on #4 is correct and #5 is correct. And you must shoot slightly under H 2 and H 3. High 2 is usually missed more than any other targets on skeet because of excessive gun movement.

And for sporting clays, here is something you can try at home ..........if your club will allow it.

On a skeet field, shoot the low house target on #1 with a 1 Unit Lead. Shoot the target 4X over the center stake. This target will be at coming in at approximately 15 degrees to your shooting position. Then, IF YOUR CLUB WILL ALLOW IT. move out about 10 feet to the side of the High house and shoot the low house target on the adjacent skeet field. This target over the center stake will now be about 60 yards away from you. The 1 Unit Lead will still break it.

Then borrow the Unit Lead book from Freddypip and look at the diagram that explains why it will still break it on page 36.

Of course now some of you will be once again trying very hard to trip me up and tell me "the target isn't doing that speed, its 47 mph" or "I shoot faster shells than 1,200 ft/second" or "it's 16 degrees to your shooting position, not 15 degrees" Please don't bother splitting hairs guys, heard it ALL before. many, many times.

 

[Luke_(NL)]

I would much prefer to stay quite and press that 'ignore' button, but if that from was a private email it was a private email and you should not be reprinting it here. To do so is just bad manners. And that's assuming you have a correct quote in context.

In case that wasn't clear, he wasn't quoting an actual e-mail from me. I am not sure why he would make it out to sound like he was, other than self-aggrandizement or being a tool. To each his own.

Freddypip Luke contacted me in October saying his average was 22-23 for Olympic skeet and that he would quote from the e mail :-"love to explore any means and theory for improving."

This is correct and an actual quote, but from the contact form on your site, to which you linked on the forum.

In case my "thank you" for the offered advice wasn't received - THANK YOU. I will also mention that it consisted of a couple of paragraphs on your visualisation method and a page from a book. I respectfully don't agree that they were "very clear, precise and specific instructions", nor were they tailored to my question. That's fine, but I drew a conclusion that such "advice" despite being FREE OF CHARGE wasn't very useful to me. As to why you seem to take issue that I don't agree with your 'read' on what lead is required when I shoot is beyond me, as according to you, every champion is backing your corner.

@Freddypip - Thanks for the support and promotion of common decency (as well as common sense).

 

[bordergun]

Luke_NL No, that isn't what you did and you of course are well aware of that.

If you take the trouble to look on a skeet field diagram, my advice to you was 100% correct. It was my professional opinion based on knowledge accrued from 7 years as the professional at arguably the best skeet club here in the US and 3-4 years coaching Olympians and I gave you the advice in good faith. Rather than replying directly to me via e mail and letting me know that you didn't agree with my advice, you put your reply on here:- Introduction and Gunfit, post #151. I then suggested ways to improve your average and despite several e mails to you, they were ignored. Instead, you then decided to put something on this public forum suggesting that I only wanted to sell books and the domain name was available to that end.

For many years I have happily answered questions from shooters and I will continue to do that. Most say my replies to them help but unfortunately, there are some that prefer to abandon objectivity and logic and can't be helped.

I think your post #159 where you say, quote:- "I shoot everything by letting the clay pass the barrels first." sums it up admirably. Really? For Olympic skeet? Seriously, in view of that, maybe you should take up golf? And please don't press the report button (as you did last time) to get this post removed because that suggestion really is honest, constructive criticism.

 

[Freddypip]

I read it as a quote so it’s very disappointing to find it’s not. Very unprofessional. Having said that it doesn’t surprise me given Peter’s polarised view of himself and the ease with which he dismisses others points of view. I now understand why Ben was so forthright when Peter first started posting here.

Overall it’s a shame. Whilst I think Peter’s promotion of maintained lead doesn’t sit well with the CPSA system & FESkent is right to refer to George Digweeds comments, he might have had something useful to say. As it is, despite a lot of patience by many, he is best ignored.

 

[bordergun]

Freddypip Now I get it and I apologize. I didn't realize that English was your second language. If you think someone can successfully shoot good scores in Olympic skeet by using swing through and seeing different leads than the ones that are correct, carry on.

 

[Stiggers]

The thread that keeps on giving

 

[perazman]

If it was a dog you'd have had it put down!

PM

 

[k80ben]

If it was a dog you'd have had it put down!

PM

I tried to warn you all. It’s happened with him on numerous platforms. Terrible shot, terrible coach and peddles lies about achievements and quotes.

But you all hit melt down

 

[Freddypip]

Yep - My fault - Prefer to make up my own mind.

You lot could ask me if I'm alright instead of making jokes

 

[bordergun]

Freddypip I agree, sometimes we never learn do we? And BTW, who is the guy that some of the top shooters here in the US refer to as Ben Hustlercheat? Do you know that guy?

 

[Bavarian]

I wish someone would write a book for finding the correct lead on clays.
"Station 8 - take it or leave it!" or something like that.

 

[Freddypip]

Peter - As I said above I prefer to take people as I find them. I gave you that courtesy and will continue to do the same for others.

 

[Luke_(NL)]

I think your post #159 where you say, quote:- "I shoot everything by letting the clay pass the barrels first." sums it up admirably. Really? For Olympic skeet? Seriously, in view of that, maybe you should take up golf? And please don't press the report button (as you did last time) to get this post removed because that suggestion really is honest, constructive criticism.

Well, thanks again, I guess. Also, I've yet to report any post from anyone, ever. Maybe you are mistaken me for someone else, but admin should be able to tell. I'm certainly not the only one who feels that your intentions aren't as well meant as you make them out to be, your "constructive criticism" proving the case in point.

 

[bordergun]

Luke_NL No, not mistaken. And Bavarian also gave you the same "constructive criticism" advice that I did about attempting to shoot Olympic skeet by using swing-through. But some fell on stony ground.....

 

[bordergun]

k80ben. You are correct. I have been banned on occasion from numerous platforms but not for the reasons you think. Some of the platforms don't support constructive and meaningful criticism like this one does and a quick glance reveals that yet another new member from California has now found his way here. I suspect many others will follow.

This is a MUCH better site than some of them. But as you also know, some come on here and the Internet to spout utter garbage about other, well established, successful coaches here in the US.

 

[bordergun]

Freddypip. So will I, but I'm afraid you missed the point completely about using maintained lead and the Unit Lead methodology verses the CPSA method. Please let me explain.

If you teach anyone to shoot by using a method that relies on residual gun speed, ie swing through or pull-away, two things will vary that you have no control over. These are:-
1. speed of swing and
2. shooter reaction time. If either of those vary from shot to shot, the student will learn nothing and he will only break the target some of the time. I prefer my student to break the targets every time.

When the student quickly learns the appropriate lead requirement, he can then adjust his timing to accommodate other methods, just like George Digweed does, as FESkent pointed out.