Typical Performance chart overlayed with the influence of gear on performance bell curve. (Riley T Bowman)

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • cedartop

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Apr 25, 2010
    6,707
    113
    North of Notre Dame.
    @Skip
    @ditcherman
    @backtrail540
    @gregkl

    This is the work of Riley T Bowman. The automaticity chart originated with John Hearne. It just so happens John has a couple of classes coming up in Indiana soon. Because most of this is on FB I will link Rileys Website and of course if you are on FB you can see the big explanation there from him.

    The abridged version is Riley put forth a Bell curve theory that has low skilled shooters on one end with gear not mattering and high skill shooters on the other end with gear not mattering. In the middle are the rest of us who are apparently a bunch of gear whores. Not sure if I completely agree, but it is interesting. I think it was made more interesting when Riley took John's chart modified it a bit and overlayed his bell curve on it.

    Automaticity and Bell curve.jpg
    I tagged a few people (I think), but anyone please feel free to discuss.
     

    ditcherman

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Dec 18, 2018
    7,723
    113
    In the country, hopefully.
    @Skip
    @ditcherman
    @backtrail540
    @gregkl

    This is the work of Riley T Bowman. The automaticity chart originated with John Hearne. It just so happens John has a couple of classes coming up in Indiana soon. Because most of this is on FB I will link Rileys Website and of course if you are on FB you can see the big explanation there from him.

    The abridged version is Riley put forth a Bell curve theory that has low skilled shooters on one end with gear not mattering and high skill shooters on the other end with gear not mattering. In the middle are the rest of us who are apparently a bunch of gear whores. Not sure if I completely agree, but it is interesting. I think it was made more interesting when Riley took John's chart modified it a bit and overlayed his bell curve on it.

    View attachment 269071
    I tagged a few people (I think), but anyone please feel free to discuss.
    Gear Whore?!?
    Why, I resemble that remark!
    Especially triggers. Definitely turned into a bit of a trigger snob.
     

    backtrail540

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Aug 3, 2008
    439
    27
    Angola, IN
    Keeping in mind that it isn't an exact fit for everybody, I think there is some truth. I've never done a sub 2 bill or most of the other high end automacity goals, i can pick up most of the guns in my safe and get a few turbo runs on Gabes stuff or 90 plus on the test or a FAST in 6 seconds. So for me personally, it probably drops off to gear not mattering earlier than his chart. What seems to matter more for me is recency. If I have a day or two of solid dry practice and a bit of live fire then I can perform near the top of my current game with whatever i'm running.

    That isn't to say that I'm at the top of my game with whatever my whimsy decides on, as I'm sure my peak is lower switching. But unless I get into a very nuanced gun built specifically for performance and focus solely on that then i'm not at pure peak anyway. But between the average striker or dasa guns, i shoot them relatively similarly, so anymore i just run glocks. I of course have my preferences but the numbers show they have more impact on peace of mind than performance. I used to convince myself that I needed X piece of gear to attain X result but that was more a strategy to convince myself to spend the money on the hobby than actually realizing performance gains, if i look back with honesty.

    What i find most interesting is that with a modicum of effort via dry practice and live work you can be in the top 5% of shooters performance wise. Traversing the next 4% takes substantially more effort. I've found that to be spot on. I can get a person who really wants to listen and learn to that 3-4% area in a couple of shooting sessions pretty easily. Where i have spent considerable amount of time and effort and haven't made it to the far right end of the chart. What's great about that is that with minimal work a person can be competent enough, defensively speaking, to handle the shooting tasks they'll likely encounter. The mental aspects etc...are a different ball game but strictly speaking shooting skill, the shooting problems aren't particularly hard.
     
    Top Bottom