|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
998
guests, and
6
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics40,344
Posts574,147
Members14,700
| |
Most Online32,084
Jun 14th, 2026
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 890
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 890 |
In sporting clays infancy, the first 100 straight was shot with a field grade Remington 1100.
My personal highest scores were shot with a 32" barrel Winchester 21 trap and later with a Browning Gold Sporting. I was the only shooter in SE Texas using a side by side in registered competition (long before the Vintagers or SxS only shoots were even a glimmer of thought)because I enjoyed it and had confidence in it.
O/U's became the be all-do all in sporting due to marketing and endorsements by top shooters and because not very many sxs's were being made at that time except in Europe. I remember a lady shooter from San Antonio using her Purdy game gun in an early tournament amid the snickers and snide remarks from other competitors....until she whipped most everyone's ass there.
The 6" between a shooter's ears can either be his greatest asset or his worst enemy.
"You're either on 'em or you ain't" -- The late, great Bob Brister
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 197 Likes: 5
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 197 Likes: 5 |
"speed in focus being what causes eye dominance"
Sorry, but nothing could be further from the truth. Plus, a little beyond a meter or so the human eye is already biologically and physiologically focused for distant objects. This assumes normal (corrected or otherwise) vision. We cannot purposely "focus" in on distant objects, our eyes automatically do it for us. We can peer intently, concentrate on, etc these distant objects such as birds or clays. We CAN, however, purposely focus on near objects until presbyopia sets in at around 50 years of age. To put this simply, our accommodative ability (the ability of the eye to change focus) diminishes with age. When our eyes are in a relaxed state (no muscle tension on the lens) they are optically focused for distant vision. Some of the vision stuff I have seen put out by supposedly knowledgeable shooting instructors is absolutely false.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 14,673 Likes: 2438
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 14,673 Likes: 2438 |
The nearest I can tell, I will give up 4 to 6 birds, on a round of 100, by shooting the S x S, compared to my MX-8s.
We can debate whether or not there really is a disadvantage to shooting the S x S in sporting clays all day long, and never reach a consensus. That was not my purpose in starting this thread. I already KNOW that the disadvantage is real. I only put this forth as a reasonable explanation as to why. I will continue to hunt with my S x Ss, and compete with them in S x S venues, but never again will I attempt to compete in a major sporting event with one. I enter them to try to win, and one bird can be huge in a 200 bird event. I shot in a team tournament yesterday afternoon. Four man teams, 100 bird course. Our team won the event, and $1000, by ONE BIRD! We shot a 360, next team had a 359.
The only shotgun game I can think of where there may be an advantage to shooting a really good handling S x S is box birds. What pigeon shooting I have done has been with a O/U, but the next time it will be with a S x S. Pigeons is a game of elevation, mostly. A S x S may well give a better perspective of elevation distance. One of the greatest pigeon shooters of the modern era, Billy Perdue, thought so, and only used S x Ss.
SRH
May God bless America and those who defend her.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 208
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 208 |
O/U's became the be all-do all in sporting due to marketing and endorsements... Thats my take. Along with lots of other stuff in lots of other spaces.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227 |
The nearest I can tell, I will give up 4 to 6 birds, on a round of 100, by shooting the S x S, compared to my MX-8s.
SRH Why is that, Stan? On as purely an objective, apples to apples, basis as you can describe....barrel length, chokes, stock dimensions, weight, balance, MOI....how does your SxS compare to your MX8? If you have to make a single apology for the SxS in any one of those respects, then it's a condemnation of the particular gun, not SxS's as a species. Right? I competed pretty well at sporting and FITASC with O/U's for a dozen years or so. When I ran out of mods to keep my interest fresh I switched to SxS's exclusively. Having stocked a half dozen target guns to suit myself I set out to apply what I'd learned about gun fit and target shooting to a SxS comp gun. I wound up with a a 32" barreled Fox, choked .022/.022, weighing 8.25 lb and balanced as I like. My only regret is that it didn't come in at 8.6 lbs. The only way that would have been possible would have required 3-4 ounce heavier barrels from the get go, and that wasn't in the cards. That resulted in a short learning curve to get accustomed to the slightly lighter weight. But o more so than my earlier experiences with growing barrel length and weight in my O/U's. I've now put over 50,000 rounds through the big Fox in virtually every clay target venue. All it gives up on the skeet field is what any other gun with .022 choke would give up. All it gives up at 16 yd trap is the extra 1.25 lbs I prefer. Of the meager 40 or so rounds of bunker trap I've shot, my highest score was a 23...one shot kills from a low gun start with this SxS. If I still shot registered sporting, I'd never hesitate to play the HOA option with this gun. I'm sure it sounds like I'm bragging, but I don't know a better way to stress my opinion that a properly set up SxS in reasonably capable hands is in no way inferior to an O/U....not by a single target on the most strenuous par cour imaginable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,703 Likes: 52
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,703 Likes: 52 |
Without reading the article in its full context I really cannot comment, save to say that Chris Batha's observation and your comments must be good for selling copies of the article.
I am not so sure that palm orientation is as critical to good shotgunning as eye alignment and visual acuity, which may well be all that is different between SxS & O/U shooting skills.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 14,673 Likes: 2438
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 14,673 Likes: 2438 |
mike, Thanks for the thoughtful post. Glad to reply. I honestly do not know why. I have been a S x S shooter for 52 years, since age 8. I love them. But, having shot registered sporting for probably 12 years, and having shot my way into M class (donor class  ), I have learned what works for me and what doesn't. You are most likely very right that if I could get a S x S set up exactly right, that would closely duplicate the handling characteristics of my MX-8s, I could likely shoot it just as well. I have several 32" S x Ss. One A grade Fox, one HE Fox, one LC Smith, and a couple more. I have tried them all at sporting and none suit me. I shoot a BSS with 30" barrels better than any other S x S, and won Veterans concurrent and AA class at the U S Open with it in 2010. It would likely take a full restock, done with great care and expertise to duplicate, as nearly as possible, target gun handling qualities. My shooting style would have to be taken into consideration as well. I shoot what I call "modified ambush" most of the time. It takes so much of the hands out of the game, and puts the onus on the eyes to do the work. Bill McGuire shoots this style exactly. It is a great technique for the man who likes to compete but can't shoot lots of practice targets, like me. How a gun moves, in this style shooting, is so critical, because as the target approaches your muzzle (set-up point), you only make a very short move to establish lead, and shoot. This would require a S x S that was set up to handle EXACTLY like my MX-8s, or it would throw everything off. I think what you explained is likely one reason the vast majority of comp shooters cannot shoot a S x S as well as an O/U, lack of availability. But, that is reality. How many people, until they get very serious about competition, would invest the money and time necessary to build a serious comp S x S, just so they can say they shoot a S x S as well as a O/U in competition? Batha may be all wet, and me along with him. But, if you shot serious comp for ten years, mike, you learned that little things get into your head and either bolster or erode your confidence. Though I am not swayed easily by the power of suggestion, or anyone's writing for that matter, I admit I get strong beliefs about what works, and why, in competition. Very few things are more important when you step into the box than confidence in one's self and equipment. Thanks for the consideration. SRH
May God bless America and those who defend her.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114 |
mike, Thanks for the thoughtful post. Glad to reply. I honestly do not know why. I have been a S x S shooter for 52 years, since age 8. I love them. But, having shot registered sporting for probably 12 years, and having shot my way into M class (donor class ), I have learned what works for me and what doesn't. You are most likely very right that if I could get a S x S set up exactly right, that would closely duplicate the handling characteristics of my MX-8s, I could likely shoot it just as well. I have several 32" S x Ss. One A grade Fox, one HE Fox, one LC Smith, and a couple more. I have tried them all at sporting and none suit me. I shoot a BSS with 30" barrels better than any other S x S, and won Veterans concurrent and AA class at the U S Open with it in 2010. It would likely take a full restock, done with great care and expertise to duplicate, as nearly as possible, target gun handling qualities. My shooting style would have to be taken into consideration as well. I shoot what I call "modified ambush" most of the time. It takes so much of the hands out of the game, and puts the onus on the eyes to do the work. Bill McGuire shoots this style exactly. It is a great technique for the man who likes to compete but can't shoot lots of practice targets, like me. How a gun moves, in this style shooting, is so critical, because as the target approaches your muzzle (set-up point), you only make a very short move to establish lead, and shoot. This would require a S x S that was set up to handle EXACTLY like my MX-8s, or it would throw everything off. I think what you explained is likely one reason the vast majority of comp shooters cannot shoot a S x S as well as an O/U, lack of availability. But, that is reality. How many people, until they get very serious about competition, would invest the money and time necessary to build a serious comp S x S, just so they can say they shoot a S x S as well as a O/U in competition? Batha may be all wet, and me along with him. But, if you shot serious comp for ten years, mike, you learned that little things get into your head and either bolster or erode your confidence. Though I am not swayed easily by the power of suggestion, or anyone's writing for that matter, I admit I get strong beliefs about what works, and why, in competition. Very few things are more important when you step into the box than confidence in one's self and equipment. Thanks for the consideration. SRH "Batha may be all wet" nice one Jawja Guy. Who is this shotgun guru and what is a SSM? Hopefully NOT a reference to a 32 round 9mm Parabellum magazine for a WW11 era German Schmeisser SMG__ The late Ernest Hemingway won more money in Cuba shooting box pigeons with his M12- 12 gauge 30" full choke solid rib field gun, made in 1928 with the early style perch-bellied stock and small radius pg- and he had good sized paws--for a right handed man, the left hand does the shotgun "steering", the right hand controls the trigger finger- as long as you don't drop the gun when you fire it, WTF difference does it make. My older Smiths run the gamut of pg and semi-pg shapes, depending on year and place (Syracuse or Fulton) and I shoot them all equally well=- I have seven Model 12's (OK 6 field guns, rule out the Pigeon Grade Trap 1948 with the el biggo grip and forearm) and 2 of them are pre-`1934- with the perch belly stock and smaller grip, and I also shoot them just as well as their post 1935 counterparts- grip-Schmip!!!
"The field is the touchstone of the man"..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 247
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 247 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,575 Likes: 182
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,575 Likes: 182 |
Any you guys ever boxed?
Try to throw a jab with your palm UP. At a speed bag. Your left jab, assuming you are right handed, is your lead hand. Aren't we told to use our left hand in shotgunning?
Natural, hunh?
Now try it like any boxer would.
What's easier to connect with a moving target?
I was terrible at boxing: I'm white, got a big nose, from the 'burbs, and I'm slow. I don't shoot well, either.
But I wouldn't be so dismissive of someone like Chris who has walked the walk.
Vic, I'm not sure the boxing analogy works. I'm not a golfer, but I took a golf class as a PE course in college. The most unnatural thing in the world, to me, is the way you grip a golf club--yet almost all golfers use that very unnatural grip. That being said, maybe my resistance to the golf club grip had something to do with the fact that I'd been gripping baseball bats for about 15 years before I ever picked up a golf club. Another example of what seems natural vs unnatural: How do most of us throw something? Like we'd throw a baseball, right? Did cavemen throw rocks at game the same way? We may think so, and it certainly seems "natural"--although maybe that has something to do with exposure to baseball. But watch a fast pitch softball pitcher in action (a game that, sadly, has mostly disappeared--for men, at least). The underhand motion appears very unnatural, yet it's also significantly easier on the arm and shoulder. The fast pitch pitcher can throw game after game, with little or no rest in between. Some of you may remember the four man traveling team, the King and his Court. Pitcher Eddie Feigner could throw a significantly more air-resistant softball faster than major league fastballers can throw a baseball. Easier on the arm, more effective in terms of velocity and certainly at least equal in accuracy . . . yet it feels anything but natural. Unless you're a softball pitcher. Back to guns. I've been a doublegun shooter all my shooting life, mostly sxs but some OU as well. Then, a few years back, I had a chance to pick up a 16ga A-5 (standard weight, not Sweet 16) at a very attractive price. That was the first autoloader I'd ever owned. I'd heard that one can either shoot those hump-backed Brownings or they can't. Apparently I'm one of the guys who can, because that gun seemed more "natural" to me--at least on a skeet field--than anything I'd ever shot before. I followed it with a couple of Sweet 16's. Same feeling, same results. But they did not convert me to toting A-5's after birds, because they simply don't feel right as hunting guns. Might have been different if I hadn't been conditioned to the feel, in the field, of a doublegun.
Last edited by L. Brown; 04/16/12 08:11 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
