In reality how dangerous is a right handed rifle to shoot left handed..

[Heym SR20]

I'm no expert but I think some of this is true some of the time- but certainly not all or most.

What is a dominant eye, exactly ? It won't see any better- or in a higher level of resolution. It just means the brain uses it in preference to the other.

The severity of Eye dominance must vary between people too. Just like some people are absolute retards with their non dominant hand- whilst others are semi ambidextrous- I wonder if this is the case for eye dominance too ? I would think eye dominance in some sports would be a disadvantage- basketball for example. The ability to judge distance with both eyes equally would help ? And being highly eye dominant would mean you shot an awful lot better on one side than the other- and were probably less aware of players on your non dominant side.

For very rapid instinctual shooting- where both eyes are kept open- shooting with a non dominant eye would be distracting.

However- closing the dominant eye fixes these issues.

I can't believe that rifle shooting with a dominant eye leads to getter muscle mind connection? Perhaps on an international competiton level- but for 99.9% of shooters ? I doubt it. One may get tired from closing one eye all the time I suppose

As to launching projectiles- IMO you're massively exaggerating the role of the dominant eye. You can throw a stone with both eyes closed. It's not that rare for eye and hand dominance not to match- closing the non dominant eye means the dominant hand can be used.

I'm sure there are some advantages- judging depth uses both eyes- and if you have to close one you probably lose some depth perception briefly.

The difference in 3 shooters, all shooting right handed, in 2 scenarios

1) has a slightly dominant RE

2) has a very dominant LE- and closes it to shoot

3) has a v dominant RE

A) shotgun snipe

B) Rifle shooting deer

IMO there wouldn't be much difference. Shooter 1 may well still close the non dominant eye- as it will still interfere with their image. Shooter 3 is fine- they can ignore the left eye image. Shooter 2 also closes the LE.

Hopefully someone will be along who really gets this. I can see the difficulties in very instinctual rapid shooting like boar. But that'd it IMO

As you said, you are no expert.

Eye dominance is very important to most sportsman. Most decent shooting instructors would agree and it one of the first things they determine.

I was taught to shoot by a very good shot, who was a family from a family of exceptional batsmen, himself included. There is stand at Lords named his brother/ cousin - I don’t remember which.

He was an utterly superb shot and I saw him take down five duck with five seperate shots from his savage five shot semi - and all were dead in the air before they hit the deck. By all accounts he had been a pretty damn good with a 303 browning machine gun - 8 at once in a Spitfire against Germans.

He absolutely insisted that leading eye was far far more important than which handed you were. If you are left eyed dominant shoot with your left hand, bat left handed, indeed play racket sports left handed.

I am left eyed, but right handed. I shoot left handed and shoot pretty well. I shoot both eyes open and shoot very in game style as I was taught.

I am useless at cricket and other racket sports - he took one look at me and told to switch hands. I am sure if I had done so I would have got a lot better, but got involved in boats instead.

I was a teenager at the time, and he was in his 60’s still coaching top level junior cricket as a professional coach. He could still out bat the best of the bowlers. Then he took a cricket ball in his right dominant eye that badly damaged it - he could not hit a thing after that. Even using a rifle or shotgun - no good at all.

20 odd years ago I dislocated my left wrist - my trigger hand. It was three months in pins and plaster,

During that time I practiced endlessly with an air rifle, 22 rim fire and 410 off my right shoulder. At the time I was in my mid 30’s. I could shoot tolerably well but no where near like I can shoot off my left. It was enough for me to work really hard on rebuilding my left hand function with lots of painful physio. Even with very little feel from my trigger finger and inability to grip the stock firmly I was immediately better using my left hand. Today it still not perfect I need a firm crisp pull of c3lbs. And I use the firm squeeze of the hand as my sights align and its the same whether it’s a shotgun or rifle on a moving target or stationary target.

I suppose one of the playstation generation who a video cross hair on a target and then pressing the trigger snd use the same technique with a heavy low recoiling rifle in a fully supported benchrest type stand could shoot reasonably well provided he can see an image of the cross hair on target.

But anyone who shoots by looking at a target and then aligning the gun a squeezing the trigger will never shot as well if he is using his weak eye.

There are those are much less dominant eyed, and for them which hand they shoot matters less so. But if you reasonably dominant in one eye that should be the eye you shoot with if you want to shoot to your best ability.

As for military only shooting right handed, whilst marksmanship is important being a fit and aggressive soldier is more so and getting rounds downrange towards the enemy more so. When I was innthe cadets shooting the 303 and SLR, if you could shoot a 4” group at 100 yards that was the qualification for a marksman. I think it’s still the same with the SA80 A2.

In a typical squad or platoon you will only have one, perhaps two designated marksmen whose principal role is the longer shots. The rest do the close quarters stuff.

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

As you said, you are no expert.

Eye dominance is very important to most sportsman. Most decent shooting instructors would agree and it one of the first things they determine.

I suppose one of the playstation generation who a video cross hair on a target and then pressing the trigger snd use the same technique with a heavy low recoiling rifle in a fully supported benchrest type stand could shoot reasonably well provided he can see an image of the cross hair on target.

But anyone who shoots by looking at a target and then aligning the gun a squeezing the trigger will never shot as well if he is using his weak eye.

There are those are much less dominant eyed, and for them which hand they shoot matters less so. But if you reasonably dominant in one eye that should be the eye you shoot with if you want to shoot to your best ability.

As for military only shooting right handed, whilst marksmanship is important being a fit and aggressive soldier is more so and getting rounds downrange towards the enemy more so. When I was innthe cadets shooting the 303 and SLR, if you could shoot a 4” group at 100 yards that was the qualification for a marksman. I think it’s still the same with the SA80 A2.

In a typical squad or platoon you will only have one, perhaps two designated marksmen whose principal role is the longer shots. The rest do the close quarters stuff.

Having a dominant eye that aligns with your hand dominance is a big advantage at some high level sports I'm sure. Favouring eye dominance over hand dominance is a big gamble. Perhaps for sports which don't require much athletic time restrictws coordination (like shooting) it may be wise to favour eye dominance. But for something as precise and complex as a raquet sport- it strikes me as a big compromise.

Your older mentor sounds a knowledgeable chap. And is probably true for instinctual shooting. But for patient rifle ? I'm still not so susu.b

Other that some vague claims that mind/eye/body connection is stronger with the dominant eye- is there really any evidence that one shoots rifles better with their dominant eye - when shooting in a calm environment (not instinctual shooting)?

Shooting left handed and then changing to right for a few months as you did doesn't sound like a fair comparison. Did you close your left eye while shooting right handed ?

I still do not see how closing your dominant eye doesn't nullify most of the disadvantages of shooting with your non dominant ?

In scoped rifle shooting (except perhaps low mag driven boar)- keeping the other eye open has no advantage. Your brain isn't using both eyes simultaneously anyway.

Your comment on playstation shooting- or heavy target- rather validates my point. Shooting with the dominant eye closed through a scoped rifle- nullifies the closed eye anyway- so where's the disadvantage ? I don't think the playstation point is valid- as it's a 2D image without eye alignment issues.

You referred to a target shooter as having a "weak eye" above- and whilst you may not have meant it exactly- it's partly what I'm pushing back against. Just because an eye is non dominant- it doesn't make it weak. In 99% of cases- a non dominant eye will see in the same level of detail and resolution as a dominant eye. Which is why im struggling to understand why closing 1 eye doesn't nullify most of the advantages of scoped rifle shooting with a non dominant eye- at least in stalking/general shooting conditions (perhaps not at elite level competing where every 1% helps).

 

[Heym SR20]

Having a dominant eye that aligns with your hand dominance is a big advantage at some high level sports I'm sure. Favouring eye dominance over hand dominance is a big gamble. Perhaps for sports which don't require much athletic time restrictws coordination (like shooting) it may be wise to favour eye dominance. But for something as precise and complex as a raquet sport- it strikes me as a big compromise.

Your older mentor sounds a knowledgeable chap. And is probably true for instinctual shooting. But for patient rifle ? I'm still not so susu.b

Other that some vague claims that mind/eye/body connection is stronger with the dominant eye- is there really any evidence that one shoots rifles better with their dominant eye - when shooting in a calm environment (not instinctual shooting)?

Shooting left handed and then changing to right for a few months as you did doesn't sound like a fair comparison. Did you close your left eye while shooting right handed ?

I still do not see how closing your dominant eye doesn't nullify most of the disadvantages of shooting with your non dominant ?

In scoped rifle shooting (except perhaps low mag driven boar)- keeping the other eye open has no advantage. Your brain isn't using both eyes simultaneously anyway.

Your comment on playstation shooting- or heavy target- rather validates my point. Shooting with the dominant eye closed through a scoped rifle- nullifies the closed eye anyway- so where's the disadvantage ? I don't think the playstation point is valid- as it's a 2D image without eye alignment issues.

You referred to a target shooter as having a "weak eye" above- and whilst you may not have meant it exactly- it's partly what I'm pushing back against. Just because an eye is non dominant- it doesn't make it weak. In 99% of cases- a non dominant eye will see in the same level of detail and resolution as a dominant eye. Which is why im struggling to understand why closing 1 eye doesn't nullify most of the advantages of scoped rifle shooting with a non dominant eye- at least in stalking/general shooting conditions (perhaps not at elite level competing where every 1% helps).

I think we will have to agree to disagree. I suggest you do your research and speak to a number of shooting other sports coaches on the importance of eye dominance in overall performance.

You might have a read of this article - https://www.cpsa.co.uk/userfiles/files/Eye Dominance.pdf

With to handness, a rifle or shotgun are both two handed tools. Depending on your style, technique etc one hand simply operates the trigger whilst the other hand actually does the aiming / pointing in the correct direction.

At one extreme is the straight gripped shotgun. These are very deliberately straight gripped to minimise control by the trigger hand. Correct technique is to point with the forehand that grips the barrels. You look at bird and point the gun. The trigger hand simply lifts the butt and trigger is squeezed as the butt hits the shoulder.

With a hunting rifle, again you should be looking at the target and then insert the rifle into your line of vision as you keep your on the target. You may well be resting your hands or the rifle to steady things up, but the basic get your rifle into its natural point of aim still holds true. If you use your non dominant eye you need to close one eye as you point the rifle, otherwise your dominant eye causes the rifles natural point to be to one side. Closing an eye helps, but you immediately loose you peripheral vision and what is going on around the target. This is not important on range shooting with static targets with Range officers etc. but in the field on animals they are really static for long. In herd animals such as fallow, there is constant movement and you need to be able to have as wide and as much depth of vision as possible.

For me being left dominant eyed it is only possible with my left eye.

The motor skills required to squeeze a trigger are not complex, nor is operating a bolt action. Most of us can easily use a knife and fork together to cut up food and transfer to your mouth. These are complex motor skills that use both hands. Admittedly in some cultures they cut all the food into small bits, put knife to one side and then just a fork in their right hand.

The view of most coaches in shooting sports is that the dominant eye should take precedent over handidness. If you left eyed, left handed - or vice versa you much better off shooting left or right handed as dictated.

If you are cross dominated go with the eye dominance rather the hand dominance. You can easily learn the trigger / aiming skills, but much more difficult to improve your eye skills.

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

With a hunting rifle, again you should be looking at the target and then insert the rifle into your line of vision as you keep your on the target. You may well be resting your hands or the rifle to steady things up, but the basic get your rifle into its natural point of aim still holds true. If you use your non dominant eye you need to close one eye as you point the rifle, otherwise your dominant eye causes the rifles natural point to be to one side. Closing an eye helps, but you immediately loose you peripheral vision and what is going on around the target. This is not important on range shooting with static targets with Range officers etc. but in the field on animals they are really static for long. In herd animals such as fallow, there is constant movement and you need to be able to have as wide and as much depth of vision as possible.

This paragraph is where you really lose me. I will quote each section to find out where exactly we properly disagree.

With a hunting rifle, again you should be looking at the target and then insert the rifle into your line of vision as you keep your on the target. You may well be resting your hands or the rifle to steady things up, but the basic get your rifle into its natural point of aim still holds true.

Agreed 100%. You line up the rifle on the sticks/bipod- using the length of the gun as a guide to point directly to the target/herd.

If you use your non dominant eye you need to close one eye as you point the rifle, otherwise your dominant eye causes the rifles natural point to be to one side.

I do not think this is the case. Remember- we are just "eyeballing it"- and haven't looked through the scope yet.

Youre Just judging it without looking through the scope- You would be very close to being in line- regardless of eye dominance. If your dominant eye was affecting the alignment- you could close it for a fraction of a second to ensure you were lining up as accurately as possible. IME you're never that accurate with it anyway- it's just a rough eyeball before looking through the scope. You will have the move the rifle a bit anyway. More for a cross dominant person (unless they closed the dom eye as they lined it up). But it's still rough.

Closing an eye helps, but you immediately loose you peripheral vision and what is going on around the target.

Again I don't agree here. It's absolutely impossible to look through a magnifying scope with 1 eye, and harness the peripheral vision of the other. The brain can not fuse two massively different sized images together.

Perhaps it's possible with a 1x or even 2x mag scope on driven boar. But anything larger and the brain can't do it.

Plus- if the dominant eye is looking through the scope- your brain won't be able to recieve much input from a non-dominant eye anyway- so how will you benefit from the peripheral vision ?

Finally- if the animal is far enough away to need a scope- its unlikely your peripheral vision will be that useful anyway.

This is not important on range shooting with static targets with Range officers etc. but in the field on animals they are really static for long. In herd animals such as fallow, there is constant movement and you need to be able to have as wide and as much depth of vision as possible.

As above- you can't enjoy peripheral vision at human Base mag with a non dominant eye, whilst also benefiting from a magnified scope eye at the same time. It's just not possible. The brain can't fuse them both.

I agree- there's constant movement in animals- but that's why having a relatively low Base mag (or a low fixed mag) scope is useful- on low power a scope offers a wide field of view.

I think you're contradicting yourself a little here. You're stressing the need for a dominant eye to be behind the sights- because it's so dominant it will always interfere and dominate a non dominant eye. But then you're saying that a non dominant eye can be harnessed for peripheral vision when required. Ignoring the vast image sizes of human eye and even a 6x mag scope- doesn't the dominant eye always dominate (unless closed)- regardless of whether you want this peripheral vision all of a sudden?

depth of vision as possible.

I'm not sure what you mean by depth of vision?

If that's the same as depth of field- or depth of focus- I'm not sure having a huge DoF is always a good thing? And again- you just can't use both eyes at the same time.

Would be interested in your thoughts, if you think we are being constructive

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

@Heym SR20

As to the rest of your post-

An interesting article- but it applies to shotguns- where peripheral vision of tracking a bird applies more- with no mag difference between eyes- where the peripheral vision really can be used!

There's probably a magic amount of eye dominance- enough where the dominant takes care of the aiming- but there's just enough input from the recessive to contribute to peripheral vision. The author suggests some coaches are very dominant.

Agree that the lead hand aims, arguably a more demanding task than the trigger hand.

Your final sentence catches my eye too- what "eye skills" does a dominant eye have, that a recessive doesn't? And whatever "special connection" it has to the brain by default- isn't this immediately passed to the recessive eye the moment the dominant is closed ?

This has made me think a bit- I'm tempted to try a bit of left handed shooting as I am left eye dominant and shoot right handed. I close my left eye when shooting a rifle and it doesn't bother me at all. I'm not much of a shotgun shot- but suspect that's little to do with cross eye dominance- although closing it does reduce my peripheral vision.

If I decided to really focus on shotgun shooting I may choose the re-learn that left handed- as its so instinctual.......

 

[takbok]

Delighted that you guys have found a room

 

[Heym SR20]

@Heym SR20

As to the rest of your post-

An interesting article- but it applies to shotguns- where peripheral vision of tracking a bird applies more- with no mag difference between eyes- where the peripheral vision really can be used!

There's probably a magic amount of eye dominance- enough where the dominant takes care of the aiming- but there's just enough input from the recessive to contribute to peripheral vision. The author suggests some coaches are very dominant.

Agree that the lead hand aims, arguably a more demanding task than the trigger hand.

Your final sentence catches my eye too- what "eye skills" does a dominant eye have, that a recessive doesn't? And whatever "special connection" it has to the brain by default- isn't this immediately passed to the recessive eye the moment the dominant is closed ?

This has made me think a bit- I'm tempted to try a bit of left handed shooting as I am left eye dominant and shoot right handed. I close my left eye when shooting a rifle and it doesn't bother me at all. I'm not much of a shotgun shot- but suspect that's little to do with cross eye dominance- although closing it does reduce my peripheral vision.

If I decided to really focus on shotgun shooting I may choose the re-learn that left handed- as its so instinctual.......

Try shooting a rifle left handed. What I suggest will make sense. You will probably shoot much better. I think from memory you are still pretty new to shooting. Start just dry firing and look at the target. What I suspect you will find is that you will find the rifle just sits much easier on target especially if you are shooting unsupported and much easier to bring on target. I am much more instinctive shooter especially on live animals - I just look at the target, control my breathing and as the sights move through the target I squeeze.

Certainly when I tried shooting with my right eye I just found it much more difficult to get on target - it was a fault in the wiring and the whole timing just didn’t work for me.

Re Mag difference between the eyes when using a scope I don’t find this an issue at all and don’t even need to close my left eye.

 

[Heym SR20]

@Heym SR20

As to the rest of your post-

An interesting article- but it applies to shotguns- where peripheral vision of tracking a bird applies more- with no mag difference between eyes- where the peripheral vision really can be used!

There's probably a magic amount of eye dominance- enough where the dominant takes care of the aiming- but there's just enough input from the recessive to contribute to peripheral vision. The author suggests some coaches are very dominant.

Agree that the lead hand aims, arguably a more demanding task than the trigger hand.

Your final sentence catches my eye too- what "eye skills" does a dominant eye have, that a recessive doesn't? And whatever "special connection" it has to the brain by default- isn't this immediately passed to the recessive eye the moment the dominant is closed ?

This has made me think a bit- I'm tempted to try a bit of left handed shooting as I am left eye dominant and shoot right handed. I close my left eye when shooting a rifle and it doesn't bother me at all. I'm not much of a shotgun shot- but suspect that's little to do with cross eye dominance- although closing it does reduce my peripheral vision.

If I decided to really focus on shotgun shooting I may choose the re-learn that left handed- as its so instinctual.......

Eye skills - its the skills that allow you eye to align you hands automatically on target. Its the skills that allow you to point a gun at target from your waist without necessarily looking the sights. Its the skills that allows a cricketer throw a ball at the stumps whilst diving through mid air. Its the skills to look at target, close your eyes and through a stone that will hit it.

In all of these its the dominant eye that controls things.

Not at all surprised that you don’t get on with a shotgun. Your left eye wants to control the aiming, whilst your other is adding 3d vision which allows you brain to determine how the target is moving. But using your right eye and closing you left you are reducing your natural ability to point the gun in the correct direction as well as removing all the depth and speed information. Your brain is only getting a fraction of the information that it would get if you shot with your dominant eye.

I have taught a few people to shoot and certainly those who are left eyed but shoot right handed have all struggled. When the switch, they start hitting much more consistently and easily and it doesn’t take long before it comes naturally. Indeed they are using their dominant eye to guide their dominant hand which does the aiming.

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

Try shooting a rifle left handed. What I suggest will make sense. You will probably shoot much better. I think from memory you are still pretty new to shooting. Start just dry firing and look at the target. What I suspect you will find is that you will find the rifle just sits much easier on target especially if you are shooting unsupported and much easier to bring on target. I am much more instinctive shooter especially on live animals - I just look at the target, control my breathing and as the sights move through the target I squeeze.

Certainly when I tried shooting with my right eye I just found it much more difficult to get on target - it was a fault in the wiring and the whole timing just didn’t work for me.

Re Mag difference between the eyes when using a scope I don’t find this an issue at all and don’t even need to close my left eye.

I almost never shoot unsupported. But agree in a driven boar unsupported scenario- the more instinctive the better.

When shooting with the right eye, Were you closing your dominant eye as you brought the gun up to target ?

You're scope shooting with the left eye. You can keep the right open easily as it's non dominant. But are you saying that you can use both eyes at the same time ? Or that your brain switches between the two eyes easily without closing either/moving your head ?

Eye skills - its the skills that allow you eye to align you hands automatically on target. Its the skills that allow you to point a gun at target from your waist without necessarily looking the sights. Its the skills that allows a cricketer throw a ball at the stumps whilst diving through mid air. Its the skills to look at target, close your eyes and through a stone that will hit it.

In all of these its the dominant eye that controls things.

Not at all surprised that you don’t get on with a shotgun. Your left eye wants to control the aiming, whilst your other is adding 3d vision which allows you brain to determine how the target is moving. But using your right eye and closing you left you are reducing your natural ability to point the gun in the correct direction as well as removing all the depth and speed information. Your brain is only getting a fraction of the information that it would get if you shot with your dominant eye.

I have taught a few people to shoot and certainly those who are left eyed but shoot right handed have all struggled. When the switch, they start hitting much more consistently and easily and it doesn’t take long before it comes naturally. Indeed they are using their dominant eye to guide their dominant hand which does the aiming.

I hope I'm not coming across as pedantic- but I really don't see this-

Closing the dominant eye means the "eye skills" automatically transfer- and you can bring the gun in line with your eye IME.

If the said cross dominant cricketer closes their dominant eye- they can throw the ball just as easily & accurately.

I actually don't think the eyes are involved at all if you close them and throw. So many bigger factors at play IMO.

I close my dom eye with a shotgun. My Right eye judges everything. I do lose some peripheral vision I suppose. But speed is just as easy to judge with 1 or 2 eyes.

I'm not sure how much use a 2nd eye is for depth perception at 40 yard shotgun range tbh.

Vital for threading a needle. Damn useful for parking a car and judging a walls distance 5' away. But for something 40 yards ? Not so much IMO.

But I agree- I seem more hampered with a shotgun than rifle.

I will give it a go on a rifle and see how it feels- although I'm not sure how much a N of 1 is really going to contribute....