24/01/2026
If you coach or compete seriously, you know the limitation of score-based feedback: the target shows the outcome, not the full ex*****on that produced it. 🎯
Norwegian ISSF coach Morten Teinum has published a detailed article on training with SCATT, and it reads like a coach using measurement properly: not as “more data,” but as a way to quantify the shot process and compare it across series, sessions, and athletes. 📊
Three points worth taking from his write-up:
- Process visibility at shot level: shot placement is paired with the aiming trace and measured parameters, so you can separate group location from ex*****on quality and identify repeatable technical signatures. 🔍
- Defined time windows around release: segmenting the trace before and after the shot makes it easier to evaluate what changes as the shot approaches, rather than judging a single averaged “stability” value. ⏱️
- Metrics that support coaching decisions: timing, aim speed, stability and coordination become trackable variables. The value is in the trends, the dispersion, and the differences between shots, not in a single “good/bad” number. 📈
And there’s much more than that in the article, including practical interpretation of the displays and how to use the analysis views to guide training priorities.
🔗 Read it here:
A new version of Scatt Expert for MX-W2