It’s intended to replace prescription eyeglasses because they are inconvenient to shoot with.
It has the same function, except tailored to shooting (only one eye). So you aren’t getting a noticeable advantage vs someone with perfect eyesight (otherwise it wouldnt be legal at olympics).
They also let you adjust the aperture size with an iris and/or apply colored filters! The filters help with the harsh lighting, and the aperture helps reduce strain on your eye. It’s a bit like having a supportive insole for your face.
That they even allow acuity correction is different from all other sports. For example my vision is very far from human perfect. 20/20 is average but some people have natural 20/10 vision. Similarly some people are naturally stronger than me but I wouldn’t be allowed to use a passive device (like an arm extension that would give mechanical advantage to throwing) to compensate for my natural average strength.
Right, I mean what sport would use an arm extension for mechanical advantage like a cricket bat, a field hockey stick, a badminton racket, a ping pong paddle, a lacrosse stick, a vaulting pole, a tennis racket, a golf club, ski poles, ice hockey sticks, or curling brooms?
If the equipment is available to all, it’s not creating an unfair advantage.
Everyone has the same equipment in those games. That equipment is carefully regulated.
Regulating how much a human can be enhanced isn’t a weird concept. Nike shoes and shark swimsuits were also banned. Here’s a science YouTuber that covers the issue and specifically mentions the glasses that shooters are allowed.
It does provide an advantage. One side of the headgear obfuscates vision from that eye so that they can shoot with both eyes open, but don’t have to learn how to block out input from the non targeting eye. The shooting eye lens can be prescription, but the main purpose is to narrow their field of vision, providing increased focus, and essentially becoming a 3rd sighting aperture. They’re legal because all of the shooters have the option to use them, and most do, because they provide an advantage. The Turkish shooter doesn’t use them because he’s trained a lifetime without them and has learned to ignore input from his non-sighting eye. That, combined with his T-shirt as a uniform, and his casual demeanor, is what people find appealing.
I’ve seen the photo of the Korean Olympic shooter. That headgear isn’t just prescription eyeglasses.
It’s intended to replace prescription eyeglasses because they are inconvenient to shoot with.
It has the same function, except tailored to shooting (only one eye). So you aren’t getting a noticeable advantage vs someone with perfect eyesight (otherwise it wouldnt be legal at olympics).
They also let you adjust the aperture size with an iris and/or apply colored filters! The filters help with the harsh lighting, and the aperture helps reduce strain on your eye. It’s a bit like having a supportive insole for your face.
If it wasn’t an advantage over regular glasses, they would wear regular glasses.
Because regular eyeglasses have glare and acuity problems that disadvantage the shooter.
You can read about the topic here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_glasses
That they even allow acuity correction is different from all other sports. For example my vision is very far from human perfect. 20/20 is average but some people have natural 20/10 vision. Similarly some people are naturally stronger than me but I wouldn’t be allowed to use a passive device (like an arm extension that would give mechanical advantage to throwing) to compensate for my natural average strength.
Right, I mean what sport would use an arm extension for mechanical advantage like a cricket bat, a field hockey stick, a badminton racket, a ping pong paddle, a lacrosse stick, a vaulting pole, a tennis racket, a golf club, ski poles, ice hockey sticks, or curling brooms?
If the equipment is available to all, it’s not creating an unfair advantage.
Everyone has the same equipment in those games. That equipment is carefully regulated.
Regulating how much a human can be enhanced isn’t a weird concept. Nike shoes and shark swimsuits were also banned. Here’s a science YouTuber that covers the issue and specifically mentions the glasses that shooters are allowed.
https://youtu.be/pfIWxFIVP_Y?si=fRcpzRnhFm1h2267
It does provide an advantage. One side of the headgear obfuscates vision from that eye so that they can shoot with both eyes open, but don’t have to learn how to block out input from the non targeting eye. The shooting eye lens can be prescription, but the main purpose is to narrow their field of vision, providing increased focus, and essentially becoming a 3rd sighting aperture. They’re legal because all of the shooters have the option to use them, and most do, because they provide an advantage. The Turkish shooter doesn’t use them because he’s trained a lifetime without them and has learned to ignore input from his non-sighting eye. That, combined with his T-shirt as a uniform, and his casual demeanor, is what people find appealing.