Mr Dutton,
You seem to have your mind made up about this 'follow through' concept. Your thread has gotten a lot of mileage from folks who agree with you, and more who seem to dis-agree.
Its been a looong time since I read any training manuals from the folks down in Ft. Benning, but from what I remember of the TMs, 'follow through' was considered to be worthy of significant ink.
Maybe its a 'ghost', maybe it isn't. It seems that you want to define follow through much like barrel time. If that works for you, great.
We disagree only in semantics. Some folks see 'follow through' as an ongoing process..You seem to see it as an individual event.
Follow through is part and parcel of trigger control, sight alignment, recovery, and do it again....
To me, and maybe others, it isn't a single event that can be measured, but an ongoing process of delivering a series of rounds to the target.
I dunno, but maybe its kinda like a revolver shooter who thinks that trigger return is as important as important as indexing the cylinder and making the hammer drop. He (she) may see the whole process as kinda/sorta like a round trip ticket...getting back to the orign is as important as getting to a destination.
You see it as 'trigger control', others may well see it as 'follow through'.
Personally, I don't know which of the two it is..just depends on which way the convoluted gray matter between our ears can use it to our best advantage.
Kind like Dan Daly and Ethel Merman singing about 'po-ta-toes' or 'pah-tat-oes'.
However you pronounce 'em, they taste better pan fried, with a mess of grits, ham steak, and scratch biscuits.
YMMV, but I can't help it if you're wrong.
Respectfully, and for the last time,
salty.