Spot on. At handgun distances (say under 20 meters) the issues of trigger control and grip are going to dominate the quality of the sights, as long as they are

Spot on. At handgun distances (say under 20 meters) the issues of trigger control and grip are going to dominate the quality of the sights, as long as they are half decent. Since good shooting practice is to focus on the front sight, thus rendering the rear sight fuzzy, that rear sight has to be useful while out of focus. Consider the classic Novak sight. The front sight is a rectangular post that fills the gap that is the rectangular notch of the rear sight. Also, the front sight post and two rear sight posts have colored (white or glow-in-the-dark) dots that form a 3-dot line that is parallel to the ground when aligned. This type of sight leverages our ability to spot horizontal lines, something that our vision/brain is very good at doing: lining up the top of front sight such that it is flush with the top of the rear sight and forming a proper 3-dot line that is in line with the ground. This type of sight is pretty accurate and permits fast acquisition. It looks like the pointing-in of the rear sight to form the triangle is somewhat subtle. I am unconvinced that the headless triangle is sufficiently discernable whilst fuzzy. And it doesn't offer multiple cues like the Novak. And it seems like it would take longer to acquire a good sight picture. Still, I could see how this would be very useful at relative fixed distances in the hands of a trained shooter.