I started noticing this in the 1990s, shortly after getting back into shooting, and it came as a flood after I got into the gun accessory business.
We’d get it over and over and over. People would call in, wanting a sight, or an optic sight dot reticle, that wouldn’t “cover the target”.
My first response soon became, and remains, “If you don’t want your sight covering the target, then stop covering the target with your sight.”
It’s as simple as that. I believe the problem is that it is SO simple, beginners can’t believe it, and expert shooters won’t allow themselves to believe it because important things take time to learn and are complicated.
Some of the most experienced shooters, for whom I otherwise have a great deal of respect, seem unable to grasp the simple concept; YOU choose your sight picture. It isn’t necessarily built-in by the manufacturer. Stop assuming.
Also, give me a front sight, or a reticle, shaped like my shoe, or a Ford F-350 with duals, or Bridget Bardot, and I’ll be able to shoot just as well with it after a little bit of practice, AND since I choose to not cover the target with it, the target won’t be covered.
People have gotten, and no doubt will continue to get, all kinds of pissed off at me for saying this, pleading their case that no, since the post, or reticle, is such and such an angular size, and the target smaller, then the target is covered. Wrong! Don’t make me draw you pictures.
Stop covering the target, and adjust your sights accordingly. Chances are you don’t need new sights, or a smaller dot reticle.
And don’t bother arguing; I very much doubt you can tell me anything I haven’t already heard hundreds of times. I spend a good part of every day talking to shooters from all disciplines ad of all levels of experience.