Also, I've tried point shooting, using the stance and grip from this old training film:
The portion on point shooting starts around 8:20 in. The picture shows a target I shot from seven yards, doing ten fast presentations from the low ready. All ten hit the blue part of the target, I guess. Note that the target was at the time motionless and not lunging out of a dark alley with a machete held overhead.
I can get faster hits and hold the X-ring using the sights. For me, at least, point shooting doesn't seem to work very well.
While I'm rambling about my unpopular opinions, I also think the .38 Special snubby is a semi-obsolete platform in an era of ultralight singlestack 9mm subcompacts (or even in an era of .380 compact CCW pistols. The late Skeeter Skelton may have been the first gun-rag writer to notice and say in print, over fifty years ago, that .380 from the typical pocket pistol and non-+P .38 Special from a 2" revolver had pretty near identical numbers in terms of kinetic energy, and so on, and made indistinguishable icepick-like wound tracks in a block of ballistic gelatin, leading him to believe there wasn't a whole lot of difference between them on the receiving end.
.38 Special from a snubby has similar ballistic limitations to the .380. With a 2" .38 Special snubby you can generally have ammunition with a bullet that penetrates the 12"+ of calibrated 10% ballistic gelatin, OR you can have a bullet that expands significantly, but if you want both you've got a very short list of acceptable performers. My everyday CCW is a Kahr CW9 9mm loaded with 147gr Ranger-T, and my summer/deep concealment carry gun is a Kahr CT380 loaded with Hornady 90gr XTP, one of the very very short list of .380 rounds that both penetrates 12" or so and does so with a bullet that will usually expand a bit. I believe, but can't prove, that a bullet that even just partially initiates expansion will, due to its irregular, rough and jagged shape, tear more tissue than roundnose ball, and if I am fighting for my life I will take any edge I can get.
I want to be more skilled at using all types of firearms but short-barreled .38 Special revolvers strike me as being 1898's answer to questions about concealable handguns for self-defense. The 20th Century had better answers to those questions, and the 21st Century has better answers still.