"The Modern Technique" and "Competition Driven Shooting"

[Marty Hayes]

I know we're all beating up on Marty, and frankly I appreciate with him still sticking around this thread.

However, good golly. I'll never go to an instructor who considers themselves to be at the end point of his learning curve when it comes to shooting technique. Whether it's shooting, cooking, fighting, driving, etc, there is never an end to the improvement of technique. Believing oneself to be finished with learning technique is the surest way to get left behind by the rest of the world.

Show me a new school of thought, that I haven't been exposed to or already tried and discarded, which seems to have some merit and I will be all over it. But, as I said to Caleb, I have been training, competing and teaching for over 35 years now. Hell, I started with the FBI Crouch technique, Applegate point shooting, went through point shoulder isosceles, weaver, modern isos. I know them all, and have taken the best from each to teach to my students. At 56 years old and eyes that seem to be getting worse everyday, I suspect my best days of shooting are behind me, but I can still keep up with most.

[Marty Hayes]

How does one approach teaching multiple techniques in the same class?

You don't. You teach the student, not the class. Takes less than an hour of class time to explain shooting technique to a group of students, then they work out, (with coaching of course) what works best for them, given, gun size, hand size, eye dominence, physical infirmaties etc. After this is accomplished, it is on to working on training them to be skilled.

[orionz06]

Why not just tweak everything then? The point is, one type of stance/grip doesn't work for everyone, with all different sized guns, and different sized hands. A little tweak here, and lttle tweak there, and pretty soon you are might have a stance that works for you, instead of following the herd.

Following the herd made me a significantly better shooter once I stopped trying to figure out the push/pull, XX%/XX%, etc. This "herd" also happens to include some of the best shooters in the world in terms of winning matches and killing people. That is kind of where I am lost. If the technique you beat the drum to is in fact so good why is it not used by any of those guys? Now I will admit I am not up to snuff on all the academics involved, for the same reasons you are unable to give a complete reply, time. The thing that does stand out though is that technique has evolved and continues to, some people just got stuck on something and never moved on.

You don't. You teach the student, not the class. Takes less than an hour of class time to explain shooting technique to a group of students, then they work out, (with coaching of course) what works best for them, given, gun size, hand size, eye dominence, physical infirmaties etc. After this is accomplished, it is on to working on training them to be skilled.

What would someone who is 5'6", medium/large size gloves, right handed, and left eye dominant shooting a G17 be pointed towards?

[Marty Hayes]

What kind of performance tracking do you do? Any results you are willing to disclose publicly?

Performance for what? Teaching, shooting paper targets, shooting bad guys, not shooting bad guys but pointing guns at them? Students shooting bad buys, shooting paper targets, etc? What exactly do you want to know?

[Marty Hayes]

Following the herd made me a significantly better shooter once I stopped trying to figure out the push/pull, XX%/XX%, etc. This "herd" also happens to include some of the best shooters in the world in terms of winning matches and killing people. That is kind of where I am lost. If the technique you beat the drum to is in fact so good why is it not used by any of those guys? Now I will admit I am not up to snuff on all the academics involved, for the same reasons you are unable to give a complete reply, time. The thing that does stand out though is that technique has evolved and continues to, some people just got stuck on something and never moved on.

What would someone who is 5'6", medium/large size gloves, right handed, and left eye dominant shooting a G17 be pointed towards?

What herd are you following?

Regarding the second question, now sure what you mean "be pointed towards." But, given what you just told me, probably isosceles would work best for you, with possibly a little cant of the gun towards your left eye.

[Marty Hayes]

Okay boys, catch you later. Gotta go work again.

[GJM]

I get why a Weaver shooter would be unwilling to change to a Modern Iso stance, if they feel like the Weaver meets their needs. However, given that the Modern Iso has been so clearly demonstrated as the best shooting stance for everyone from competitors to war fighters, how does an instructor these days justify teaching the Weaver to new shooters?

[orionz06]

Performance for what? Teaching, shooting paper targets, shooting bad guys, not shooting bad guys but pointing guns at them? Students shooting bad buys, shooting paper targets, etc? What exactly do you want to know?

In particular your performance. Examples would be common drills, tests, standards, etc. El presidente, The F.A.S.T., Hackathorn Standards, IDPA Classifier, Triple Nickel, or any that you might use on your own. (All links to P-T.com for simplicity)

What herd are you following?

Regarding the second question, now sure what you mean "be pointed towards." But, given what you just told me, probably isosceles would work best for you, with possibly a little cant of the gun towards your left eye.

I was assuming "the herd" was everyone who shoots something that is considered "competition based" or whatever. On that it seems odd that some people try to use "competition based" as a means to put down one technique while sticking to their technique that was also started party in competition. Maybe I am wrong though.

I meant what would you suggest, weaver, iso, or a modification of either. I currently use some form of Iso or whatever the hell it is with a slight turn of my head.

[beltjones]

In particular your performance. Examples would be common drills, tests, standards, etc. El presidente, The F.A.S.T., Hackathorn Standards, IDPA Classifier, Triple Nickel, or any that you might use on your own. (All links to P-T.com for simplicity)

In all fairness, I'm not sure Marty's own personal performance is the issue here.

[beltjones]

How many years is that Caleb? I have been shooting seriously for about 35+ years, competing for 30+ years, not to mention the THOUSAND + HOURS of firearms training courses I have personally attended, and the several thousand hours of firearms training courses I have taught. I think I have my own shooting figured out now. If I don't, a few hours with the next latest and greatest Guru probably won't make much difference.

Also, in fairness I don't think you have been competing consistently with a pistol in all of that time.

Still, the attitude you have toward improving is pretty disturbing. I know of plenty of shooters who are older than anyone posting here, who are better shooters than most, and who also have countless hours teaching and taking classes, and they still are itching to learn new stuff. I would personally rather train with someone who is worse at shooting than I am, but who has an open mind and who is comfortable pushing the envelope, than someone who is better than I am and who thinks they have it all figured out.