To Press out... or not? Or something else?

[JHC]

Caleb's article answers the question for me:

1. The index draw's utility for most people only works for high percentage shots: target is static, shooter is static, target is close, big, and unobstructed. That's 99% of the first shots fired from the holster in IPSC and IDPA.
2. Mastering a useful index draw takes time, reps, and ammo; that time and ammo could just as easily be spent on further improving my press-out.
3. The index draw puts the gun out in front of the body and below the sight line. That's fine for competition. It's not as good for any time you've got close threats or environmental limitations (like a steering wheel or wall) that prevent moving the gun like that. If you're also pressing the trigger before the gun is aligned between your eyes and the target, you're violating a fundamental safety rule.

I don't doubt for a moment that the index draw, practiced enough, can result in a faster first shot out of the gun. Based on all the "index draw shooters" I've seen try the F.A.S.T. in classes and at similar events, I'm convinced that it doesn't translate into consistent on-demand ability to make tough shots under stress. The number of people who'll actually put serious time and effort into both techniques is small. The number who'll call upon the best technique for a given target at a given instant during a dynamic event is even smaller.

The press out, like the fundamentals it incorporates such as sight alignment and trigger manipulation, can be as precise as necessary or as sloppy as allowable. But it's sort of like the aimed vs. point shooting debate, where aimed fire tends to improve one's point shooting while the opposite is not the case. Practicing a good press out means I can call upon it when needed and rush it when it's not. Someone whose practice is all about indexing an A-zone isn't going to "rise to the challenge" when life forces him to hit a small, moving target in low light.

The video from Caleb's article helped me understand the definitions alot and I now reckon to be definitely indexed based.
I've definitely not found Todd's listed potential shortcomings to be a problem. For example when drawing up against an obstruction, I've never rammed the gun into it.

[Ben Stoeger]

To demonstrate what IPSC actually is I have for you guys a video of an regional match I shot last year. Looking back at it I can find only one example of simply standing in place and shooting a close target (I went with 7 yards or less as a "close" target). On that particular target I moved my feet as I drew to put me in a more advantageous position to get out of there once I was done shooting, so even then it wasn't a completely static situation.

Every other stage had you move a little bit or pick up the gun or load the gun or whatever before you shot. If one of those things didn’t apply than the target was farther away than 7 yards.

Now… none of this has any great bearing on any of this. Looking at the video, I am not sure if I am doing a press out or an index or what the hell is going on… but I think IPSC is a lot more dynamic skills test than what was stated earlier in the thread.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r1KGuhgbdQ

[Mr_White]

If you're also pressing the trigger before the gun is aligned between your eyes and the target, you're violating a fundamental safety rule.[/LIST]

Someone whose practice is all about indexing an A-zone isn't going to "rise to the challenge" when life forces him to hit a small, moving target in low light.

I always find this an interesting discussion. I really haven't fully decided this issue for myself. On any given day, I might be feeling the virtues of either a muzzle-level pressout or an index draw - but I don't think I am talking about the same index draw as is under discussion here. I don't use a draw that moves in a 45-ish degree line. When I say an index draw, it is probably a muzzle-level version of what Todd has described as a hybrid technique before. Basically, the difference between the two for me is that when I do a muzzle-level pressout, I slow the gun before full extension, sufficiently to see and finely adjust small degrees of sight alignment and work the trigger at the same time. When I do my index/hybrid draw, I don't try to change the gun's path, but do get the gun to full extension as fast as I can, then see and finely adjust small degrees of sight alignment and finish working the trigger. Overall, I think the hybrid is noticeably faster for me, but is more dependent on my indexing ability to get the gun where it needs to be at full extension.

I have had a few experiences in practice/training that make me unconvinced that index is insufficient to hit a difficult target under difficult conditions - admittedly that may not be as difficult a target as some people are thinking of, and these aren't 'for real' stress conditions. I am speaking of drawing and hitting a black bowling pin at 10 yards, in front of a black and gray bullet trap, in light reduced to near darkness, to the point that I can barely maintain visual fixation on the bowling pin at all, with a gun with black sights, drawing and shooting SHO on a brisk walk moving left (me being right-handed.) I was able to pull several first-round hits under those conditions in person-vs-person practice competition. Anecdotal for sure - I don't have comparative data or a larger sample size or anything like that. And in fairness, I spend a truly ridiculous amount time practicing drawstroke, though not that particular variation (SHO moving left.)

I have some (probably just semantic) disagreement here: If you're also pressing the trigger before the gun is aligned between your eyes and the target, you're violating a fundamental safety rule.

That statement creates a logical web that precludes responsibly using any type of below-line-of-sight retention shooting when necessitated by a proximate threat. Either it needs to be rephrased, or an exception has to be carved out for retention shooting, or retention shooting is thereby declared to be violating a fundamental safety rule. I know this is a tangent - the same one I brought up in the 'punch out vs press out thread.'

There are other ways of knowing where the gun is pointed, using physical reference points that don't require the sights be visible, that can be sufficient to hit a proximate threat when it's necessitated.

Rule 3 was taught to me as: finger needs to be indexed, until two conditions have been met - the muzzle is aligned with the target, and a conscious decision to fire has been made. This phraseology allows for retention shooting to be used without declaring it to be violation of a fundamental safety rule. Semantics tangent for sure, I know you don't think retention shooting is wrong.

[JHC]

. Looking at the video, I am not sure if I am doing a press out or an index or what the hell is going on… but I think IPSC is a lot more dynamic skills test than what was stated earlier in the thread.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r1KGuhgbdQ

Basically put the gun in front of your face and shoot it.

Great watch. No groucho walk?

[JAD]

The third rule is "keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target."

[ToddG]

That statement creates a logical web that precludes responsibly using any type of below-line-of-sight retention shooting when necessitated by a proximate threat.

And I think just about everyone who deals with contact-distance shooting understands that a lot of things are different under those circumstances. When something is close enough that sights aren't even an issue, then obviously sight alignment with the eye-target line isn't going to happen.

Getting back to the topic at hand, my point is that people who use the belly-to-extension straight line draw and pull the trigger before the gun is up in front of their face are assuming the area below the target zone will always be safe. The easiest example I've used is with Air Marshals: when they draw their guns they may very likely have to shoot someone standing up, but there will be seated passengers between the FAM and the BG. Traversing all of those people with your muzzle while pressing the trigger is putting a hell of a lot of faith in your timing. And there's no way to argue that it violates a fundamental safety rule.

A less esoteric example would be sitting across from the dinner table with your spouse. If you have to stand and draw to shoot at something behind her, are you really going to want to muzzle her head while pulling the trigger as part of your routine draw stroke?

[ummm]

Looking at the video, I am not sure if I am doing a press out or an index or what the hell is going on… but I think IPSC is a lot more dynamic skills test than what was stated earlier in the thread.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r1KGuhgbdQ

Ignorant n00b eyeballs are telling me it's almost a hybrid.

Does anyone else see this? When I watch, say, the steel stuff from Caleb's post, there's a lot of true "gun goes from holster to extension in a very straight line". When I watch a video of, say, the slow press out, I see the gun go from holster to the line between the eye and the target, then it kinda rides along that line out to extension.

When I see Ben and Dave shooting the FASTS, it looks like they do a 91.441% Steel-type draw, but that last little 8.559% there's a bit of "rides out along that line" -- only at the very end, towards full extension.

Could easily be my incompetence making this stuff up, but I'm telling it like I see it. Is it possible there's merit, *if* a full-on press-out is considered too slow for IDPA / IPSC, and a full-on Steel Challenge index is too iffy given the added variables of IDPA / IPSC, in a bit of a blend?

Prolly just crazy talk from the fng, but great thread, and thanks to all for your posts -- I'm learning a ton!

[Ben Stoeger]

Getting back to the topic at hand, my point is that people who use the belly-to-extension straight line draw and pull the trigger before the gun is up in front of their face are assuming the area below the target zone will always be safe.

What if (for the sake of discussion) they were to train themselves to NOT do this. What if they waited until the gun was on target to pull the trigger? What would the diagnosis of the technique be at that point?

[Ben Stoeger]

Ignorant n00b eyeballs are telling me it's almost a hybrid.

Does anyone else see this? When I watch, say, the steel stuff from Caleb's post, there's a lot of true "gun goes from holster to extension in a very straight line". When I watch a video of, say, the slow press out, I see the gun go from holster to the line between the eye and the target, then it kinda rides along that line out to extension.

When I see Ben and Dave shooting the FASTS, it looks like they do a 91.441% Steel-type draw, but that last little 8.559% there's a bit of "rides out along that line" -- only at the very end, towards full extension.

Could easily be my incompetence making this stuff up, but I'm telling it like I see it. Is it possible there's merit, *if* a full-on press-out is considered too slow for IDPA / IPSC, and a full-on Steel Challenge index is too iffy given the added variables of IDPA / IPSC, in a bit of a blend?

Prolly just crazy talk from the fng, but great thread, and thanks to all for your posts -- I'm learning a ton!

I think you are talking some sense. I never paid much attention to any of this stuff during my own training. I simply get get from the holster, point it at the target, and then pull the trigger. That was always my process to draw... I have just worked at speeding that process up. I don't know what that means in terms of what the best technique is to train on or what the best self defense draw vs competition draw would be. I am just batting ideas around here.

[Failure2Stop]

What if (for the sake of discussion) they were to train themselves to NOT do this. What if they waited until the gun was on target to pull the trigger? What would the diagnosis of the technique be at that point?

What do you mean by "pull the trigger"?
Make initial contact, remove initial slack, begin the press, complete the full trigger travel, or all of it?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2