PDA

View Full Version : Ron Avery on the tactical vs competition false dichotomy.



wtturn
08-25-2015, 08:55 AM
Copied from his recent Instagram post:

ron.avery.official

"Please explain to me how, at 3 – 5 yards, in the open, person to person as in a contact with a subject on the street, you are going to be better than a competitive shooter who trains far more than you do, who can move and shoot faster and more accurately than you can, who has the will to win, honed by countless hours of competition and has basic tactical concepts down as well or better than you do?

Do you honestly believe they are going to “cave” when the moment of truth arrives? Do you think they cannot react to subject cues and are going to wait for a start buzzer to get into action? Seriously?

I can give you numerous examples of competitive shooters having to put their skills to the test in real world challenges. Further, I would trust a USPSA or action pistol competitor behind me in any situation because I know their finger won’t be on the trigger with the muzzle pointing in my direction.

Anyone who has competed or watched competitive shooters in USPSA, IPSC, Steel Challenge, 3 Gun Nation and other action shooting sports knows just how fast and accurate these shooters can be, both stationary and on the move. Many attend tactical training courses. A lot of them are cops or military as well with plenty of real world experience.

Competitive shooting, blended with tactical training and tactical thinking and other skills areas, leads to a superior performer who knows just how good he/she is on any given day with the equipment they are carrying.

Jeff Cooper designed man vs man competition as well as the sport of IPSC precisely because he realized how competition honed gunfighting skills.

Failure2Stop
08-25-2015, 09:18 AM
Trying to pigeon-hole shooters into "tactical" and "competition" is dumb.
Good shooters are good shooters.
Good fighters are good fighters.
They are neither mutually exclusive or inclusive.

I'm not at all disagreeing with Mr. Avery, rather pointing out that just because someone fancies themselves a "tactical" shooter doesn't mean a damn thing about actual tactical proficiency or marksmanship skill.

SLG
08-25-2015, 09:40 AM
I certainly agree with the above posts, though if Mr. Avery thinks that he's safer with a competitor behind him because of finger discipline issues, I would opine that he hasn't been paying as much attention to the sport lately as he might. Stereotyping in any direction usually leads to false assumptions. Though I'm picking on that part a bit tongue in cheek, it is certainly a real problem. I have found that it's pretty easy to judge a shooter or group of shooters as good or bad, but when it comes to finger discipline under stress, I make that determination on a case by case basis, and not lightly. I've had an awful lot of guns pointed at me in my life, and more of them were from good guys than bad guys. Not fun. As I've said before, there are limited times when that is inevitable, but mostly it is avoidable. There is never an exception to the finger issue though.

wtturn
08-25-2015, 07:54 PM
Trying to pigeon-hole shooters into "tactical" and "competition" is dumb.
Good shooters are good shooters.
Good fighters are good fighters.
They are neither mutually exclusive or inclusive.

I'm not at all disagreeing with Mr. Avery, rather pointing out that just because someone fancies themselves a "tactical" shooter doesn't mean a damn thing about actual tactical proficiency or marksmanship skill.

well said.

BehindBlueI's
08-25-2015, 08:26 PM
Competitive shooting, blended with tactical training and tactical thinking and other skills areas,

Well, uh, yeah. I don't know that anyone is arguing differently.


Please explain to me how, at 3 – 5 yards, in the open, person to person as in a contact with a subject on the street, you are going to be better than a competitive shooter who trains far more than you do, who can move and shoot faster and more accurately than you can, who has the will to win, honed by countless hours of competition and has basic tactical concepts down as well or better than you do?

By cheating. Street shooting is OODA. Competition shooting is A. It's a relay race. It's great to have a fast anchorman, but if my first three guys are fast enough I'm across the finish line before your anchorman gets the baton, you still lose no matter how fast he is. I guess if we're going to have a wild west showdown, you got me. I've yet to see that scenario play out in the streets, though.

I see a lot of sprinkling of "tactical" in his statement. I like Ron Avery, and I understand that folks in his business have to have something new to say every so often to spark buzz and keep your name up front. You can only have the "is your j-frame enough" and "Glock vs 1911" discussion so many times. However I'm seeing a lot of loopholes in this supposed false dichotomy. YMMV.

MVS
08-25-2015, 09:03 PM
I have come to appreciate competitive shooting, and am even starting to believe you may have to do some if you want to get really good, buuuuut, where I differ is here. Most of the competition shooters I know in real life (that is not on this board) carry a 5 shot or no gun at all when not competing.

HopetonBrown
08-26-2015, 04:04 AM
I have come to appreciate competitive shooting, and am even starting to believe you may have to do some if you want to get really good, buuuuut, where I differ is here. Most of the competition shooters I know in real life (that is not on this board) carry a 5 shot or no gun at all when not competing.

He's addressing their physical and mental ability. Not material readiness. Most pure gamers I know treat it like golf with a gun with no interest in the tactical/self defense aspect. Which is perfectly fine.

I like how Mr. Avery left out IDPA. Ha.

voodoo_man
08-26-2015, 07:07 AM
While the "false dichotomy" of competition vs. "tactical" shooting is always a sore point or an obvious point of contention I think people misunderstand the actual nature of how these things are debated and applied in the real world.

No one should ever argue that accurate shooting or training for accurate shooting is bad. Especially when you train to shoot fast and accurate. The issue becomes fast and accurate shooting is only a very small part of "tactical" shooting.

Should we define what "tactical" shooting is? Is it CCW-style on the street 3-5 feet or yard encounters? Are they what police officers get into during patrol duty? Is it what SWAT or tactical officer's get into during raids or house clearings? Which one of those do competition shooters do really well? Probably the CCW-style, standing in the open and engaging with a target. Oh, that's what the OP even said. What about competition shooting has to do with taking cover, providing covering fire, overlapping fields of fire, discrimination, angles and walls, as well as other "tactical" concepts.

How does competition shooting blend tactical concepts? It does not, really.

Most who know me, know I do not shoot competition or game in any way, to me it is an easy way to burn horribly bad reps - speed unloading, speed reholstering, throwing guns, zero discrimination, no use of cover or concealment, no scanning, wearing gamer rigs and the obvious issues I've talked about over the years. People treat competition shooting like training. They do this because its vastly cheaper than actual classwork and it strokes their ego. The competitions I have RSO's at (only because they needed help no because I wanted to shoot them) nearly all the competitors, repeatedly, made tactical mistakes and refused to listen to a single word of advice on the matter, because their times would slow if they did things a different (tactical safe) way.

The other kicker for me is that many competitions do not allow to shoot "as you come" meaning if I show up with an AIWB rig and pocketing my reloads, they'll tell me I cannot shoot. What is the issue there? Ohh, they do not believe the people can shoot or act safely - like vickers with his classes.

I have nothing against Avery or what he is saying, we all have our points of view and our "filters" we use to gauge the world. I have had experiences with supposedly trained LEO's behind me that I did not trust holding a gun clearing rooms, hell, two or so years ago I did a sim training at my PD and I was shot in the stack....by the #2 !!! Twice. That's a training thing, sure, but its really an adrenaline thing, that's condition black. You cannot replicate that or how you will function unless you actually find yourself in that situation through training, profession or street encounter. How many competition shooters go to condition black during training? How many have a spike in heart rate so high that they are on autopilot? Because that's what happens in real life and no amount of competition shooting will prepare someone for that. Tactical training and experience, will and has.

BehindBlueI's
08-26-2015, 09:07 AM
I have had experiences with supposedly trained LEO's behind me that I did not trust holding a gun clearing rooms, hell, two or so years ago I did a sim training at my PD and I was shot in the stack....by the #2 !!! Twice.

...maybe that guy didn't like you? ;)

I have found Simunitions and realistic scenarios (which, for us our generally recreations of police action shootings our officers were recently involved in) has been the most helpful thing in my mind for furthering one's "tactical shooting" abilities.

voodoo_man
08-26-2015, 09:11 AM
...maybe that guy didn't like you? ;)

I have found Simunitions and realistic scenarios (which, for us our generally recreations of police action shootings our officers were recently involved in) has been the most helpful thing in my mind for furthering one's "tactical shooting" abilities.

Was a female that was about to retire and had no business being at the training.

Sims are great. I wish there was a competition-style setup that requires people to find and shoot people who are going to shoot them back, all with sims. That would be worth the price of admission

BaiHu
08-26-2015, 09:38 AM
Was a female that was about to retire and had no business being at the training.

Sims are great. I wish there was a competition-style setup that requires people to find and shoot people who are going to shoot them back, all with sims. That would be worth the price of admission
Like a KSTG with live "targets". I'd be all over that. Wait, isn't that called paintball?

orionz06
08-26-2015, 10:05 AM
Gamers gonna praise gaming, gamer haters gonna hate on gaming. Seems perpetual. Oh well.


Competitive paintball is fun. It'll probably get me killed on my drive home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Alpha Sierra
08-26-2015, 10:21 AM
Most who know me, know I do not shoot competition or game in any way, to me it is an easy way to burn horribly bad reps - speed unloading, speed reholstering, throwing guns, zero discrimination, no use of cover or concealment, no scanning, wearing gamer rigs and the obvious issues I've talked about over the years.
You can certainly avoid doing any and all of the above in USPSA. You can unload and reholster as slowly as you like, as you are not on the clock. Throwing guns? WTF....I've never been to any legit shooting match where that was even remotely OK. You can use all the (simulated) cover and concealment that you want in the field course stages. It's not required that you do so, but it's also not prohibited. Same goes for scanning and gamer rigs. Scanning and assessing and duty or concealment rigs are not required, but they are also not prohibited.

People treat competition shooting like training.
Correction, some people (very few) treat competition as if it were training. Most of us treat it as an enjoyable sport.

The competitions I have RSO's at (only because they needed help no because I wanted to shoot them) nearly all the competitors, repeatedly, made tactical mistakes and refused to listen to a single word of advice on the matter, because their times would slow if they did things a different (tactical safe) way.
That's probably because they are treating the competition as a sport, and doing the things they can do within the rules to maximize their score; and not treating the competition as if it were some tactical exercise.

The other kicker for me is that many competitions do not allow to shoot "as you come" meaning if I show up with an AIWB rig and pocketing my reloads, they'll tell me I cannot shoot.
I can't speak for other shooting sport, but I know for a fact that you can shoot USPSA with your AWIB carry rig, just sign up for Limited (iron sights) or Open (if your pistol has an RMR) divisions and you'll be good to go. If you have any doubts, I'm sure Mr. White can clear them up as that is how he competes in USPSA.

Twice. That's a training thing, sure, but its really an adrenaline thing, that's condition black. You cannot replicate that or how you will function unless you actually find yourself in that situation through training, profession or street encounter. How many competition shooters go to condition black during training? How many have a spike in heart rate so high that they are on autopilot? Because that's what happens in real life and no amount of competition shooting will prepare someone for that. Tactical training and experience, will and has.
What kind of "tactical" training recreates the stress of being shot at, or you about to shoot someone, for real? Not trying to be a dick, just really curious. I thought the only way to get that level of stress is in a real life deadly force confrontation

Bottom line, no one will (or should) give you any crap if you decide to apply sound tactics to a sport shooting match, so long as you follow the safety rules and procedures.

By the same token, you shouldn't expect others to do as you would, when all they want out of it is a sporting competition.

BehindBlueI's
08-26-2015, 10:26 AM
Simunitions and force on force training simulate it pretty well. FATS can seem very real, as well.

Going through a game run is one thing. Going through a real school with over a hundred role players, speakers echoing gun shots and screams, etc your brain forgets it isn't real pretty quick.

GJM
08-26-2015, 10:32 AM
Simunitions and force on force training simulate it pretty well. FATS can seem very real, as well.

Going through a game run is one thing. Going through a real school with over a hundred role players, speakers echoing gun shots and screams, etc your brain forgets it isn't real pretty quick.

If it like flying, it is very real initially, then the intensity fades. The jet simulators I train in are certified by the FAA as so realistic, you can obtain your complete sign off to fly the real aircraft, without leaving the simulator. Initially, you feel much the same as flying the real aircraft. Over time though, you come to realize it is "only a simulator," and you will not die if you screw up. That is quite different than flying the real plane, where death is a possibility if you screw up.

Alpha Sierra
08-26-2015, 10:42 AM
Simunitions and force on force training simulate it pretty well. FATS can seem very real, as well.

Going through a game run is one thing. Going through a real school with over a hundred role players, speakers echoing gun shots and screams, etc your brain forgets it isn't real pretty quick.
Thanks for the education

Glenn E. Meyer
08-26-2015, 10:43 AM
My goal as a fat old guy is to be reasonably competent with the firearm as to skills and have some stress innoculation. I'm not a cop or a soldier.

Thus, I found personally that a combination of classes and competition is the best I can do. I did put out the effort to do a fair amount of training with quality trainers like Givens, Ayoob, Spaulding, Insights, KRtraining, etc. and go the NTI and Givens conference. Granted I had the resources to do such. Getting a touch old and got to watch the budget for big trips now.

I also shoot IDPA and sometimes steel. I just didn't like USPSA and some of the extreme gaming. I would shoot it if the only game nearby but we have lots of IDPA.

As far as stress innoculation, that's a real effect and simulations are the only way to get close. Some of the FOF exercises while not life and death are stressful. People have stressed out at some and take the results seriously. I've learned quite a bit when I failed in some (better experience than winning). But I've seen folks flip out that it was unfair that they 'lost'. I currently find IDPA not to be stressful but it was way back when. I have confidence in basic skills in reloading, clearing the gun, and things like that. Having to do a one handed anything - I know how. When faced with a few sketchy folks in the past few years - it wasn't a flip out - I said mentally that I can handle this with a range of de-esclation or if need be something worse. I think that is from quite a few FOF experiences with Code Eagles or airsoft (all of those do hurt).

Now for the AIWB - find a game that allows it if you want. Since I almost had my foot take a 45 ACP from a guy who couldn't holster his gun (I was score keeper), I can see why a local match may not want to deal with you shooting yourself without a vetting of one's expertise. Should a local match have to give you a pre-test? Maybe they don't want to. We've had the Serpa shoot yourself enough. One local range will only let you draw in a range if they pretest you. You may have the skill but do all?

IDPA or USPSA are not realistic (what an insight!). Replace the targets with folks with airsoft guns and you have one also. BEEP - you would be lucky to get past the first two targets without being shot. Who is going to survive 8 folks shooting back at you in most circumstances.

I find the whole debate to be a non-issue if you are an educated student of the issues. You take what you can from competitions and training. Appeals to authority are not definitive. Mr. X or Y saying A, B or C does not overwhelm my critical thinking.

BTW - screwing up and running into guys with full auto airsoft at a few feet and getting hosed, does break the skin and hurt. Then your wife yells at you for being a stupid fat old guy. But you can posture in the gym and preen for the guys who go to the square range as 'training'. :rolleyes:

PS - that also happens when you take a knife class and break a blood vessel in your hand so that it swells up and you have to go the ER, being yelled at by your wife. Then you get a rig to wear to work and have to tell liberal arts professor that you did this during knife fighting class (haha!).

BehindBlueI's
08-26-2015, 10:49 AM
If it like flying, it is very real initially, then the intensity fades. The jet simulators I train in are certified by the FAA as so realistic, you can obtain your complete sign off to fly the real aircraft, without leaving the simulator. Initially, you feel much the same as flying the real aircraft. Over time though, you come to realize it is "only a simulator," and you will not die if you screw up. That is quite different than flying the real plane, where death is a possibility if you screw up.

There's pros and cons to everything and if you run through the same simulation over and over I'm sure it gets old. Going through different live action scenarios routinely, though, keeps it fresh. Especially if you have pain feedback. Mixing simulator use in with live action FoF where bruises remind you that you caught a "bullet" have kept things pretty 'real' for me in training. I'm sure its also helped me stay more calm in real armed encounters and during real shoot/no shoot decisions because it felt more familiar.

**edit**

I'm also going to say that pain feedback and peer review make lessons stick much more than paper target lessons do. I vividly remember a scenario where I did something I thought would work but turned out to be very stupid and the instant feedback was I would have been stitched with AR fire if it was off the range. I instantly realized my plan in that situation was going to get me killed if I put it into play in real life, adapted my response, and now had that more improved plan in my head. That's the biggest difference for me.

Chuck Haggard
08-26-2015, 10:51 AM
Pat Mac is rather tactical, what does he say about competition?;

http://soldiersystems.net/2012/08/18/gunfighter-moment-mcnamara/

HopetonBrown
08-26-2015, 11:44 AM
Mike Pannone urged our class to go and compete. He's kinda tactical.

BehindBlueI's
08-26-2015, 11:57 AM
I think in some cases people are talking past each other. In my mind there is nothing wrong with competing, and there are benefits to doing so. Yes, it's not realistic. Neither is dry firing. Yet most people believe there is a benefit to dry firing.

It is my opinion that that competition shooting ALONE is insufficient. Most of the guys quoted here are saying it supplements or bolsters tactical training, not that it replaces it. That's where I'm at.

You wouldn't expect to make a basketball team if all you did was practice a 3 point shot. You could be the world's best 3 point shooter, but if you can't run up and down the court, can't hit a free throw, can't guard your opponent, can't catch a rebound, etc. etc. you ain't making the team no matter how good at that one component you are. We all realize that while you may be a standout in one category of the game, you must be well rounded to be a truly good player. Competition shooting is practicing one aspect of real world encounters. The shooting part. Being good at the shooting part is important, no doubt. But there's a lot more to it, such as decision making, interrupting your opponent's OODA loop, etc. that you simply can't practice in competition.

45dotACP
08-26-2015, 12:09 PM
It seems that there is a lot of agreement on this subject among the cognoscenti...it's the Cleeti who have the deafeningly controversial opinions. For instance, someone who doesn't train or compete because they will "point shoot" will do poorly when the balloon goes up. Compared to someone who regularly trains, uses the sights, can manipulate their gun quickly and call their shots will do better. Perhaps not ideal, and perhaps not even good enough but give that person triple digit training hours with a defensive shooting instructor and they stand the best chance...bad, good, best are the options I see myself having so why wouldn't I give myself every advantage.

Sent from my VS876 using Tapatalk

JAD
08-26-2015, 12:30 PM
Like a reformed smoker wrinkling his nose at someone's Marlboro, I get nervous when people invoke Cooper.

voodoo_man
08-26-2015, 03:49 PM
No one, especially a big name instructor, going to diss gaming. It just wont happen as they are running a business.

I was speaking from first hand experience of games not allowing setups of aiwb or that nature as well as other points.

Recreating condition black is very doable, hell ive been there in training several times. The training value is incredible.

Also the topic of discrimination has been passed over, as ive expected.

HopetonBrown
08-26-2015, 03:58 PM
Mike Pannone is a Master in USPSA so I don't think it's a case of upsetting his client base.

orionz06
08-26-2015, 04:02 PM
No one, especially a big name instructor, going to diss gaming. It just wont happen as they are running a business.

I was speaking from first hand experience of games not allowing setups of aiwb or that nature as well as other points.

Recreating condition black is very doable, hell ive been there in training several times. The training value is incredible.

Also the topic of discrimination has been passed over, as ive expected.

Have you trained with Ken Hackathorn or Larry Vickers?

Alpha Sierra
08-26-2015, 04:15 PM
I was speaking from first hand experience of games not allowing setups of aiwb or that nature as well as other points.

USPSA will let you do everything you've said you wanted in a gun game. So now it's up to you if you want to take advantage of the opportunity or not.

Let's discuss target discrimination. What, exactly, would you have gun games do to make you discriminate between shoot and no shoot targets besides what they do now?

You can forget about condition black (maybe condition brown?) in the shooting sports. That's flat out not going to happen.

45dotACP
08-26-2015, 04:25 PM
No one, especially a big name instructor, going to diss gaming. It just wont happen as they are running a business.

I was speaking from first hand experience of games not allowing setups of aiwb or that nature as well as other points.

Recreating condition black is very doable, hell ive been there in training several times. The training value is incredible.

Also the topic of discrimination has been passed over, as ive expected.

You can carry appendix in games like USPSA. Just shoot limited. You may not be super competitive, but you wouldn't be alone in doing it.

As for your other topics: Well yeah, I won't learn how to clear rooms, drop terrorists, or even shoot it out in the parking lot with three shady dudes, but I don't shoot USPSA because I think I'll fly into a dynamic battlespace without cover and start laying down double alphas on tangos...or something. The idea of getting quality defensive training is a great thing. But it's pretty clear that a A class, M class or GM class shooter will have good transitions, good accuracy, and the ability to rapidly put bullets on target from strong and weak hand positions and call their shots.

Better shooting is better shooting. It doesn't mean better cover, it doesn't mean better tactics, and it doesn't mean discrimination and without those things, the actual technical side of shooting doesn't matter...as much...but it still matters and when it comes to the technical side of shooting, a high level USPSA shooter will have an advantage.

And that is hard to argue.

SLG
08-26-2015, 04:49 PM
I am getting a little tired of this old argument, but I guess it's like revolver vs. auto.

I used to be a good shooter, and thought I was better than I was. Then I started competing and found out what a good shooter really is. I got a lot better as well. Most especially my ability to quickly process info and see quickly. Never hurt me on the tactical side either, you just can't let it take over your shooting/training life. There really are no valid arguments against doing SOME competition shooting, if you want to shoot better. Just don't do so much that it skews your priorities. That's where people go wrong.

GJM
08-26-2015, 05:30 PM
I am getting a little tired of this old argument, but I guess it's like revolver vs. auto.

Same here.

Great technical shooting skills are not a substitute for poor tactical skills.

Great tactical skills are not a substitute for poor technical shooting skills.

A question is often posed -- do you want technical or tactical skills? The answer should be both.

voodoo_man
08-26-2015, 05:33 PM
The games around me (eastern pa) dont allow aiwb. Ive rso'd at dozens of games and each ones has the issues I posted about.

As for discrimination, every target is either a shoot or clearly a no shoot (brown on white). Theres nothing tactical in nature about that.

As for training in higher heart rate status, as all the points I have brought up because the OP referred to tactical shooting, and I defined that without any objections.

As ive stated, gaming is good for accuracy and handgun skillsets, but not tactical in nature and seriously lacks what is required for those who carry firearms on a daily basis to effectively overcome "tactical" scenarios.

Alpha Sierra
08-26-2015, 06:05 PM
The games around me (eastern pa) dont allow aiwb. Ive rso'd at dozens of games and each ones has the issues I posted about.
Whatever games you're shooting, they're not USPSA. They're either IDPA or some outlaw version of.....something

As for discrimination, every target is either a shoot or clearly a no shoot (brown on white). Theres nothing tactical in nature about that.
Nor will there ever be anything else. It's not training. And frankly, for the average concealed carrier, what kind of discrimination skills will he or she need to make the shoot/no shoot decision. Someone presenting a deadly weapon in a threatening manner just discriminated himself as a target. That's all I need.

As for training in higher heart rate status, as all the points I have brought up because the OP referred to tactical shooting, and I defined that without any objections.
???

As ive stated, gaming is good for accuracy and handgun skillsets, but not tactical in nature and seriously lacks what is required for those who carry firearms on a daily basis to effectively overcome "tactical" scenarios.
What a citizen needs to defeat a personal threat is not the same as what some swat team needs to defeat their type of threat. And most people who carry concealed are mature enough to avoid the sheepdog fantasy

Glenn E. Meyer
08-26-2015, 07:11 PM
And most people who carry concealed are mature enough to avoid the sheepdog fantasy

Well, I don't know about that but empirically we tested three groups of folks for a research project. One was people who carried and had significant training, one group was those with TX CHLs but no formal training outside of the CHL class - maybe they shot paper once in awhile and the last was students with no gun training as control.

The question was if you saw a woman being beaten would you intervene - there was a range of options (Likert rating). Do nothing, flee, observe, call the law, duke it out, challenge with a gun or just shoot him.

Of all the groups - almost no one would shoot him. Only very few would challenge with the gun. The gun folk were more likely to call the law than the student controls. Having the guy going to set the woman on fire (a real case), that raised the gun challenge quite a bit (as happened in real life) but still not too many shots fired chosen as a rated option.

At the NTI, they ran a similar assault in a dark garage. It was 50-50 ish if participants would actually intervene. Half watched. I think most people there could run a gun.

However on the Internet, you are called a coward and immoral if you don't intervene with guns blazing.

PS - In FOF, there are all kinds of ambiguous folks running around.

Just an anecdote, at the NTI - I was in a wheelchair (my role) and my partner was pushing me around. Then the SHTF - he was to get me out. That chair was hard to push on the uneven ground. Now, my partner was a reverend. We survived but I said to him - next time, Rev. - put your hands on my shoulders and yell - Hallelujah. I'll yell : I'M HEALED - AMEN - and then we will run our butts out of the fire fight.

Mr_White
08-26-2015, 08:00 PM
voodoo_man, any official USPSA match should allow you to shoot AIWB from concealment in either Open, Limited, or Limited-10 Divisions. If they don't, they are not running an official USPSA match by the rules and need to get straightened out. AIWB is emphatically disallowed in IDPA - quite the irony since it's legal in USPSA.

Mr_White
08-26-2015, 08:02 PM
Dumping partially-filled magazines on the ground instead of retaining them

Misidentification of material suitable for use as cover

Nonexistent or poor use of 'cover'

Standing in open area exposed to multiple adversaries

Failure to engage adversaries through light barriers

Rushing toward known threats at maximum speed instead of retreating or fortifying current position

Shooting adversaries twice only

Superficial or nonexistent thread ID and assessment

Nonexistent representation of opposing will by adversaries/cardboard don't shoot back or maneuver against your position and flank you

Lack of 'hard break'/follow through - hurrying to unload

Nonexistent post-shooting procedure

Failure to get gun fully loaded before holstering

Unrealistic equipment - 'game' gun, belt, etc.

Inability to initiate action in absence of a timer beep

Action unconsciously and unintentionally initiated when a beep is heard outside of the game

Unrealistic WHO draw (draw with strong hand, transfer to support hand)

Unrealistic SHO and WHO malfunction clearance (both hands used)

All adversaries in known locations at start of stage/engagement

Mr_White
08-26-2015, 08:05 PM
Unrealistic equipment - 'class' gun, belt, etc.

Unrealistic quantity of magazines carried for class

Knee/elbow pads used in class but not in life

Nonexistent representation of opposing will by adversaries/cardboard don't shoot back or maneuver against your position and flank you

Misidentification of material suitable for use as cover

Failure to engage adversaries through light barriers

Only taking one step instead of a more radical amount of movement during reloads and malfunction clearance (when on a line with other students)

Practicing to clear double feeds or otherwise manipulate gun within a distance that fails to address a threat aggressing/closing distance while gun is down

Dunning-Krueger effect on a person's estimation of their own skill level

Reverse Dunning-Krueger effect on a person's estimation of their own skill level - head shots cannot realistically be made, hit ratio will be ~20% at best, won't be able to see or use sights, shooting will be done one-handed despite training to the contrary, etc.

'Worst case is the norm' - two is one, one is none, you better be able to clear a double-feed weak hand only while supine and backwards in a ditch, partial magazines must be retained in case you fire your other 61 rounds and need those two rounds that you dropped

Taking a knee in the open

Known extreme likelihood of needing to use force/deadly force when entering a scenario or FOF

Over-representation of malfunction rate when dummy rounds are introduced

Under-representation of reload rate if post-shooting procedure (topping off) is emphasized

Under-representation of stovepipe/failure to eject malfunctions that require rolling the gun on its side in order to clear with tap-rack

Superficial or nonexistent threat ID and assessment

Inability to initiate action in absence of a range command to do so

Action unconsciously and unintentionally initiated when a range command is heard outside of training

Glenn E. Meyer
08-26-2015, 08:26 PM
Interesting list - I don't know if all apply to all competitions and all trainers :o. However, what's


Action unconsciously and unintentionally initiated when a range command is heard outside of training

I've never heard a Load and Make Ready, Shooter Ready, Beep, or whatever in WalMart. Thus, I haven't shot anyone there. Has this happened?

Luke
08-26-2015, 08:56 PM
Can confirm. Have fired at drive through window box after hearing a beep.

JAD
08-26-2015, 09:34 PM
Can confirm. Have fired at drive through window box after hearing a beep.

If it was a Starbucks, you probably hit a hippie. Good shoot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

nwhpfan
08-26-2015, 09:44 PM
Shooting is a tactic.

Practice it, challenge yourself. The toughest shot I've taken was in competition. I have learned a lot competing. I think if you carry because you might shoot somebody, you should give competing a try and see how good your shooting is. Many shots you take in competition are similar to what you may face in real life....some are not. But if you have to hit something fast, you should see what's out there, IMO.

BehindBlueI's
08-26-2015, 09:52 PM
Interesting list - I don't know if all apply to all competitions and all trainers :o. However, what's



I've never heard a Load and Make Ready, Shooter Ready, Beep, or whatever in WalMart. Thus, I haven't shot anyone there. Has this happened?

I've shot my microwave 3 times, and my wife knows not to run the dryer when I'm home.

BN
08-27-2015, 06:50 AM
I've never heard a Load and Make Ready, Shooter Ready, Beep, or whatever in WalMart. Thus, I haven't shot anyone there. Has this happened?

You say "load and make ready, shooter ready" to yourself in your mind before you leave home. That way you are prepared for when you get to the food court at the mall.

LSP972
08-27-2015, 07:23 AM
Can confirm. Have fired at drive through window box after hearing a beep.

LOL.

.

Pup town
08-27-2015, 08:15 AM
The games around me (eastern pa) dont allow aiwb. Ive rso'd at dozens of games and each ones has the issues I posted about.

.

Why in God's name are you RSOing for competitions that you openly disdain? So you can give out "tactical" lessons that no one wants to hear? I bet you are a real joy to be around.

You've been told multiple time that you can shot AIWB, do your scans and deliberately re holster at USPSA matches. Did that not sink in?

Compete or don't. I don't care.

voodoo_man
08-27-2015, 08:26 AM
As I have stated, there are many positive points that come with competition shooting. It is not, however, tactical in nature. It does not offer the fundamental skills which allow people to survive street encounters. It does not developed anything "tactical" and my responses were in the context of the OP.

Glenn E. Meyer
08-27-2015, 09:32 AM
The difference between an IDPA shooter and USPSA shooter at the drive thru - is that the latter airguns through the line three times before shooting the clerk at the beep. The IDPA shooter just shoots him as he or she does not want a penalty for airgunning.

Pup town
08-27-2015, 09:42 AM
As I have stated, there are many positive points that come with competition shooting. It is not, however, tactical in nature. It does not offer the fundamental skills which allow people to survive street encounters. It does not developed anything "tactical" and my responses were in the context of the OP.

That didn't answer my question about why you were RO'ing at dozens(!)of matches you don't participate in. Those matches can't find any to run a timer and hold a clipboard? Something seems off.

JHC
08-27-2015, 10:14 AM
However on the Internet, you are called a coward and immoral if you don't intervene with guns blazing.



And that is said in the context of an armed American standing by as a good witness; watching someone light a woman on fire? Presumably with an accelerant. Am I tracking?

HopetonBrown
08-27-2015, 12:33 PM
As I have stated, there are many positive points that come with competition shooting. It is not, however, tactical in nature. It does not offer the fundamental skills which allow people to survive street encounters. It does not developed anything "tactical" and my responses were in the context of the OP.

Why does everything have to be "tactical in nature"?

"There is a lot talk about competition shooting getting you killed in the streets. I'm here to tell you there is no street or sport. There is only skill and application. The skills are the same, we just have to adapt them to the application." -Mike Pannone (https://www.facebook.com/AliasTrainingLLC/posts/684179421708248:0)

(although I realize that earlier you believe that the highest level tactical trainers in the world don't badmouth competition purely because they don't want to offend that massive revenue stream of USPSA/IDPA shooters taking tactical classes)

Mr_White
08-27-2015, 12:45 PM
I've never heard a Load and Make Ready, Shooter Ready, Beep, or whatever in WalMart. Thus, I haven't shot anyone there. Has this happened?


Action unconsciously and unintentionally initiated when a range command is heard outside of training

This one ^^^ is reflective of this one:


Action unconsciously and unintentionally initiated when a beep is heard outside of the game

I have seen the second one asserted by more than one person in total seriousness - that outside of the context of being the current shooter in a competition, a beep will cause a competition-conditioned person to shoot, almost shoot, draw, or at least start to draw. I made up the one about range commands as a similarly ridiculous flipside to the same coin. I'm unaware of any credible instances of either one.


Interesting list - I don't know if all apply to all competitions and all trainers :o.

I'm sure they don't.

---

The competition list contains some examples of supposed competition-rooted bad habits that I have seen actually asserted, as well as more along the same lines that I thought up that are just as valid. The tactical training list contains the same types of examples, based in precisely the same line of thought as the criticisms of competition. I'm sure we could think of many more for both lists.

Bottom line is that all training and competition is mostly unrealistic. Different modalities of training and other activities can portray specific elements realistically. But the other elements are usually highly unrealistic. And that's why one needs to use a variety of training modes, activities, etc. None of it will cover everything, and all of it has the potential to create 'training scars' if it is the only activity utilized. Tactical training may focus on things other than what is focused upon in competition, but tactical training has an absolute litany of potential pitfalls, even when done well, just like competitive shooting. The practical reality is that one will have to use a variety of preparatory activities, and no one is going to escape having to use their brain to observe, make decisions, and carry out those decisions as well as they can under the circumstances and taking context into consideration.

The alternative to the risk of training scars, as so astutely pointed out by someone in another place, is to simply not train or compete. Which probably means, to just plain suck. I think we're better off to train, compete, practice, etc., even with the inherent risks.

Failure2Stop
08-27-2015, 01:33 PM
Marksmanship training should make you a better shooter.
Simulation should make you more comfortable in the simulated environment.
Expecting one to do the other's job is a point of failure.

There is a cyclic relationship between skill training and simulation, and of course the necessity of each is proportional to the skill and environment.

I could go on about these concepts at long length, but overall, I agree with the good Mr. White:
Most training and competition environments are poor simulations of real world gunfightin' (tm).
Most competition training is almost analogous with actual competition.

voodoo_man
08-27-2015, 01:42 PM
Why does everything have to be "tactical in nature"?

"There is a lot talk about competition shooting getting you killed in the streets. I'm here to tell you there is no street or sport. There is only skill and application. The skills are the same, we just have to adapt them to the application." -Mike Pannone (https://www.facebook.com/AliasTrainingLLC/posts/684179421708248:0)

(although I realize that earlier you believe that the highest level tactical trainers in the world don't badmouth competition purely because they don't want to offend that massive revenue stream of USPSA/IDPA shooters taking tactical classes)

If your read the OP that's the context I was responding in.

Chuck Haggard
08-27-2015, 03:29 PM
I'll note that when I was down at DARC training with Uncle Rich he noted that after the .mil guys go through similar training that we were doing, all Sims and scenarios, 96+ hours of it that week, the military guys would go back through a live fire training package due to the fact that they had found their marksmanship and weapon handling skills would degrade from all of the Sim work.

MVS
08-27-2015, 08:12 PM
As I have stated, there are many positive points that come with competition shooting. It is not, however, tactical in nature. It does not offer the fundamental skills which allow people to survive street encounters. It does not developed anything "tactical" and my responses were in the context of the OP.

Hmmm, so there is nothing in observing, reacting to stimuli, quickly and efficiently accessing your firearm, moving or not, and accurately putting rounds on target that would help people survive a street encounter? There are a lot of gunfight winners out there that may beg to differ that assertion.

MVS
08-27-2015, 08:16 PM
I'll note that when I was down at DARC training with Uncle Rich he noted that after the .mil guys go through similar training that we were doing, all Sims and scenarios, 96+ hours of it that week, the military guys would go back through a live fire training package due to the fact that they had found their marksmanship and weapon handling skills would degrade from all of the Sim work.

That's interesting Chuck. Coming from a "reality" training background where they were heavily invested in movement and FOF, I definitely realized later after training with TLG and Tom Givens, that many of those guys from the "reality" school couldn't shoot worth a crap. The few who could were those who competed on the side but kept it a secret as to not be ridiculed. One of those just shot a 115 at the Rogers short course Ronnie Dodd teaches a couple of weeks ago.

voodoo_man
08-27-2015, 08:32 PM
Hmmm, so there is nothing in observing, reacting to stimuli, quickly and efficiently accessing your firearm, moving or not, and accurately putting rounds on target that would help people survive a street encounter? There are a lot of gunfight winners out there that may beg to differ that assertion.

Maybe you missed the rest of my posts, might be worth reading them all before cutting one out of context and replying to it.

rob_s
08-28-2015, 04:29 AM
While the "false dichotomy" of competition vs. "tactical" shooting is always a sore point or an obvious point of contention I think people misunderstand the actual nature of how these things are debated and applied in the real world.

No one should ever argue that accurate shooting or training for accurate shooting is bad. Especially when you train to shoot fast and accurate. The issue becomes fast and accurate shooting is only a very small part of "tactical" shooting.

Should we define what "tactical" shooting is? Is it CCW-style on the street 3-5 feet or yard encounters? Are they what police officers get into during patrol duty? Is it what SWAT or tactical officer's get into during raids or house clearings? Which one of those do competition shooters do really well? Probably the CCW-style, standing in the open and engaging with a target. Oh, that's what the OP even said. What about competition shooting has to do with taking cover, providing covering fire, overlapping fields of fire, discrimination, angles and walls, as well as other "tactical" concepts.

How does competition shooting blend tactical concepts? It does not, really.

Most who know me, know I do not shoot competition or game in any way, to me it is an easy way to burn horribly bad reps - speed unloading, speed reholstering, throwing guns, zero discrimination, no use of cover or concealment, no scanning, wearing gamer rigs and the obvious issues I've talked about over the years. People treat competition shooting like training. They do this because its vastly cheaper than actual classwork and it strokes their ego. The competitions I have RSO's at (only because they needed help no because I wanted to shoot them) nearly all the competitors, repeatedly, made tactical mistakes and refused to listen to a single word of advice on the matter, because their times would slow if they did things a different (tactical safe) way.

The other kicker for me is that many competitions do not allow to shoot "as you come" meaning if I show up with an AIWB rig and pocketing my reloads, they'll tell me I cannot shoot. What is the issue there? Ohh, they do not believe the people can shoot or act safely - like vickers with his classes.

I have nothing against Avery or what he is saying, we all have our points of view and our "filters" we use to gauge the world. I have had experiences with supposedly trained LEO's behind me that I did not trust holding a gun clearing rooms, hell, two or so years ago I did a sim training at my PD and I was shot in the stack....by the #2 !!! Twice. That's a training thing, sure, but its really an adrenaline thing, that's condition black. You cannot replicate that or how you will function unless you actually find yourself in that situation through training, profession or street encounter. How many competition shooters go to condition black during training? How many have a spike in heart rate so high that they are on autopilot? Because that's what happens in real life and no amount of competition shooting will prepare someone for that. Tactical training and experience, will and has.

I used to think like you.

Then I realized I was wrong.

The thing is that, like you, there is nothing anyone is going to say to someone with those views that is going to get them to change their mind, so there is little point.

I will say this, your entire post is about what you don't do because of the actions you think you observed in others. Kinda weird.

voodoo_man
08-28-2015, 06:30 AM
I used to think like you.

Then I realized I was wrong.

The thing is that, like you, there is nothing anyone is going to say to someone with those views that is going to get them to change their mind, so there is little point.

I will say this, your entire post is about what you don't do because of the actions you think you observed in others. Kinda weird.

Thanks for assuming and generalizing.

Before I got on the job I used to shoot games at my local club. I carried and shot "action pistol" matches monthly and enjoyed it, lots of fun. This was 2004-2007-ish.

It was not until after I got on the job and realized, very quickly, how all the crap I have been doing at these games would very quickly get me into a huge world of hurt. I sought out professional instruction, did my own research and did everything in my power to find those who "been there and done that" including some big name instructors before they were big name instructors.

Mr. White referred to the Dunning-Kruger effect and I was invested in it, I have no issue saying that, specifically because of the over-estimation of my ability due to gaming and not actual street encounters. When I got into my first real life, no buzzer, go big or go home situation, I had a "come to Jesus" moment.

All the gaming in the world won't get you out of a bad situation if you don't have the tactical skill-sets required to make it out alive. Why did I survive? I have always been fast, speed is life, nothing changes that.

What did I change? I stopped gaming and started focusing on real, tangible, proven tactics that evolve over time. I quickly realized that the amount of reps I burned doing things that may put me in a bad situation were high enough that I had to change it. I studied tactics, literally became a student of them, and burned good reps to offset the crappy ones.

The issue here, Rob, is that gamers almost never have these moments, they never wake up and realize their just tactics are non-existent and they are at any given moment waist deep in Dunning-Kruger.

So lets leave the assumptions and generalizations to the speculators and non-shooters. I am here to discuss factual experiences based on first hand knowledge for the betterment of every member. This ego, middle-school, chest thumping non-sense does no good for anyone.

SLG
08-28-2015, 07:50 AM
Well, as I said before, if you want to be a great shooter, you have to shoot competition. If you want to be a great tactical shooter, you have to limit your competition shooting at some point so that you dont start thinking that what you do on the range matters more than what you need to do for real. I have seen more than a few high level tactical guys get too far into competition and degrade what really matters. Nonetheless, some competition shooting is essential to great shooting, tactical or otherwise. I dont agree with much of what vdm posted, but I'll take him at face value. It sounds like he has done some competition and found his limit. Maybe he'll go back to competition at some point, but if not, so what? I competed pretty hard for a couple of years, and did pretty well, while staying true to my real world needs. I got fed up with competition and stopped for a bunch of years. I don't have the time to shoot competitions now as much as I'd like, but i enjoy the ones i get to shoot now, and they dont negatively affect me for work. You have to have balance in all things.

Btw, when i talk about tactical needs vs. Competition, i'm not talking about the mindless nonsense that people seem to worry about, and has been beaten to death in this thread. I'm talking about altering your techniques and equipment to be "more competitive", rather than just doing as well as you can with proven gear and techniques. For example, my slidelock reload is right about 1.2 shot to shot, without concealment. I could speed that up if i altered my technique, but then i would lose some consistency and reliability. One well known gm has a reload, on a good day, about .3 faster than me. (Never mind that slidelock reloads dont really occur in uspsa, this is a guy i have shot a bunch with in and out of competition). However, about 1 in 10 reloads gets fumbled, and ive seen him miss the gun completely and send the mag sailing across the range more than once. That is an unacceptable tradeoff. His technique is not solid, and is not stress proof. Some use the same technique and do it a little better than him, but guys like TGO use a different, much more reliable technique, even though it is a bit slower.

JHC
08-28-2015, 08:22 AM
I've never found competition to stroke my ego. Quite the contrary I'm sad to say.


That is all.

orionz06
08-28-2015, 09:20 AM
I've never found competition to stroke my ego. Quite the contrary I'm sad to say.


That is all.

You only get outta it what you out into it. Your approach, and that of most others, must vary with that of a few.

Oh well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

YVK
08-28-2015, 11:08 AM
The games around me (eastern pa) dont allow aiwb. Ive rso'd at dozens of games and each ones has the issues I posted about.

As for discrimination, every target is either a shoot or clearly a no shoot (brown on white). Theres nothing tactical in nature about that.

As for training in higher heart rate status, as all the points I have brought up because the OP referred to tactical shooting, and I defined that without any objections.

As ive stated, gaming is good for accuracy and handgun skillsets, but not tactical in nature and seriously lacks what is required for those who carry firearms on a daily basis to effectively overcome "tactical" scenarios.

We've just had like a multi million page thread establishing the fact that multiple reputable tac trainers do not allow AIWB, some even IWB.

At some point in my life I was taking up to 5 tac classes annually. I don't remember any target discrimination tasks set differently than shoot/no shoot/hostage a'la games. I do remember that shooting on the move in tac classes was done at a speed of keeping the line straight, completely and unnaturally slow and way below any movement speed that games challenge me with.

I try not to dichotomize tac and games, but in my experience most of tac classes are nothing but handling and marksmanship intros. Ive had some solid handling training, but shooting tasks and target setups were not ever more realistic than what games do. I am open to suggestions as who teaches decision making, realistic target discrimination, unusual positions, shooting and non shooting engagements while maintaining high level of shooting performance etc in their one and the same class.

Mr_White
08-28-2015, 11:41 AM
At some point in my life I was taking up to 5 tac classes annually. I don't remember any target discrimination tasks set differently than shoot/no shoot/hostage a'la games.

...

realistic target discrimination

That's essentially been my experience with training too. There are some things you can do to try incorporating threat ID and assessment into live fire. They are generally pretty ham-handed though and don't correspond to many of the threat cues that real people display. That's why you gotta do scenarios/FOF. Then you have people, with behavior to evaluate. At some point I realized the objection to superficial target discrimination in competition applied just as much to tactical training.

Glenn E. Meyer
08-28-2015, 11:44 AM
I am open to suggestions as who teaches decision making, realistic target discrimination, unusual positions, shooting and non shooting engagements while maintaining high level of shooting performance etc in their one and the same class.

For a FOG civilian, I found the NTI, Insights classes (like SVT) and KRTraining (Rehn's AT series and guests like Dave Spaulding and Andy Standford) had shooting and FOF components that covered such. In the FOF classes, we had to use simulated firearms and had various acting components that were not just a match shoot/no shoot.

1986s4
08-28-2015, 11:49 AM
Interesting discussion. I don't carry a gun for a living, never have. I have sought and received good instruction from well known and not so well known trainers. I have also enjoyed gun games for years. I'm no GM but I can do myself proud on occasion. My feeling is that one can take skills and apply them as needed. A lifeguard at the local pool needn't be an Olympic gold medal swimmer but when faced with saving a life in the water wouldn't be nice to have at least some of that conditioning and skill?

Alpha Sierra
08-28-2015, 01:19 PM
the NTI

What exactly is that? Not familiar with the acronym

BehindBlueI's
08-28-2015, 02:01 PM
That's why you gotta do scenarios/FOF. Then you have people, with behavior to evaluate.

Yup.

Still not sure why so many folks take a "this vs that" approach. Everything is awesome and everything sucks, just in different areas. A multi-discipline approach makes a more rounded and better prepared gunfighter. Boxers don't just get practice against real people, and they don't just hit bags, and they hit the weight, and they do conditioning, etc. etc. Somehow once you get to guns, though, that component approach seems to lose favor. It's "do this or you'll die".

Pup town
08-28-2015, 02:32 PM
Most who know me, know I do not shoot competition or game in any way, to me it is an easy way to burn horribly bad reps - speed unloading, speed reholstering, throwing guns, zero discrimination, no use of cover or concealment, no scanning, wearing gamer rigs and the obvious issues I've talked about over the years. People treat competition shooting like training. They do this because its vastly cheaper than actual classwork and it strokes their ego. The competitions I have RSO's at (only because they needed help no because I wanted to shoot them) nearly all the competitors, repeatedly, made tactical mistakes and refused to listen to a single word of advice on the matter, because their times would slow if they did things a different (tactical safe) way.

.

As best I can tell, all your arguments against competition boils down to you not wanting to "burn bad reps".

Ok, but how do you justify the reps that you burn in a Sayoc class, where they have you shoot their standards, or Defoors tests, or whatever tests they come up with. What about the drills they have you shoot? You can see them on YouTube. They seem pretty similar to a very short USPSA classifier stage.

Aren't you worried about those horrible reps?

What about when you shoot with your agency or shoot your qual? Are there not the same artifices that are present in competitions? Are you worried about that getting you killed?


Face it, every time you go to a range you won't have a FoF experience or a NTI scenario.

Also, I'm calling BS that you have RO'd 24 times for competitions that you didn't shoot. That's absurd. i think you made it up so you can claim to have observed all the faults of competition shooting (and still claim to not shoot competitions).

voodoo_man
08-28-2015, 02:52 PM
Trolls gana troll...but what do we expect?

What it inevitably comes down to is personal preference and personal requirements. If a person wants to game, awesome, if not cool. We are all responsible for our ignorances.

Mr_White
08-28-2015, 03:13 PM
voodoo_man,

Pup town asked some questions about your concerns about bad reps in classes and I think those are good questions - what I was going to ask you about is your dry practice. Do you do target discrimination in dry practice? If so, how do you make it relevant to target discrimination applied to actual people who speak and generally exhibit behavior? Also, do you 'clear the malfunction' every time you press the trigger in dry practice and the gun doesn't actually fire? If you do, do you then follow with remedial malfunction clearance when the initial malfunction clearance does not let the gun then go bang? These are honest questions in an attempt to further the discussion.

Thanks!

voodoo_man
08-28-2015, 03:21 PM
voodoo_man,

Pup town asked some questions about your concerns about bad reps in classes and I think those are good questions - what I was going to ask you about is your dry practice. Do you do target discrimination in dry practice? If so, how do you make it relevant to target discrimination applied to actual people who speak and generally exhibit behavior? Also, do you 'clear the malfunction' every time you press the trigger in dry practice and the gun doesn't actually fire? If you do, do you then follow with remedial malfunction clearance when the initial malfunction clearance does not let the gun then go bang? These are honest questions in an attempt to further the discussion.

Thanks!

I blocked him since hes a troll with a more than obvious vendetta or bone to pick, I dont know him or why he acts that way so his questions won't be answered and I would prefer to not engage him in any conversation, productive or not.

Discrimination is only done with live people in training most of the time. I have also done it with numbers and shapes, picking one at random before the start of a drill and excluding them.

As for malfunctions, I perform an immediate action with every dryfire trigger press. I mitigate this by running drills that do not require immediate action, such as striking and deployment.

Mr_White
08-28-2015, 03:55 PM
Discrimination is only done with live people in training most of the time.

Do you mean scenarios/FOF? Surely you don't mean live fire unless I am completely misunderstanding you. If live fire, then how do you accomplish it? If you mean scenarios/FOF, then what does it matter that target discrimination in competitive shooting is based on something as obvious, superficial, and irrelevant as the color of the cardboard target, if you already don't practice target discrimination in live fire anyway?


I have also done it with numbers and shapes, picking one at random before the start of a drill and excluding them.

I think there are benefits to that (gives you a little bit of task loading burden, a specific thing to look for and then engage), but target discrimination based on looking for colors, numbers, or shapes is completely irrelevant to threat ID and assessment on real people. Or are you taking it for its benefits, while shoring up its holes with other training activities that more realistically address those elements?


As for malfunctions, I perform an immediate action with every dryfire trigger press. I mitigate this by running drills that do not require immediate action, such as striking and deployment.

I'm not sure I completely follow what you are saying in the second sentence. But what I am getting at with dry practice and malfunctions is this:

You press the trigger dry and the gun goes click, then don't 'clear the malfunction', then you are training yourself to fail to remedy a gun that has not fired, right?

You press the trigger dry, then do clear the malfunction, and don't press the trigger again, then you are training yourself to only fire one shot at a target (deadly threat!), right?

You press the trigger dry, then do clear the malfunction, then press the trigger again (gun goes click because dry fire), then if you don't follow that with remedial malfunction clearance, then aren't you training yourself to fail to remedy a gun that wasn't fixed with your initial malfunction clearance? If you do follow with remedial malfunction clearance, and then get another click (and you will because dry practice), then....

You get the idea.

My point is that if you already accept dry practice as a valid mode of training, maybe you could see how we are faced with a similar situation in all types of training, competition, and related activity: there will be holes in it and the potential for training scars will exist with basically everything. But just as in the dry fire you so right enjoy the benefits of, maybe competitive shooting can have some big benefits too. And those benefits are not easily obtained in many other ways. You could enjoy those benefits if you looked past the overplayed issue of training scars from engaging in competition, and especially so when we are talking about someone (you) who obviously avails himself of defensively-oriented training and practice of numerous types, which is going to shore up any holes that might try to creep in on you.

What do you think? Does this make any sense to you or not really?

voodoo_man
08-28-2015, 04:07 PM
Do you mean scenarios/FOF? Surely you don't mean live fire unless I am completely misunderstanding you. If live fire, then how do you accomplish it? If you mean scenarios/FOF, then what does it matter that target discrimination in competitive shooting is based on something as obvious, superficial, and irrelevant as the color of the cardboard target, if you already don't practice target discrimination in live fire anyway?



I think there are benefits to that (gives you a little bit of task loading burden, a specific thing to look for and then engage), but target discrimination based on looking for colors, numbers, or shapes is completely irrelevant to threat ID and assessment on real people. Or are you taking it for its benefits, while shoring up its holes with other training activities that more realistically address those elements?



I'm not sure I completely follow what you are saying in the second sentence. But what I am getting at with dry practice and malfunctions is this:

You press the trigger dry and the gun goes click, then don't 'clear the malfunction', then you are training yourself to fail to remedy a gun that has not fired, right?

You press the trigger dry, then do clear the malfunction, and don't press the trigger again, then you are training yourself to only fire one shot at a target (deadly threat!), right?

You press the trigger dry, then do clear the malfunction, then press the trigger again (gun goes click because dry fire), then if you don't follow that with remedial malfunction clearance, then aren't you training yourself to fail to remedy a gun that wasn't fixed with your initial malfunction clearance? If you do follow with remedial malfunction clearance, and then get another click (and you will because dry practice), then....

You get the idea.

My point is that if you already accept dry practice as a valid mode of training, maybe you could see how we are faced with a similar situation in all types of training, competition, and related activity: there will be holes in it and the potential for training scars will exist with basically everything. But just as in the dry fire you so right enjoy the benefits of, maybe competitive shooting can have some big benefits too. And those benefits are not easily obtained in many other ways. You could enjoy those benefits if you looked past the overplayed issue of training scars from engaging in competition, and especially so when we are talking about someone (you) who obviously avails himself of defensively-oriented training and practice of numerous types, which is going to shore up any holes that might try to creep in on you.

What do you think? Does this make any sense to you or not really?

Im on my phone so typing out an appropriate response isnt something I am going to do.

I will say, however, this "gotcha" type of discussion is growing tiresome, not specific to you, but in general.

I get that I go against the grain on this, and as I said, its due to my experience.

Mr_White
08-28-2015, 04:22 PM
Im on my phone so typing out an appropriate response isnt something I am going to do.

I will say, however, this "gotcha" type of discussion is growing tiresome, not specific to you, but in general.

I get that I go against the grain on this, and as I said, its due to my experience.

Well, if you have time later when you are not on your phone and it is more convenient for you, I'm interested in reading what you have to say in response to my last post.

I guess the reason I even care to talk about it with you is that I too am a tactical guy. That is what I have always been about, though I might look like the opposite sometimes in my life on the internet. I understand going against the grain - that is what I was doing in some circles and by some people's estimation, when I started to shoot competition. And I can't even begin to tell you how much I think I have benefited from shooting competitively, even with my defensive priorities.

voodoo_man
08-29-2015, 09:34 AM
Do you mean scenarios/FOF? Surely you don't mean live fire unless I am completely misunderstanding you. If live fire, then how do you accomplish it? If you mean scenarios/FOF, then what does it matter that target discrimination in competitive shooting is based on something as obvious, superficial, and irrelevant as the color of the cardboard target, if you already don't practice target discrimination in live fire anyway?

Live as in, live people, role players or otherwise, not live fire. Now I may be wrong, correct me if I am, in competition shooting, the only discrimination that exists is either a blank white target or a target with two painted hands on it. Pretty much anything is a step up from a predetermined course of fire with predetermined, completely static, no shoots, would you agree? The discrimination training I have had that was worth anything was with live people, FoF or scenario based and it was completely based on a fluid, developing situation/scenario. Most LEO's on this forum probably went through something similar. These scenario's and situations provide a very great training value when it features situations/scenario's that have been clearly documented - ie; a scenario which has been played out in real life and we are doing it for the specific purpose of learning from others. I would go further and state that live fire with live targets for discrimination is about as reckless in training as it would get.

I think there are benefits to that (gives you a little bit of task loading burden, a specific thing to look for and then engage), but target discrimination based on looking for colors, numbers, or shapes is completely irrelevant to threat ID and assessment on real people. Or are you taking it for its benefits, while shoring up its holes with other training activities that more realistically address those elements?

What type of discrimination training would you suggest without anyone else involved? Just you, a few guns, ammo and range time allotted for live fire? I have found that giving myself a mental load to focus through even though I have a course of fire to complete in a specific amount of time is worth the very minimal scarring it provides. I do a variant of the shapes/colors/numbers drills available by search online in various places - I use a target similar to this:

https://www.blacksheepwarrior.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Tactical-GearRTG1.jpg

I take several 3x5 cards (minimum of 5) and write down, on each one, a color, a shape and a number. I start a buzzer and flip the card (this is important as it does not give you time to think), I then complete a one shot per target, clockwise starting at 12 o'clock (there is no middle target with the target I use). All this is done at 7 yards. I write down the time and how many no shoots I hit and repeat the same stage, counter clockwise flipping another card with another set of no shoots. I have done this with two shots per target, three and even five to give myself a mandatory reload while not losing sight of the target. This can also be done with several targets on the move.

Not your typical blank white no shoot target, not a live person either.

I'm not sure I completely follow what you are saying in the second sentence. But what I am getting at with dry practice and malfunctions is this:

You press the trigger dry and the gun goes click, then don't 'clear the malfunction', then you are training yourself to fail to remedy a gun that has not fired, right?

When I do any dry practice with a blade deployment and/or striking, yes I am training myself to deploy a blade instead of clearing a malfunction. That is the point.

You press the trigger dry, then do clear the malfunction, and don't press the trigger again, then you are training yourself to only fire one shot at a target (deadly threat!), right?

I would argue that this is more of a mindset meets firearm function than anything else. If you press the trigger dry, do the malfunction, and then press the trigger dry, then repeat, what are you doing there? Are you training yourself to perform immediate action after every round? I have always trained to shoot to the ground and the fact I burn a good rep of clearing a malfunction after doing very specific training action is not training myself to fire one shot at a target. If this was the case, I would do this on the range with live fire, yet I've never done this, nor has anyone I train with on a routine basis.

You press the trigger dry, then do clear the malfunction, then press the trigger again (gun goes click because dry fire), then if you don't follow that with remedial malfunction clearance, then aren't you training yourself to fail to remedy a gun that wasn't fixed with your initial malfunction clearance? If you do follow with remedial malfunction clearance, and then get another click (and you will because dry practice), then....

See my statement about blade/striking training.

You get the idea.

My point is that if you already accept dry practice as a valid mode of training, maybe you could see how we are faced with a similar situation in all types of training, competition, and related activity: there will be holes in it and the potential for training scars will exist with basically everything. But just as in the dry fire you so right enjoy the benefits of, maybe competitive shooting can have some big benefits too. And those benefits are not easily obtained in many other ways. You could enjoy those benefits if you looked past the overplayed issue of training scars from engaging in competition, and especially so when we are talking about someone (you) who obviously avails himself of defensively-oriented training and practice of numerous types, which is going to shore up any holes that might try to creep in on you.

What do you think? Does this make any sense to you or not really?

Dry practice is a valid mode training, but all the dry practice in the world means very little if you never actually get out to do the live practice work. Of course there will be holes in it. There are holes in everything, there is no perfect system or else everyone would do it, would you agree? Out of the statements you have made, referring to holes in dry practice and eventual training scars, I have personally never speed unloaded a firearm and reholstered a firearm after a course of fire. I have seen this done repeatedly by those who shoot competition. Where are the scans? I do them in dry practice. I breathe. I take dry practice seriously enough that these training scars are nonexistent because I am not training to do what a competition shooter is training to do, there are drastically different goals here.

A competition shooter wants to do what? Memorize a course of fire, "air gun" it and the reloads, make sure their stance is correct in a particular square or section and then follow through with shooting as fast and as possible with the designated amount of rounds per target with the least amount of errors. Awesome, there are a lot of people that I have seen that can do this very quickly and efficiently. All of which starts with a buzzer.

What does a person do when they are involved in a deadly force confrontation? I will speak from personal, first hand experience here, there is no buzzer, often times there is no cue or anything of that sort. All targets are always moving, very rarely do targets stand static and when they do it is because they are behind/near cover that prevent your rounds from affecting them. There is no course of fire, there is no specific amount of rounds per person that will label a target "neutralized," sometimes you have to literally put an entire magazine into a person to stop them, while moving, by the way, there is always something on the ground that you will hit with your foot because you were not looking where you were fast walking/running to. Sometimes there is no light, sometimes the sun is directly in your eyes and your sunglasses fell off because you have been chasing this guy for three blocks through backyards (LEO specific, I know). How about heart rate? Condition black is where these seconds play out. No shoots sometimes walk directly in the line of your muzzle. By the way, how many CCW'ers, LEO's or otherwise carry race guns and race belts? Then there is the whole aspect of two (or more) on one shooting and transitioning from one target to another while both are shooting at you from various and continuously variable distances? (refer to LEOKA data over the last few years, backs up many of the above statements)

I went a little overboard with it, but as you can see and as I have stated ad nauseam in this thread that competition is great for those who want to get better at shooting fast and accurate, I have never said anything to the contrary of that. Safe gun handling, proper trigger press, deployment of firearm over a course of time, awesome this is definitely what you want to do. There is a very real benefit to competition, but for those looking for training on how to effectively survive a deadly force encounter, they should seek other remedies.

Just to throw this out, since I know there will be plenty of fire that is going to spewed at this post - where is the mindset? What does competition mentally prepare you for? It prepares you for doing exactly what you do at the stages you shoot. Draw and complete a course of fire. When any and/or all of that is non-existent, and you have never trained for any other scenario, what happens then?

BaiHu
08-29-2015, 01:29 PM
I can't believe I'm throwing my hat into this ring, but...as an occasional-gamer and occasional-tactical-Timmy, I feel the need to muddy the waters.

I like guns. I like self defense. I like practice. I like practice that puts stress on the fundamentals of:

Grip
Sight alignment
Trigger control
Reloads
Drawing
Movement
Awareness
Discipline (4 rules)
Organization

If I can't get to a class, I hit up a USPSA match. Given funds lately, USPSA is cheap and so is my practice.

However, at my range I can draw, but not SOM, so I dry fire on the move at home. Since I can SOM at a USPSA match, I do and then I just play the game with my own rules that don't interfere with the safe playing of the game.

I'll put the puzzle together as time, money and ability allow. It's my puzzle, no one else's. The only time I engage in someone else's puzzle is if I see them do something unsafe that will hurt me, themselves or others between us.

Oh! And I like talking about all of this when it's constructive.

45dotACP
08-29-2015, 02:38 PM
While I think VDM might not be entirely wrong, I think it's more likely that people will parrot opinions such as his to excuse why they suck at shooting. I am not saying VDM sucks at shooting, but I've run across more than one someone who can't hit a dinner plate on demand at 20 feet with a Kimber 1911 and tells me "Well, I'm not trying to be the next Ben Stoeger...This is good enough for the real world" or some variation of how starting a string of rapid fire, with transitions, movement, and awareness of safety rules will get them killed on the oft fabled "streets" where they carry a J frame. I mean they'd be lucky to hit a barn door from inside the barn with their carry piece.

I nigh on guarantee that VDMs lifestyle and how he prefers to train is what these guys think they're doing...but they aren't.

Again, I love competition, because I tend to be competitive, but lets face it, as a civvie, the chance I need to pop someone is low, the chances it's at short range is high, the number of rounds fired will probably be low. I likely don't need to be ben stoeger. I also likely don't need to attend every FOF class ever concieved. Some good, regular training and refreshment by a quality instructor, some regular practice in both fundamentals and situational awareness and I'll likely survive most things up to and possibly including multiple armed assailants determined to kill me even after taking hits.

I know, I know...playing those odds is dangerous, but that's my personal reason for why I suck...both at USPSA and IDPA and likely will be killed on the oft storied "streets"

Sent from my VS876 using Tapatalk

Alpha Sierra
08-29-2015, 04:20 PM
I love competition, because I tend to be competitive, but lets face it, as a civvie, the chance I need to pop someone is low, the chances it's at short range is high, the number of rounds fired will probably be low. I likely don't need to be ben stoeger. I also likely don't need to attend every FOF class ever concieved. Some good, regular training and refreshment by a quality instructor, some regular practice in both fundamentals and situational awareness and I'll likely survive most things up to and possibly including multiple armed assailants determined to kill me even after taking hits.

I know, I know...playing those odds is dangerous, but that's my personal reason for why I suck...both at USPSA and IDPA and likely will be killed on the oft storied "streets"

Sent from my VS876 using Tapatalk
Amen

HopetonBrown
08-30-2015, 12:40 AM
One of the harder things about competition is taking hundreds of hours to tactical training courses and still getting spanked by a tubby in a bicycle jersey.

Luke
08-30-2015, 12:47 AM
One of the harder things about competition is taking hundreds of hours to tactical training courses and still getting spanked by a tubby in a bicycle jersey.

One of the first matches I went to had a guy who was just about spanking everybody out there. He was blazing fast and accurate. We got to chatting about trainers and he said he was going to his first class in a couple weeks and was nervous lol. Didn't have the balls to tell him I'd been to plenty of classes. He said as soon as he took that class he was going to start carrying.. Couldn't believe it. M class shooter scared to carry a gun till he took a class.

GJM
08-30-2015, 07:07 AM
One of the harder things about competition is taking hundreds of hours to tactical training courses and still getting spanked by a tubby in a bicycle jersey.

Or spanked by a 12 year old boy sharing magazines with his dad.

SLG
08-30-2015, 07:23 AM
...He said as soon as he took that class he was going to start carrying.. Couldn't believe it. M class shooter scared to carry a gun till he took a class.

Lots of M class shooters scare me with their handling... Of course, so do many tactical instructors.

Actually seems pretty responsible of him to me. Lots of things about carrying a gun and self defense that you don't learn in competition.

45dotACP
08-30-2015, 11:44 AM
One of the first matches I went to had a guy who was just about spanking everybody out there. He was blazing fast and accurate. We got to chatting about trainers and he said he was going to his first class in a couple weeks and was nervous lol. Didn't have the balls to tell him I'd been to plenty of classes. He said as soon as he took that class he was going to start carrying.. Couldn't believe it. M class shooter scared to carry a gun till he took a class.

Fairly responsible. I wouldn't carry without training either...

Mr_White
08-31-2015, 04:14 PM
Live as in, live people, role players or otherwise, not live fire. Now I may be wrong, correct me if I am, in competition shooting, the only discrimination that exists is either a blank white target or a target with two painted hands on it. Pretty much anything is a step up from a predetermined course of fire with predetermined, completely static, no shoots, would you agree? The discrimination training I have had that was worth anything was with live people, FoF or scenario based and it was completely based on a fluid, developing situation/scenario.

I feel like we are agreeing there - FOF/scenario training is where realistic threat ID and assessment can occur. It doesn't happen realistically in live fire, whether it's a defensive training class or an action pistol competition. My conclusion is that if the lack of realistic threat ID and assessment in live fire defensive training can be excused in exchange for its enormous benefits, then why shouldn't it be excused in competitive shooting in exchange for the other enormous benefits available there?


What type of discrimination training would you suggest without anyone else involved? Just you, a few guns, ammo and range time allotted for live fire? I have found that giving myself a mental load to focus through even though I have a course of fire to complete in a specific amount of time is worth the very minimal scarring it provides.

Like I said, I don't think that's a bad drill. Looking for colors, numbers, or shapes has nothing to do with threat ID and assessment with real people though. It does give you some task-loading, and makes you look for something, which is good, but not the same as practicing threat ID and assessment. I don't have a great suggestion for threat ID and assessment in live fire. It can be done superficially, but to do it realistically requires real people, and that means FOF/scenarios. Sure seems like you are fine with accepting some rough edges in defensive training and dry practice in order to get the benefits they otherwise provide. I see competition as a similar set of tradeoffs that amount to a good deal.


I would argue that this is more of a mindset meets firearm function than anything else. If you press the trigger dry, do the malfunction, and then press the trigger dry, then repeat, what are you doing there? Are you training yourself to perform immediate action after every round? I have always trained to shoot to the ground and the fact I burn a good rep of clearing a malfunction after doing very specific training action is not training myself to fire one shot at a target. If this was the case, I would do this on the range with live fire, yet I've never done this, nor has anyone I train with on a routine basis.

Yes. I agree. You use your brain and act appropriately for the activity/context at hand. Competitive shooting can be treated the same way. Why are training scars potentially formed by competitive shooting an insurmountable problem, but those potentially formed by defensive training and dry fire are not?


Dry practice is a valid mode training, but all the dry practice in the world means very little if you never actually get out to do the live practice work. Of course there will be holes in it. There are holes in everything, there is no perfect system or else everyone would do it, would you agree?

Yes, I think that is what I have been saying.


Out of the statements you have made, referring to holes in dry practice and eventual training scars, I have personally never speed unloaded a firearm and reholstered a firearm after a course of fire. I have seen this done repeatedly by those who shoot competition. Where are the scans? I do them in dry practice. I breathe. I take dry practice seriously enough that these training scars are nonexistent because I am not training to do what a competition shooter is training to do, there are drastically different goals here.

You can certainly make scanning part of your dry fire - the benefit is that you are reinforcing your scan. The tradeoff is that you are spending time and energy on that instead of something else. Everyone doesn't have to organize their training efforts the same way. Competition shooters aren't wrong to not scan in the context of a shooting competition where scanning does nothing and means nothing. I don't scan in dry or live practice that is focused on skills work, or in competition. I do it within the context of simulation exercises. And in walking around in daily life, as you so rightly mentioned. Don't need a gun in hand to practice looking around, paying attention to what you see, and making decision based on that.

Speed unload and holster: in what context have you seen competition shooters do this? Was it after shooting an actual person in self-defense? People compete for a number of different reasons. There are plenty of competitors who are solely interesting in playing the game, and they don't care about scanning, nor do they have to. One of the things I love the most about USPSA is how inclusive it is of people with different goals and priorities. There can be an intermingled group of Timmies and Gamers, all using the pressure of competition to further their skills for their own reasons and in accordance with their own priorities. And joking together about the food court the whole time, I might add. And if you wanted to shoot competition, you could scan at the end of your turn if you wanted. Nothing is stopping you from doing that if it suits you.

It all goes back to using your brain and acting appropriately to the context at hand.

How about all those wrestlers, who practice a whole bunch of double-leg takedowns in practice, focusing in on that skill - do you know anyone who has done that, then gone on to take a guy down in the street and immediately let him back up like they did in wrestling practice?

Ever heard the one about cops practicing disarms, where they hand the gun back after doing the technique so they can practice it again, then go on to mindlessly hand someone's weapon back to them after they disarmed them on the street?


A competition shooter wants to do what? Memorize a course of fire, "air gun" it and the reloads, make sure their stance is correct in a particular square or section and then follow through with shooting as fast and as possible with the designated amount of rounds per target with the least amount of errors. Awesome, there are a lot of people that I have seen that can do this very quickly and efficiently.

All that other stuff comes after the central element of shooting a variety of different targets as accurately and quickly as possible, integrated with moving about a space that often involves physical barriers, while constantly adjusting for tiny errors in space and timing.


All of which starts with a buzzer.

Meaning what? That they won't be able to choose to act if there is no buzzer? How about someone who does a lot of defensive training but not competition? Will they be able to choose to act in absence of a range command to do so? No one yells 'up', 'threat', 'gun', 'tango in your six', etc., so they can't do anything? I think both ideas are equally ridiculous.


What does a person do when they are involved in a deadly force confrontation? I will speak from personal, first hand experience here, there is no buzzer, often times there is no cue or anything of that sort. All targets are always moving, very rarely do targets stand static and when they do it is because they are behind/near cover that prevent your rounds from affecting them. There is no course of fire, there is no specific amount of rounds per person that will label a target "neutralized," sometimes you have to literally put an entire magazine into a person to stop them, while moving, by the way, there is always something on the ground that you will hit with your foot because you were not looking where you were fast walking/running to. Sometimes there is no light, sometimes the sun is directly in your eyes and your sunglasses fell off because you have been chasing this guy for three blocks through backyards (LEO specific, I know). How about heart rate? Condition black is where these seconds play out. No shoots sometimes walk directly in the line of your muzzle. By the way, how many CCW'ers, LEO's or otherwise carry race guns and race belts? Then there is the whole aspect of two (or more) on one shooting and transitioning from one target to another while both are shooting at you from various and continuously variable distances? (refer to LEOKA data over the last few years, backs up many of the above statements)

I know, there is a litany of potential problems with anything. We've both said that. I think they are mostly overblown, especially if a person engages in a variety of training and related activities so that weaknesses from one activity are shored up by another activity.

To grab one thing out of that paragraph though - private citizens and LE who participate in shooting competition are under no obligation to carry race guns or belts outside of competition. That's not my business, and they shoot according to their own reasons and priorities, just as I shoot according to my own reasons and priorities. But since you brought it up: as a person committed to competing with my carry gear from concealment, other people using game-specific gear is only to my advantage. It raises the level of competition I am up against and makes me have to perform better if I want to win the game. I feel a lot of confidence in my capability with my pistol when I walk away from a USPSA match having been able to hang with the legitimately skilled and equipped Open/Limited Ms, but using what I really walk around with.


I went a little overboard with it, but as you can see and as I have stated ad nauseam in this thread that competition is great for those who want to get better at shooting fast and accurate, I have never said anything to the contrary of that. Safe gun handling, proper trigger press, deployment of firearm over a course of time, awesome this is definitely what you want to do. There is a very real benefit to competition, but for those looking for training on how to effectively survive a deadly force encounter, they should seek other remedies.

I definitely think that people are in a better position to defend themselves if they get training specific to self-defense. But that's a different thing than rejecting competition altogether, which I think is just throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

You listed some of the benefits that competition can help provide, or guide one toward. But there are two other big benefits that can come from competition and are hard to get elsewhere. The technical level of the competitors one is up against is sky-high. It's hard to get 'big fish/small pond syndrome' in USPSA or GSSF, as examples. And being up against tough and skilled competitors in a game that one cares about winning, causes most people to self-induce stress and pressure out the ying yang. For many people, that is one of the only venues where they are going to feel that level of pressure and have to perform very skillfully in the face of it. That benefit is only magnified, the more one gets into the game and cares about winning, and ascends among the other competitors. And realistic gear need not be compromised to get that benefit.

Have you ever read any of the comments that Jim Cirillo or Kyle Lamb or Frank Proctor have made about competitive shooting?

Cecil Burch
08-31-2015, 04:46 PM
How about all those wrestlers, who practice a whole bunch of double-leg takedowns in practice, focusing in on that skill - do you know anyone who has done that, then gone on to take a guy down in the street and immediately let him back up like they did in wrestling practice?




You don't even have to have a "street" incident to know how ludicrous that idea is. Take those same wrestlers, who have literally practiced one move in the manner you described, and just see how many stopped in competition at the point where they did in training. The answer is zero. It has never happened anywhere.

LSP552
08-31-2015, 05:36 PM
You listed some of the benefits that competition can help provide, or guide one toward. But there are two other big benefits that can come from competition and are hard to get elsewhere. The technical level of the competitors one is up against is sky-high. It's hard to get 'big fish/small pond syndrome' in USPSA or GSSF, as examples. And being up against tough and skilled competitors in a game that one cares about winning, causes most people to self-induce stress and pressure out the ying yang. For many people, that is one of the only venues where they are going to feel that level of pressure and have to perform very skillfully in the face of it. That benefit is only magnified, the more one gets into the game and cares about winning, and ascends among the other competitors. And realistic gear need not be compromised to get that benefit.

Have you ever read any of the comments that Jim Cirillo or Kyle Lamb or Frank Proctor have made about competitive shooting?

I have personally felt more stress shooting competition than shooting for my life. IMO, time plays a factor in this. Most LE shootings are pretty much right now events, watching other relays shoot is not. Failing to effectively deal with this stress is why I was a middle of the road M class PPC shooter who never beat his practice scores in a match.

voodoo_man
08-31-2015, 05:55 PM
I'll respond when I feel up to it since this type of rhetoric is pushing my forums are trash buttons.


You don't even have to have a "street" incident to know how ludicrous that idea is. Take those same wrestlers, who have literally practiced one move in the manner you described, and just see how many stopped in competition at the point where they did in training. The answer is zero. It has never happened anywhere.

Really?

In 2009 a good friend of mine (I had lunch with him today) was working when he spotted a stolen car and began to chase it. After a short pursuit that car crashed and the male ran on foot, my friend followed. They ran for several blocks and the male turned around and threw up his hands in a fighting stance. This was before we had tasers. My friend was a purple belt in BJJ at that time and had never fought outside of competition. He focused primarily on competition BJJ, he was very good at it. They began to fight and my friend got his back, getting some sort of arm lock from behind, I forget which one. The guy reached back and double-tapped on his arm, as someone would do in competition, and has done to my friend hundreds of time before, this was a fight, after a vehicle and foot pursuit, he was well into condition black. He let go, the guy rolled him and began to choke him, from his back. My friend got his pistol out and the fight began over the pistol. A single round was shot past his head, discharge by the POS. My friend was able to gain control of the firearm and the confrontation end with him discharging into the guys chest.

He has not competed since. This never made the news, other than "police involved shooting" and this a 100% competition induced, not training for the fight, scenario.

I've told this to LL, Orionz and several others here several years ago over beers, so before anyone drops the "that's bullshit" flag, you can confirm with them.

It can happen. It does happen. Just because there aren't any articles about it, no video's about it, no media clips about it does not mean it does not. My good friend lived it and it almost did not because of competition and the unconscious failures it provides.

Alpha Sierra
08-31-2015, 06:10 PM
My good friend lived it and it almost did not because of competition and the unconscious failures it provides.

The logical fallacy is extrapolating everyone's behavior based on one individual.

Cecil Burch
08-31-2015, 06:39 PM
The logical fallacy is extrapolating everyone's behavior based on one individual.

Exactly.

I can provide a hundred more going the other way, including actual video. And after 21 years of doing this, that is the first time I have heard of it truly happening. Interesting that I have white and blue belts in weekly class who don't act this way. Even in training in the gym, I never see this automatic response - it is always a conscious decision to release a hold. There is a well known video of a BJJ black belt, whose entire competition game is based on "sport" techniques, and has admitted to never thinking about self-defense, but in the video takes the attacker down, mounts him, and puts him in a controlling hold. And it clearly is a conscious act.

And I have never seen it happen it any FoF scenario, including double digit ECQC's, nor in any of the training evos I run in my seminars. Going back to 2007.

Also, the specific example was wrestlers working a movement in training, without finishing the move, who then never fail to complete the move. A different animal altogether from your example.

rob_s
08-31-2015, 06:56 PM
I'll respond when I feel up to it since this type of rhetoric is pushing my forums are trash buttons.



Really?

In 2009 a good friend of mine (I had lunch with him today) was working when he spotted a stolen car and began to chase it. After a short pursuit that car crashed and the male ran on foot, my friend followed. They ran for several blocks and the male turned around and threw up his hands in a fighting stance. This was before we had tasers. My friend was a purple belt in BJJ at that time and had never fought outside of competition. He focused primarily on competition BJJ, he was very good at it. They began to fight and my friend got his back, getting some sort of arm lock from behind, I forget which one. The guy reached back and double-tapped on his arm, as someone would do in competition, and has done to my friend hundreds of time before, this was a fight, after a vehicle and foot pursuit, he was well into condition black. He let go, the guy rolled him and began to choke him, from his back. My friend got his pistol out and the fight began over the pistol. A single round was shot past his head, discharge by the POS. My friend was able to gain control of the firearm and the confrontation end with him discharging into the guys chest.

He has not competed since. This never made the news, other than "police involved shooting" and this a 100% competition induced, not training for the fight, scenario.

I've told this to LL, Orionz and several others here several years ago over beers, so before anyone drops the "that's bullshit" flag, you can confirm with them.

It can happen. It does happen. Just because there aren't any articles about it, no video's about it, no media clips about it does not mean it does not. My good friend lived it and it almost did not because of competition and the unconscious failures it provides.

Without realizing it, you pretty much just made everyone else's point.

And you're so stuck on being right, you'll never figure out why.

Pup town
08-31-2015, 07:38 PM
And you're so stuck on being right, you'll never figure out why.

We aren't going to convince VoodooMan - he's deluded and I've already called BS on his ROing claims. This purple belt cop releasing to a tap from a perp may be apocryphal as well (that he told LL earlier doesn't prove its true- it would just prove he's been telling that story for a while.).

Anytime you are debating you aren't trying to convince the person on the other side of the argument. You are trying to persuade the onlookers. That's why I don't care what VoodooMan does.

But by his logic, I wonder how he gets any training done. Every defensive tactic evolution must end with him cuffing his training partner and putting him in the squad car and taking a ride to the station - cause to acknowledge that it's training and stop at any point earlier than that would create a bad habit that might get him killed.

voodoo_man
08-31-2015, 07:55 PM
I've learned about all I need to from this "discussion."

It is very disconcerting that a group of educated, experienced and competent people can be so blinded by their own bias against a stance that opposes theirs.

I sincerely hope all of you truly believe what you are putting out there, I would hate for someone to buy into it and have it all fail for them when it really counts.

Mr_White
08-31-2015, 08:07 PM
It is very disconcerting that a group of educated, experienced and competent people can be so blinded by their own bias against a stance that opposes theirs.

Speaking only for myself, I used to be blinded by an anti-competition bias I absorbed in defensive training, and while I wish I had started shooting competing earlier, I consider myself lucky to escape it at all.

voodoo_man
08-31-2015, 08:12 PM
Speaking only for myself, I used to be blinded by an anti-competition bias I absorbed in defensive training, and while I wish I had started shooting competing earlier, I consider myself lucky to escape it at all.

I am far from blinded. I shot competition, as I stated I did before I got on the job. The only bias I have is my selfish desire for living through a deadly force confrontation.

MVS
08-31-2015, 08:16 PM
Speaking only for myself, I used to be blinded by an anti-competition bias I absorbed in defensive training, and while I wish I had started shooting competing earlier, I consider myself lucky to escape it at all.

Same here. Mostly because that is what my defensive training guru told me.

GJM
08-31-2015, 08:22 PM
I am far from blinded. I shot competition, as I stated I did before I got on the job. The only bias I have is my selfish desire for living through a deadly force confrontation.

I would be curious to hear some of the details of your competition experience. Which disciplines, such as USPSA, IDPA, or something else, and did you do it enough to obtain a USPSA and/or IDPA classification?

voodoo_man
08-31-2015, 08:26 PM
I would be curious to hear some of the details of your competition experience. Which disciplines, such as USPSA, IDPA, or something else, and did you do it enough to obtain a USPSA and/or IDPA classification?

It was mostly location-specific "action pistol" classes which were run by IDPA RSO's at the time. I do not believe there were any classifications, if there were I did not go out seeking them.

Mr_White
08-31-2015, 08:27 PM
voodoo_man,

Why are training scars potentially formed by competitive shooting an insurmountable problem, but those potentially formed by defensive training and dry fire are not?

voodoo_man
08-31-2015, 08:33 PM
voodoo_man,

Why are training scars potentially formed by competitive shooting an insurmountable problem, but those potentially formed by defensive training and dry fire are not?

As much as I'd like to continue this conversation, it is more than clear to me that certain members have taken this civil discussion and want to use it to attack, defame or ridicule stances which they oppose. Since I care very little for them and their lack of ability to have a civil discussion, I will not contribute anymore.

Meet me on a range some day and we can continue this discussion.

GJM
08-31-2015, 08:33 PM
It was mostly location-specific "action pistol" classes which were run by IDPA RSO's at the time. I do not believe there were any classifications, if there were I did not go out seeking them.

I would be glad to pay your entry to a few USPSA matches, if you were willing to give a few USPSA matches a whirl. If nothing else, it would probably provide some material for a few of your blog posts. USPSA is mega shooting fun with someonelse responsible for setting all the stuff up.

voodoo_man
08-31-2015, 08:38 PM
I would be glad to pay your entry to a few USPSA matches, if you were willing to give a few USPSA matches a whirl. If nothing else, it would probably provide some material for a few of your blog posts. USPSA is mega shooting fun with someonelse responsible for setting all the stuff up.

..and this is where I point out the obvious disconnect here.

Shooting may be fun, but the mindset behind training to shoot people is not something I take enjoyment in.

This is my last post in this thread.

taadski
08-31-2015, 10:29 PM
I'll respond when I feel up to it since this type of rhetoric is pushing my forums are trash buttons.



Really?

In 2009 a good friend of mine (I had lunch with him today) was working when he spotted a stolen car and began to chase it. After a short pursuit that car crashed and the male ran on foot, my friend followed. They ran for several blocks and the male turned around and threw up his hands in a fighting stance. This was before we had tasers. My friend was a purple belt in BJJ at that time and had never fought outside of competition. He focused primarily on competition BJJ, he was very good at it. They began to fight and my friend got his back, getting some sort of arm lock from behind, I forget which one. The guy reached back and double-tapped on his arm, as someone would do in competition, and has done to my friend hundreds of time before, this was a fight, after a vehicle and foot pursuit, he was well into condition black. He let go, the guy rolled him and began to choke him, from his back. My friend got his pistol out and the fight began over the pistol. A single round was shot past his head, discharge by the POS. My friend was able to gain control of the firearm and the confrontation end with him discharging into the guys chest.

He has not competed since. This never made the news, other than "police involved shooting" and this a 100% competition induced, not training for the fight, scenario.

I've told this to LL, Orionz and several others here several years ago over beers, so before anyone drops the "that's bullshit" flag, you can confirm with them.

It can happen. It does happen. Just because there aren't any articles about it, no video's about it, no media clips about it does not mean it does not. My good friend lived it and it almost did not because of competition and the unconscious failures it provides.


So are you alleging your friend would have come out better somehow had he not trained in the art at all? :confused: I think we can all agree that there is a potential for developing bad habits by practicing anything without due attention. But it certainly seems like there is almost always a sizable net gain, even in as severe a case as you describe here.


t

45dotACP
08-31-2015, 11:09 PM
So are you alleging your friend would have come out better somehow had he not trained in the art at all? :confused: I think we can all agree that there is a potential for developing bad habits by practicing anything without due attention. But it certainly seems like there is almost always a sizable net gain, even in as severe a case as you describe here.


t

Should have just trained Krav Maga...it was made for fighting, not competing.

Not to turn it into a personal attack but any art that claims it is "too dangerous" to be used for sport is typically one that involves being quite full of shit.

Here's my metaphor of today: I'll take Krav Maga over the Tae-Kwon-Do at the mall any day...but if I train Muay Thai, Boxing, and a strong Sambo/BJJ/Judo ground game, any notion of the "real world" krav maga actually standing a chance in such a matchup is laughable.

"but big boy rules!" you'll say.

Well just because the real world isn't Marquis of Queensbury doesn't mean an expertly thrown left hook hurts any less when it comes from a heavyweight.

HCM
08-31-2015, 11:58 PM
..and this is where I point out the obvious disconnect here.

Shooting may be fun, but the mindset behind training to shoot people is not something I take enjoyment in.



Shooting is fun. It was fun when I was a kid shooting with my dad and uncle in a gravel pit and it wil be fun when I retire. For the meantime shootingis still fun. Training for gunfighting and shooting people who otherwise need shooting is work. Two seperate and distinct activities with two seperate and distinct mind sets.

I stumbled across a steel challenge match Saturday which looked like a lot of fun. I'd like to shoot the next one because it looks like fun and there may be some collateral benefit to my technical shooting skil set. There is nothing about it which approximates dealing with an opposing will trying to harm you or the reactive nature of street situations.

Alpha Sierra
09-01-2015, 04:13 AM
..Shooting may be fun, but the mindset behind training to shoot people is not something I take enjoyment in.

I don't think there's a way to bridge a disconnect this big

HopetonBrown
09-01-2015, 04:41 AM
This reminds me of a time when the forum was trying to explain that using both hands during a draw was not a one handed draw.

Glenn E. Meyer
09-01-2015, 09:48 AM
Shooting may be fun, but the mindset behind training to shoot people is not something I take enjoyment in.

Pain, blood, death complex - This is an evolutionary look at violence. We have to engage in violence at times. Fighting dangerous animals with sticks and stones. Close up fights with our human enemies.

Who wants to do that. An article in Behavioral and Brain Sciences (got the reference somewhere), suggest that using violence against our enemies unleashes a dopamine blast that is pleasurable. It is similar to effect of orgasm, certain drugs and solving an intellectual problem. It rewards these aspects of human behavior. Thus, violence itself and the appreciation of violence against our enemies can be pleasurable. That's why torture porn or watching real torture was a recreational event.

An aborigine, returning from the hunt, commented to an anthropologist that 'sex is always better after the blood' , as the two reward systems interacted.

It is also the case that we have systems to tone down interpersonal violence. But the for most people, honestly, practicing the killing arts is pleasurable.

Another good book is "Why we watch" - an analysis of why we watch competitive games and enjoy seeing the other team smashed. Obviously watching football contributes little to the intellect but we do. It harks back to tribal contests over territory and releases the dopamine blast when our team wins.

Pup town
09-01-2015, 01:40 PM
voodoo_man,

Why are training scars potentially formed by competitive shooting an insurmountable problem, but those potentially formed by defensive training and dry fire are not?

I regret posting in this thread now, as this is the $64,000 question that I'd truly like to see a anti-competitor answer, and I fear my participation in this thread has either caused or given VoodooMan an excuse to stop responding.

So VoodooMan, I'm excusing myself from this thread. I won't post again. You can answer without worrying about my response. I think you'll find that no one else has been hostile to you, nor they will be. They are genuinely interested in your response.

wtturn
09-01-2015, 04:05 PM
Mr. White again proves himself to be one of the most thoughtful, earnest seekers of the truth in the shooting community.

If we had more like you, we'd be in good shape.

GJM
09-01-2015, 04:07 PM
If Gabe runs for President of the PF student body, he has my vote.

cheby
09-01-2015, 04:26 PM
If Gabe runs for President of the PF student body, he has my vote.

Mine too

GJM
09-01-2015, 06:12 PM
Mine too

I am preparing the questions for the podcast when we interview Gabe to learn more about his plans and platform.

Cecil Burch
09-02-2015, 12:26 PM
I was hoping that there would be some response besides telling of a single story to answer a specific statement. Since that is not forthcoming, I will just have this to add since there are a lot of people on this board who do not do BJJ and might think what was said is actually a legitimate indictment of the art. Voodoo Man's whole narrative that competition was somehow responsible for his friend’s action is demonstrably wrong and based on a completely false premise. I can go on and on with reasons, but for brevity’s sake, I will just give two for now. But these are two that are the easiest to understand, even for someone who does not train BJJ.

1) Competition focus could not have caused the friend’s action for the simple reason that you do not release the hold to a tap in competition. The match is only stopped when the referee signals and commands you to stop. It is possible for the guy in the hold to tap, the other guy releases, and if the ref did not see it, the match can continue! So you are specifically told NOT to release on the tap. As a matter of fact, most IBJJF referees will tell new white belts in their first competition exactly that before the match starts. I did it all the time as a ref, including when I officiated at the European Championships with the language barrier (there were a lot of eastern Euros competing), and most of the refs that I know will do so as well. And even if the ref does not mention it, it is in the rulebook, in black and white, for everyone to see, and has been pretty much since the formation of the federation almost 30 years ago. So there is absolutely no way that competition ingrained such a response, because it goes exactly against the rules to act in that manner.


2) Even if a person had a subconscious reaction to tapping and released the hold, it would not have led to the situation you described, simply because if you performed BJJ properly, it could not happen. A good BJJ player does not flail around in a desperate drag race to slap on a choke or limb break, hanging on for dear life while doing so. That is contrary to the heart of BJJ. There is a fundamental, underlying principle that the entire body of BJJ is built on, and that is referred to as “position before submission”. In other words, one needs to have positional based dominant control before and during the execution of a submission. For example, I need to not just be on top of someone, I need to have such control that they cannot escape, or prevent me from applying the attack, or defend and stop it in the middle. Only then is the submission applied. So, even if said person had made the mistake of releasing the submission in a weird and unprecedented autonomic tap response, the other person still could not have reversed the situation and went back to being an active threat, because in addition to releasing the hold itself, the person would also have had to continue the further action of moving off the position into a neutral or inferior position afterwards. An extended action that all would have had to have been without conscious thought. That is the equivalent of touching a hot stove, and not only pulling your hand back, but then running away to the far end of the room and squatting down, all in one continuous automatic reaction. That would defy all logic in believing that would happen more than as a great anomaly, and in no way would provide reasonable evidence that this kind of failure could possibly occur much, if at all.

BJJ
09-02-2015, 01:02 PM
Thanks for adding your thoughts, Cecil.

RJ
09-02-2015, 01:41 PM
See, this is why we need a like button. I heart this thread. :cool:

markp
09-02-2015, 03:35 PM
Interesting thread.
I went back and tracked down Ron's instagram post here (https://instagram.com/p/3A5MdQiSBz/?taken-by=ron.avery.official)

and the last comment nails it for me;

grandmasterwicked
"There are always exceptions, never underestimate your enemy or overestimate yourself."

Cecil Burch
09-02-2015, 04:39 PM
And in case someone thinks I am doubting the veracity of his story, nothing could be further from the truth. All I am doubting is the underlying cause of the failure in the story to be related to competition or competition focused training, in and of itself.

Could an individual have a failure of that kind? Maybe, but it is an individual failure, and not an indictment on the training. I am reminded of how often we see someone letting their muzzle of a loaded gun cover someone on the range or in the real world. We don't then hear cries that the entire rules of safety need to be scrapped. Rather it is chalked up to an individual mistake, that cannot, and should not be applied to the macro.

45dotACP
09-02-2015, 04:42 PM
Cecil, that was just an absolutely outstanding post.

Seriously. Well said.

GAP
09-02-2015, 08:45 PM
Excellent posts Cecil and you are 100% accurate in your assessment. Prior to competing in MMA, I competed in various BJJ competitions. A tap is not an "I give" motion to you, it's an "I give" motion to the ref.

The strength in BJJ is in positional dominance and understanding where you can and can't be damaged. You can ride out a very large person as long as no weapons are involved and dominate them without applying a single submission.

Getting off track from the original topic, but I'd say competitions are a solid way of learning how to rapidly apply accurate shots under pressure. It's the same reason my camp didn't prepare for a MMA fight by just throwing on gloves and slapping the hell out each other every night. You need to drill the fundamentals over and over and over again in the safest manner possible.

What I do agree with is that you won't know how you will react until the bullets go flying, but at least you will have the fundamentals to give you the greatest chance possible to survive. We had plenty of studs in the gym who sucked when they competed in front of a crowd. Even with that said I guarantee they would still dominate any normal fan in the crowd.

SLG
09-02-2015, 09:04 PM
In the duh! category, any kind of BJJ/MMA/TMA competition will provide way more stress and pressure testing than any shooting competition. I would guess that it's orders of magnitude more. The difference is, you can be an out of shape slug, or injured, and still go shoot competition. You can even do well. And, since it's the most stress most people can avail themselves of on a regular basis with a gun, it is still worth something. Much harder to attend high level force on force on a monthly basis. Finally, for anyone who hasn't yet competed, and wants to benefit from the stress of it, I personally never found USPSA or IDPA to be stressful. Steel challenge, otoh, gives most people the shakes at one point or another. I hear Bianchi Cup does as well, but I have yet to try it myself.

GAP
09-02-2015, 09:48 PM
I agree with the assessment of stress, but there isn't much of an alternative. I guess that was my point, you need an activity that you can repeat over and over. I would imagine a gun fight being closer to an MMA fight psycologically. I had twelve and can't remember much of anything from them.. kind of blacked out and my body just did what I drilled 10,000 times.

It didn't get much easier either, I can't imagine it would be for officers in gun fights. That's my problem with someone dismissing competition vs. a real scenario... You can't do anything but rep the fundamentals and understand strategy. Some people just perform better under stress than others and I'm not sure it's as "train-able" as some think.

Stuffbreaker
11-27-2015, 05:00 PM
Ron Avery shoots my local USPSA clubs, so it may be useful in the context of his post to know a bit about who shows up to these matches. Ron is among a select few national caliber Grand Masters who frequent these matches, giving the rest of us a chance to see what maximum human performance looks like. Most shooters are not emotionally prepared for the cold hard truth of how bad they suck, so many vanish never to return. Whether you compete or not, it's useful to get a visual of what this level of skill looks like first hand. It's bewildering and demoralizing.

The shooters near the top of the pecking order at these matches include former SWAT, active LEO instructors, federal agency handgun instructors, some IDPA MA/Ex refugees, and former Military. Many are already combat tested. Almost nobody shoots what they carry, and the strongest active LEO instructor shoots a compensated/red dot/2011 Open race gun, which is nothing like any typical LEO gun. Take it FWIW, but the 'shoot what you carry' theory is lost among this group. An IDPA Master I know from this group hadn't shot his M&p 9c for months, then proceeded to click off FAST in the 4.6 second range with it in a recent practice session. Food for thought.

Virtually all shooters at these matches have tactical or defensive training, and many are active instructors in these disciplines. Many have shot IDPA, but only the Masters and Experts seem to stick around USPSA for very long. All seem to recognize USPSA is just a game, but the level of skill needed to be even remotely competitive is ego shattering. Most IDPA types try a match or two, but eventually opt to stay home and try to rationalize why their tactical training, mindset and gear make them better prepared for the streets. Ron's point is these folks are delusional.

Cool Breeze
05-12-2016, 01:14 AM
I was in the local Barnes & Noble the other day and came across this article that made me think of this thread. Maybe this can be helpful to some. I am not sure the credibility of the article - but if you believe this guy was one of the guys that fought in Benghazi, says that competing in USPSA has "greatly improved my shooting and strategy"
7828
7829
7830
7831

Randy Harris
05-12-2016, 10:06 AM
An article I wrote a few years back (circa 2008) for another website that you guys might find entertaining.....

IDPA - Will It Get You Killed?
Randy Harris - Suarez International Staff Instructor

There are many shooters who participate in shooting sports like IPSC or IDPA. In these sports the shooters engage a wide array of targets in little scenarios that often require drawing from a holster, movement, target discrimination, reloading, accurate shooting under time constraint and sometimes malfunction clearance. These are all good skills to work on if we also carry a gun for personal protection. Of course it is not training but it is good practice. But there are those that argue that participating in IDPA or other action shooting sports will build bad habits and can even get you killed. Let's look at that for a minute.

The issues that people have are typically with use of cover, IDPA style reloads, only allowing 11 rounds in the gun in the "hi cap" categories, and the proactive nature of IDPA. The arguments ostensibly stem from people not wanting to ingrain habits that are not tactically sound. Ok fine. That is a laudable pursuit. The problem is that I think people sometimes do not look at context of the problem or the big picture or understand that there is a way to play the game and still be competitive and still work on skills that are real world useful in a real confrontation. I also honestly think some naysayers run down IDPA because they don't perform well at it. Lets look at some of the arguments.

USE OF COVER: In IDPA, per the rules, you must use cover if available. And by using cover they want at least 50% of your body behind cover. The "gamesman" side of the equation stretch this to the limit exposing far more of themselves than they probably would want to in a real fight when rounds might be flying in both directions.

But in IDPA the whole time you are shooting the timer is running and the winner is the one with the lowest time adjusted for score on targets. So the "gamesmen" get just enough of themselves behind cover to not be penalized and then shoot very fast. The "Tactical" side though often hunker down behind cover and engage targets VERY slowly. They argue that they expose much less of themself and thereby are doing it "right". They argue that doing it fast without getting 99% behind cover will get you killed. Maybe they have an argument, but not always a well thought out one....and not one that always applies.

RELOADS: The reload argument comes from the "IDPA approved " reloads in the rule book. We have a slidelock reload, that is your gun has been shot to slidelock. We have a tactical reload . This is the classic reload during a so-called "lull in the action" where you save the rounds from the partially depleted mag by first inserting the new mag then stowing the old one. And then finally there is the reload with retention. Here you stow the old mag first and then insert the new.

Any time the gun is reloaded and there are still rounds left in the old mag it must be retained. The logic is that you might need those saved rounds later on. The "gamers" and some "tactical" guys actually have some common ground here. They both disagree with the IDPA approved reloads. They argue that the IPSC style speed load is actually faster and should be encouraged instead of having to retain the partially depleted mag in the middle of a gunfight.

CAPACITY: One thing I hear a lot of grumbling about is the 10 round limit. The most you can load is 10 in the mag and 1 in the chamber to start. Each subsequent mag can only contain 10.

When IDPA was started we were in the midst of the ridiculous Omnibus Crime Act of 1994's ten year prohibition on new manufacture of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. We all had mags that held more than 10 but we could only load 10 because that was all that new production pistols came with. But when sanity returned and the "Assault Weapon and Magazine Ban" portions of that law expired in 2004 IDPA kept the 10 round limit in place. The logic was that several states still have state laws limiting the capacity to 10 and to be fair to them the limit would stay at 10. The argument is that those of us who carry pistols that hold more than 10 are penalized because we are forced to reload earlier than we would in real life. And I agree. But frankly I just do not think it is as big a deal as some make it.

PROACTIVE NATURE: Finally comes the proactive nature of IDPA. During the course of fire you will often move from a known area into an area that may be brimming with bad guys. Generally in real life this would be suicidal by yourself. Military CQB room clearing is rarely done with less than FOUR people for that reason. The "gamers " have no problem with it. It is par for the course in IPSC. But the "tactical " crowd argues that it is not realistic..and I agree...to a point.

About the only reason I could see for ever doing that would be to rescue a loved one. If your child or spouse is screaming downstairs and you hear strange angry voices I doubt that many" type A" meat eater personalities would stay put while who knows what happens to our spouse or child. In that case there is a reason for going into that situation. Otherwise we would be wise to stay put and let them come to us. But sometimes there might be overriding concerns that force us to take action we would not normally take.

At this point if we decide to go extract our family members from whomever is confronting them then we are essentially in dynamic entry hostage rescue mode. If it is your house you will know the lay out better than the intruder or intruders. Here surprise and violence of action MIGHT help you survive, but any time you are trying to clear a structure , even your own, by yourself you are not on the good side of the odds. But on the positive side the proactive nature of IDPA gives some practice in dynamic movement and target discrimination. There is always a silver lining if you just look for it.

So where do I (and Suarez International) come down on these arguments?

On use of cover, there are times when it is just not going to be there to use and there will be times when it is there to use. Saying cover is always available is just as silly as saying it is never available. And proper use of cover does not mean setting up housekeeping behind the little plastic barricade and shooting at a snail's pace. Just because you are behind something now does not mean that the bad guys cannot quickly outmaneuver you and flank your position. So cover needs to be used wisely and then quickly move to a better piece of cover.

One other thing though that the "tactical" crowd , with all their tip toeing about and bunkering up behind cover seem to not take into account. The first gunshot goes off and the element of surprise is gone. At that point dynamic movement and accurate shooting will be more help that tip toeing up to the next doorway giving them time to get set and get behind cover. After all, they probably got a bit of a clue that you were there when you shot one of them.....

And I know at least one guy in particular who has been in more than one gunfight and use of cover was not an issue in his fights because they were over very quickly and there was no cover to be used! You might know him too. His name is on the deed here! EDITORIAL NOTE( referring to Gabe Suarez)

On the reload, this is a bone of contention with some. Some in the tactical community teach an IPSC type speed load as the default reload method for real world tactical problems. They argue that it is hands down the fastest way to get a gun fully loaded again. They say that the reload with retention or tactical reload are both too slow and too cumbersome. But IDPA mandates that any reload not from slidelock must have the mag retained. Some argue this is silly. I think it really depends on the individual circumstances.

There are some who wear more than one spare magazine on them so if they do lose one it is no big deal- they still have another full one. Hard to argue with that logic when the average gunfight is 3 to 5 rounds anyway.. The only issue is when the problem is not average and there is a limited number of mags and no immediate way of replenishing.

Think Hurricane Katrina type situations. Or maybe military type clandestine operation in foreign lands.Here if you drop a mag it is likely gone for good. While I doubt many of us reading this fall into the latter category, I know many people went about armed after Hurricane Katrina and if they had been dropping mags in the water their mag supply would soon be depleted.

Much more likely though is the "normal " guy who carries just one spare mag. If he jettisons his first and ends up having to shoot all of his second he is going to end up out of ammo fast. Especially if that is a single stack gun he carries.While this may be an unlikely scenario for the average citizen it might be a real concern for police or military guys. So I have no issues with the reload with retention. In fact the default proactive mag change that Suarez Int teaches is a reload with retention. While we do our 360 degree after action assessment we stow the mag that was in the gun and reload with a fresh mag. This gets us back up and loaded in case reinforcements for the bad guy are on their way but also retains the extra rounds in case things go from bad to worse.

So if at the match you are forced to reload with retention and do not like it just imagine the scenarios are operating post Katrina and you are doing it in 2 feet of murky water and are without any support system to replenish lost gear. This might make that reload with retention more palatable.

Now for the capacity concerns. I carry a hi cap pistol 99% of the time. And when I carry it I never download it to 11 rounds. I came to grips with it by considering it a malfunction and reloading and moving on. No one counts their rounds in real fights. They shoot until it goes click or shoot until there is no one left to shoot at . THEN they do a tac load of some type. But I have heard very few stories of civilian tac loads under fire. So I simply shoot the stage as written and unless there is a mandatory reload required I shoot until it is empty and reload. After it is all over I might tac load before I show "all clear" , but I realize the difference in training and the game so I honestly rarely do that. In fact there is a move in IDPA to get away from tac loads on the clock. I personally think that is a move in the right direction.

The truth is that like any other shooting competition, IDPA matches are going to be won by those who shoot quickly and accurately. But then again aren't most gunfights also won by those who shoot quickly and accurately? So maybe we should worry less about doctrinal issues like cover and reloads and worry about whether we can hit what we are aiming at quickly. Remember it is a shooting match. A test of marksmanship and gunhandling under time pressure in a setting roughly replicating real world encounters.

And then there are those that simply argue IDPA is not real. You know what? They are right. The bottom line though I think is not so much that the game is bad for the shooter, it is often that some shooters just do not do well at the game. Some of them argue that it was not real and use that as an excuse for poor grasp of basic defensive marksmanship and gunhandling . I am somewhat tired of hearing all the constant "IDPA is not real" and "if you try to win you'll get killed one day when you don't use cover trying to shoot the BGs fast". Of course it is not real, because the targets don't move and shoot back!!! And I darn sure don't down load my G34 to 10 rounds before I leave the house in the mornings! But I also realize IDPA is just a game. It is a game it has to have rules.

To them it seems to come down to some kind of choice between being competitive or being "tactical" Look guys, if you work on your gunhandling skills (draw/presentation,trigger control, reloads,shooting from different positions) and on moving your feet rapidly when you need to move, you certainly CAN do well at the sport of IDPA and still be "tactically correct" on the street. The faster you can accurately shoot, the better, whether it is in a game or on the street. I still shoot fast and accurately and I finish high at my local matches most of the time because I don't waste time dithering over what to do, and I shoot and handle the gun QUICKLY.

I honestly think a lot of people use "IDPA is not real"as an EXCUSE for not doing well or as an EXCUSE for not working harder to improve their skills! It almost becomes a justification for mediocrity.If you can "stink it up" and just throw out the tired old line "well, I did it RIGHT you guys are gaming it!" then there is no incentive to get better! What makes you think that while you barricaded yourself behind cover and took 15 seconds to shoot 6 shots at 3 targets 5 YARDS away,that in the REAL WORLD those bad guys didn't just flank your sorry butt and shoot you in the back of the head while you took FOREVER to shoot them? On the other hand if you can shoot each of them twice in 3 seconds they probably won't have that opportunity! What I was referring to about context. If the bad guys are close then you need to shoot fast, not give them an opportunity to out maneuver you. So hiding behind cover all day long is not always the correct tactical thing to do.

Again, not directing this at any one individual. This is directed at the "tactical community" in general. I hear these excuses so often I begin to think it is just a crutch or excuse to justify moving and shooting like a lame turtle! Yes it is a game, but so is Ultimate Fighting Championship. Do you really think Chuck Liddell will fight on the street EXACTLY like he does in the octagon? I doubt it.

If you WORK at your manipulations and gunhandling and shooting to the point it becomes second nature and you can do it "unconsciously" you WILL do well in IDPA. Will you win a National championship? Maybe not. That really depends on your ability. But you will probably do very well at your local matches and as a by product be that far ahead of the curve if it ever happens for real!

You see IDPA is not real. It is not training. It is time pressured and peer pressured gunhandling and marksmanship practice on a course not of your design, so there is some thinking under pressure involved. You know, those physical and mental skills that help win real fights.

And one other thing for those who do not participate due to fear of not doing well.

Growth can only be achieved through risk of failure.

Many are too ego invested to try new things that they may fail or have to work hard at to attain a high level of ability. If they DO something and fail,that is not a validation of their long practiced (or NOT practiced) training regimen.

So to keep from damaging their ego they avoid putting themselves in a situation with the chance of failure. But at the same time they avoid the chance to polish their skills and become BETTER. No one becomes a master of anything avoiding hard work and challenges. Some of the best learning experiences are from FAILURE. But some people will never understand that. Get out and give it a try. If you don't like it then you hopefully had an educational experience and can use that to grow your practice regimen.Just don't avoid it because someone somewhere said it was not "real".

Mr_White
08-24-2016, 11:22 AM
Yes you did and it was extremely difficult to respond to you when there were three pages generated from the peanut gallery attacking me for not following dogma so forgive me for not wanting to play with the trolls.

You were able to respond to me just fine. The other posters were not stopping you.

My question remains:


Why are training scars potentially formed by competitive shooting an insurmountable problem, but those potentially formed by defensive training and dry fire are not?

You say you answered with this, but it not responsive to the question:


As I have stated ad nauseam, "training scars" which are formed in gaming have to countered with correct repetition to counter the learned responses. So the guy who runs a stage and speed unloads, shows clear, clicks the trigger pointlessly and speed reholsters is going to do that in a real life deadly force situation. Because that's all he knows and that's all he will do. There are numerous of examples like this, any one of which may potentially get a person killed.


----


To expound on this a little more here are the insurmountable problems associated with gaming as I have seen/in my opinion:

Unrealistic gear selection, which leads to bad reps with gear that will never be carried in real life - gamer rigs

Light loads or "powder puff" loads which provide an unrealistic recoil response which is much lighter than any modern defensive ammunition - gaming hand load vs 147gr +P 9mm.

Walking a stage in an effort maximize points by planning course of fire - this does not exist in real life sets up a false confidence for the shooter

Specific areas which shooting has to occur from, a box you have to stand inside of, a specific area you have to use, a specific barricade, etc - no such limits in real life

Round limits per magazine - there is no such thing in reality

Combat reloads or "forced reloads" - Of all the instructors I've taken classes with, and all the MIL/LEO's I've trained with, I may have heard of one 3rd party story about someone having to perform a reload quickly in order to survive a deadly force confrontation. This is simple something that a lot of time is wasted on and a lot people burn bad reps in this context. People will devote a lot of time to this instead of something else, with a rig they will never carry outside the game and developed a skill they may never need. The only time this becomes a real plus is when you compete as you carry, which most won't because you don't win and no one is going to back pocket reload when others are doing so from a gamer rig, because winning the game is the objective not burning good reps.

Shoot everyone stages - the likelihood of anyone of us showing up to a situation where every single person there needs to be shot/killed is extremely low it's nearly zero. But yet every single game makes the shooter burn the rep of shooting every single target. Sure there are a few "no shoots" thrown into the mix, but that is still not realistic. Hostage headshot at 25 yards? Even if they are standing still the average shooter won't take that shot, but in a game they will this is burning a bad reps of multiple things.

Zero considerations for background of targets because of preplanning - none of this exists in real life and over penetration as well as back drop as very real issues during a shooting. To disregard them is to dismiss them entirely, this means, again the average shooter will believe this is how real life will be because they have never once considered it while pulling the trigger.

Two or three shots to an A-zone / shoot until the metal drops means you "killed" the target - this is not how life works. Show me a stage where the metal target pops back up repeatedly because will do that after being shot and falling. Show me the target with an A-zone being the high thoracic cavity and a C-zone the middle area where the standard A-zone is, not regulation is it? Life is not regulation.

Throwing of shotguns/rifles at the end of that particular stage sometimes onto tables sometimes into buckets - It's empty so we just throw the gun?

Slings? None-gaming mags/tubes for rifle/pistol/ No one is going to carry around a rifle with this type of mag attached to it:

http://www.cabelas.com/assets/cms/img/doorway/gunSports/rt_3gun_03.jpg

or this tube attached to their shotgun:

http://3gunnation.com/Portals/0//EasyDNNnews/120960/Thompson_Shotgun_Thumb_1.jpg

or whatever this is:

http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/utah3gun05.jpg

Running unrealistic long guns like this creates an unrealistic consideration for its ability it also does not allow for retention of the rifle. Show me a stage where you shoot a few rounds through a rifle then have to keep it on your person for an entire pistol stage? There may be one or two, but most that I've seen video's of? Throw them into a bucket.

Muzzle brakes - not applicable for real life and will give away your position instantly in low/no light.

Gun specifically designed to give the shooter as much of a competitive edge as possible - super light triggers, hi-vis fiberoptic sights (non-night sights), unrealistic open holsters.

Gaming rigs - LEO's wear duty rigs with less stuff on it sometimes and no one walks around like this.

http://i744.photobucket.com/albums/xx87/rginidaho/70belt.jpg

Complete lack of target discrimination of any kind with any platform. Is there a stage where the furthest targets require very specific PID and shooting them automatically DQ's the shooter, the caveat is that the shooters aren't told about it and the targets are PID'd through an obscure method? Probably not, but that's reality - this is teaching people to shoot everyone without any consideration for ID, this is very bad.

Use of buzzers/timers - do not exist in real life, building an unconscious response. This doesn't mean the average gamer will default to shooting people on a buzzer, but there will be bad reps burned because that is the only stimulus presented to start the stage. Why not start with a gun shot at random? Or some mechanical presentation of a threat? Probably because you can't quickly write down a time from that and do some score keeping, both of which don't exist in real life.

The "always default to gun/shooting" mentality - which will get you in legal issues that you may not be able to overcome - see George Zimmerman

Orientation of firearm decided by range rules, muzzle down type "no muzzle over berm" rules - do not exist in real life shootings.

Complete lack of tactical awareness - putting guns and arms through windows, past door ways, or "cover" of some kind. - There are a lot of bad reps but this is really bad.

Zero pieing of corners or proper clearing of any kind - there is no penalty for doing it wrong, there is a penalty for doing it right. This is unacceptable and a seriously bad rep. I don't remember the name of the video, I think vickers was in it and some Asian guy showing the difference between game clearing and real life clearing. If you mute it and watch it for what they do, not say you will quickly see the competitive shooter doing things that is completely unrealistic and will most definitely get someone killed if they ever did it that way in real life - which by the way no one does or ever trains to.

Speed unload, speed reholstering - every shooter does this on every single stage. That is burning a lot of bad reps.

[B]To contrast here are some things which I believe can be beneficial:

Random start positions - as in stances or orientation of the shooter to the target.

Tac reloads, reloading when the shooter has time and opportunity to have a fresh mag for new threats - this burdened, however, by pre-planning of the stages.

Repetitive manipulation of a firearm system in a context the shooter may not have the opportunity to do otherwise.

Repetitive accuracy standards (for points) which require the shooter to be accurate and precise in their application of a firearm and the skill sets which develop to facilitate that end.

Improved firearm awareness - condition, status, etc

Recording of shooting to go over mistakes and try to learn.

Classifiers - I like this because its just a pure skill based setup in some instances, there are a few which I do not like because they violate basic common sense - this one for example (https://www.uspsa.org/classifiers/13-01.pdf) there is a no shoot but the rules clearly say you can engage the first target or the third target? That means if you engage the first target you are potentially shooting the no shoot? How about we don't shoot no shoots in any capacity even if a shoot target is in front of them? Because in real life that's not going to happen and training for this is setting yourself up for failure. Otherwise there are a lot of good qualifiers that incorporate movement and accuracy.

Other things to consider:

There are lots of good things that have come from gaming into the LE/MIL/CCW world. Extended magazines have been worked out well, like the TTI and ETS 22rnd magazines. The proliferation of variable magnified optics, which has become a standard. "Match" grade barrels.

The is, however, a complete breakdown in the mindset developed that is required to overcome a deadly force confrontation, most of which has very little to do with shooting.




**The above items/lists are not inclusive and I will add to them as I have time**

This newer post is going backwards in the discussion pretty far. Go back and re-read this thread because this has all been addressed. Pretty directly applicable are posts 35 and 36, but we do continue discussing it from there.

Then answer my question:

Why are training scars potentially formed by competitive shooting an insurmountable problem, but those potentially formed by defensive training and dry fire are not?