The old guys

[rob_s]

I've been trying to figure out the wording for this, and what section to put it in, for awhile. Hopefully I get my thoughts across here, and it's in the right place.

We lost Louis Awerbuck in 2014.
Pat Rogers died earlier this month.
I'm not sure if Bill Jeans is still teaching or not, but I suspect not.
Randy Cain, the "young guy" of this old group ain't no spring chicken (Randy, if you read, this, sorry!)

These are just a few of the guys I happen to have trained with, but there are others. And these guys all taught at Gunsite at one time or another, to one degree or another, but that's not critical to the discussion. I haven't trained with him, but I'm sure Clint Smith is of the same type.

I find myself, at or approaching middle-age (depending on your scale) missing the old-days of the traveling firearms instructor. Maybe it was because these guys were older than me, and an ever-increasing number of instructors I come across are my age or younger, or perhaps because all these guys came from one certain place at one time or another, but there was a certain quality that was shared among these guys, and a certain sense of history and depth of knowledge that is pretty rare today.

I'm glad I got the chance to train with these guys. I regret not going to Gunsite before Cooper died, as I definitely could have met him if I couldn't have actually trained under him.

These guys all had, or have, a shared approach to things. A certain logic based on the laboratory of the range and the teaching and the learning that seems to be dying off with them. Now everything seems to be about body-count, and high-speed, and low-drag, and combat applications that may or may not be applicable to the guy standing in his bedroom at 3 AM wearing nothing but his boxers wondering what just went "crash" in the living room.

I dunno. I guess I didn't actually word it too well. I guess I just miss the old guys. I probably didn't appreciate them near enough when I was with them on the range, but I certainly miss them now, and I think we're losing a lot of what they had to offer, as nobody seems to know their own history anymore.

[David S.]

Hackathorn comes to mind.

I don't know that Tom is an old guy, but seems cut from the same cloth.

[NickA]

John Farnam would be another. I was fortunate enough to get my first actual training from him ( mostly his wife Vickie), and it set the bar for everything after.
His actual techniques and some of his ideas may be dated according to some, but that basic class included an emphasis on avoidance, some bare bones MUC techniques, and flashlight use. Most importantly they stressed fundamentals, and that you really didn't want to ever have to use any of this stuff.

Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk

[VolGrad]

From what I have heard the "old guys" are concerned they are all soon to be gone as well and are concerned what direction the industry is going in.

From what I hear it was a topic of concern in informal discussions at the recent tactical conference.

[Tom Givens]

John Farnam is now 71. Clint Smith, Ken Hackathorn and Mas Ayoob are all in their late 60's. I'm in my mid-60's.

Many of us are, indeed, concerned about the proliferation of instant experts and Youtube guru's. To combat this, some of us spend a lot of time mentoring younger guys who are trying to amass the training and life experience to replace us. As Pat's untimely passing reminds us, none of us are guaranteed tomorrow.

[1slow]

Not old but we lost Paul Gomez at age 41.

We keep losing irreplaceable experience. As in many combat disciplines, the more training generations away from actual combat use, the more non useful stuff creeps in. Then it becomes stale exercises that no one knows the reason for.

Thanks to all of you keeping this alive, improving and useful.

[okie john]

I think it’s critical that all of the the guys you listed once worked for Cooper because it was Cooper’s idea to use competition to determine the best tactics and gear. When those guys started off, cops were still shooting Colt revolvers one-handed out of Berns-Martin clamshell rigs. Cooper’s employees saw the development of modern technique. They have insight into why things should be done in a certain way. A lot of folks can parrot that, but haven’t lived it—witness how few people still understand the revolver.

When we talk about “the old guys”, we’re really talking about generalists who were versed in the shooting sports as a whole. When I was a kid in the 70’s, the older gunwriters knew how to shoot a rifle with a loop sling, and most of them had shot some bullseye in addition to whatever specialty they were writing about. We don’t really see that any more. Instead, people can say whatever they want online, and the rest of us have to hope that a few SMEs will emerge.

There’s also the fact that now there’s a LOT more to know these days. The original (14th-17th century) “renaissance man” was one who knew the entire body of art and science available in the world at the time, and had made significant contributions to them. That was possible because, there wasn’t that much to know. Today it’s impossible to master one aspect of science, let alone all of them.

Today it’s extremely rare to see someone with significant experience in the military, in law enforcement, in competition, and in hunting because there’s just so much to do in all of those fields.


Okie John

[Dagga Boy]

I delved into this pretty deeply for an article that will likely never be published as it was for Combat Tactics. From the original thought factory at early Gunsite, those early folks headed back to the lives from which they came and tested, modified, and worked with the Modern Technique to build on it with experience. Many tested in in various ways. With some it was field work combined with competition. Others were straight field work and working with dedicated groups in tip of the spear pressure testing. Others went on to revamp competition to try to better reflect defensive shooting. There was sort of a national and international circle that was trying to figure out what worked, but it was a fairly small group by contrast today, and Gunsite was essentially the Internet forum of its day, and a small one by comparison.
I am part of a group that came up under the original folks who did a lot of the initial work. I cut my teeth with the crew from LAPD that started with Mudgett, Helms, and Reitz and progressed to many others. Since then I have spent solid time with Pat Rogers, Ken Hackathorn and Tom Givens. All of these folks do things a little different based on their experiences and what has been pounded out on their own anvils of experience. I look at folks from my generation as really blessed as we got to deal with proven data with relevance and a lot of very much first hand info and proper context without being watered down. I am also of a generation that got to read a lot from the core group of initial Modern Technique shooters who documented their findings in writings that were more technique and academic oriented rather than advertising generated gun magazine writing as opposed to a good level of firearms journalism. I got to apply what I learned in my own laboratory and see lots of solid results first hand and with an eye towards really trying to understand what we were seeing in relationships from training to street performance. Others have benefited from that early mentoring. John Hearne is a stand out in what he has done. Others like Wayne Dobbs in Texas, Chuck Haggard in Kansas, an entire flock of folks Pat Rogers affected, and many others. Then you have guys who have progressed the entire fighting dynamic....Craig Douglas comes immediately to mind. Others went towards the sort of pure "shooting" progression. Todd Green obviously fit in here. GJM has a ton of experience through a very long history of chasing performance. We are seeing some exceptional melding of competitive performance being layered on the shooting performance and many of those are here as well. SLG, Dr. No and Surf are walking examples of exceptional "athletic" performance shooters who are applying those skills daily and dealing with bad folks.

Where I see us losing is the industry has gotten very perverted due to size and a lack of folks needing to earn credibility. On the other hand, things like the Rangemaster Conference give me hope to keep a lot of this alive. I also think it is absolutely critical that we try to understand context of where this stuff came from and how we got to where we are. Folks need to understand that none of this is new. I am reading a new Frank Hamer book now. Guys like Hamer, Askins, Bryce, and many others buried in the legacy of police departments all over this country and many military guys did exceptional work, and we need to realize we are just trying to perfect what they sweated and bled for.

[okie john]

I delved into this pretty deeply for an article that will likely never be published as it was for Combat Tactics.

Any chance it might see the light of day in another venue?


Okie John

[GJM]

Rob, there is a fine line here.

On one hand, you want to be respectful of proven teachers and techniques. On the other hand, you don't want to become a grumpy old man that is resistant to anything new.

[Dagga Boy]

Rob, there is a fine line here.

On one hand, you want to be respectful of proven teachers and techniques. On the other hand, you don't want to become a grumpy old man that is resistant to anything new.

I resemble that remark....:cool:

[Drang]

I delved into this pretty deeply for an article that will likely never be published as it was for Combat Tactics.


Any chance it might see the light of day in another venue?

If only we knew someone in the publishing trade...

[rob_s]

Rob, there is a fine line here.

On one hand, you want to be respectful of proven teachers and techniques. On the other hand, you don't want to become a grumpy old man that is resistant to anything new.

On the third hand, you don't want to forget that "new" doesn't automatically equal "better".

So much of what is touted as "new", really isn't. And this is part of my point: there's all these guys out there re-inventing the wheel simply because they lack the history since they didn't learn it in Basic Training.

[11B10]

I've been trying to figure out the wording for this, and what section to put it in, for awhile. Hopefully I get my thoughts across here, and it's in the right place.

We lost Louis Awerbuck in 2014.
Pat Rogers died earlier this month.
I'm not sure if Bill Jeans is still teaching or not, but I suspect not.
Randy Cain, the "young guy" of this old group ain't no spring chicken (Randy, if you read, this, sorry!)

These are just a few of the guys I happen to have trained with, but there are others. And these guys all taught at Gunsite at one time or another, to one degree or another, but that's not critical to the discussion. I haven't trained with him, but I'm sure Clint Smith is of the same type.

I find myself, at or approaching middle-age (depending on your scale) missing the old-days of the traveling firearms instructor. Maybe it was because these guys were older than me, and an ever-increasing number of instructors I come across are my age or younger, or perhaps because all these guys came from one certain place at one time or another, but there was a certain quality that was shared among these guys, and a certain sense of history and depth of knowledge that is pretty rare today.

I'm glad I got the chance to train with these guys. I regret not going to Gunsite before Cooper died, as I definitely could have met him if I couldn't have actually trained under him.

These guys all had, or have, a shared approach to things. A certain logic based on the laboratory of the range and the teaching and the learning that seems to be dying off with them. Now everything seems to be about body-count, and high-speed, and low-drag, and combat applications that may or may not be applicable to the guy standing in his bedroom at 3 AM wearing nothing but his boxers wondering what just went "crash" in the living room.

I dunno. I guess I didn't actually word it too well. I guess I just miss the old guys. I probably didn't appreciate them near enough when I was with them on the range, but I certainly miss them now, and I think we're losing a lot of what they had to offer, as nobody seems to know their own history anymore.



rob - you did just fine.

[Wondering Beard]

Guys like Hamer, Askins, Bryce, and many others buried in the legacy of police departments all over this country and many military guys did exceptional work, and we need to realize we are just trying to perfect what they sweated and bled for.

^
this.

I don't think that we are going to lose all that hard won knowledge. Sure, it's gotten diluted by the size of the market (let's think back to the early 90s when gun owning and training was not kindly looked upon by the majority of the population to now with what Michael Bane has called gun culture 2.0) but the core of people who are serious about this remains (it's not big compared to the whole population of gun owners but it is larger than before) and the serious students can find the serious teachers.

[GJM]

On the third hand, you don't want to forget that "new" doesn't automatically equal "better".

Agreed, but if you believe absolutely nothing new is "better," that also is a clue.

[orionz06]

Everything we do now comes from someone who challenged what was standard before. Given the reach and speed of information today things get distorted a bit.

If forums existed back in the day I wonder how many people would be bitching about the gamer ass Cooper putting two hands on the gun?


Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

[Rosco Benson]

Hackathorn comes to mind.

I don't know that Tom is an old guy, but seems cut from the same cloth.

I talked with Hackathorn at the NRA show in Louisville Saturday. He said he only had two classes scheduled for this year and that he would probably not be doing any next year.

Rosco

[Dagga Boy]

Agreed, but if you believe absolutely nothing new is "better," that also is a clue.

The problem in my mind is sorting through the idea that everything new is better (and we have all been in this phase), and how we are proving what actually is better. The difference in the past and many of the core group coming out of Gunsite were testing in both the field and in a competition realm that was very different. We got some very good longer term info of things we could point to tested in multiple areas with consistent application. The Internet has put us on far faster spreading of ideas, both good and bad as well as a very different world for testing real world application and how information from the field is shared.


Everything we do now comes from someone who challenged what was standard before. Given the reach and speed of information today things get distorted a bit.

If forums existed back in the day I wonder how many people would be bitching about the gamer ass Cooper putting two hands on the gun?


Sent from my Nokia 3310 using an owl

It was gamer Jack Weaver who was putting both hands on the gun and bringing it to eye level that really changed things.....Cooper just understood that it was something better and working.

[Shumba]

I am fortunate to have trained with Jeff Cooper and Louis Awerbuck.
17 years ago last February, my then 17 year old daughter announced she wanted to hunt with me in Africa, and I had little time to get her ready.
Her coordination is excellent and she is highly focused. Off hand, sitting and prone were fine.
She shot very well from kneeling, a very useful field position, but while her vertical dispersion was minimal, she was stringing shots horizontally.
I called Louis and asked for help. He was unsure but said "I will call Jeff and get right back to you."
Within the hour he called and said "Jeff says she should turn her support foot toes inward a bit."
Out the back door to the range we went.
Problem solved!
Shumba

[rob_s]

Agreed, but if you believe absolutely nothing new is "better," that also is a clue.

Half the battle is simply knowing whether or not it's really "new".

With the utter lack of history and depth of knowledge evident in far too few of the people steering the ship in the shooting world, it's not hard to think that something is "new" when in fact someone else already tried it, found it lacking, and discarded it.

I think that's the piece that's so desperately missing from the young guns. No history, no depth, just whatever they learned from the last guy, or (perhaps) what they think saved them in their gunfight(s).

[Chance]

Half the battle is simply knowing whether or not it's really "new".

With the utter lack of history and depth of knowledge evident in far too few of the people steering the ship in the shooting world, it's not hard to think that something is "new" when in fact someone else already tried it, found it lacking, and discarded it.

I think that's the piece that's so desperately missing from the young guns. No history, no depth, just whatever they learned from the last guy, or (perhaps) what they think saved them in their gunfight(s).

I think this is just the nature of the maturation of any field (if you want to call this a "field"). This is a relatively young art, and plenty of the people who have been there since square one are still around. At some point, we're going to start losing access to those folks, and as much as we may want to, there's no way we can archive a lifetime's worth of experience.

It's lamentable, but that's just how it works. C'est la vie.

[Drang]

If forums existed back in the day I wonder how many people would be bitching about the gamer ass Cooper putting two hands on the gun?
You Applegate Fanbois are all alike! :cool:

[DacoRoman]

I talked with Hackathorn at the NRA show in Louisville Saturday. He said he only had two classes scheduled for this year and that he would probably not be doing any next year.

Rosco

I'm glad I caught a class with Hackathorn this last April. He did mention some disappointment with the way the training industry has been going lately, especially regarding the proliferation of internet sources of what he called, and I'm paraphrasing here, poor information and unqualified people giving out info or teaching. On a personal note I don't think that I've been exposed to this too much since I've been very discriminating where I get my info., and I've chosen my training with generally very respected trainers. So I try to keep the bullshit filter on high and choose wisely.

[LSP972]

With the utter lack of history and depth of knowledge evident in far too few of the people steering the ship in the shooting world, it's not hard to think that something is "new" when in fact someone else already tried it, found it lacking, and discarded it.



Exactly so.

The other "half" of that issue, IMO, is those same young guys who think/say that old stuff, period, is no good anymore (because its old)… such as revolvers are a waste of time.

.

[HCM]

Agreed, but if you believe absolutely nothing new is "better," that also is a clue.

IMHO This ^^^ is what set Pat Rogers apart from many of his contemporaries.

Healthy skepticism, discrimination and discernment are important but change is a constant.

Example: http://www.swatvault.com/weapons-training-and-tactics/putting-down-the-man-gun/

[vcdgrips]

As I have gotten older, I too have lamented my failure to train with as many of the stalwarts as I could or should have. When I started shooting in 1991, I was fortunate enough to fall into a group of of 4 guys in particular (DS, CA, TH and JH) who had trained with Cooper and his instructors beginning in the late 70's. It was 2004 before I attended my first "sleep away" school at TR when Clint Smith was still in TX. I did not get to Gunsite until 2006 and have managed to train with Pat Rogers, Randy Cain and Tom Givens and others since.

The post below is something I wrote in 2011 and is even more true today re Tom Givens acumen as a writer, teacher, indeed professor (as in one who creates knowledge) re
the uniquely American martial art of Pistolcraft etc.

"Full Disclosure- I hosted Tom for a two day class in KC in April 2011. I attended the Rangemaster Instructor's Course in Oct 2010 and Tactical Confs in 2009 and 2010. I first met Tom at the Cooper Memorial in 2007. He along with Todd have influence my mindset/shooting/training more than anyone else in the last few years.

Tom is one of the few old school masters of the Modern Technique who continues to study and improve the art. He understands that what was state of the art in 1981 may have changed/evolved/improved/developed/morphed etc in 2011. Tom is arguably the best living bridge between between the 1st gen students of Cooper ( i.e. Givens, Taylor, Smith, Awerbuck, Jeans, Hackathorn, Rogers etc) and today's younger instructors of note."

Tom, and the few of his ilk that are still left, are true wisdom keepers. I fear that we are failing to partake of this wisdom at our and our art's peril. I would respectfully assert that no bodily kinestetic(sp?) movement when attempted to be performed at its highest level, looked the same in 1986 as it does in 2016. If this is true for both team and individual sports, how can it not also be true for Pistolcraft?

[Dagga Boy]

I have told many folks that Tom Givens is one of the best examples of what a really good evolution of the art looks like. You can see a fundemental base and skeptical add on's. It is a good combo of the purely martial side mixed with advances from the sport side. Tom has the experience to filter that many lack.

[BJXDS]

I aint exactly young but in several more years there will be some new Old guys. We tend to identify with those that we grew up/learned with. Change for the sake of change is never a good thing. I think there are some absolutes in reference to fundamentals in shooting that must be adhered to. Some other things, ie pad of finger or more trigger finger are more individual things. Technology and tactics do change things, not always for the best, but sometimes.

There will always be a special place in my heart for the old guys, just as there is for revolvers, 1911's, and M1's, although I believe in a LE/MIL role the Glock and M4 are superior.

Lets all thank the "Old Guys" for giving us a base to build on, as well as the advancement of technology and techniques, with out that, we would not be where we are today.

[orionz06]

Change for the sake of change is never a good thing.

Just as not changing for the sake of not changing is never a good thing. We're smarter and better than that. It's rather easy to contemplate, evaluate, and keep what works. We have instant access to the best face shooters and the best gamers in the world. Within an hour one can easily have a response from either. Why waste all that trying to keep kids off your lawn?

[Dagga Boy]

Just as not changing for the sake of not changing is never a good thing. We're smarter and better than that. It's rather easy to contemplate, evaluate, and keep what works. We have instant access to the best face shooters and the best gamers in the world. Within an hour one can easily have a response from either. Why waste all that trying to keep kids off your lawn?

Sometimes, you also have a case of a very strong, built in, Hardwired set of very good responses that are tested and proven. They are front loaded into to your brain, over learned, and have proven themselves under stress. So when do we abandon that for something that "may" be slightly "better"? Also, keep in mind that the folks who find it "better", also may have anchored the better technique or process through the same level of repetition you have anchored the "dated" one.

This for me is a lot like the stance debate. I am essentially agnostic on it. Use what works best for you as we all likely have a different set of parameters we work from. Pat Rogers and I discussed this often. We loved the term "fighting stance" for what we were doing. How do you efficiently fight. My efficiency may be very different than someone built totally different. My efficiency may be very different than someone in a wholly different environment. My "test" for many techniques was how easily does it work when in a small bathroom with the lights turned off. I spent a lot of time in dark confined environments, so that was my test. Totally different from someone looking for best efficiency in a sport venue, or even a fighting environment that is mostly daylight in non confined space.
Now, some folks like GJM will and can invest the reps to grasp every possible improvement out there. Mr. White is another example of someone who is building pure efficiency for them at a level most will never attain. On the opposite side of the coin, some of the work Tom Givens has done and what I saw with my folks of dealing with non-dedicated folks with limited time may dictate a totally different level of what we are building to an unconscious level and how we want to maximize their minimal amount of train or qualification time.

[orionz06]

Sometimes, you also have a case of a very strong, built in, Hardwired set of very good responses that are tested and proven. They are front loaded into to your brain, over learned, and have proven themselves under stress. So when do we abandon that for something that "may" be slightly "better"? Also, keep in mind that the folks who find it "better", also may have anchored the better technique or process through the same level of repetition you have anchored the "dated" one.



This is justification after thought. This is not what I was referring to. If the next Raptor has 10 more HP that doesn't make yours any slower. The difference is you're not scoffing at anyone who buys the new one and calling them a fool.

[redbone]

I'm glad I caught a class with Hackathorn this last April. He did mention some disappointment with the way the training industry has been going lately, especially regarding the proliferation of internet sources of what he called, and I'm paraphrasing here, poor information and unqualified people giving out info or teaching.


THIS IS THE GOLDEN AGE OF FIREARMS TRAINING! To lament the state of the training industry is just wrong. For every Instructor Zero/that tatted up Stolen Valor Corey/Yeager, there are five solid instructors traveling around the country to bring good training to your door step. Let's don't lose sight of that as we get nostalgic for the good ol' days.

Twenty years ago if you wanted to train you had to fly out to Gunsite to learn methods that Leatham and Enos had already made outdated.

Now in just about any part of the country you can find a solid class within driving distance every weekend. Want to train with a USPSA national champion? You can do that. Want to learn to shoot a carbine from some guys that have years deployed overseas? Have at it. Have a hankering to ring steel at 1000 meters? Guys can teach you. Want to learn how to fight at close distances with a pistol or blade? Craig Douglas is your man. Need to learn the criminal psyche and how to avoid being a victim? There are guys that have devoted their professional lives to studying that and teaching it.

Seriously, I appreciate Gunsite for what it was and its legacy but let's be honest. Clint Smith or some of the other guys mentioned could stop teaching tomorrow and there wouldn't be a void in the training industry.

[rob_s]

Just as not changing for the sake of not changing is never a good thing. We're smarter and better than that. It's rather easy to contemplate, evaluate, and keep what works. We have instant access to the best face shooters and the best gamers in the world. Within an hour one can easily have a response from either. Why waste all that trying to keep kids off your lawn?

I'm not sure I'm convinced that what we have is measurably better, nor that there is a scale, nor that there needs to be.

I suppose we have people that are better at face-shooting, and better at particular games, than ever before, but I'm neither a face-shooter nor interested in the hardcore competitive nature of gaming anymore (if I ever really was), so I frankly don't think it matters. I don't believe for one second that some guy's Roland G19 carried appendix with 97 hours of "formal firearms training" from every former SEAL and Delta Operator in Alias's roster is any more likely to win a gunfight in the food court than Louis Awerbuck would be with his 1911 and two shotguns shells on his belt.

[TCinVA]

It's not really a question of techniques. It's the overall approach.

One Tom Givens is worth immeasurably more than a thousand Bret Fawbushes...for all kinds of reasons that aren't measured on a timer.

EDIT - Although I'll say this: You'll have a devil of a time finding somebody who can best Tom on the casino drill on-demand.

[Erick Gelhaus]

If it wasn't mentioned, Bill Jeans has retired and is enjoying it.

[serialsolver]

There's a couple of guys I would want to spend a day on the range with, some passed on and some still here but most of all....Jim Cirrillo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[orionz06]

I'm not sure I'm convinced that what we have is measurably better, nor that there is a scale, nor that there needs to be.

I suppose we have people that are better at face-shooting, and better at particular games, than ever before, but I'm neither a face-shooter nor interested in the hardcore competitive nature of gaming anymore (if I ever really was), so I frankly don't think it matters. I don't believe for one second that some guy's Roland G19 carried appendix with 97 hours of "formal firearms training" from every former SEAL and Delta Operator in Alias's roster is any more likely to win a gunfight in the food court than Louis Awerbuck would be with his 1911 and two shotguns shells on his belt.

I guess I am lost then. What are you looking for? Why are you training?

[Mr_White]

Sometimes, you also have a case of a very strong, built in, Hardwired set of very good responses that are tested and proven. They are front loaded into to your brain, over learned, and have proven themselves under stress. So when do we abandon that for something that "may" be slightly "better"? Also, keep in mind that the folks who find it "better", also may have anchored the better technique or process through the same level of repetition you have anchored the "dated" one.

This for me is a lot like the stance debate. I am essentially agnostic on it. Use what works best for you as we all likely have a different set of parameters we work from. Pat Rogers and I discussed this often. We loved the term "fighting stance" for what we were doing. How do you efficiently fight. My efficiency may be very different than someone built totally different. My efficiency may be very different than someone in a wholly different environment. My "test" for many techniques was how easily does it work when in a small bathroom with the lights turned off. I spent a lot of time in dark confined environments, so that was my test. Totally different from someone looking for best efficiency in a sport venue, or even a fighting environment that is mostly daylight in non confined space.
Now, some folks like GJM will and can invest the reps to grasp every possible improvement out there. Mr. White is another example of someone who is building pure efficiency for them at a level most will never attain. On the opposite side of the coin, some of the work Tom Givens has done and what I saw with my folks of dealing with non-dedicated folks with limited time may dictate a totally different level of what we are building to an unconscious level and how we want to maximize their minimal amount of train or qualification time.

Darryl, I think that's pretty fair overall.

FWIW, I think the bedrock foundation you always talk about should in fact be The Foundation generally speaking, and although built in the context of training as a nonprofessional, is precisely my foundation before Joining The Internet. I think I've already benefited a lot from that, and could benefit a lot more in the future too. People who learn that type of foundation, and then still want to spend a lot of resources on reaching higher levels of raw physical performance, and other parts of the whole package, might focus on specific things at some point that wouldn't be very worthwhile to concentrate on when building the bedrock foundation.

Really I think it's pretty simple: build a great FOUNDATION, then if you're care to, and have the resources, build a bunch of floors on top of that in accordance with your personal or professional priorities and interests.

[VolGrad]

I don't believe for one second that some guy's Roland G19 carried appendix with 97 hours of "formal firearms training" from every former SEAL and Delta Operator in Alias's roster is any more likely to win a gunfight in the food court than Louis Awerbuck would be with his 1911 and two shotguns shells on his belt.
Great post.

To me someone with little training but a good mindset and some talent - either natural or learned is way better off than someone that follows every firearms forum, takes all the classes, wears all the right logos (and watches - that's a joke .... don't get mad), etc.

Now, the person doing all those things MIGHT be the same person that has a good mindset and some talent. The two groups aren't mutually exclusive.

[Dagga Boy]

Darryl, I think that's pretty fair overall.

FWIW, I think the bedrock foundation you always talk about should in fact be The Foundation generally speaking, and although built in the context of training as a nonprofessional, is precisely my foundation before Joining The Internet. I think I've already benefited a lot from that, and could benefit a lot more in the future too. People who learn that type of foundation, and then still want to spend a lot of resources on reaching higher levels of raw physical performance, and other parts of the whole package, might focus on specific things at some point that wouldn't be very worthwhile to concentrate on when building the bedrock foundation.

Really I think it's pretty simple: build a great FOUNDATION, then if you're care to, and have the resources, build a bunch of floors on top of that in accordance with your personal or professional priorities and interests.

I use the foundation and house analogy a lot. This also gets a bit into neighborhood. The foundation I want for pure shooting performance in a sport environment is not the same neighborhood as a urban street LEO who is faced with lots of fun problems and few shooting problems.....,which is also different for a homeowner wher this process is also different.

[MolonLabe416]

I'm fortunate to have trained with most everybody mentioned here in the Cooper-Givens-Higgenbothem-Hackathorn-Rogers-Jeans-Slawson-Cain cohort. I attended the last Scout Rifle conference and several RangeMaster TacCons. I'm also fortunate to have met and chatted with some old school gunwriters including Bill Jordan, Skeeter, Finn Aagaard, et al. What's my point?

Part of what I miss is the quality of writing and the willingness to answer questions from even a low speed high drag FOBBIT like me. COL Cooper personally answered ever letter I wrote him. I've stayed at Slawson's home several times. Pat invited me to his home in VA for the afternoon once when I was in DC on business. Reading Aagaard, Jordan, Keith, Givens, et al is not only informative, it's a pleasure.

We seem to be losing something which I largely can't define, but which I rarely see in the younger instructors. Or, perhaps I'm well on my way to curmudgeon-ville...

[DacoRoman]

THIS IS THE GOLDEN AGE OF FIREARMS TRAINING! To lament the state of the training industry is just wrong. For every Instructor Zero/that tatted up Stolen Valor Corey/Yeager, there are five solid instructors traveling around the country to bring good training to your door step. Let's don't lose sight of that as we get nostalgic for the good ol' days.

Twenty years ago if you wanted to train you had to fly out to Gunsite to learn methods that Leatham and Enos had already made outdated.

Now in just about any part of the country you can find a solid class within driving distance every weekend. Want to train with a USPSA national champion? You can do that. Want to learn to shoot a carbine from some guys that have years deployed overseas? Have at it. Have a hankering to ring steel at 1000 meters? Guys can teach you. Want to learn how to fight at close distances with a pistol or blade? Craig Douglas is your man. Need to learn the criminal psyche and how to avoid being a victim? There are guys that have devoted their professional lives to studying that and teaching it.

Seriously, I appreciate Gunsite for what it was and its legacy but let's be honest. Clint Smith or some of the other guys mentioned could stop teaching tomorrow and there wouldn't be a void in the training industry.

I agree and I'm greatful for that. However there are lots more wannabes out there too, and the low information consumer can easily get bamboozled.

[Wobblie]

I agree and I'm greatful for that. However there are lots more wannabes out there too, and the low information consumer can easily get bamboozled.
The low information consumer will remain so and not even know he's been shortchanged. Luckily, he likely won't need to use the "training" either.

[mmc45414]

I talked with Hackathorn at the NRA show in Louisville Saturday. He said he only had two classes scheduled for this year and that he would probably not be doing any next year.
Rosco
Though he attributed this not just to his age, but also the logistics of his dream home being on the north west edge of BFE with a 3.5hr drive to and from a small airport with limited service and something about free range cattle being on the road home in the darkness... :)

[OldRunner/CSAT Neighbor]

Though he attributed this not just to his age, but also the logistics of his dream home being on the north west edge of BFE with a 3.5hr drive to and from a small airport with limited service and something about free range cattle being on the road home in the darkness... :)

I heard sim. verbiage from him last yr. @ WC ranch & later near Waxahachie.

[HCM]

Remember, "old guys" is a relative term. ;-)

8211

[HopetonBrown]

The first class I ever took was with Louis Awerbuck, in 2012. Once in 2013 I had classes with Hackathorn and Louis in the same week. My friend and I told Ken that we'd be seeing Louis at the weekend; he told us to say hi for him. The last time I saw Louis, in 2014, was when a friend was taking one of his courses. I stopped by the range to say hello to my friend, and Louis kindly invited me to jump in. I'm grateful today that I did my homework on who to give my money to when starting out.

[SAWBONES]

We seem to be losing something which I largely can't define, but which I rarely see in the younger instructors. Or, perhaps I'm well on my way to curmudgeon-ville...

Maturity and perspective.
And not rarely, humility.

Just my observation as an old fart.

[JohnO]

I wish I had the chance to train under or just meet Col. Cooper.

Another war horse who worked under Cooper is still out there training, Chuck Taylor. I have trained with Chuck numerous times as he comes to Connecticut every year.

[Surf]

I grew up in a revolver era and moved to pistols. Early in LE I was a young, full of spunk, hard work ethic and no lack of drive when it came to mixing it up. I looked up to many guys in my field, still do. However there were many guys that I looked up to that were living off of perhaps a fleeting moment of greatness, only to stagnate, perhaps believing too much in their own BS, or too comfortable in their own world to progress afraid to work outside of their own comfort zone. Taught the same shit their entire career. I think in LE you might find more of the later than the former.

I always strove to be better and in many respects always felt like I was never good enough. I always needed to be the guy neck deep in the mix, always wanted to be first through the door. Not because I was overly macho or not afraid or any BS like that, but I always felt that at the least I had put in the time or due diligence to attempt to be the best that I could be and that perhaps I felt better equipped to face what was on the other side of that door. This pushed me hard and I have always felt that to be better that I needed to remain on the cutting edge of what was new. Not new for the sake of being new, but new as in something I could test and personally vet as something that had merit and raised my level of skill in the world in which I worked.

I had run into many guys I looked up to in my world that I painfully found out were full of shit, but quickly learned to ignore this disappointment. I never wanted to become that guy. I took pride in going down my own path and being different. Hell, no more than 10-15 years ago did entrenched trainers hate my approach of infusing "gamer" related technique or drills and fusing them into a "tactical shooter". Shot timer on a range? Heresy. As time progressed it became easy to determine who were the real deal as far as trainers and those resistant to change and who were too afraid of anything new and were living off of their perhaps fleeting reputation.

I guess the down and dirty to this is that there are many old timers who get stuck in a time warp, even top name guys. Also there are many new trainers out there who really have no business in the business. Many who are trying to be different just to be different perhaps trying to coin their own phrase, or who have no real solid foundation or clue of what they should be working off of as a baseline. It does seem that in this business there are those who think coming up with the new flavor of the week is their way to stardom or tactical coolness.

We need to honor the old, but be open to the new. IMO, not just be open to the new, but be creating it not just following it.

[Dagga Boy]

As usual....Surf nails it.

[Randy Harris]

My own perspective as a "not as young as I once was" guy.....

I grew up reading the gun magazines , reading about Cooper and Chapman, Cirillo, etc... While other kids in high school were reading Sports Illustrated I was reading Combat Handguns, Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement, and anything else I could get my hands on. My first training videos were the Gunsight videos with Bill Jeans and Jack Furr. I bough books written by Fairbairn/Sykes, Applegate, McCann, Ayoob ,Suarez, Cooper, Stanford, etc etc. I practiced every opportunity I got. To get more opportunities to test my skills against other serious shooters I started shooting competitively at least on the local level (was young and didn't have money to travel) and worked my ass off to get to where I was pretty much dominating all the local matches (IDPA, 3 gun, Cowboy Action) in my area in the late 90s and early 2000s. During the same time I started assisting with and then teaching on my own the TN state Handgun Carry Permit classes. But I knew that just because I had a training certificate it didn't mean I new everything...it just meant I now had my foot in the door.

After a few years I got picked up by a nationally known training organization and that opened the door for an exponential number of other training opportunities and to meet numerous trainers both well known and lesser known, both excellent and....less than excellent. Some instructors I met were awesome and some guys are just rote regurgitators of contextually vacant dogma that they neither know where the information originally came from nor how it actually fits in the big picture. And oddly enough they both make money teaching because the students/clients often just don't know the difference. The latter are the guys that I think the "old guys " are worried about taking over the industry.... guys that are more concerned with proving to you how bad ass they are or used to be or with selling you something you don't need than in actually educating you on how to prevail in a potentially lethal confrontation.

But for both good and bad, I have been able to become familiar with what a large number of folks in the industry do and have had numerous opportunities that I would not have had if I was just teaching CCW classes in my own little corner of the world. I got out and started training with folks who fit my training worldview. One of those opportunities that otherwise would not have happened was being invited to the National Tactical Invitational with Tom Givens and his crew . Spending a week with Tom and his guys early in my teaching career is a treasured memory. I also met a very thoughtful (and possibly deranged) individual who you at the time only saw pics of with his face blacked out and went by the moniker Southnarc who let students actually shoot each other with Sims guns at contact distance in the clinch who validated a lot of what I was already doing and thinking and who I now consider as one of my training mentors. I also was able to train quite a bit with Tom Sotis, a guy who puts knife (and empty hand against a knife )work into perspective by having you test everything full on and leaving no doubt on what is sound and what is garbage that only works in a controlled setting at 25% speed. I mention these as guys who have helped steer my journey as a stark contrast to plenty of instructors out there who get their NRA certification from a 16 hour class and then start teaching "gunfighting" after they themself only having been to a "safety " class....and that is where the industry seems to be heading to some..

Over the past 10 years of travelling and teaching and travelling and taking classes I have encountered many different folks with different motivations, backgrounds, and world views. Not all that is "old" is good and not all that is "new" is bad. Just like not all that is old is bad or new is good. Are there guys who never have progressed past circa 1990 Gunsite and are locked into perpetuating dogma that Cooper himself later renounced? Yes. And are there guys that are constantly looking for the next big thing and if it wasn't used in the sandbox it is crap? Yes. There are guys who are of the opinion that if they don't teach it just like Cooper did in 1980 they are going to go to "training Hell" when they die. And then there are guys still teaching Fairbairn / Sykes/Applegate shooting like it is the "one true answer". It is like they are more interested in preserving a religion than making concessions for changing realities and changing society...and then there are guys running tactical dude ranches where you come to dress up like SEAL Team 24 and burn up 2500 rounds a day with little to no contextual underpinning for what situation you would ever find yourself in to even use that. If folks want to take a shooting vacation and engage in some tactical entertrainment then more power to them...but that is not something I care to spend much time doing.

Which brings us to there are conscientious instructors out there that go out of their way to stay current but also not try to reinvent the wheel. There are guys who filter everything through an experienced eye but also realize they do not have ALL the experience and are constantly looking to improve. And just like every other job there are also guys who are just simply there to collect a check and who do the bare minimum, know the bare minimum and aspire to the bare minimum because in their worldview the students are not likely to ever use the skills anyway so what you teach is not all that important...

Not necessarily when the OLD guys are gone, but when the CONSCIENTIOUS guys are gone is what worries me...

[Randy Harris]

Had to cut that short and go to a meeting.....continuing on....

Unfortunately it seems that a lot of the conscientious guys are getting older and no one lives forever. So my advice to the folks who want to get a class with someone like Ayoob, Givens, Farnam, Hackathorn etc.....don't wait. Get to it because you never know when the opportunity will no longer be there.

[PNWTO]

I feel like that what Eric posted this morning on SSD has great relevance here: (http://soldiersystems.net/2016/06/07/dont-confuse-enthusiasm-with-capability/)


There’s a old adage in Special Operations, “Don’t confuse enthusiasm with capability.” I heard it used a lot over the years and was told it stemmed from the ill-fated Operation Eagle Claw, where an ad-hoc task force made up of different service capabilities was created to attempt the rescue of American hostages held by Iran. Truth be told, it’s probably even older than that. The point is, you can call yourself special all day, but that doesn’t mean that you are. With the Iran mission, everyone wanted a piece of the pie whether they were ready or not and the mission failed. Although the lessons learned from that mission led to the eventual creation of USSOCOM, don’t think this idea is solely the purview of SOF. It doesn’t matter what you do, or where you fit in the food chain, it’s applicable to everyone.

In more recent times, there were many new organizations stood up within DoD after 9/11. They were specialized in nature but not necassarily in capability. In each case, they were weighed in measured by the war. Some matured, others disappeared. The concept of enthusiasm being tempered by capability is an inescapable crucible.

Generally, SSD readers are a cut above. They care about their profession, or interest, and choose the best equipment. Others go a step further and seek out training to improve their capabilities. That is the sign of a true professional. However, such positive traits are not going to be true of everyone in an organization. We are truly as weak our weakest link and we all know someone who is all show and no go. Do not let them define you or your unit and don’t make promises you can’t deliver on.

Everything we do isn’t awesome. Accept criticism and reflect on it. That’s a trait of maturity. If you’re thin skinned, you’ve likely got maturity issues and aren’t very good at what you do. As an aside, don’t take criticisms of your profession in general, or of others in your profession personally. Every profession has plenty of room to improve. However, do deliver constructive criticism to your peers. Use it to grow professionally and personally and encourage others to do so as well. Make things better.

There is a current notion that everyone is a winner and gets a trophy. We must stop this concept from poisoning the profession of arms. Not everyone is going to be an Operator and we don’t need them to be. Figure out what it is you are supposed to do, and be awesome at it, both individually and collectively.

This isn’t meant as discouragement. To the contrary. Love what you do. Create enthusiastic capability and make sure that you can deliver on demand, no matter the job. Help others rise to the same level.

I wish I had the geographic and financial ability to cross paths with a lot of the "Old Breed" out there.

[RevolverRob]

I just found this thread while reviewing the PF Week in Review. I have a suggestion.

In some (most?) fields of academia, there is a lineage tracing of scientists. In fact, in my field it is especially acute. The academic lineage you come from isn't the only thing defining your credibility, but it helps, because it instantly gives someone a base for your curriculum and scholarship. At the upper-levels of firearms training there is no difference. Bryce, Fairbairn, Applegate, Cooper, Awerbuck, Hackathorn, etc. etc. Are/were all scholars of shooting and fighting. They sought out information, studied it, practiced it, integrated it, developed it, and taught it.

And so my suggestion would be to build a tree/write a piece (article, blog post, post right here on PF), that represents the "academic lineages" of instructors, past and present. Right away, this should allow a group of people to determine good ideas and great background from those with weaker backgrounds. That doesn't mean that people from outside of establish lineages are bad, but should allow for a bit more discrimination of someone's credentials.

This would be really useful information, especially for the future.