Interesting read regarding training with timers.

[gtmtnbiker98]

http://www.grantcunningham.com/2016/09/meaningless-increments-precision-avoid-them/

[Al T.]

Valid points. Once again, the Venn diagram of police/military/civilian shooting needs touch but don't really have much overlap.

One other thing that bugs me is audible signals to start defending yourself. Yelling gun, police whistle, etc., etc., is (IMHO) different than seeing an attack coming at you.

[Luke]

I'd bet money this guy sucks at shooting. I believe that in a gun fight I want to do EVERYTHING as fast as I can.




Disclaimer: I'm a gamer. I have never been in a "self defense" situation.

[OnionsAndDragons]

I think that the timer is very important for diagnostic and skill-checking purposes. Probably not needed or super useful for all of your defensive shooting practice.

From what I have read, the science of learning backs up the statement that the more learned the skill, the more automatic it is, the faster one can perform it at a given level of precision. I think it is important to know what your own level is and at what rate you are progressing over time.

On the reloads angle, I'm totally on board as far as defensive shooting is concerned. I want to have a rock-solid, reliable reload technique that is the hardest for me to screw up as opposed to what is on average the fastest, but I will probably bobble a higher percentage of.

[GJM]

I'd bet money this guy sucks at shooting. I believe that in a gun fight I want to do EVERYTHING as fast as I can.




Disclaimer: I'm a gamer. I have never been in a "self defense" situation.

It is hard to take seriously a person who says they never use a timer in their practice.

As long as we are piling on, this struck me as odd:

My name is Grant Cunningham, and I’m a renowned author and teacher in the areas of self defense, personal safety, home and family defense, and instructor development.


I didn't know "renowned" was a description bestowed on you, by you.

[CCT125US]

When I started measuring performance, it was my first time shooting the FAST. I will take my current <6 self over the then >11 self any day. And I thought I was fast and accurate then, and now I realize I still need much work. But then I am not renowned for much these days.

[ubervic]

I don't know about the author's credentials, but that doesn't affect my appreciation for his expressed point of view.

Many firearms enthusiast can get very, very deep in the weeds regarding specs/stats/pull weights/physical size & weight measurements/split times/etc. And that's fine. If one finds the exercise of squeezing out the last fraction of a second in draw times or reloads, that's totally cool and absolutely a legit pursuit. It's a very rewarding thing to improve one's skill level in a measurable way. But I also think that, in some cases, the intense hair-splitting can move quickly into focusing on distinctions that don't make a real difference.

[Jay Cunningham]

No relation.

[GJM]

No relation.

You and Big T have won the internetz for the day.

[Paul Sharp]

I've heard Tom Givens, Claude Werner, and Dave Harrington say something along the lines of; how much time do you have in a fight? The rest of your life.

So three guys I have immense respect for, essentially say a fight is a timed event. The meaning I take from that is the faster I can do the necessary skills like present the pistol and make an accurate first shot, (if it's a shooting situation), then the more time I'm giving myself of the allotted time.

If I'm not using a timer to track the data on an essential skill such as presentation time to first accurate hit how exactly will I know if I'm improving? I know my strength program works because I track the data and see the numbers changing. I know my conditioning program is working, even when I feel like it's not, because I track the data and see the numbers changing. How do I know if my dry and live fire training program is working if I don't have a way of tracking data?

[NickA]

It is hard to take seriously a person who says they never use a timer in their practice.

As long as we are piling on, this struck me as odd:

My name is Grant Cunningham, and I’m a renowned author and teacher in the areas of self defense, personal safety, home and family defense, and instructor development.


I didn't know "renowned" was a description bestowed on you, by you.
Relating to the timer thing, I'll just leave this here, from his bio page:
"I’m a certified instructor for Combat Focus Shooting, Combat Focus Carbine and Home Defense Handgun through I.C.E. Training."


I've heard Tom Givens, Claude Werner, and Dave Harrington say something along the lines of; how much time do you have in a fight? The rest of your life.


I don't know who said it (Ayoob or Cirillo, maybe? One of the old school guys) but
"A competition isn't a gunfight, but a gunfight is damn sure a competition" seems to sum it up nicely.

[HopetonBrown]

Relating to the timer thing, I'll just leave this here, from his bio page:
"I’m a certified instructor for Combat Focus Shooting, Combat Focus Carbine and Home Defense Handgun through I.C.E. Training."


Yeah, his sensei doesn't like timers so of course neither does he. I wonder if he also doesn't like dryfire and prefers to carry his mags bullets backwards.

[45dotACP]

Yeah, his sensei doesn't like timers so of course neither does he. I wonder if he also doesn't like dryfire and prefers to carry his mags bullets backwards.
Ah... explains a few things

[NickA]

Weird thing is I'm pretty sure he was a renowned (or at least very well respected) revolver 'smith, but seems to have retired from that and hung his training shingle out on a fairy thin resumé.

Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk

[breakingtime91]

I got into a interesting discussion with the Sage Dynamics guy on Instagram about this same thing. I kept getting back to how do we measure our gains and success without a timer? As a civilian who doesn't have money for sims or a job that creates the situation where I may draw on someone daily/more then my life time, a timer seems like a good thing. I can track my performance across many drills and test. His argument kept coming back to no timers in a gun fight. This literally makes me want to rage quit the "industry". It makes me want to copy and paste my DD214 for all to see so I can say, "no fucking shit asshole, I have been in a fucking gun fight". I think if I would of said that or posted my dd214 he would of blocked me and not continued our discussion. I second Luke, this guy probably isn't the best shooter and has a million reasons why we shouldn't use timers or drills.

[BehindBlueI's]

His argument kept coming back to no timers in a gun fight.

There's often a par time, though. Not making it gets you or someone else shot.

[ReverendMeat]

Shit, I thought I'd heard good things about Mr. Cunningham from some in-the-know folks. I guess he's a stupid piece of fuck because he thinks a tenth of a second difference or whatever in reload speed won't get you killed in the streets. The idea that there might be more important things to consider in a deadly force type situation than blazing fast splits? Absolutely ludicrous.

Though in the spirit of piling on, he has silly hair.

[Lon]

This bothered me, regarding reloads and how rare they are in a gun fight:


.....The logical conclusion is that reloading the gun isn’t a skill that’s terribly important in the scheme of things. It doesn’t merit a lot of instructional time or practice effort, and in fact the video itself wasted more time and energy than the topic was worth.

Hard for me to take him seriously after reading that.

[Jay Cunningham]

http://pistol-training.com/archives/9715

[Paul Sharp]

...I kept getting back to how do we measure our gains and success without a timer? As a civilian who doesn't have money for sims or a job that creates the situation where I may draw on someone daily/more then my life time, a timer seems like a good thing. I can track my performance across many drills and test. His argument kept coming back to no timers in a gun fight...

This. Without measurable data how do we know if our training regimen is effective? There are really only two things we can track; time and/or accuracy. If we're making improvements in those areas we're training effectively. If not, we need to examine our practice sessions and make adjustments.

The no timers in a gunfight is the gun guy version of the 1990s combatives guys "no ref in the street" idiocy. What's the next mind blowing gem waiting to drop? Water is wet?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JAD]

http://pistol-training.com/archives/9715

I loved that post a lot. I think drilling reloads is irrelevant for defensive applications, and a huge time suck. What I took from Todd was that it's important to make the reloads that I have to do anyway as intentional and valuable as I can. That was enlightening.

[BehindBlueI's]

Shit, I thought I'd heard good things about Mr. Cunningham from some in-the-know folks. I guess he's a stupid piece of fuck because he thinks a tenth of a second difference or whatever in reload speed won't get you killed in the streets. The idea that there might be more important things to consider in a deadly force type situation than blazing fast splits? Absolutely ludicrous.


I don't know that that's an argument anyone here is making. I've said myself that the shooting is the easy part in most defensive shootings, that fast reloads is a low reward skill, etc. That doesn't diminish the value of a timer. The ability to see performance under time pressure on yourself, to improve recoil control, to track progress, to have measurable goals to work towards to keep yourself interested in a practice regime, etc. are in no way diminished because there's no real difference in a 1.6s reload and a 1.5s reload in da streetz.

[BN]

There's often a par time, though. Not making it gets you or someone else shot.

I regret that I can only like this once. So here it is again. :)

[Paul Sharp]

...The ability to see performance under time pressure on yourself, to improve recoil control, to track progress, to have measurable goals to work towards to keep yourself interested in a practice regime, etc. are in no way diminished because there's no real difference in a 1.6s reload and a 1.5s reload in da streetz.

This gets to the core of the issue. It's about pursuing excellence in everything we do. Why would any of us want to do SOME things well when with a little more effort we can do ALL things well? Most, if not all on this board are motivated shooters. Pursuing excellence in performance is the juice that makes all the squeezing worth it. Folks enjoy the process otherwise who in their right mind would spend all this time in seemingly mindless tasks? Dry firing? Movement drills? Hell, what's more mind numbing than a reload press?? Yet it's all part of the process involved in pursuing this internal standard we all hold ourselves to and hope to achieve.

Much of what we do was codified in non-Buddhist terms by https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mihaly_Csikszentmihalyi a long time ago. We do this stuff because we enjoy the process. We enjoy the pursuit. Excellence is an internal, unwavering standard we hunt so when we read or hear anything that essentially carries the torch for something that resembles mediocrity? We lose our shit. To put it plainly.

I had this conversation with a trainer that, in my opinion, espouses the good enough approach. He said, "we're speaking past each other. Like we're speaking different languages..." Because we are. I want to be great at everything I do, not good enough. As BBI mentioned, taking my reload from 1.6 to 1.5 won't really matter in da streetz or even in the food court but for folks like us? Making that improvement is what ALL of this stuff is really about.

To quote myself talking to the good enough trainer, if all I cared about is what works in the street I'd buy carry a clip-it knife and a Raven .22.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BigT]

I think it was Hilton Yam who said "training for speed without a timer is like training for accuracy without a target. " Though I may have the source of the quote way off.

Pretending its about being a tenth on a reload becomes a convenient red herring to enable one to best make fun of us silly gaymer fags. What it misses is that without a timer you don't have any means of knowing if your first shot times are 1.5seconds or 3.5 seconds. And seeing as most civilian shootings are of an "counter ambush" flavour ,to use that schools terminology ,that difference is massive.

[Totem Polar]

Weird thing is I'm pretty sure he was a renowned (or at least very well respected) revolver 'smith, but seems to have retired from that and hung his training shingle out on a fairy thin resumé.

That's about how I see it, FWEIW. Every time Grant says something about revolver internals, I feel like I learned something. Half the time he's talking about running them, I feel like packing my ears with white phosphorus. Somewhere, on the wide Internet, is a video of him teaching revolver reloads where he fumbles the reload on film when it's actually time to demo. I dunno. It's not like I'm king wheelie guy myself, but I waited until Saturday morning to open this thread because I figured the discussion would on awesome ways to use a timer, and I wanted to be able to read it deliberately—and give my full attention to the information.

I've been punked.

[John Hearne]

I don't know who said it (Ayoob or Cirillo, maybe? One of the old school guys) but
"A competition isn't a gunfight, but a gunfight is damn sure a competition" seems to sum it up nicely.

Ayoob. I have this on my wall at work: "A shooting match isn't a gunfight but every gunfight is a shooting match."

[Wheeler]

Grant is the one of roughly three gunsmiths in the country that can still properly tune a Colt. Beyond that he's a vocal advocate for PDN and ICE and regurgitates everything Rob says without any question as to the validity. I've talked to him a couple times in regards to revolver and lever action rifle specifics and got the impression that he felt as if my questions were bothersome and a waste of his time.

I found his first book an excellent primer for setting up a revolver for the uninitiated. I found his second book a jumbled mess of ICE rhetoric poorly meshed with his own theories on how to run a revolver.

I recently attempted to get Rob to explain how one can evaluate performance without standards. He proved to be a master of avoidance and deflection and referred me to his site. I'll repeat that Grant is essentially a mouthpiece for ICE and while he isn't as smooth as Rob in deflecting specific questions, he rarely answers them either.

[Totem Polar]

^^^Was. Was once one of the roughly three gunsmiths in the country who could properly tune just about anything. I know, because I was on his list for about 5 years before he changed tack due to health reasons and gave it up completely.

[RJ]

I've heard Tom Givens, Claude Werner, and Dave Harrington say something along the lines of; how much time do you have in a fight? The rest of your life.



I like this.

The other quote that sticks in my mind from Mr. Givens is that "You need your gun out right fucking now."

Disclaimer: I don't own a "real" timer.

But I do a lot of draws from concealment in my Dry Practice using an iPhone timer app. My current par I've set is 2.0s. I hope this won't get me kilt in the streetz.

[Wheeler]

I like this.

The other quote that sticks in my mind from Mr. Givens is that "You need your gun out right fucking now."

Disclaimer: I don't own a "real" timer.

But I do a lot of draws from concealment in my Dry Practice using an iPhone timer app. My current par I've set is 2.0s. I hope this won't get me kilt in the streetz.

Having played around with some of the smartphone timer apps for dryfire I'd not criticize your choice. Once you get your draw consistent at 2 seconds you should work down to 1.5 or even 1.25 seconds.

[RJ]

Having played around with some of the smartphone timer apps for dryfire I'd not criticize your choice. Once you get your draw consistent at 2 seconds you should work down to 1.5 or even 1.25 seconds.

Ok, thanks.

Not to turn this into a CCW course, but do you have any thoughts how to deal with clothing?

I'm making under 2.0 easily with a tucked shirt and Blade Tech OWB range holster.

If I use my JM CK IWB 1 worn at 9 (lefty) and an XL T shirt (usual FL garb), not so much. I usually futz for 0.25 to 0.5s with getting the damn T shirt tail out of the way.

[Totem Polar]

^^^Gabe White to the customer courtesy phone... paging Mr. White/Origami/Spottedprints...

[RJ]

^^^Gabe White to the customer courtesy phone... paging Mr. White/Origami/Spottedprints...

ROFL.

Oh, and edit to add, I would not know I had this problem if I didn't have a timer.

Boom. Mic drop. :cool:

[RJ]

(double tapped post, sorry)

[GJM]

^^^Gabe White to the customer courtesy phone... paging Mr. White/Origami/Spottedprints...

He is busy teaching a class this weekend, but when I looked at the timer today, he was at .95 for his first shot on the Bill drill from AIWB closed front.

[Totem Polar]

I swear the dude just posted a vid of a .7something draw in one thread or another over the last week... that's my recollection, at least.

Edit: I exaggerate greatly. It was actually .82:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?21782-Week-177-If-You-Aren-t-Fast-Enough-It-Doesn-t-Matter-How-Accurate-You-Are

[MVS]

[QUOTE=GJM;507648.

I didn't know "renowned" was a description bestowed on you, by you.[/QUOTE]

I am even more lost than you. I didn't realize that if you were actually renowned that you would have to tell people what you were renowned for.

[jetfire]

I have a hard time believing that if I'm the victim of a surprise assault I wouldn't want to be able to get my gun out of the holster at damn near lightspeed.

[nwhpfan]

I actually kind of enjoyed the article and see what he's getting at. I don't agree when he essentially says, "size doesn't matter." Anyone over 40 knows it does.

[RJ]

I have a hard time believing that if I'm the victim of a surprise assault I wouldn't want to be able to get my gun out of the holster at damn near lightspeed.

I agree 100%.

Rereading the article, this statement in particular gives me gas:

"... it’s all the other stuff which really eats up time: recognition of the attack; processing the information; making a decision; recalling the skills necessary to implement that decision (or improvising a response if no direct skills exist); and responding appropriately. Those are things which we can’t time (at least not in any consequential manner) but are what we really need to be training..."

(Emphasis mine).

I realize I am but one out of the great unrenowned masses, but it seems to me that I can sure as hell time "recalling the skills necessary to implement that decision", and work to reduce that time as much as possible.

[rd62]

I believe I understand Mr Cunningham's thought process, however being in a defensive shooting is a statistically improbable event for many folks, much like being in a fire or tornado. We still drill for those circumstances though.

If my luck is already craptastic enough that I AM in a defensive shooting, it's not unreasonable to assume my day may also involve a malfunction, multiple assailants, or other circumstances which may necessitate a reload.

While it's not the #1 skill I drill it's certainly not a bad thing to be able to recharge your weapon relatively quickly.

[Mr Pink]

"Meaningless increments of precision" is the title. I'd say stopping the threat before it kills you is not "meaningless", but I could however, go on about the "meaningless" things "defensive instructors" are teaching. Being fast is not one of them and always remember that in a gunfight: Time = Life!

Not using a timer is an excuse of why you suck. Much like the super "touch of death" guys who won't spar because their techniques are too deadly to demonstrate.

Let's look at scientific methods. They can be divided into two primary categories: (1) empirical science and (2) historical science.

-Empirical science entails a systematic approach to epistemology that uses observable, testable, repeatable, and falsifiable experimentation to understand how nature commonly behaves. It finds its implementation in such disciplines as immunology, rocket science, molecular biology, etc.

Thanks to some of the top competitive shooters, we know what techniques are the most efficient ways to win a match.

-Historical science involves the interpretation of evidence and the deduction of past occurrences, which is normally based upon an underlying supportive paradigm.

Thanks to some of the top Military, Law Enforcement units in the world (who were taught by those competitive shooters), we know the most efficient way to win a gun fight.

Tom Givens (http://rangemaster.com/about/tom-givens/) has some great data on his students who have been in gunfights and WON. Interesting enough Tom has used a timer, once or twice.

[JustOneGun]

Shit, I thought I'd heard good things about Mr. Cunningham from some in-the-know folks. I guess he's a stupid piece of fuck because he thinks a tenth of a second difference or whatever in reload speed won't get you killed in the streets. The idea that there might be more important things to consider in a deadly force type situation than blazing fast splits? Absolutely ludicrous.

Though in the spirit of piling on, he has silly hair.

My beef with him is that he seems to be leaning towards an either/or argument. It's all about a balance. If I rob you by saying, give me all your money then you can say draw smooth and win the day. If I walk up to you with a bat, hit you in the head and then take your money, then you need a fast draw. A fast draw isn't everything but it sure is handy. Nothing wrong with incremental gains in all our defensive topics.

[BehindBlueI's]

I have a hard time believing that if I'm the victim of a surprise assault I wouldn't want to be able to get my gun out of the holster at damn near lightspeed.

I've yet to hear anyone say they wish they were slower, and I've seen cases where the good guy was cut down during the draw or while reaching for off body carry. There's one video I use in a class I teach that is sooo close before the bad guy fires and drops the defender before they fire. Par times are real.

Now, I absolutely agree that SA, knowing when to feign compliance and wait for an opening vs going straight to the draw, de-escalation, etc. are all incredibly valuable skills and should be learned and honed. I just disagree that means a timer is worthless, or that speed never matters. Speaking from experience, sometimes you just screw the pooch and find yourself behind the curve needing to make up time.

[Corey]

Not sure who said it, but Tom Givens comes to mind when me. There may not be a timer in a gunfight, but there is another dude trying to kill you and he is probably in a hurry.

[orionz06]

Tom pretty much slaughtered this elsewhere online.


Metrics vs Mediocrity

There is a small, but vocal, segment in the defensive training community that discourages the use of stopwatches or electronic timers, and belittles attempts to quantify skill at arms with scored courses and drills. I read some drivel from a couple of these guys on Facebook recently, and was really disturbed by the level of antagonism they showed toward striving for competency with a deadly weapon. They actually used terms like “good enough”, and advised to take one firearms class and move on to other things. In fact, they described anyone who actually bothered to measure performance as a “hobbyist”, and from their tone it was obvious they use that term derisively. Let’s see, someone is trying to kill me, and I’m legally accountable for every bullet I launch, so bare minimum training is “good enough”? WTF?

Shooting skill, particularly with a handgun, is perishable. Competent initial training has to be followed by regular sustainment training to have any hope of solid performance under high stress. Let’s look at a couple of examples from the police training world. Yes, I understand not everyone is a cop, but police agencies track these things and the information is available to us.
The New York City Police Department has their officers fire 50 rounds of ammunition, twice a year. Part of their qualification course is not even timed. Every year, their hit ratio runs about 10%-20% in the field. In one year, they fired 1,293 shots on the streets of New York to hit 64 suspects and 11 innocent bystanders. That’s “good enough” for some, but I’d like to see them do better.

The Los Angeles Police Department, on the other hand, requires officers to shoot every 30 days. Their qualification course uses a smaller target and has reasonable time limits, which are strictly enforced by turning targets, which disappear when the time limit expires. The department as a whole has about a 55% hit ratio. The Metro Division, which gets even more focus on firearms training, has an 85% hit ratio. Coincidence?

Let’s say, just for the sake of discussion, we have a silhouette target that has an 8 inch circle in the upper chest to simulate the vital zone of an attacker, and this target is at 5 yards, a typical civilian engagement distance. The task at hand is to draw from concealment and hit this circle with three rounds. We have two shooters complete this task. Both shooters place all three hits inside the “vital zone”, so they are equal, right? Good enough?

The difference is, Shooter A got his hits in 1.8 seconds, while Shooter B took 3.5 seconds to get his hits. Shooter A is clearly a better shooter. If Shooter B is serious about self defense, he will strive to become better, which in this case, means faster, so that he has a realistic chance of getting his hits in a defensive shooting incident before he is hit, himself.

Without a reasonable target (in this case the 8 inch circle) and without a time measurement (stopwatch/timer), there is no way to asses skill, measure progress, or diagnose and address deficiencies. The adult teaching model is Explain, Demonstrate, Practice and Test. Without Testing, there is no measure of learning, and you are only engaging in ballistic masturbation. It may make you feel better in the short term, but you aren’t accomplishing anything.

These same pundits rail against scored drills, calling them meaningless measures of precision. Actually, scored courses or drills serve many important functions and are critical to development as a defensive shooter. Here are some of the reasons they are important.

1. We need an objective view of the student’s skill, not a subjective view. The target and timer don’t lie.

2. We can compare the student’s performance to a historical standard, set by measuring the performance of a number of students before him. Thus, we know if we need to remediate or move forward.

3. We can precisely quantify and track progress, essential to skill building.

4. We can instill the timing issues necessary for shooting at the right cadence as target size/distance varies.

5. We can get the student accustomed to working under stress.

6. We can help the student build confidence. Not measuring skill leads to false confidence. Students always think they are doing better than they are. Actually scoring, and incorporating both accuracy and speed in the scoring, shows true skill level, and allows real confidence.

7. Training and practice build skill. Skill builds confidence. Confidence leads to coolness. Coolness prevents panic. This is what wins fights.

In the extreme stress of a real life shooting incident, skill degrades. However, the more skill one has, the less skill one tends to lose (see #7 above). The less skill one has, the more skill one tends to lose under duress. This is why “good enough” is not good enough. Also, the Mother of retention of any physical skill under duress is structured repetition. To have a higher skill level, one had to practice more (structured repetition). I have debriefed a number of people after shootings, and not one of them has ever said to me, “When the bullets starting coming my way, I wished I hadn’t trained as hard.”

As an example, one of our students, who we will call John, has taken several classes with us, including our Instructor Development Course. In that course, students are held to high accuracy and speed standards, and those who do not make the required scores do not get certificates. This January, John was forced to shoot a man under highly stressful circumstances, including total surprise. John fired four rounds and got four upper torso hits, ending the threat to him and his family. That’s the goal, not just to be “good enough”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wheeler]

Not sure who said it, but Tom Givens comes to mind when me. There may not be a timer in a gunfight, but there is another dude trying to kill you and he is probably in a hurry.

More along the lines of "Competitions aren't gunfights but gunfights are most assuredly competitions," or words to that effect.

[Corey]

More along the lines of "Competitions aren't gunfights but gunfights are most assuredly competitions," or words to that effect.

I won't argue that. It means pretty much the same thing, I just think my version is a more clever turn of a phrase. The mental image of sumdood trying to kill you is more vivid.

[Paul Sharp]

More along the lines of "Competitions aren't gunfights but gunfights are most assuredly competitions," or words to that effect.

I've heard him say both but when you're listening to a guy talk that's been at this longer than I've been alive? There are a lot of moments best described as; I should write that down before I forget it, wait he just said something else that I should write down... screw it, I'll just listen and hopefully I'll remember later.

[Wheeler]

I've heard him say both but when you're listening to a guy talk that's been at this longer than I've been alive? There are a lot of moments best described as; I should write that down before I forget it, wait he just said something else that I should write down... screw it, I'll just listen and hopefully I'll remember later.
Ha! Try taking notes when Super Dave is dropping nuggets of wisdom and insight.

[Peally]

I stopped at the title and reading that he doesn't use a timer. Author is a massive idiot.

[GJM]

FIFY


I stopped at the title and reading that he doesn't use a timer. Author is a renown idiot.

[Totem Polar]

...There are a lot of moments best described as; I should write that down before I forget it, wait he just said something else that I should write down... screw it, I'll just listen and hopefully I'll remember later.

That is the mark of being in the right place, at the right time, with the right people—right there. I live for that sort of frustration: may it long continue... :cool:

[Corey]

Reminds me of my time at Gunsite listening to guys like Pat Rogers, Hershel Davis, Ed and Giles Stock and a few others dropping very witty pearls of wisdom faster than you could even precess them.

[ACP230]

Mas Ayoob wrote up a gunfight in the South West (Arizona?) in American Handgunner
a while back.

A shooter coming back from the range saw a cop being assaulted by some
gang members. He had a pistol and several loaded magazines. In the fight he
went through almost every round he had, saving the cop and, since the gang bangers
turned their attention to him, himself as well.

I wonder what he thought (thinks) about the need to reload quickly?

It was an atypical gunfight but happened despite that.

[Drang]

More along the lines of "Competitions aren't gunfights but gunfights are most assuredly competitions," or words to that effect.

Mas said that at MAG40.

“While a shooting match is not a gunfight, a gunfight is certainly a shooting match!”
Whether he said it first, I don't know. A quick Google search was inconclusive.

[Wheeler]

Mas said that at MAG40.

Whether he said it first, I don't know. A quick Google search was inconclusive.

I had seen it attributed to Tom. I don't doubt that both said it or expressed similar thoughts.

[Paul Sharp]

Ha! Try taking notes when Super Dave is dropping nuggets of wisdom and insight.

That's another one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sal Picante]

That's another one.

I got yelled at for taking notes... LOL

"I'm over it!"

[Exurbankevin]

Grant is the one of roughly three gunsmiths in the country that can still properly tune a Colt. Beyond that he's a vocal advocate for PDN and ICE and regurgitates everything Rob says without any question as to the validity. I've talked to him a couple times in regards to revolver and lever action rifle specifics and got the impression that he felt as if my questions were bothersome and a waste of his time.

I found his first book an excellent primer for setting up a revolver for the uninitiated. I found his second book a jumbled mess of ICE rhetoric poorly meshed with his own theories on how to run a revolver.

I recently attempted to get Rob to explain how one can evaluate performance without standards. He proved to be a master of avoidance and deflection and referred me to his site. I'll repeat that Grant is essentially a mouthpiece for ICE and while he isn't as smooth as Rob in deflecting specific questions, he rarely answers them either.

I am probably 1/50th as qualified to talk about this sort of thing as most people here, but CFS seems to be ideally suited to shooters who want to go 2/3rds up the first slope of the Dunning-Kruger curve and then stay there, and not having standards and/or benchmarks is a good way to instill the illusion of mastery in your students. This does wonders for their ego (and yours, heck, you might even become "renowned"...), but it does little to help your students actually achieve mastery.

[Paul Sharp]

I got yelled at for taking notes... LOL

"I'm over it!"

That was pretty funny. In the 3 hour car ride from the airport I told him he should have a camera crew follow him around so we can capture all of his SDave'isms.

He said, "Yeah dude, that won't work though. That would only capture what I HAD said. You'd still be behind regarding what I'm SAYING. You'll always be behind. Anyway, so dude I'm looking at this bike..."

Pure SDave moment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cory]

I'm not sure that I can say anything here that hasn't been said by people far more experienced, skilled, and probably smarter. But to someone who has been a casual shooter for a long time, who recently started using a phone app to try and improve... I can't believe I never timed myself before. I just didn't know, what I didn't know.

Some people want to improve, and some people want to be great right now. People who value improving come up against an obstacle (be it failure, or a poor performance, or what have you) and they put in the work to do better. They adjust themselves to the standard or goal. People who want to be great right now come against an obstacle and don't perform well, they change the standard to themselves. They rationalize, blame shift, and make up excuses about why they didn't do well. More commonly they will demean the standard and say how it isn't relevant or isn't valid in context. These people plateau. They don't get better because they stop putting in the work. For them the standard or goal is no longer valuable anyway.

That having been said, someone who values the current perception of being great could start out at a high performance level and stay there. Someone who values improvement might be bested by them in the short term, but won't be in the long term.

While I'm still relatively early in trying to improve my shooting, I've been improving my running for about 5 months. If it wasn't for a measurable goal, and a measurable skill level of where I am, I wouldn't know if I had done better or not. and If I decided "running is stupid anyway" I wouldn't have kept at it. Make sense?

-Cory

[Mr_White]

This gets to the core of the issue. It's about pursuing excellence in everything we do. Why would any of us want to do SOME things well when with a little more effort we can do ALL things well? Most, if not all on this board are motivated shooters. Pursuing excellence in performance is the juice that makes all the squeezing worth it. Folks enjoy the process otherwise who in their right mind would spend all this time in seemingly mindless tasks? Dry firing? Movement drills? Hell, what's more mind numbing than a reload press?? Yet it's all part of the process involved in pursuing this internal standard we all hold ourselves to and hope to achieve.

Much of what we do was codified in non-Buddhist terms by https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mihaly_Csikszentmihalyi a long time ago. We do this stuff because we enjoy the process. We enjoy the pursuit. Excellence is an internal, unwavering standard we hunt so when we read or hear anything that essentially carries the torch for something that resembles mediocrity? We lose our shit. To put it plainly.

I had this conversation with a trainer that, in my opinion, espouses the good enough approach. He said, "we're speaking past each other. Like we're speaking different languages..." Because we are. I want to be great at everything I do, not good enough. As BBI mentioned, taking my reload from 1.6 to 1.5 won't really matter in da streetz or even in the food court but for folks like us? Making that improvement is what ALL of this stuff is really about.

To quote myself talking to the good enough trainer, if all I cared about is what works in the street I'd buy carry a clip-it knife and a Raven .22.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow, that is so well said Paul. Absolutely right on.

[jetfire]

One note about this that came out of a different conversation: I find it mildly humorous that a guy known for carrying and shooting a wheelgun (Grant) is poo-pooing the idea that one might have to reload said wheelgun.

Shooting a wheelgun is a lot like flying a fighter jet: when you take off you're already out of gas, and if you have to do anything other than fly around in a pattern, you're going to be REALLY REALLY out of gas.

[Mr Pink]

Pure SDave moment. I've got a lot of time around SDave (Army SF, Competitions, Contracting and classes). My favorite as he's yelling at a student: "DUDE! I can tell you how to do! I can show you how to do it! But I can't f*cking do it for you!"