AAR: Sheriff of Baghdad (John McPhee) 1 Day Pistol Video Diagnostics, WV, 8/21/17

[43Under]

Feel free to ask questions or comments here, but the AAR is on my blog here:

https://civiliangunfighter.wordpress.com/2017/08/24/aar-sheriff-of-baghdad-john-shrek-mcphee-one-day-pistol-video-diagnostics-kearneysville-wv-082117/

[Randy Harris]

Nice write up (as usual).

My one question/mild skepticism(?) is the socket wrench thing. A socket wrench does not bend (and hook) with three index finger joints in play like a finger does and as such the wrench is really just "pressing the trigger straight to the rear". And THAT is after all what we are trying to get people to do....press the trigger straight to the rear without pushing or pulling it left or right or hooking it and "jerking it" low and left (right handers).....

I'm just not sure that using a wrench to hit a trigger really hard has anything to do with people curling their finger as they jerk the trigger. If they are pulling it STRAIGHT (like a wrench handle would) then it does not really matter how hard they do it as long as they grip the gun tight.....I'm just not sure the socket wrench illustration is a true test of whether trigger jerk is real.

[Cheap Shot]

Do you think one day is sufficient or would a 2nd day to implement what you've learned be justified?

Would you take this class again?

Thanks for doing these!

[octagon]

Nice review and details. The more I hear about McPhee the more I want to take his pistol class.

[JohnO]

Nice write up (as usual).

My one question/mild skepticism(?) is the socket wrench thing. A socket wrench does not bend (and hook) with three index finger joints in play like a finger does and as such the wrench is really just "pressing the trigger straight to the rear". And THAT is after all what we are trying to get people to do....press the trigger straight to the rear without pushing or pulling it left or right or hooking it and "jerking it" low and left (right handers).....

I'm just not sure that using a wrench to hit a trigger really hard has anything to do with people curling their finger as they jerk the trigger. If they are pulling it STRAIGHT (like a wrench handle would) then it does not really matter how hard they do it as long as they grip the gun tight.....I'm just not sure the socket wrench illustration is a true test of whether trigger jerk is real.

I get the exact same impression. Almost sounds like a parlor trick. By smacking the wrench you can get the trigger to break before anything else can happen. And like Randy pointed out it is being driven straight back.

[YVK]

Does anyone have a problem with an instruction based purely (or almost purely) on a form analysis, with form sampled with four shots and one rep of draw and reload?

[43Under]

Nice write up (as usual).

My one question/mild skepticism(?) is the socket wrench thing. A socket wrench does not bend (and hook) with three index finger joints in play like a finger does and as such the wrench is really just "pressing the trigger straight to the rear". And THAT is after all what we are trying to get people to do....press the trigger straight to the rear without pushing or pulling it left or right or hooking it and "jerking it" low and left (right handers).....

I'm just not sure that using a wrench to hit a trigger really hard has anything to do with people curling their finger as they jerk the trigger. If they are pulling it STRAIGHT (like a wrench handle would) then it does not really matter how hard they do it as long as they grip the gun tight.....I'm just not sure the socket wrench illustration is a true test of whether trigger jerk is real.

Interesting question. I suppose some might depend on exactly what a "trigger jerk" really is? How do we define it?

Personally, and I might be wrong, but I always thought of it as a very sudden squeeze. If this working definition that I already had is correct, then the socket wrench does indeed "work" to illustrate this. Likewise, if we are worried about side-to-side play due to the shape of our fingers, wouldn't a proper grip prevent that from entering the equation as well? As he illustrated in class (not mentioned in the AAR): what is stronger, your trigger finger or your two hands? If your index finger is so strong that it can outdo what your combined hands can do, you might be built strangely.

Edit to add: Thanks for the positive feedback on the overall AAR.

[43Under]

Do you think one day is sufficient or would a 2nd day to implement what you've learned be justified?

Would you take this class again?

Thanks for doing these!

Had the two-day version of this class been available, I would have taken it even without knowing exactly what was covered vis a vis the one-day. Having taken the one-day, it was great, but as mentioned in the review, I would have loved to have more reps, maybe put everything into practice shooting at greater distances, etc. I'd also love to see his take on one-handed work.

We'll see what happens when I start using his techniques in live fire, hopefully this week. Assuming I reap the benefits, I'd probably take it again, or the two day, or the even one day carbine one.

[Randy Harris]

I guess maybe my issue is there is a difference between saying something simply doesn't exist and saying it can be controlled or mitigated by death gripping the gun. Those are 2 completely different things. We KNOW it exists because we can SEE it happen. And when we see it in dry fire it darn sure isn't from recoil anticipation. And there are a lot of guys that know quite a bit about shooting at a high level that still think and teach that it exists so to say that they don't know anything (per the video from Trigger Time ) is either marketing bravado or ....who knows? Again Nice review and maybe I'd change my mind if he were saying "You can eliminate the effect of slapping the trigger by death gripping the gun" but to say trigger slap causing the gun to move is not real is totally different.

[jandbj]

I guess maybe my issue is there is a difference between saying something simply doesn't exist and saying it can be controlled or mitigated by death gripping the gun. Those are 2 completely different things. We KNOW it exists because we can SEE it happen. And when we see it in dry fire it darn sure isn't from recoil anticipation. And there are a lot of guys that know quite a bit about shooting at a high level that still think and teach that it exists so to say that they don't know anything (per the video from Trigger Time ) is either marketing bravado or ....who knows? Again Nice review and maybe I'd change my mind if he were saying "You can eliminate the effect of slapping the trigger by death gripping the gun" but to say trigger slap causing the gun to move is not real is totally different.

Rob Leatham is a world class trigger slapper. He makes it work because he's Rob Leatham though.

[Chance]

Does anyone have a problem with an instruction based purely (or almost purely) on a form analysis, with form sampled with four shots and one rep of draw and reload?

What John can tease out of a few frames of video is pretty impressive. I would be incredulous too had I not seen it in person.

With regard to sample size...? If I had to guess, I'd say what you do on your cold opening shots is probably what you'd do under stress. Pick up a copy of Coach's Eye and see if you notice any difference. Worth an experiment.

[Randy Harris]

Rob Leatham is a world class trigger slapper. He makes it work because he's Rob Leatham though.

And he is one of those people I was referring to that are high level shooters that say it is real....BUT that it can be mitigated with death gripping the gun. But a guy with the hand size and strength of Leatham is gonna be able to get away with a lot more slap than someone's grandma is.....and when that target is 25 yards away I'll bet the results of just gripping it hard and slapping it are not quite as acceptable for most people.....

[jandbj]

And he is one of those people I was referring to that are high level shooters that say it is real....BUT that it can be mitigated with death gripping the gun. But a guy with the hand size and strength of Leatham is gonna be able to get away with a lot more slap than someone's grandma is.....and when that target is 25 yards away I'll bet the results of just gripping it hard and slapping it are not quite as acceptable for most people..... My point exactly.

[43Under]

I guess maybe my issue is there is a difference between saying something simply doesn't exist and saying it can be controlled or mitigated by death gripping the gun. Those are 2 completely different things. We KNOW it exists because we can SEE it happen. And when we see it in dry fire it darn sure isn't from recoil anticipation. And there are a lot of guys that know quite a bit about shooting at a high level that still think and teach that it exists so to say that they don't know anything (per the video from Trigger Time ) is either marketing bravado or ....who knows? Again Nice review and maybe I'd change my mind if he were saying "You can eliminate the effect of slapping the trigger by death gripping the gun" but to say trigger slap causing the gun to move is not real is totally different.

Ah, Randy, now I see where you are coming from.

I THINK what he is saying is that jerking/slapping the trigger is a non-issue IF you do everything else in terms of grip and stance correctly. Like Leatham, McPhee said he slaps the crap out of his trigger, but that it doesn't matter because his grip is so good that he can do anything with the trigger.

So I guess it's sort of a semantics thing more than anything.

[YVK]

What John can tease out of a few frames of video is pretty impressive. I would be incredulous too had I not seen it in person.



Here are the problems that I have with that. If a dude comes up to the line and burns down sub-2.0 Bill Drill, cleans up Garcia dots, hits 3.9 FAST, you name it, but there is something that doesn't conform to a perfect form on a video, would you have him correct that imperfection out?
I may have posted this on PF: video analysis software has been used in technical training in other disciplines for the decades. My entire family has done late Vic Braden's tennis strokes video analysis years ago. Video imagery is always an adjunct, first measure the performance, then identify weaknesses, then see if the video can identify cause-effect relationships, etc. I would argue that there's no perfect or ideal shooting form, or grip, or presentation. Some aspects are agreed on, and some are highly variable. People do great with press out and present-pause-press. People do great with pressing a trigger with a tip and a crease. People do great with aligning the gun with the V, and without. Some need to lean into a gun, others produce .18 splits while standing seemingly upright. I can absolutely guarantee that pointing support hand thumb at a target is counterproductive for many shooters. Some still put support hand index finger on that trigger guard, or go Vogelesque. A big one - what you do at speed is very different from what you do at a sedate pace.
That is my long winded way of saying that I don't get how technical teaching can occur without measuring technical performance first, just on a form factor. Obviously, I wasn't there, maybe I would've gotten it better if I was, but just reading it, it is hard for me to buy into it.




With regard to sample size...? If I had to guess, I'd say what you do on your cold opening shots is probably what you'd do under stress. Pick up a copy of Coach's Eye and see if you notice any difference. Worth an experiment.

Maybe yes, maybe no. I took swimming lessons from a pro this summer, that little torturer made me swim some quarter of a kilometer to evaluate my form. Hawthorne effect is a classic research bias, you do things differently when you are observed. Multiple sampling or making people tired are some of the ways of working around it.

[Chance]

I would argue that there's no perfect or ideal shooting form, or grip, or presentation. Some aspects are agreed on, and some are highly variable.

Shrek has definitely zeroed in on what he considers perfect form and it centers on efficiency. I was with him on everything except clearing stoppages: he likes the whole 'turn to the side, pinch the front of the slide, et cetera' thing and I can't help but picture exploding vienna sausages every time I saw it.

He makes a compelling case with the video. Being able to slow things down to a hundredth of a second and seeing every minor movement of your body is pretty convincing. For instance, it's pretty easy to tell when you're bleeding time because you don't have a good front sight picture. It's not completely one-size-fits-all - for example, if you're not being pushed back by recoil there's no need to put more bodyweight forward - but it is one-size-fits-most.

If he had an abrasive personality, his style of instruction would probably be really irritating. But he doesn't beat people about the head if they elect to do something different than what's advised. Unfortunately, I don't think you get enough reps in to make an inherent change to your style, and that was my only complaint about the class.

[Chance]

Great example of John coaching.


https://youtu.be/byKEsJibaN0

[feudist]

Great example of John coaching.


https://youtu.be/byKEsJibaN0

That's pretty cool.

I don't see any dogmatic "this is the only way" in this particular example.

[DacoRoman]

Here are the problems that I have with that. If a dude comes up to the line and burns down sub-2.0 Bill Drill, cleans up Garcia dots, hits 3.9 FAST, you name it, but there is something that doesn't conform to a perfect form on a video, would you have him correct that imperfection out?
I may have posted this on PF: video analysis software has been used in technical training in other disciplines for the decades. My entire family has done late Vic Braden's tennis strokes video analysis years ago. Video imagery is always an adjunct, first measure the performance, then identify weaknesses, then see if the video can identify cause-effect relationships, etc. I would argue that there's no perfect or ideal shooting form, or grip, or presentation. Some aspects are agreed on, and some are highly variable. People do great with press out and present-pause-press. People do great with pressing a trigger with a tip and a crease. People do great with aligning the gun with the V, and without. Some need to lean into a gun, others produce .18 splits while standing seemingly upright. I can absolutely guarantee that pointing support hand thumb at a target is counterproductive for many shooters. Some still put support hand index finger on that trigger guard, or go Vogelesque. A big one - what you do at speed is very different from what you do at a sedate pace.
That is my long winded way of saying that I don't get how technical teaching can occur without measuring technical performance first, just on a form factor. Obviously, I wasn't there, maybe I would've gotten it better if I was, but just reading it, it is hard for me to buy into it.



Maybe yes, maybe no. I took swimming lessons from a pro this summer, that little torturer made me swim some quarter of a kilometer to evaluate my form. Hawthorne effect is a classic research bias, you do things differently when you are observed. Multiple sampling or making people tired are some of the ways of working around it.

I've taken a few of John's Classes, including a one day pistol video analysis and I can't recommend him enough.

But I'll try and address some of your very good points and skepticisms.

I remember John saying that what he teaches are "best practices" that will allow to aim fast, hit fast, and keep hitting fast and accurately by teaching what he considers best shooting practices. But I distinctly remember that in my class he said, and I suppose I'm paraphrasing here, "that the better one gets the greater the possibility to cheat some of these best [biomechanical] practices".

But I have to say based on the video analysis of myself and the other shooters, most shooters had very common problems, and no one was able to be nearly as efficient as they could have been, and the most important point is, no one would have known it without the video. Especially if you are a pretty good shooter. That pretty good draw of 1.26s to the first shot may be pretty good, but then you won't know that you are wasting .26 seconds "fine tuning" your shot cause your presentation wasn't optimized or consistent and you don't really have as good a working sight picture as you could have, esp. when pushing the speed (that was me). What if you are plagued by shots that are low because you are overlooking your sights (me again)? What if your strong side hand thumb is pushing your support hand off the grip just enough to Fook your grip much more than you realize (me again), etc. etc. And this is just scratching the surface. Lot's of such incredibly illuminating gems are revealed in John's video analysis class, that you wouldn't even realize are happening.

I thought I was a decent shooter when I took the class, with lots of room for improvement. My metrics where on the average about a 1.3 draw from an OWB, splits about .22s with 90% of my rounds in the A zone (8" circle) at 7 yards. I think my fastest FAST score ever was a 5.86 seconds with one miss, at 5 yards (I know it was supposed to be done at 7 yards, but I was warming up to it :D). So plenty of room for improvement. Anyway, in my other classes, even with my modest performance I wouldn't get that much attention from instructors cause I was "good enough" to pass by.

Now if you can stand ramrod upright, have relaxed upper traps, dropped elbows, and you can rock .18sec splits into 4-6 inches at 7 yards, with a sub 1 second draw from concealment then you don't need to follow John's best practices, biomechanically speaking, you have gotten good enough, or are talented enough, to "cheat" or "bypass" those best practices. However, the video will still pick up little tidbits that you would other wise miss that can still lead to improvement. E.g. what if you are getting contacting the trigger too early, or what if when you do your emergency reload, you loose contact with what's downrange too soon, or in fact, your draw to first shot could actually be .9s because your presentation is still a little off and you delay the shot .1s as you "fine tune" your sight picture and don't immediately shoot at full presentation.

I hope I didn't ramble on too much and I made some sense, cause I'm pressured for time, but I hope this addresses some of your concerns.

[YVK]

Thanks for the reply, DR. I certainly agree with the value of video analysis, and many errors are common and easy to pick. My issues are, as I had mentioned, with sample size and some of cause-effect relationships mentioned but I presume this applies to any class. Most instructors are well intended and say what they believe in; it is up to us whether to share those beliefs or not. Glad to hear that Shrek's class advanced yours and others skills.