On-demand skill

[GJM]

So what is your definition of on demand skill?

[WobblyPossum]

On demand skill is turning out to be something that is harder to define than I originally thought, especially after the replies to ASH556’s recent thread. That thread gave me a few things to think about. On demand performance definitely needs to be measured cold. It’s not something you can deliver after having run a drill a few times to warm up. My goal for skill development training and practice is to close the gap between what I can deliver cold and what I can deliver warmed up.

[okie john]

It’s what I can do without warmup. The first drill of the day.


Okie John

[BN]

My thoughts mostly come from a competition standpoint.

When you approach a stage, can you do whatever is needed to complete the stage with confidence that you will perform up to your usual standards.

One of our local monthly pistol matches always has a weak hand stage. We have all learned to shoot well weak hand and now when we go somewhere with weak hand we can perform this skill on demand.

[shane45]

I would add, with consistent repeatability and predictability.

[Darth_Uno]

I have a 6” steel tree that I use as much as I can, so I’m pretty sure I can drive to class, hop out of the truck, walk up to the line and hit a 6” plate at 10 yards. That’s “on demand” - something you can do at any time, and repeat as necessary, with no warmup.

Now if you say, ok hit that same 6” plate at 25 yards, I can’t promise I can do it every time (or even more often than not). So, that’s *not* on demand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GJM]

When you say you must be able to repeatedly do something cold, what percentage successful are we talking about?

[Duces Tecum]

So what is your definition of on demand skill?

Some of us keep our prescriptions in an upper kitchen cabinet. Occasionally the removal of one bottle unintentionally slides another bottle off the shelf. In my mind, an example of an on-demand skill, in it's most useful iteration, is the catching of the second bottle in the act of dropping. It happens without conscious thought, with only the most minimal effort, and has no effect on one's composure.

Basically, if the stimulus is not both (a) unexpected and (b) kinetic there is time to mentally prepare. Stress cannot help but be reduced, sometimes to a non-event. That's not the same as performing well before the need reaches full consciousness, but it's also not terribly rare. Some of the very excellent dove shooters regularly do that ("Yes, Winston, I suspect there are birds somewhere in this field, but neither of us knows where or when they will present themselves.")

An on-demand skill is one that satisfactorily concludes before the "demand" is obvious.

[Clusterfrack]

So what is your definition of on demand skill?


When you say you must be able to repeatedly do something cold, what percentage successful are we talking about?

Good questions. Here are my thoughts:

On demand skill: performance during the event you are training for.

This could be a USPSA stage or classifier, a self-defense situation, an encounter with dangerous wildlife...

On demand skill level may be hard to measure because we (hopefully) don't have to use it in self-defense often or ever. I like competitive shooting because of the requirement to do very difficult shooting challenges under pressure. At a major match, the pressure can be significant. As well, consistency is a big part of skill, so I like your second question. Some competitive shooters have high maximum skill levels (sometimes very fast and accurate), but fail often. Others are very consistent but extremely slow. Match performance is an excellent way to learn what to work on to improve your "on demand skill".

The required combination of accuracy, speed, consistency, and other factors would depend on the situation you are training for.

Frequency of success: this depends on the event. The goal for on-demand skill is subconscious mastery of that skill.

I would propose a 95% success rate as a good starting point for thinking about consistency. However, I can also recall when I was seriously into shooting precision tactical matches, and the chance of success was often quite low even with top on-demand skills and subconscious mastery. In this case, part of the skill is knowing the difficulty and being able to subconsciously estimate the chance of a hit.

Anyway, great topic. I'm looking forward to the discussion.

[CCT125US]

I think Clusterfrack nailed it. For the prior 6 weeks my on demand skill needed to be above that of my opponent for the pins bracket. I took it a step further and wanted it above the fastest shooter, as well. I was successfull about 95% of the time. I demanded something of my skill, and was able to achieve it. Other instances of on demand could be making shots on moving critters or varmints. No warm up or walk through on those. Part of that on demand skill is understanding what is required to win, and being able to do it. Looking at a COF and having a pretty solid idea of how long it will take.

[Totem Polar]

When you say you must be able to repeatedly do something cold, what percentage successful are we talking about?

I need to shift over to something that I have enough expertise in to comment with any authority. In music recording and performance, there is a saying I picked up from a respected Nashville songwriter/artist: "Let 95 percent of the performance be 95 percent as good as it can be; you’ll go blind chasing the last 2 5 percent categories." I’ve always kept that in mind while picking the shit out of my own performances.

A good baseline "on demand" standard is getting 95 percent of what you’re trying to get, 95 percent of the time—under pressure and the microscope of observation.

In other words, setting a 100 percent threshold as any sort of upper limit to "on demand" is going to plummet your performance standard into the basement. Honest to God, even just playing a 2-octave C major scale perfectly, every. single. time. is beyond the abilities of most pro musicians. Things happen; a door slams down the hall, your leg cramps, you brain fart and cause a minor bobble. It’s objectively no easier to do basic things at 100 percent all the time than to play a Bach fugue at 100 percent all the time, so may as well shoot for 95/95 on something extremely challenging and worthwhile.

Or put differently, I’d rather shoot 95 on the FAM qual cold than 100 on some low-fruit CCW rubber stamp job.

I’m more or less on the same page as clusterfrack.

[GJM]

I need to shift over to something that I have enough expertise in to comment with any authority. In music recording and performance, there is a saying I picked up from a respected Nashville songwriter/artist: "Let 95 percent of the performance be 95 percent as good as it can be; you’ll go blind chasing the last 2 5 percent categories." I’ve always kept that in mind while picking the shit out of my own performances.

On demand is getting 95 percent of what you’re trying to get, 95 percent of the time—under pressure and the microscope of observation.

In other words, setting a 100 percent threshold as any sort of upper limit to "on demand" is going to plummet your performance standard into the basement. Honest to God, even just playing a 2-octave C major scale perfectly, every. single. time. is beyond the abilities of most pro musicians. Things happen; a door slams down the hall, your leg cramps, you brain fart and cause a minor bobble. It’s objectively no easier to do basic things at 100 percent all the time than to play a Bach fugue at 100 percent all the time, so may as well shoot for 95/95 on something extremely challenging snd worthwhile.

Or put differently, I’d rather shoot 95 on the FAM qual cold than 100 on some low-fruit CCW rubber stamp job.

I’m more or less on the same page as clusterfrack.

NFL kickers should be at the top of food chain in terms of on demand performance, but there is a lot more variability in their 2018 performance than I would have expected.

38497

[JHC]

IMO, "on demand" means someone or some circumstance has demanded the performance. That could be Gabe on the timer or a match or a shot at game or battle.

I can rep something all day year round but it's on demand when someone says show me. Right here, right now.

[P.E. Kelley]

Some of us keep our prescriptions in an upper kitchen cabinet. Occasionally the removal of one bottle unintentionally slides another bottle off the shelf. In my mind, an example of an on-demand skill, in it's most useful iteration, is the catching of the second bottle in the act of dropping. It happens without conscious thought, with only the most minimal effort, and has no effect on one's composure.

Basically, if the stimulus is not both (a) unexpected and (b) kinetic there is time to mentally prepare. Stress cannot help but be reduced, sometimes to a non-event. That's not the same as performing well before the need reaches full consciousness, but it's also not terribly rare. Some of the very excellent dove shooters regularly do that ("Yes, Winston, I suspect there are birds somewhere in this field, but neither of us knows where or when they will present themselves.")

An on-demand skill is one that satisfactorily concludes before the "demand" is obvious.

Damn! I like that! Who are you mister? PM me if you would.

[Clusterfrack]

NFL kickers should be at the top of food chain in terms of on demand performance, but there is a lot more variability in their 2018 performance than I would have expected.


I guess it's harder than it looks? This is a good example of where on demand performance with subconscious mastery doesn't mean assured success.

[GJM]

Since Gabe is my friend, I don’t think he will mind if I do a deep dive on his numbers. This is what he said in the aha thread:

3. This one I can definitely say I can do successfully most of the time. In something like 16/18 classes, I've hit the overall Turbo threshold of at least 4/8 runs. Most of them are 5 or 6 out of 8. I've hit 7/8 a couple times. I haven't hit 8/8 yet.

First, Gabe is a very skilled shooter. Second, this is his test, and I bet he can shoot it as well or better than anyone else. Third, it is a fixed time test, and since Gabe knows through experience he can make the par times, it is less tense than for someone who is not making the times. His numbers are for demoing in front of a class, which is certainly more stressful than practice by himself, so that pushes the other way.

16/18 successful runs in front of a class is about an 89 percent sucess rate. However, that is defining success at 4/8 test runs, which is a different standard than 8/8. If we take 6 successful runs as his average, I think the math is as follows. 18 tests times 8 runs is 144 individual tests. Using 6/8 as his average, we end up with 108 turbo runs out of 144 possible, for a percentage of 75 percent. So depending upon whether you define success as half successful runs to pass or each run being turbo, we have a success rate of 75-89 percent. This make sense?

[Clusterfrack]

Complete sense. We can ask: what level of performance can be delivered on demand with a given likelihood?

[Mr_White]

GJM - If you had asked me to turn my paragraph into a simple percentage, 75% is absolutely what I'd have said. 6/8 Turbo seems to be my most common demo score in class.

[GJM]

GJM - If you had asked me to turn my paragraph into a simple percentage, 75% is absolutely what I'd have said. 6/8 Turbo seems to be my most common demo score in class.

I usually tease you for “so many words,” and this may be payback! :)

[LSP552]

I guess it's harder than it looks? This is a good example of where on demand performance with subconscious mastery doesn't mean assured success.

No matter how good you are, there is a small factor you just can’t control. You can do everything right and still not win the day. Not talking about match performance.

I think it’s hard to put a number on it, but I’d be more than happy delivering 95 % consistently, rain or shine, regardless of environmental conditions.

[GJM]

No matter how good you are, there is a small factor you just can’t control. You can do everything right and still not win the day. Not talking about match performance.

I think it’s hard to put a number on it, but I’d be more than happy delivering 95 % consistently, rain or shine, regardless of environmental conditions.

So would NFL kickers, looking at their point after stats. Considering they are the best at what they do, I bet 75 percent is a more realistic goal for what you describe.

[Mr_White]

I think each shooter has an envelope of technical skill - from that which is most within their capability and most approaches 100% reliable execution for that shooter, to what they can reach out and touch when stretching their capability and is the least repeatable thing they can do.

I have always found that latter type of challenge fascinating. I always like to go for it if appropriate, and have accumulated some amazing shots that way (in shooting and other things too.) I could not properly characterize any likelihood of success with those types of shots. But my subjective impression is that I make a lot of those crazy shots wher you have one naturally-occurring chance.

I personally have never really felt that there is such a thing as a 100% guaranteed shot. I mean other than something as easy as "shoot this wall."

[Mr_White]

I was surprised when Ben Stoeger said on a podcast that he hit his grip about 90% of the time in practice and 80% of the time in a match, if I am remembering that correctly. He's well known as a super consistent shooter.

[LSP552]

So would NFL kickers, looking at their point after stats. Considering they are the best at what they do, I bet 75 percent is a more realistic goal for what you describe.

No doubt, that’s why I’d be happy to hit 95% ;)

[psalms144.1]

I was lucky enough to train with some of the most talented, well trained combat shooters in the world in my last position. They held firm that performing at 50% of "range" capability on the "two way rifle range" was all any of them could ever hope to achieve - and these are guys who shoot THOUSANDS of rounds every month, in the most demanding training environments you could ever imagine. So, that has always been my goal - to get myself to the point where I'm shooting at 50% of perfect range performance when I'm moving, target's moving, I'm injured, it's wet, cold, dark, hot, too bright, whatever. All the "X shots to a Y size target in Z seconds" is just a measure to see if you're getting there - not an end in and of itself...

[scjbash]

NFL kickers should be at the top of food chain in terms of on demand performance, but there is a lot more variability in their 2018 performance than I would have expected.

38497

If you look at the numbers out to 39 yards they are close to identical: 100% or right under. Beyond that there are too many variables per team for that chart to be very useful. A kicker playing half his games under a roof on turf is going to have it easier at 40+ than a kicker in an outdoor northern stadium with grass. And a coach who is confident in his defense may be more likely to try field goals in bad conditions than a coach with a shitty D who is more likely to punt. And so on.

That being said, there have been a handful of kickers who were flat out automatic for years. The Stoegers of football.

[ArgentFix]

An on-demand skill is one that satisfactorily concludes before the "demand" is obvious.

You should talk more.

[JHC]

I was surprised when Ben Stoeger said on a podcast that he hit his grip about 90% of the time in practice and 80% of the time in a match, if I am remembering that correctly. He's well known as a super consistent shooter.

Very interesting. Only tangentially related but re sinking the grip; shooting so much 1911 mixed with standard frame Glocks from the holster these last couple of years I was really struck by the difference in the two platforms if you bork a grip. With the heavier steel pistol and a lighter trigger I think there is noticeably more "forgiveness" than the same with the lighter polymer framed gun and a more challenging trigger. Like still hitting alphas or close C's vs bad C's a long ways out of the A.


Ben shoots a heavy gun IIRC and one probably with a competition optimized SA trigger.

[ASH556]

Very interesting. Only tangentially related but re sinking the grip; shooting so much 1911 mixed with standard frame Glocks from the holster these last couple of years I was really struck by the difference in the two platforms if you bork a grip. With the heavier steel pistol and a lighter trigger I think there is noticeably more "forgiveness" that the same with the lighter polymer framed gun and a more challenging trigger. Like still hitting alphas or close C's vs bad C's a long ways out of the A.


Ben shoots a heavy gun IIRC and one probably with a competition optimized SA trigger.

I found this to be 100% true in my Beretta shooting.

[Clusterfrack]

It doesn’t take that much time to fix a bad grip freestyle.

[JHC]

It doesn’t take that much time to fix a bad grip freestyle.


Before or after the first shot? My observation is of the first shot from the holster.

[Clusterfrack]

Before or after the first shot? My observation is of the first shot from the holster.

Before the first shot. Unless the target is very low risk, I'll usually invest the time in fixing a bad grip.

When I was playing with snatch vs. scoop draws from my Production rig, I found that I could fix a bad scoop draw and fire in about the same time as a slower snatch (~1.2 - 1.3s). So the fix costs around 0.5s. I ended up not liking the scoop, and sticking with the snatch, but that's another story.

[GJM]

Does the definition of “on demand” contemplate a non-botched draw?

[Clusterfrack]

Does the definition of “on demand” contemplate a non-botched draw?

I'd say on-demand is whatever your current level of skill will produce.

As I've become more comfortable with adjusting a sub-optimal grip on the fly, I have experienced way fewer fucked up draws. Confidence yields relaxation, which produces consistency.

[GJM]

I'd say on-demand is whatever your current level of skill will produce.

As I've become more comfortable with adjusting a sub-optimal grip on the fly, I have experienced way fewer fucked up draws. Confidence yields relaxation, which produces consistency.

Do you adjust your grip or how you press the trigger with a bad grip? TGO demos how you can shoot A’s with almost any grip, but it changes how and how fast you press the trigger. For fewer shots, I change how I press rather than adjust my grip.

[Clusterfrack]

Do you adjust your grip or how you press the trigger with a bad grip? TGO demos how you can shoot A’s with almost any grip, but it changes how and how fast you press the trigger. For fewer shots, I change how I press rather than adjust my grip.

If it’s freestyle I adjust the grip if it’s really jacked. If I’m slightly off, I’ll just roll with it.

But SHO or especially WHO, adjusting is tough for me, so the trigger press has to be more “careful”.

[cheby]

I start all my practices with some standard drill that I shot before and I know what my best is. It could be a USPSA classifier or something like 25 yrds Bill Drill. It is always different. That is the important part. One day it could be a hoser type drill (Bill Drill, 4 A's, El Prez, Front Sights and so on). Some other day it is more oriented toward some tight shooting or movements. The point is to shoot it COLD and see what my percentage is compared to my best. I especially like USPSA classifiers because of the instant feedback. The key is to vary them to test different skills (Hosing, Long distance, Movements, Transitions, and so on). I track my progress and see that I am getting better and better. It does not mean that I shoot all of them cold at GM levels but I do it every once and a while and it is getting more often. So my on demand skills are getting better. Nobody does it 100% all the time. I saw Ben Stoeger getting three Mikes on the classifier stage at the Nationals. And Ben is one of the most consistent shooters out there.

[GJM]

I start all my practices with some standard drill that I shot before and I know what my best is. It could be a USPSA classifier or something like 25 yrds Bill Drill. It is always different. That is the important part. One day it could be a hoser type drill (Bill Drill, 4 A's, El Prez, Front Sights and so on). Some other day it is more oriented toward some tight shooting or movements. The point is to shoot it COLD and see what my percentage is compared to my best. I especially like USPSA classifiers because of the instant feedback. The key is to vary them to test different skills (Hosing, Long distance, Movements, Transitions, and so on). I track my progress and see that I am getting better and better. It does not mean that I shoot all of them cold at GM levels but I do it every once and a while and it is getting more often. So my on demand skills are getting better. Nobody does it 100% all the time. I saw Ben Stoeger getting three Mikes on the classifier stage at the Nationals. And Ben is one of the most consistent shooters out there.

A few concepts floating around here. One is cold performance vs warmed up. Another is performance today vs personal best. Two different comparisons.

[Darth_Uno]

A few concepts floating around here. One is cold performance vs warmed up. Another is performance today vs personal best. Two different comparisons.

OP asked what it is “to us”. Well I take that to be a minimum level of skill you can demonstrate at any time.

I coach baseball and still play softball, if you ask me to show you how to catch an easy fly ball I’ll just say, “Like this, watch me,” and go do it. Nobody never messes up but I’m pretty sure I’ll catch it nearly every time.

Then you’ve got college ball players with a much higher level of talent, and pros who are higher yet. But what’s a routine easy play to them might be more challenging to me. So their threshold for “on demand”performance is much higher than mine.

[JHC]

Before the first shot. Unless the target is very low risk, I'll usually invest the time in fixing a bad grip.

When I was playing with snatch vs. scoop draws from my Production rig, I found that I could fix a bad scoop draw and fire in about the same time as a slower snatch (~1.2 - 1.3s). So the fix costs around 0.5s. I ended up not liking the scoop, and sticking with the snatch, but that's another story.

Very interesting and you have the cred to back that up as in "this is where a smart guy, would get out of the truck" :D

When I muff one it is invariably on a speed oriented closer in challenge and I just go Leroy Jenkins for the first shot (so long as its still a safe grip, in Gabe's class I muffed a grip badly enough that I took deliberate time to secure it, to Gabe's expressed appreciation :D ). Not advocating that as rightness, just my approach.

[thward89]

The below statement from Bill Rapier best sums up how I look at "on-demand skill". For me, it is understanding what I can, and more importantly, what I cannot do with very little stress on a flat range and how that affects my mindset and capability in a stressful situation.

"Knowing your accuracy ability. The only thing worse than losing a loved one would be to lose them because you think you can shoot better than you actually can. Know your ability." - Bill Rapier

Full article: https://www.amtacshooting.com/what-is-most-important-in-training/