Ben Stoeger's Review of Bill Rogers' Book

[beltjones]

http://www.amazon.com/review/R18D69TT40H5Z6/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0578047942&nodeID&tag&linkCode

"I love learning more about shooting, so I read everything I can. I jumped at the chance to read "Be Fast, Be Accurate, Be the Best" because it is written by someone that has a highly regarded shooting school. That fact alone earns it a read without needed to know anything else. I was surprised by the content of the book, to say the least.

You might think that "Be Fast, Be Accurate, Be the Best" is a book about shooting. You would be wrong... pretty much.

About 80% of this book is essentially a disjointed autobiography. It recounts many of the authors experiences. Everything from being in the FBI to starting his own business (a few of them actually). It doesn't really directly have anything to do with shooting, although shooting is a topic of conversation frequently in the book.

The last portion of the book finally gets to the stuff that everyone cares about. You get exposed to some unique ideas. The author calls his brand of technique "reactive" shooting. The goal is to be able to raise a gun up from a low ready position and hit a head sized target at 10 yards in half a second. The author has a few other ideas about training that are contained in the book.

For a shooting book then, "Be Fast, Be Accurate, Be the Best" is a little off the beaten path. It spends a lot of time on things that aren't really related to the noisy part. A lot of readers might be irritated by this, but I found it refreshing. The biographical information in the book was absolutely fascinating. The author had an interesting life and came up with a few shooting innovations. He pioneered retention holsters and kydex holsters. He mastered single handed point shooting, only to abandon it when better techniques came along. All of this is well written and fascinating to read if you have carefully studied handgun marksmanship, because you will have a greater understanding of how technique and equipment evolved. There is even a bit in the book where the author gets spanked at shooting by a weaver shooter and decided immediately to adopt that shooting style.

On the other hand, the bit of the book on shooting that is actually about shooting is pretty weak. It is extremely brief and not very well written. The author makes some assertions, some of them very bold, that require more material to back them up. For example, the author claims that if your goal is to hit X target in X time, it is pointless to practice doing that at a slower speed. I really think if you want to claim slow fire practice is a waste of time, you need to bring a lot of evidence to the table to support it.

The verdict then is mixed. I absolutely loved parts of this book. Reading about the author abandoning one technique for another and constantly trying to solve new shooting problems was downright inspiring. I liked reading a whole new take on how to develop as a shooter. The problem is that this whole thing is just too short. It is like going to a 5 star restaurant and getting your food taken away after you take a few bites. You are left hungry and unsatisfied, just like after reading "Be Fast, Be Accurate, Be the Best"."

Thoughts?

[GOP]

My thought is that Ben Stoeger acts like a 6 year old boy and is a troll, plain and simple. He wins some major matches, and now feels like he is a made man and trashes people who have accomplished more than he ever will with a gun. His antics are very unprofessional and often disrespectful. I've even had a poor exchange with him on Facebook (read: he responded like a douche on a page and I ignored him), mainly because he is a troll and has a couple of cronies/fan boys who back him up. He's doing this review to get a response and to get more people talking about him.

I know he's currently an IPSC/USPSA Champion, but I don't think his review is going to effect Bill Roger's at all. It appears that several VERY high speed military units are training with him this year, I think their continuous training with Rogers shows much more about his ability to teach reactive gun fighting skills than some punk shooter who shoots purely in a pro-active environment.

[GJM]

I think Bill's book is primarily designed as a companion piece to attending RSS -- to both shorten the time necessary for the Sunday lecture, and to provide some more information than the fast pace of the course allows. It is hard to imagine anyone exposed to the Rogers range, and a course there at RSS, not coming away with incredible respect for Bill and his program.

[EmanP]

Have you read the book? My thoughts were about the same. Very little about shooting and mostly about his history which was cool to read and the highlight of the book. Only the last few pages talk about actually shooting and most all of it from low ready. Before I read the book I was wondering how he was getting those .5 time frames I heard about but it was clear once he said they were all from low ready and almost aimed in on target. I've seen video of the guy though and he's definitely got skills but let's face it, the books is a autobiography. Forget about who wrote it for a second and see if what's written is accurate. Besides, everyone is allowed an opinion.

[MDS]

I didn't feel like the shooting portion of the book was weak... But I'm not Ben Stoeger. I do agree with Ben that the autobiographical stuff was interesting and useful context. I also found that the book left me wanting more, but in a good way. This is what tipped me in the direction of a rss class this year instead of afhf or even a hack class being held a couple hours' drive from my house.

From the pov of this noob, the Rogers book is highly recommended.

[guymontag]

I remember Ben Stoeger's review of Julie Golob's "Shoot" on the Enos forum, it turned chaotic quite quick. I know he has other reviews posted there as well.


My thought is that Ben Stoeger acts like a 6 year old boy and is a troll, plain and simple. He wins some major matches, and now feels like he is a made man and trashes people who have accomplished more than he ever will with a gun.

Honest question: Did you know him before or are you hypothesizing? I have known plenty of "douches" that were "douches" before they were a "made man".

It sounds to me an interesting book. As for Ben Stoeger's comments - at its best, you have a critique by a seasoned shooter, and at its worst, you have a bit more information on the contents of the book and a grasp of the reviewer's personality. Stoeger may be sensationalizing or may be writing critical reviews, either way you, the reader, ultimately decide the worth of the book to you. My current knowledge is limited to a few reviews of his I have read, and his website which offers tips for dry fire practice, stance, grip, etc.

[ToddG]

I remember Ben Stoeger's review of Julie Golob's "Shoot" on the Enos forum,

Calling that a review is incredibly generous, especially if you know the backstory. Stoeger pretty much fell off my radar after that stunt.

[GOP]

Honest question: Did you know him before or are you hypothesizing? I have known plenty of "douches" that were "douches" before they were a "made man".

It sounds to me an interesting book. As for Ben Stoeger's comments - at its best, you have a critique by a seasoned shooter, and at its worst, you have a bit more information on the contents of the book and a grasp of the reviewer's personality. Stoeger may be sensationalizing or may be writing critical reviews, either way you, the reader, ultimately decide the worth of the book to you. My current knowledge is limited to a few reviews of his I have read, and his website which offers tips for dry fire practice, stance, grip, etc.

No, I didn't know him before. I followed his training log on Enos' forum, and well, he didn't troll as much at the time because he was a nobody.

This isn't the second troll job by Stoeger. After the JulieG book bashing, he started a public feud with The Rudy Project shooting team. He would publicly bash them, the Rudy Project guys would try to extend an olive branch, and then he would bash them again publicly. Finally, I believe the director of the Rudy Project called him and he finally stopped acting like that. I'm all for someone having an opinion and sharing their opinion. I have an opinion too, and I think Stoeger is "the opposite of mature and the opposite of kind" (trying not to call any names, my first post in the thread may have been harsh and I respect this forum's rules... so I don't want to break any rules). With all of that said, Stoeger is an amazing shooter and has done well for himself.

[guymontag]

...especially if you know the backstory...

I'm not privy to it.


No, I didn't know him before. I followed his training log on Enos' forum, and well, he didn't troll as much at the time because he was a nobody.

This isn't the second troll job by Stoeger. After the JulieG book bashing, he started a public feud with The Rudy Project shooting team. He would publicly bash them, the Rudy Project guys would try to extend and olive branch, and then he would bash them again publicly. Finally, I believe the director of the Rudy Project called him and he finally stopped acting like that. I'm all for someone having an opinion and sharing their opinion. I have an opinion too, and I think Stoeger is "the opposite of mature and the opposite of kind" (trying not to call any names, my first post may have been harsh and I respect this forum's rules... so I don't want to break any rules). With all of that said, Stoeger is an amazing shooter and has done well for himself.

Interesting... thank you for elaborating GOP.

[Leozinho]

If you were as good as he is, as young as he is, and not welcomed by the old guard (for what ever the reason) , I'd cut you some slack too for speaking your mind.

I think its kind of cool that he doesn't mind going against the status quo.

He did write a positive review of Brad Engman's book, so he not just trolling and looking to start fights. I think someone forgot to tell him you can't write an unfavorable review of Golob's book because she's done a lot to promote shooting sports , especially women shooting, and is by all accounts a genuinely nice person.

[ToddG]

I think someone forgot to tell him you can't write an unfavorable review of Golob's book because she's done a lot to promote shooting sports , especially women shooting, and is by all accounts a genuinely nice person.

Your moment-in-time snapshot understanding of what happened is woefully lacking in perspective. Many folks -- myself included -- believe that if Julie had written a book that made you taller, more handsome, smarter, and a better shooter... he still would have written a hit piece on it.

As for the "old guard" not welcoming newer and younger shooters, I can only assume you've never actually hung out with many of them. Rob Leatham in particular has taken a keen interest in helping many new, upcoming shooters. Back when he was still active at a very high level, Scott Warren would spend considerable time with some rising stars including a guy you may have heard of named Sevigny...

The line between being a speaks-his-mind independent thinker and a loudmouth attention seeker can be a very fine one.

[Leozinho]

Your moment-in-time snapshot understanding of what happened is woefully lacking in perspective. Many folks -- myself included -- believe that if Julie had written a book that made you taller, more handsome, smarter, and a better shooter... he still would have written a hit piece on it. .

I don't doubt there's a lot going on to which I'm not privy.



As for the "old guard" not welcoming newer and younger shooters, I can only assume you've never actually hung out with many of them. Rob Leatham in particular has taken a keen interest in helping many new, upcoming shooters. Back when he was still active at a very high level, Scott Warren would spend considerable time with some rising stars including a guy you may have heard of named Sevigny...



I didn't say the old guard doesn't welcome newer and younger shooters. I said they haven't welcomed him for whatever the reason.

Did he do something to cause himself to be left out, or was he left out and that's made him critical? I wouldn't know. Heck, for all I know he might have some sort of punk ethos and likes being anti-establishment. I do know he's written about some top shooters arguing and getting calls, which I'm sure didn't win him any friends. (Anyone think Jordan didn't get calls in his favor? Anyone think a RO working his first major match would have trouble calling a penalty on a multi-year champion?)

At any rate, I'm not going to wish opprobrium on him just because he speaks his mind.

He trains mostly by himself somewhere up north and doesn't travel to a lot of major matches. He was never mentored by an established top shooter or had a father bankroll his shooting. So he's an outsider, relatively speaking. (Yes, I'm sure there are others that came up the same way he did.)




The line between being a speaks-his-mind independent thinker and a loudmouth attention seeker can be a very fine one.


Yes. Now having said that, I suspect his review of Roger's book is spot on. Does anyone that has read it disagree? Stoeger even says he found the history part fascinating and well written.

Let's please separate the Rogers Shooting School experience from the book. No one doubts that Rogers has trained and still trains many high speed guys. Is the book mostly history and slim on the shooting as Stoeger says?

[ToddG]

I didn't say the old guard doesn't welcome newer and younger shooters. I said they haven't welcomed him for whatever the reason.

You absolutely did, and I misread it and then mischaracterized it. I apologize.


(Anyone think Jordan didn't get calls in his favor? Anyone think a RO working his first major match would have trouble calling a penalty on a multi-year champion?)

I can tell you from first hand experience that it works the exact opposite way just as often, especially in IDPA. The top guys are often held to a standard that is unrealistic because people who cannot fathom shooting at that level are making judgment calls based on their own limited point of view.

[beltjones]

You absolutely did, and I misread it and then mischaracterized it. I apologize.



I can tell you from first hand experience that it works the exact opposite way just as often, especially in IDPA. The top guys are often held to a standard that is unrealistic because people who cannot fathom shooting at that level are making judgment calls based on their own limited point of view.

He obviously wasn't talking about IDPA.

Ben has been scathing in his criticism of many top (USPSA) shooters arguing for calls from ROs.

But I think the main reason a lot of those people don't like Ben is that he disdains sponsorship and shooting is his hobby. The "pros" can't be too happy when their lunch money gets taken by a guy in a yellow shirt without logos all over it.

[Ben Stoeger]

I just want to assure everyone on here that I do in fact spend most of my time writing "hit piece" reviews of books. I am sure to work in lots of personal attacks against the author and half the time I don't even read the book first. If you don't believe me, check out my Amazon review page.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/AGD0GPUA6AW1X/ref=cm_pdp_rev_all?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview

Todd is absolutely correct about me when he asserts that I have some sort of a "backstory" regarding Julie. I have never met her or even spoken to her, but don't let that fool you. I lucked out when she wrote a bad book because that saved me having to lie about it in my review.

I am a mean spirited bastard and I love trolling around on the internet. Don't let anyone tell you differently.

My probation agreement keeps me 1000 feet from schools and playgrounds, so until that restriction gets lifted I have nothing left to do but sit in my basement and bash people.

[Ben Stoeger]

I forgot to mention that I LOVE Pistol-training.com and have lurked on pistol-forum.com for awhile.

I use a couple of the drills in classes I teach and even refer people to Pistol-Training.

[Dr. No]

Classic.

[PPGMD]

http://www.lazyeights.net/Avion/homer_popcorn.jpg

I don't know the back story, because honestly I don't care enough about competition shooting to get involved in the drama. I think I have 7 posts on Enos' forum in like 5 years. I just want to shoot.

Anyways I agree with the overall gist of Ben's review of Julie's book. The audience it is targeting is a little to confusing. Some sections are pretty basic aimed at new shooters, while the competition section is a little too in depth which seems to be aimed at more experienced shooters. For example it gives you the calculation to do leads for the Mover for NRA action pistol. So I do the math, and I show up, and a high master basically tells me to forget all that and gives me a simpler to remember leads (basically the edge of the rings). Now I am sure that those calculations come in handy if you want to do the initial zero of a stick shift on a static range, but for a production shooter you don't have the time to figure out if I am 2.2 inches, or 3 inches to make the 6 shots I need in 6 seconds.

Now I am sure that his review of the Rogers' book is accurate. Ben's problem seems to be his more inflammatory language, which seems to come from his disdain of the professional shooters of the world, and how they are treated. Hell I've felt that without even shooting with someone like TGO, or Dave the cyborg. Just asking about a DQ level offense (dropping a loaded gun) by one of the local Master shooters (IDPA) I felt like I was being a douche. I can't imagine what it would've been like if it was someone like Rob Leatham.

[jar]

I haven't seen SHOOT, but Ben's reviews of Refinement and Repetition and Thinking Practical Shooting are absolutely spot on.

I don't know Ben personally, but I've been following his training log on Enos for years. He's one of the few top dogs who really puts everything out there, and I like that. His log is a great case study in how doing the work earns championships.

Ben, congrats on the win last year, and good luck in this year's matches. Hopefully you'll stick around here and post more.

[TCinVA]

I just want to assure everyone on here that I do in fact spend most of my time writing "hit piece" reviews of books. I am sure to work in lots of personal attacks against the author and half the time I don't even read the book first. If you don't believe me, check out my Amazon review page.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/AGD0GPUA6AW1X/ref=cm_pdp_rev_all?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview

Todd is absolutely correct about me when he asserts that I have some sort of a "backstory" regarding Julie. I have never met her or even spoken to her, but don't let that fool you. I lucked out when she wrote a bad book because that saved me having to lie about it in my review.

I am a mean spirited bastard and I love trolling around on the internet. Don't let anyone tell you differently.

My probation agreement keeps me 1000 feet from schools and playgrounds, so until that restriction gets lifted I have nothing left to do but sit in my basement and bash people.

I don't recall ever having heard your name prior to this day as I don't really pay attention to the shooting sports. I've never darkened the door of Enos' forum although I'm sure it's a wonderful resource...and so I have absolutely no clue about any of this.

What I do know is our site rules, especially this one:



Select members of the pistol-forum.com community have been granted the title Subject Matter Expert (SME). These are individuals with proven credentials within the community who directly influence firearms-related policy decisions for high profile law enforcement, military, and/or industry entities. These professionals are often highly compensated for their time and expertise, and pistol-forum.com greatly appreciates their generous participation here. As such, forum members are expected to treat all such SMEs with appropriate respect and deference.


Nothing in there mandates that you have to like Julie's book or like/agree with any of our SME's...but we are pretty particular about how you (collective "you" aimed at everyone) talk to and about folks here.

I don't really care about anyone's agenda outside the forum. I'm deeply concerned with people's behavior on the forum and while I'm usually a pretty cuddly fellow, I can get downright curmudgeonly if I think somebody is intent on starting trouble.

[ToddG]

Ben -- I'm not getting into a dueling banjos. You're welcome to your opinions and you're welcome to voice them here on PF should you choose to do so. So are people who are as equally straightforward in sharing their opinions in opposition.

[chuck s]

seems to me Ben would qualify as an SME, at least as it applies to shooting pistols.

[Ben Stoeger]

seems to me Ben would qualify as an SME, at least as it applies to shooting pistols.

My reading of the definition of SME leads me to say no. I am not tied to the firearms industry in any way and do not have any influence over anything. I am a regular joe like anyone else, and you should feel free to treat me as such.

[chuck s]

perhaps "subject matter enthusiast" then

[Ben Stoeger]

perhaps "subject matter enthusiast" then

I am no different than anyone else man, I don't deserve any special titles or treatment.

[chuck s]

and none will be given

[beltjones]

I don't recall ever having heard your name prior to this day as I don't really pay attention to the shooting sports. I've never darkened the door of Enos' forum although I'm sure it's a wonderful resource...and so I have absolutely no clue about any of this.

What I do know is our site rules, especially this one:



Nothing in there mandates that you have to like Julie's book or like/agree with any of our SME's...but we are pretty particular about how you (collective "you" aimed at everyone) talk to and about folks here.

I don't really care about anyone's agenda outside the forum. I'm deeply concerned with people's behavior on the forum and while I'm usually a pretty cuddly fellow, I can get downright curmudgeonly if I think somebody is intent on starting trouble.

With all due respect, did you make the same statement to folks who were trashing Ben's name in the beginning of the thread, or were you just upset that Ben made a sarcastic comment that undermined Todd's claim about some mysterious backstory that spawned the review of Julie's book?

This is how things went down, just to make sure we're all on the same page.

I posted Ben's review to see what people would say, considering this is a forum with a lot of experience with Rogers' Shooting School.

People trashed Ben.

Todd claimed there is some mysterious backstory.

People who actually read Ben's review and Bill's book agreed with the review.

Ben refuted the backstory, and you got all curmudgeonly about it.



Now let's get back to discussing the book. The end of Bill's video at Panteao Productions was perhaps the only worthwhile piece of "instruction" I received at that site, and I'd be interested in some of the stories from the Bill's experience in the FBI. Anyone?

[JHC]

I'm fascinated by the Bill Rogers story and other than he was an FBI agent, a top comp shooter and invented his target system; I don't know much about him. I'm probably more likely to seek out his book for the review than without.

[GJM]

With all due respect, did you make the same statement to folks who were trashing Ben's name in the beginning of the thread, or were you just upset that Ben made a sarcastic comment that undermined Todd's claim about some mysterious backstory that spawned the review of Julie's book?

This is how things went down, just to make sure we're all on the same page.

I posted Ben's review to see what people would say, considering this is a forum with a lot of experience with Rogers' Shooting School.

People trashed Ben.

Todd claimed there is some mysterious backstory.

People who actually read Ben's review and Bill's book agreed with the review.

Ben refuted the backstory, and you got all curmudgeonly about it.



Now let's get back to discussing the book. The end of Bill's video at Panteao Productions was perhaps the only worthwhile piece of "instruction" I received at that site, and I'd be interested in some of the stories from the Bill's experience in the FBI. Anyone?

Have you attended RSS?

As I said, on page 1, I believe Bill's book is intended largely as a companion piece for students attending RSS, to shorten the Sunday evening lecture. He provides it to students prior to arriving at RSS. When I was there again, in March, virtually every student had read the book, and many had specific questions that Bill elaborated on. He then demonstrates the topics covered in the book, always with a timer or timed target, and the school tests and drills reinforce RSS techniques and time constraints. I have been to RSS three times, and while many students have been disappointed, I have never heard a single person suggest the course, and Bill's teaching beliefs and methods were not incredibly effective. My wife and I each have a copy of the book and often review sections.

Now, if folks think the objective of the book is to somehow provide a substitute for taking a Rogers School course, then they will be disappointed -- since the Rogers range is the core of the Rogers experience, and it can not be replicated with words.

[ToddG]

I'm moving this thread to the Romper Room, since it's very clearly not about marksmanship & gun handling.

[spanky]

Ben Stoeger is an asshole. So is that ToddG guy.

:D

In all seriousness, book reviews in general should be taken with a grain of salt. Read the book and see for yourself. Obviously Ben's opinion is shared by at least a few folks on here so he certainly seems to not be just pulling it out of his ass. That'd be a pile of.... Doodie.

[TCinVA]

With all due respect, did you make the same statement to folks who were trashing Ben's name in the beginning of the thread

I performed my assigned function as staff by reminding folks of the rules of the site, including the one about how SME's are treated here. I'm not going to tolerate anyone bagging on our SME's because that significantly diminishes the value of the site. Whatever transpired outside the confines of the forum, while folks are on the forum we absolutely expect them to observe our rules. No exceptions.

if you have any other questions, send me a private message and we can discuss it...but please refrain from playing umpire when members of staff are doing their jobs to try and prevent a downward spiral into absurdity.

[beltjones]

.....

[ToddG]

http://9x19mm.com/photoalbum/albums/userpics/PF-tombstone.jpg