Not to get all gamer and all..... but would it be against the spirit of the test to fire the 3 rds and immediately do a reload? Hmmm, now that I type that out, never mind.
Not to get all gamer and all..... but would it be against the spirit of the test to fire the 3 rds and immediately do a reload? Hmmm, now that I type that out, never mind.
Taking a break from social media.
I'll set it up and run it this week with the variations.
For dudes shooting solo, here's how I ensure I get random mags. I load three mags, one with 3, one with 4, and one with 5, then toss them into my range bag. Shake bag around, reach in, grab mag, insert into gun without checking it. Bingo, random reload point.
I like it Todd - it's a nice way to shake up things to minimize "gaming" the system a bit (by knowing the reload point), but it should show true awareness, reaction, and manipulation skills. All while under stress (timer).
It will definitely make getting a coin time more challenging, but not significantly (IMHO).
I'm very interested to see what the results yield in terms of your new variance in times with folks running it in the v2.0 method.
Full disclosure: I am a freelance professional photographer/cinematographer for the firearms and defense industry, among others.
Stated drill is to shoot until pistol is empty and then reload, complete.Originally Posted by CCT125US
If the point is to create a "better drill," do whatever you want.
If the point of the FAST is to bench mark your own results over time and compare them to other shooters, the introduction of variability makes comparing results less relevant.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
I'm not sure that any of the three permutations of first mag load are inherently advantageous with respect to the others.
I don't understand why changing the reload to a semi-surprise reload makes it more difficult to compare results with other shooters.
You still have to engage the circle 4 times and get a reload in there somewhere. The only real way to cheat is if you know when the reload is coming ... but at that point you're not shooting the drill correctly.
Which is the point of the thread.
If replacing an unrealistic skill (pre-planned reload) with a more realistic one (variable "time" reload) can be accomplished in a way that does't skew results then it's a net gain. If the placement of the reload does in fact impact performance -- say, hypothetically, that having 3rd in the mag turns out to be "ideal" somehow -- then you're absolutely right. More importantly it throws off the fairness of the drill in terms of being evaluative of shooters which is the original and still primary goal.
I agree with GJM.
If, in the new drill, knowing when the reload is coming is cheating then every previous FAST score was cheating. I'd bet if you watched the previous coin holders runs that few (if any) of them were actually checking to see if they'd run dry and were just automatically reloading after the second shot. That is inherently faster and would certainly skew the results. I think it's a cool tweak, but I also think you'd have to trash all the old benchmarks.
Please excuse my ignorance, particularly if this is something you have addressed in the past and I missed it. My perception of the FAST test has always been a bit skewed. By shooting the low probability targets first, aren't you already skewing the results? I would think the drill would be harder to run by shooting the 8 inch circle first, then the 3x5 card. By shooting the 3x5 first, my perception of the test after watching goes something like this.. Concentrate, Concentrate, transition and reload then yell "AMERICA!!!" and let loose. Ok, to be fair I never seen someone yell America after reloading but I think it would be awesome. I think running the FAST in the reverse order, it would better fit the situations people find themselves in defensively. Shoot the 8 inch circle first, with a reload somewhere in those first four shots then transition to the low probability target of the 3x5 card. I reserve the right to edit this post if someone with more knowledge makes me look both ignorant and stupid.
Reply With Quote