Performance Range and Performance On Demand

[GJM]

I checked my own numbers and hover closer to 25%, interestingly. I'm not in the same league as your subject, but thought it a decent barometer of on demand vs. absolute performance.

Your data, along with the Grauffel data, the info on the FAST from Sevigny, Vogel, White and what I have observed in two AF classes suggests that on-demand FAST performance mirrors that of USPSA, with there being a significant delta between relaxed, warmed up performance and what is done under "do it right now pressure," when attempting the FAST in or in front of a class. If I expected to shoot two clean runs in an AF class, I better be able to shoot sub 4 to very low 4's consistently when relaxed, without "right now" pressure. And, when I attempted the FAST for "money," I would invest small increments of time in grip, stopping the gun, aiming and working the trigger, to try to appropriately invest in a good outcome.

[ToddG]

And, when I attempted the FAST for "money," I would invest small increments of time in grip, stopping the gun, aiming and working the trigger, to try to appropriately invest in a good outcome.

This identifies the difference in training philosophies perfectly.

I don't consciously decide that this time I'm going to be a little more careful with my grip, my draw, aiming, and trigger. My training is focused on doing those things as a default. When I push faster than I can guarantee all those things, that is the time I'm making a conscious decision to do something outside of my norm.

My default is hitting my guaranteed success rate. That's what training to perform on demand is about. I don't count on the ability to see someone with a gun popping out of a shadow and then having the time or mental capacity to say, "ok Todd, slow down and make it count this time." I'm not interested in seeing a 25% difference between my normal run and my "real" run. Because I don't think people are simply autonomously going to back off 25% when it comes time to do it "for real."

Again, this why SOF units and SWAT teams and other high level "for real" people train differently and often (too often, IMHO) look down on competition shooters. It's because they really do follow the thought process of amateurs train until they get it right, professional train until they never get it wrong.

[mizer67]

This identifies the difference in training philosophies perfectly.

I don't consciously decide that this time I'm going to be a little more careful with my grip, my draw, aiming, and trigger. My training is focused on doing those things as a default. When I push faster than I can guarantee all those things, that is the time I'm making a conscious decision to do something outside of my norm.

My default is hitting my guaranteed success rate. That's what training to perform on demand is about. I don't count on the ability to see someone with a gun popping out of a shadow and then having the time or mental capacity to say, "ok Todd, slow down and make it count this time." I'm not interested in seeing a 25% difference between my normal run and my "real" run. Because I don't think people are simply autonomously going to back off 25% when it comes time to do it "for real."

Again, this why SOF units and SWAT teams and other high level "for real" people train differently and often (too often, IMHO) look down on competition shooters. It's because they really do follow the thought process of amateurs train until they get it right, professional train until they never get it wrong.

Those same people, training to a higher standard, still see significant performance declines under (extreme in many cases) pressure.

Maybe I missed the point but I thought is was along the lines of, "Train until your default "on demand" time/accuracy/whatever is sufficient to guarantee success under duress because a performance impact is going to happen."

[Gio]

My practice vs. on demand performance is different, but I think it's important to push your practice beyond the comfort zone of your on-demand performance. I will typically shoot 91-94% of points at a USPSA match (shooting production/minor). I rarely shoot a penalty, or even D hits in a match. In the two majors I shot last year, 1 section match and 1 area match, I shot a combined 2 D's for both matches.

In contrast, in a regular practice session, I will shoot one or two runs of a drill at that type of match pace where I can almost guarantee A zone hits, and then I will push it faster and faster until the wheels come off. I'll shoot a lot of D's, misses, and make mistakes because of the speed I push to in practice. Before I'm done though, I dial it back down and can usually shoot faster than my initial "cold" runs of the day but still maintain the A zone hits.

If someone told me to shoot a FAST drill with a $20 penalty for misses, I'd probably run around a 4.75. If I am pushing as fast as I can on the edge of control, I can push the time into the 3.4-3.5 second range but I may miss 30-40% of the head shots. At a 3.75-4.0 pace (which I shot for the drill of the week), I will usually drop about 10% of the head shots. I think it's an important skill to understand where your different levels of control are though, rather than always staying in your comfort zone.

[GJM]

Again, this why SOF units and SWAT teams and other high level "for real" people train differently and often (too often, IMHO) look down on competition shooters. It's because they really do follow the thought process of amateurs train until they get it right, professional train until they never get it wrong.

So have these SOF/SWAT teams cracked the code and figured out how to extract 100 percent of their absolute ability on demand, under stress, or have they just chosen to practice at 75 percent of their performance envelope, and figure if they need more they will wing it and rise to the occasion on that day?

[KevinB]

GJM -- mostly the understanding is that under pressure you fire faster and worse than you do in practice.
How much training, and how many times you've been in a similar situation will level that out.

But for the majority of high end user groups - accuracy above all else is stressed.


The other understanding is that gunfighting is just part of the job, medical, comms, breaching, etc all take time too. Only so many hours in the day.

I will say though that in the last 5 or so years speed has come up greatly

A good carbine/pistol test - is Jason Falla's (Redback One) Operator Readiness Test.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R57R5Iz2ndo

Which has speed, accuracy, reload, transitions etc built in. It's sort of like a carbine added to a FAST - but in full mission gear.

[ToddG]

Let's take a step back and talk about something that was popularized in the shooting community eons ago by Mas Ayoob: the four levels of competence.

• There's unconscious incompetence, in which the shooter doesn't even realize he sucks. It's basically the Dunning-Kruger level.
• Next is conscious incompetence, where the shooter has finally reached a level where he sees that he sucks and that he'll have to work to be good.
• Then there is conscious competence, meaning that when the shooter needs to, let's say, "invest small increments of time in grip, stopping the gun, aiming and working the trigger, to try to appropriately invest in a good outcome." In other words, he needs to think about doing it right in advance to do it right when it really counts.
• Finally, there is unconscious competence, where people don't have to plan their execution beforehand but still do it right.

A lot of people spend much of their shooting careers at the conscious competence level because they care more about what they can do when they're thinking about it than what they'll need to do when their minds are occupied by other things. Which is fine if that's your goal. It's just important that he not pretend he'll magically jump to the next level when he suddenly finds himself without the opportunity to think things through in advance.

So have these SOF/SWAT teams cracked the code and figured out how to extract 100 percent of their absolute ability on demand, under stress, or have they just chosen to practice at 75 percent of their performance envelope, and figure if they need more they will wing it and rise to the occasion on that day?

George I'm really not sure how to respond to those straw men since I've suggested neither of them. What I am sure of is that we've been 'round and 'round over this so many times that you can't possibly believe I was trying to suggested either of them and, having once again made an otherwise worthwhile discussion too frustrating to continue, you win by attrition. I'm out.

[BN]

Back in the early days of IDPA, one of the stages at the Nationals was the El Presidente. There were rumors of people doing 4 seconds on this drill. On match day, IIRC, the best time recorded was the mid 7 second range by Rob Leatham. You wouldn't be able to win the match by burning this stage down, but you could certainly lose by messing up.

[Mr_White]

Back in the early days of IDPA, one of the stages at the Nationals was the El Presidente. There were rumors of people doing 4 seconds on this drill. On match day, IIRC, the best time recorded was the mid 7 second range by Rob Leatham. You wouldn't be able to win the match by burning this stage down, but you could certainly lose by messing up.

I remember reading a gun magazine article by Ken Hackathorn that talked about that stage. I think it was something like that - 7.xx to 8.xx for the top shooters around. I was similarly surprised recently when I saw some USPSA match results that showed Eric Grauffel to shoot the El Presidente (I assume the USPSA version) in right about 5 seconds with a few Cs. I was initially surprised not to see under 4 seconds.

[GJM]

GJM -- mostly the understanding is that under pressure you fire faster and worse than you do in practice.
How much training, and how many times you've been in a similar situation will level that out.

But for the majority of high end user groups - accuracy above all else is stressed.


The other understanding is that gunfighting is just part of the job, medical, comms, breaching, etc all take time too. Only so many hours in the day.

I will say though that in the last 5 or so years speed has come up greatly

A good carbine/pistol test - is Jason Falla's (Redback One) Operator Readiness Test.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R57R5Iz2ndo

Which has speed, accuracy, reload, transitions etc built in. It's sort of like a carbine added to a FAST - but in full mission gear.

Kevin, thanks for this, it makes perfect sense. I absolutely get how carbine would be at the top of the list and then a bunch of things in front of the handgun.

Also appreciate your comment on accuracy. I need to develop my thoughts on this, before posting more, but I think an accuracy standard might lend itself more to guaranteed hits than a drill emphasizing speed.