Looking for opinions on Sayoc Tactical (for firearms training)

[JodyH]

Paul Castle taught CAR to a lot of tier 1 groups... being tier 1 doesn't guarantee you'll never get taken in by a bullshitter.

[SLG]

Couldn't agree more. I realize that my "not for debate" comment might not have come across as I intended. My only point was that claims of STG teaching elite soldiers (or however it was phrased) was accurate.

[Pup town]

I'm really not interested in open enrollment classes, we really do them for friends and so our younger instructors can get reps teaching material. Open enrollment tends to fill up with Internet Warriors, pissy bloggers, gun buffs and wannabe Former Action Guys.

I suppose it's good you aren't interested in open enrollment classes, because if you keep disparaging your open enrollment clients like this you soon won't have enough to fill a class. This sentence, more than anything else anyone says about STG, makes me hesitant to give you a single penny.

(Of course, if you want to get your younger instructors more reps but not have to lower yourself to interact with the common folk, you could hold classes for just LE/MIL that are paying out of their own pocket. A lot of people here fall in that category.)

[Thomas Kier]

I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but when I hear a sales pitch that makes claim to have uncovered some new science or methodology - based on some never before conducted analysis or research - founded on some newly discovered dynamic of human conflict - my BS detector starts going off ...... LOUDLY!

Additionally, I don't care if the guy serving that Kool-Aid claims to have killed Osama with a blow-gun .... BS is still just BS.

I agree with you 100% 41magfan.

But allow me to explain.
We have not uncovered new science or claimed never before conducted analysis. There is nothing new under the sun, but there are things forgotten and misunderstood. And if you think you or anyone else knows it all, you are confused, friend.

We have developed our own curricula, but it is not way outside the box or unrecognizable. We look at any training with all the science and technology which is available to us, scientific reason and practical application is what we strive for. Many drills we have developed over the years, but there are just as many we have taken from other sources always giving credit, sometimes we run them as is or we make slight variations because we see a way to enhance it. Much of the continued development is due to the great shooters we work with on a daily basis and have for years.

We start off with basic marksmanship and weapon manipulation, but we look at this all within a logical formula and training progression. There are many schools out there which build training scars because of bad reps, they do this unconsciously of course, but it still happens. The reason for this is most instructors out there have not been trained as instructors and are sometimes unaware of the most efficient way to transfer knowledge.

"The best way to learn boxing is not from a boxer, it's from a boxing coach, and not all coaches are equally good"

Nothing we talk about during a class will be something you have not heard before, but the way we explain it may be. We at the same time do not want to tell anyone what to think, but we feel strongly on the way to think. Thought process and how to analyze is part of the methodology. Therefore everything taught in the class will be explained within that framework, the "why" not just the "how".

The first level class 1.0 is something everyone would be familiar with marksmanship and weapon handling and mindset. But we go into the why and when of it all.

The second level 2.0 is beginning integration and a concealed carry class. We look at gear, carry options, target recognition and discrimination along with with mindset and Legal concerns.

The third level 3.0 - 5.0 would be a departure from what is normally taught, in that it is highly dynamic as far as movement and all drills can be integrated with striking, grappling and blade work as well as shooting. At 3.0 and above there is over 50% Force on Force with simunition, much of it leaving the square range and entering a scenario based training model. Scenarios would include street crime, fighting in transitional space and working inside buildings as individuals and teams. All these classes are 5 days long.

We don't teach the same material to the open enrollment that we do for our Mil or Gov clients in fact we don't ever teach exactly the same material, every course is customized to the audience in some way.

I see there are a few out there with some opposing views or still want to hear how many of our instructors have tactical backgrounds. The answer is all of them. Naval Special Warfare, Army Special Forces, some are publicly well known and also run their own companies like Kyle Defoor, Bill Rapier and Dom Raso. Others are less well known publicly but very well known within the community of operators. Almost all of our instructors are independent contractors and work with us from contract to contract.

I hope this finally clears things up, I'm not trying to be super secret there is no reason to be. Also I'm not ever sure why I'm spending the time to do this explanation, I guess it's that I have some time right now and really I feel like we have been misunderstood and I guess at some level I want to be understood.

Thanks

[Thomas Kier]

I suppose it's good you aren't interested in open enrollment classes, because if you keep disparaging your open enrollment clients like this you soon won't have enough to fill a class. This sentence, more than anything else anyone says about STG, makes me hesitant to give you a single penny.

(Of course, if you want to get your younger instructors more reps but not have to lower yourself to interact with the common folk, you could hold classes for just LE/MIL that are paying out of their own pocket. A lot of people here fall in that category.)

I don't have active military pay out of their own pockets to train, if uncle Sam won't pay, they train for free.

I don't care about open enrollment, mostly thin skinned, crybaby penny pinchers, who over estimate their ability to shoot.
I say these things to discourage certain type from coming to classes, if you feel I'm talking about you, then don't come.

If not, lets do some training. I enjoy teaching and it is good instructor development, but from a business standpoint, open enrollment means nothing.

I hope this clears things up Pup.

Thanks

[JodyH]

Class act.

[HopetonBrown]

I'm really not interested in open enrollment classes, we really do them for friends and so our younger instructors can get reps teaching material. Open enrollment tends to fill up with Internet Warriors, pissy bloggers, gun buffs and wannabe Former Action Guys.

I don't care about open enrollment, mostly thin skinned, crybaby penny pinchers, who over estimate their ability to shoot.
I say these things to discourage certain type from coming to classes, if you feel I'm talking about you, then don't come.

If not, lets do some training. I enjoy teaching and it is good instructor development, but from a business standpoint, open enrollment means nothing.

I took a class with Vickers, he said he liked open enrollment. He said because they're there on their own dime, on their own time, with their own ammo, so they are often very motivated students. He said sometimes the LE/MIL guys are either too cool for school, or just would rather be someplace else.

[Eyesquared]

I took a class with Vickers, he said he liked open enrollment. He said because they're there on their own time, on their own time, with their own ammo, so they are often good students. He said sometimes the LE/MIL guys are either too cool for school, or just would rather be someplace else.

I don't think you need to try and convince Mr. Kier that open enrollment is worth teaching. He obviously has a strong opinion which he has expressed very clearly here.

[HopetonBrown]

I don't think you need to try and convince Mr. Kier that open enrollment is worth teaching. He obviously has a strong opinion which he has expressed very clearly here.

I'm not trying to do anything with Mr. Kier, I'm sharing the opinion of another instructor about the subject of open enrollment.

[LittleLebowski]

I see there are a few out there with some opposing views or still want to hear how many of our instructors have tactical backgrounds. The answer is all of them.

Are you able to share with us the details of your own tactical background or do you work for STG purely in an administrative role?