Follow on observations "mini rant" ;-)

[rob_s]

I assume what we're discussing here is chasing the 1% of shooters, no?

We all know that many people that carry guns for a living get ZERO training or practice outside their annual qual. As one example, I'm aware of a local PD that had a woman officer show up for her qual, draw the gun, attempt to shoot, and discover that the gun was not loaded. Turns out, she had emptied it after he last qual 6 months ago and had never re-laoded the gun, meaning she was "on the street" with an empty gun for six months!

I think we would all agree that, in those situations where the officer is otherwise getting no training or practice, they would be better off showing up to the occasional (preferably regular) IDPA or USPSA match with their duty gear, no?

[GRV]

Again! I think I'm going crazy. Tom, is it possible to run stats on how many of my posts end up last on a page?

Man, what a boringgreat episode of the Twilight Zone that would be.

[babypanther]

I began shooting USPSA to get myself out of the comfort zone that I was in. I am trying to be a well rounded guy like some others that have been mentioned in this thread and elsewhere. I think coming from an LE shooting world of standing flat footed and shooting a course over and over, sport shooting or whatever you call it is great at showing you where you're at in reality concerning reloads, shooting on the move, draws, etc. As others have stated, it is important to keep in mind WHY you are there. Me personally, is not to win matches, but get better as an overall shooter. For me that is hard because I get competitive about it if i lose sight of the WHY. Im just trying to get better, and have fun at this point in USPSA.

[Mr_White]

I agree with BJJ - I wouldn't want to give up Minor scoring. I don't think Major scoring would be a positive influence on my shooting.

Also agree with VolGrad - the stress of competition is very real for many people. It certainly is for me. Private informal competition against buddies, or in training classes is good and it's something, not nothing. But it also doesn't hold a candle to the intensity of formal, public competition. Same thing but with a much more powerful stress effect for me.

The practical solution to that is probably the most important aspect of shooting: on demand performance. I have to retreat into what I can reliably do with the sights and trigger. There isn't any bullshitting about what you can do in competition, which is one reason why plenty of people would rather talk about intangibles from behind a keyboard, than allow themselves to be judged in a public competition. Also because intangibles can be talked about from behind a keyboard anytime, whereas you can only go to an actual competition when one is going on and you can attend it. And that's not unrelated to the relationship between competition, training, and field experience...which in an important way boils down to a simple question of availability.

Experience matters, and most competitive shooters don't point guns at people for a regular basis. I think this matters, a lot. Without experience, priorities can get confused, and it's easy to let winning move to the top of the list.

Borrowed from Bill Rogers: Combat IS a competition. Winning is a priority. I know, I know, we are discussing the 'how to get there' part.

I agree that experience matters, but obtaining real experience is also irrelevant to a lot of people. Those who don't have jobs that require they deal with hostile parties in ambiguous situations and make use of force decisions simply do not have the option of amassing real experience. Just the way it is. So when you are that person, you do what you can. That includes training, which absolutely should be guided by the bedrock of experience that comes from others who have BTDT, and whatever else that can be done to build skill, induce stress, and help model effective behavior. One of the most readily available and inexpensive opportunities nonprofessionals have to shoot and gunhandle under stress is competition. Training too, but that costs a lot more and often focuses on different (and very important) aspects of the puzzle.

But I do think that the best stress competition has to offer comes from 'getting in the game' and trying to win. It may be a balancing act to try to win, but not do every possible thing you could to win (not sacrificing gear priorities is a prime example.) Honestly trying to win enables a lot of the value for me though.

[taadski]

I agree with BJJ - I wouldn't want to give up Minor scoring. I don't think Major scoring would be a positive influence on my shooting.

Also agree with VolGrad - the stress of competition is very real for many people. It certainly is for me. Private informal competition against buddies, or in training classes is good and it's something, not nothing. But it also doesn't hold a candle to the intensity of formal, public competition. Same thing but with a much more powerful stress effect for me.

The practical solution to that is probably the most important aspect of shooting: on demand performance. I have to retreat into what I can reliably do with the sights and trigger. There isn't any bullshitting about what you can do in competition, which is one reason why plenty of people would rather talk about intangibles from behind a keyboard, than allow themselves to be judged in a public competition. Also because intangibles can be talked about from behind a keyboard anytime, whereas you can only go to an actual competition when one is going on and you can attend it. And that's not unrelated to the relationship between competition, training, and field experience...which in an important way boils down to a simple question of availability.



Borrowed from Bill Rogers: Combat IS a competition. Winning is a priority. I know, I know, we are discussing the 'how to get there' part.

I agree that experience matters, but obtaining real experience is also irrelevant to a lot of people. Those who don't have jobs that require they deal with hostile parties in ambiguous situations and make use of force decisions simply do not have the option of amassing real experience. Just the way it is. So when you are that person, you do what you can. That includes training, which absolutely should be guided by the bedrock of experience that comes from others who have BTDT, and whatever else that can be done to build skill, induce stress, and help model effective behavior. One of the most readily available and inexpensive opportunities nonprofessionals have to shoot and gunhandle under stress is competition. Training too, but that costs a lot more and often focuses on different (and very important) aspects of the puzzle.

But I do think that the best stress competition has to offer comes from 'getting in the game' and trying to win. It may be a balancing act to try to win, but not do every possible thing you could to win (not sacrificing gear priorities is a prime example.) Honestly trying to win enables a lot of the value for me though.

Hey,

You should start traveling around and training people or something.

[hiro]

Hey,

You should start traveling around and training people or something.

Yes please.

[LSP552]

the stress of competition is very real for many people. It certainly is for me. Private informal competition against buddies, or in training classes is good and it's something, not nothing. But it also doesn't hold a candle to the intensity of formal, public competition. Same thing but with a much more powerful stress effect for me.

The practical solution to that is probably the most important aspect of shooting: on demand performance. I have to retreat into what I can reliably do with the sights and trigger. There isn't any bullshitting about what you can do in competition, which is one reason why plenty of people would rather talk about intangibles from behind a keyboard, than allow themselves to be judged in a public competition. Also because intangibles can be talked about from behind a keyboard anytime, whereas you can only go to an actual competition when one is going on and you can attend it. And that's not unrelated to the relationship between competition, training, and field experience...which in an important way boils down to a simple question of availability.

Borrowed from Bill Rogers: Combat IS a competition. Winning is a priority. I know, I know, we are discussing the 'how to get there' part.

I agree that experience matters, but obtaining real experience is also irrelevant to a lot of people. Those who don't have jobs that require they deal with hostile parties in ambiguous situations and make use of force decisions simply do not have the option of amassing real experience. Just the way it is. So when you are that person, you do what you can. That includes training, which absolutely should be guided by the bedrock of experience that comes from others who have BTDT, and whatever else that can be done to build skill, induce stress, and help model effective behavior. One of the most readily available and inexpensive opportunities nonprofessionals have to shoot and gunhandle under stress is competition. Training too, but that costs a lot more and often focuses on different (and very important) aspects of the puzzle.

I've felt more stress shooting NRA Regional PPC matches than shooting for my life. Competition can be a great thing, it just shouldn't be the only thing for those serious about using a gun for self defense. Without a doubt, I'd take shooting instruction from people I wouldn't take a tactics class from. Experience comes in many forms, and valid training is certainly a factor. We can all gain experience from those who have experiences above and beyond our own.

The danger for people just staring on this journey is they often don't know what they don't know. IMO, instructors that stray from their lane don't help the process.

[eyemahm]

I'm guessing my response rant got bit by last-post-on-page syndrome. What else is new




Finally. Thank you. I'm not crazy.

I've been feeling exactly this way for a while, but the bigger issue is just standardizing. eyemahm and I agreed on a tough standard for Dot Torture because...actually, here was my quote that defined the standard "no one squared away on PF should have doubts about the score we assign". What we agreed to physically was that there be grease ring inside the white/grey of the dot; this ensures the actual hole solidly breaks the black line for 9mm. The point was, when we claimed we cleaned DT, we wouldn't want there to be a single SME that would kinda roll there eyes at us and move on. But, shooting it to "edge" standards the other day for DoTW, we were shocked how many extra points show up. The moral being, a drill loses its value as a performance metric if you aren't agreeing with everyone else on the terms and conditions.

SLG, when scoring edge shots, do you go by the "grease ring touching any part of scoring area" standard?

Glad we are having this discussion and am curious to hear SLG's two cents.

When it comes to DT sometimes I think we should score it two ways, easy (grease ring touching any part of circle) and hard (no grease ring outside circle) to add greater granularity to the distance based difficulty level of the drill.

Now I'm going to go post my sad looking (easy) DT of 40.

[SLG]

Sorry, missed this before. I use the outer edge of the grease ring. If the grease is touching, its good.

Really, all that matters is consistency, but I find that is the easiest way to be consistent. If the bullet doesn't leave a grease ring, then I just use the outer edge of the hole.

[JCS]

Mike seeklander has some really good thoughts on this. I don't know them word for word but he's a huge supporter of the "everyone should shoot competitively" camp. He says it will drive you to shoot more and not only shoot more but also make you compete. As a new shooter I've found that to be very true.

I don't want to ever become a gamer and I plan on shooting in production. I shoot a Glock and carry a Glock.

Good info in this thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk