A bit late to the party, but this is a topic that interests me quite a bit.
First off, some context for my position - served on active duty in the Norwegian mil for 11 years, infantry and reconnaissance as a small unit leader, with deployments to Kosovo and Afghanistan. Currently serving in the National Guard as well, as a firearms, small unit tactics and medic instructor. I also shoot IPSC, pistol and rifle.
The BLUF here is that shooting matches is a good supplement to whatever "tactical" training you do. As others have said, shooting a match against guys who really know how to run a gun is pretty humbling, and may lead to the eating of some crow....it did on my part.
I was considered a very good shooter by my peers, and I could outshoot them easily, both accuracy wise but also mechanics wise (I was better at running the gun).
After shooting my first match, I understood that I wasn't as good as I thought I was. I was being outshot by guys who had no tactical background at all. But that fact is irrelevant, as a match does not measure tactics. It measures shooting ability.
And that last point is what annoys me, when people argue against competition because of lack of tactics - well, duh, it's not part of the game, so why argue the point at all?
Second, and I think that I am pretty qualified to state this - tactics cannot be measured objectively, as so much is subjective. In the mil, you adhere to principles that you must apply to the situation that presents itself. There is no one right answer to a tactical problem.
Now, granted, my lane or focus is not self-defense, but I do not buy into the argument that doing certain things in competition will carry over to a use of force situation. If it does, you are not adequately trained in either.
I am not going to use competition tactics when I train MOUT. I am not going to unload and show clear after each bound during squad fire and movement. I am not going to toss proper use of cover and concealment aside during SUT training. I am not going to disregard IMT when I am doing SUT. Why? Because as a human being I am capable of cognitive ability, even during stress. I am able to observe, process and decide on what I want to do.
Anyone who says differently probably hasn't trained very much.
As an example; in the military I trained on 14 or 15 different weapon types, with greatly varying manual of arms between them. It did not cause an issue for me at all, or none of those I served with. I didn't suddently apply the malfunction clearance drill for an MG-3, when shooting my HK416.....the same can be said from switching between OWB competion gear, to duty gear or CC gear. I have no issue switching from my SA Standard(Limited) gun to a Glock or my Beretta 92A1.....
I am able to combine both worlds, to where I am getting the full effect of shooting matches reflected in my gun handling, and my problem solving skills are able to be focused at the problem, instead of at the act of shooting.
Now, I was pretty good at the whole SA thing, from years and years of training in that environment, but my shooting skills were affected when I did something that I hadn't done before - namely shooting a stage.
And my SA was excellent in spite of never utilizing a scan and assess during marksmanship training - it did not prevent guys from being fully situationally aware, both in training and in actual combat.
Now, competition is not training. But that is again a moot point, as it never set out to be. That is not competition's fault, it is the fault of guys who only go to matches and never put in any other work.
Another good one is the whole "you don't get a walk through" for a real gun fight. True, but you prepare in training. You practice gun handling and shooting beforehand, so that you are prepared when shit hits the fan. You take force on force training or scenario based training to better prepare yourself to react when shit gets real. That is preparation, that is planning. You are ingraining decision making into your brain, so that you are better able to respond to a situation. That is why we shoot at different distances, at various size targets, on the move, from unconventional positions etc.
Also, in the mil (and LE) we often do reconnaissance prior to conducting an OP, and will hold an orders meeting using a sand table that reflects the target area - which will often include possible enemy positions and so forth. We don't wing it, if we can help it.
If I can, I will accept as much detail as possible on the target area, so that I have the best odds possible of succeeding.
So, in conclusion, I think people are trying to construct a divide between the tactical world and the competition world, when we in fact should try to bridge the gap.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Mr_White
