Raw speed

[GJM]

Hey wait a second. I was butthurt when JHC had to have his own view and it didn't coincide perfectly with mine.

Lots of good points on speed,accuracy,tactics and awareness being covered well. The speed of response and what the response is in a gunfight/shooting will always be a factor. How much it means is dependent on multiple factors too. I hate to quote Jon at ASP again but he has a point that you have to wait your turn(or help create it). In most cases the badguy sets the time and place to attack and that that is to his advantage. A lot of times that means gun in hand,attack in a transitional space and goodguys being behind the curve. In a lot of these if the badguy wanted to kill as their primary intent there would likely be a lot more murders and gunshots to goodguys. Thank God these badguys have crap guns or fake ones and aren't just out to murder first and take stuff second.

If everyone agreed on every point, these would be pretty boring discussions. The trick is to disagree without being disagreeable.

[Mike C]

Not sure if this was brought up but it also depends on the gunfight.
A one on one, parking lot, low visibility may count only on speed. Two to the chest and one to the head- call it a day.
The gunfights I've been in- more drawn out with more time to ensure accurate hits. The whole gunfight doesn't revolve around you being faster than the other guy.

Edit- then again for the most part where I wa- the other team just sprayed rounds. I'll shut up now.

There is relevance to what you said. In a protracted fight you have to slow down and hit the switch. Screw waiting for the other guy to bleed out because he can still get lucky as others have stated. Willingness of aggressor to close distance is also a factor, tactical pressure, positioning as well. One comment I've heard time and time again when looking at interviews from officers surviving gun fights that didn't end quickly is that many of them realized they were getting hits, or weren't so they had to remind themselves to slow down look at the sights and aim appropriately. By doing so they prevailed. Much wisdom in that I think. I'm paraphrasing but Tom Givens regularly speaks about getting the gun out quickly and getting it to eye level for sighted fire. I do believe that he has stated those two things as being a key ingredient to success. Gabe crushed any argument that can be had about speed vs accuracy when he said speed is what makes accuracy relevant. I need to unlike that post so I can mash the like button again.

To add to what you stated in my experiences the head only becomes a harder target to hit as the fight continues. In reading and speaking with others all experiences in this regard are mirrored. If you've been to the sandbox and been in a room with an asshole shooting an AK in your direction body armor, fire team, buddy team or not you can't kill his ass fast enough. This personal experience is what drives the point home for being able to hit the CNS quickly on demand in close proximity 10m and in. I have not doubts that a CNS shot would be even harder under more stressful conditions, close proximity, with a pistol while both you and the target are moving, (unless your the Lord or the Food Court who shoots golf balls at full sprint for sport). At distances 10m and in I think the ability to preform a fast CNS is paramount to strive for,. Even though Gabe, Psalms and others have pretty much struck the nail on the head I wouldn't discount your experiences. If anything they just confirm the things that they and others her are saying.


ETA: Crap just saw GJM's post, I guess I should go back and argue the other way instead of agree. Then according to Tom I should epic rage quit in the most hysterical of ways. Oh well I have a whole year to be up for the PFestivus award.

[schüler]

…Reflecting on this, I was struck by the thought that if he was an adversary, at distances inside ten yards, he would hurt you if he had a chance to shoot. That created a disconnect with what I had considered the "school solution," namely that accuracy, reasonable speed and smooth manipulations would save the day. I still believe in the accuracy and manipulations, but it strikes me that raw speed might be necessary to survive an encounter with a reasonably trained infpdividual.
…

I am reminded of the Tyson Butler/Sacramento PD incident where Ofc Butler was shot in his dominant arm before he could draw. More than likely a lucky series of shots but further illustration to me of GJM’s point.

On the solution side of this issue... it seems to lead credence to a well-executed failure drill. I think also of Paul Howe’s 5:1 failure drill ratio and Kyle Lamb’s mention of “one mag, one kill”.

[Mr_White]

Here is some data from the young man I shot with a few days ago. He was carrying a G4 G20 in a Raven style OWB holster, shooting regular 10mm ball. He had not shot all summer. I consider him decent by American standards, but he would be unlikely to get any pin in a Gabe White class. Two to the head, and two to the body/one head were taking him 2.5-2.75 seconds, with most but not 100 percent hits to the lower A or upper head area.

Grip size and shape means more to me than trigger in drawing fast.

I don't know - from what you describe there, I have to think he is very good compared to pistol owners at large. I would think average would be a three second or more, completely disorganized draw and then misses to the head and maybe peripheral low left hits in the body.

Come to think of it, I probably had about that kind of time (2.5 - 2.75) for a failure to stop, well into my initial major training progression quite a few years ago - I mean, probably 40+ hours of formal training at that point. Maybe more. Speed wasn't developed until later for me.

[Ed L]

I like this approach:

So, for beginners I recommend they get a good hit on their opponent, then move. Simply because when they try to draw on the move, their movement is slow, their draw is slower, and they miss more. Get the hit THEN move. As they get progressively more skilled, then incorporate movement during the draw, shooting on the move, etc. There's a huge difference in what someone like Gabe White can do and what Joe Snuffy the newbie can do, but Newbie may still have to perform in real life before he gets better.

[Wondering Beard]

When it comes to shooting to defend life, I truly only care about the four Ds (as I was taught):
Disrupt the bad guy's plan.
Distract his focus.
Disable his body.
Destroy his will to fight.

Gaining in raw speed can sure be helpful in that, but I'll only go as fast as I can still apply the four Ds, and I won't if I outrun my headlights.

I can still get better and faster (not for too long as age is catching up to me.) but my primary focus will still be tactical.

[LSP552]

I think without seeing videos of the shootings we'll never know if it was lack of speed, or awareness or a bit of un-digested potatoe that led to those folks being killed. I'm not saying that we shouldn't push our training, and I have been enjoying the discussion. I'm just trying to make sense of the context of the discussion,.

Was this guy too slow drawing, or would he be dead no matter how fast his reactions were?

We don't like to admit it, but we all fail at awareness sometimes. Good speed can help catch up. Being caught unaware really increases the need for speed.

[Mike C]

I don't know - from what you describe there, I have to think he is very good compared to pistol owners at large. I would think average would be a three second or more, completely disorganized draw and then misses to the head and maybe peripheral low left hits in the body.

Come to think of it, I probably had about that kind of time (2.5 - 2.75) for a failure to stop, well into my initial major training progression quite a few years ago - I mean, probably 40+ hours of formal training at that point. Maybe more. Speed wasn't developed until later for me.

I can actually add some data to this. So I have ended up spending some shooting and training time with three different people from my BJJ academy and one from a friend who attends an academy in Atlanta. I have taken the liberty of making them run your standards, Todd's F.A.S.T. along with a few other drills to a timer. Eye opener for all of them. So out of 4 people with little to no formal training they seem to hover from 2.5-3.25 seconds first shots to target. All of them carry strong side hip, two of them only had one formal weekend class, (24 hours) the other two have never taken a class before; one of them carries without a round in the chamber, (3.25 for the guy who doesn't chamber a round). I now almost have him convinced showing him some robbery videos and running yours & Todd's standards with and without a round in the chamber to show him the difference and the why. The one exception is one of the Marshall's I've shot with only once, he could be included as a 5th. I didn't put him to a timer but for sure he has a sub 1.5 draw to fire and he is stupid accurate. I know that is not a large number of people but it is a start point data wise. I'd include my info but couldn't say what my draw times where when I first started but I imagine is was probably about the same as guys I've clocked or maybe even slower. Lastly I'll include that most of the guys I've shot IDPA with locally and in my old town of residence seem to hover around 1.65-2 second mark, at least that is what I have noticed when running the timer. Most of those guys compete regularly and practice so I would rate them as higher than your average shooter. I should collect classification ratings and draw times the next time I'm at a match. I am sure that would be telling.

I can still get better and faster (not for too long as age is catching up to me.) but my primary focus will still be tactical.

I think that this point will hold true for a lot of people though I think it depends on how much fast twitch you start life out with. I've seen some super seniors that can still shoot and move pretty well. But your point is an excellent one. I think at some point if I live to slow down my focus will still be on maintaining as much speed and accuracy as possible but there will be a very sharp focus on tactics and avoidance to help mitigate risk even further. I think that is something that Claude Werner does really well and focuses on. Awareness will be key at some point, though it is still a priority now (more so as draw times and splits are finite and decline with age).

[David S.]

To my knowledge, blazing fast speed hasn’t been a factor in any of Tom Given’s accounts. Based on my single ECQC class, blazing fast speed wasn’t a decisive factor in any of the evos that I witnessed.

As far as I can tell, Givens, Douglas, Dobbs and Bolke have all gone out of their way to say that the raw speed diminishing returns curve gets really flat around a two second draw time and 0.3 - 0.5 splits. Fortunately both of those standards are very attainable by most healthy people.

I believe there is just too much other important stuff that needs to be included in a well prepared cop or civilian defender’s skill set to be working in the flat part of any particular diminishing returns curve.

Are resources better invested in RAW SPEED or acquiring proficiency in PUC, MUC, S&C, IFWA, edged weapons, less-lethal, medical, legal, long guns, criminal psychology, etc, etc, etc. If we step out of the personal defense industry in to the wider preparedness industry. Do you have enough food, water, electric, fuel, shelter, climate control, medicine, etc. to survive a routine disaster (two hurricanes, widespread wildfires and earthquake have all hit North America in the last couple weeks). Can you weather a job loss or a 2008 level financial “crisis”? How about a death or illness of a spouse, parent or child? Is your family prepared for your death or major illness?

Cuz all that stuff can kill you or wreck your life too.

I supposed it depends on where you are in the journey and how constrained your time and resources are. YMMV, and all that.

[orionz06]

To my knowledge, blazing fast speed hasn’t been a factor in any of Tom Given’s accounts. Based on my single ECQC class, blazing fast speed wasn’t a decisive factor in any of the evos that I witnessed.

As far as I can tell, Givens, Douglas, Dobbs and Bolke have all gone out of their way to say that the raw speed diminishing returns curve gets really flat around a two second draw time and 0.3 - 0.5 splits. Fortunately both of those standards are very attainable by most healthy people.

I believe there is just too much other important stuff that needs to be included in a well prepared cop or civilian defender’s skill set to be working in the flat part of any particular diminishing returns curve.

Are resources better invested in RAW SPEED or acquiring proficiency in PUC, MUC, S&C, IFWA, edged weapons, less-lethal, medical, legal, long guns, criminal psychology, etc, etc, etc. If we step out of the personal defense industry in to the wider preparedness industry. Do you have enough food, water, electric, fuel, shelter, climate control, medicine, etc. to survive a routine disaster (two hurricanes, widespread wildfires and earthquake have all hit North America in the last couple weeks). Can you weather a job loss or a 2008 level financial “crisis”? How about a death or illness of a spouse, parent or child? Is your family prepared for your death or major illness?

Cuz all that stuff can kill you or wreck your life too.

I supposed it depends on where you are in the journey and how constrained your time and resources are. YMMV, and all that.

Perhaps time to action? If we assume action is shooting then time to action would include shooting speed but add in things that do matter like recognizing you're in a fight and that you need to do something.