Gunsite Academy vs Rogers Shooting School

[GJM]

Well, sorta.

When I was there, Weaver was discussed within the context of The Modern Technique ..... but nothing more. I didn't see anyone being coerced into changing their shooting stance (or much of anything else) if they were performing well. Their philosophy (which I happen to share) is that the proof is in the pudding and your performance should speak for itself.

Within the context of defensive shooting skills, minor tweaks in technique that require a lot of time and large round counts to develop and maintain aren't very relevant IMO. Contrary to the steady stream of BS I witness being suggested, 99.9% of gunfights aren't won't by hundredths and thousands of a second.

A couple of other quick comments;

As an Instructor, I respectfully differ with GJM concerning the two venues as it relates to developing a shooter. I'm a firm believer in the principle of crawl, walk, run and putting Rogers ahead of a fundamentals class like Gunsite 250 perverts that philosophy for most shooters ..... obviously there are exceptions.

One of the guys that attended Rogers with me was a perfect example. He enjoyed the experience, but left there fairly frustrated and discouraged. He was an OK shooter but something like shooting a clean Gunsite 250 Drill was not quite doable for him at the time. Had I been free to stand next to him and actually "instruct/coach" him through the various Test at Rogers at our own pace, I'm absolutely certain I could have developed him into a better shooter, but that level of oversight isn't the paradigm at Rogers. The Staff will demonstrate things for you at Rogers, but there was very little (if any) time for individual, real-time instruction.

There's a deep chasm between demonstrating your skills as an Instructor and developing the student's skills to the same level. I've produced better shooters than myself - I know how much work is involved.

Your Rogers student example is exactly why I think a person should start with Rogers Basic, then go to Gunsite, then go back for Rogers Int/Adv. The Rogers Int/Adv is a testing class not a teaching class. Rogers Basic does the teaching, but sets the speed at a human reaction time standard, like you would likely employ if someone was shooting at you as fast as they can.

[JV_]

The Staff will demonstrate things for you at Rogers, but there was very little (if any) time for individual, real-time instruction.

Exactly. If I weren't good at weak or strong hand stuff, Rogers (advanced) wouldn't have been fun. There's very little time for you to try and fix a real issue. I would simply miss all WHO or SHO shots, knowing that I have to work on it when I get home.

Rogers (advanced) is about learning their test and shooting their test. It's not really about shooter development.

[41magfan]

Since I've never been to Rogers Basic Class, what's the student/Instructor ratio and is the round count the same?

[GJM]

Since I've never been to Rogers Basic Class, what's the student/Instructor ratio and is the round count the same?

I wish my wife and I took that class. Ratio is great. Bill, his wife and other instructors are all very hands on. Unlike the int/adv class, Bill is teaching continuously. The school provides all guns, ammo and equipment. They start with a .22 revolver, then .22 semi auto, then 9mm as student hits various thresholds.

[GJM]

Class description:

https://www.rogersshootingschool.com/classes.php

[Sterling Archer]

I took my first Gunsite class in 1991, and since then have taken many more classes (250, 499, 599, 260, 223, 270, Foreign weapons, Backcountry). Was there as recently as this past weekend for the Gunsite Alumni Shoot and reunion. Been to Rogers a half dozen times, and was class organizer three times, twice with a full boat of Gunsite instructors. Rogers and Gunsite are my favorite two week long courses, but their approaches couldn't be more difficult.

Gunsite uses the following approach:

1) Teach the student basic gun handling.

2) Teach the student manipulations like draw, reload, scan.

3) Teach the student accuracy.

4) Only after steps 1-3, focus on speed.

Rogers starts even beginner students out at full speed, and they must learn to shoot at that speed or they can't meet the standards. There is also an emphasis on strong and support hand only shooting, unlike anywhere else out there.

If I wanted to develop the best possible shooter, I would start them with the Rogers Basic class and then send them to Gunsite 250. And, specifically in that order.

Thanks for your input!

[YVK]

As an Instructor, I respectfully differ with GJM concerning the two venues as it relates to developing a shooter. I'm a firm believer in the principle of crawl, walk, run and putting Rogers ahead of a fundamentals class like Gunsite 250 perverts that philosophy for most shooters ..... obviously there are exceptions.

GJM and I have had a lot of conversations about Rogers' "full speed right off the bat" approach, and I remain convinced that I am right
I actually don't believe that Rogers uses that in his beginners classes even though the par times doesn't change from advanced to beginner classes.

Having said that, the crawl/walk/run principle employed by the different schools has two limitations. First, the sequential nature of lower level classes being prerequisites for more advanced classes leads to many students never arriving to a class where they are supposed to be trained to run. Second, the definitions of walking vs running varies greatly which perhaps explains why some Gunsite instructors can't do better than intermediate scores at Rogers. To that end, hitting a wall at Rogers right at the beginning of a path could be a great thing for a shooter who has high aspirations and motivations, who will be training beyond basic proficiency, and who does need a good definition what "run" is. On the other hand, if the goal is to get basic training and be reasonably familiar and solidly proficient without challenging self that much, then going Rogers first (or ever) doesn't make much sense.

[11B10]

Post deleted.

[Mitch]

Is it just me or is gunsite kind of nuts on their prices? I'm trying to get some shotgun training next year and when I saw the price of their 3 day class I was shocked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GJM]

Is it just me or is gunsite kind of nuts on their prices? I'm trying to get some shotgun training next year and when I saw the price of their 3 day class I was shocked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Their pricing is high compared to many traveling trainers. However, when you consider the Gunsite facility, and what it takes to operate and maintain it, pricing seems reasonable.