Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 68

Thread: Need the Hive Mind

  1. #21
    Leopard Printer Mr_White's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Gaming In The Streets
    I mean, we all answer from our own perspective, right? And that starts with the self. For me, from the beginning of my serious focus on technical skill development around 2009/2010 to now, I'm not more technically skilled for the most part. I probably used to shoot better groups. I'm almost ten years older and there is no way I am faster. I do believe I'm way BETTER now than in 2010. That improvement has not been in the form of time or accuracy, exactly. I have a long way to go for sure (journey never ends), but I am monumentally better at applying in free form or tougher circumstances a greater percentage of my raw skill. My raw skill is probably less than before. But I can factually being more of it to bear.
    Technical excellence supports tactical preparedness
    Lord of the Food Court
    http://www.gabewhitetraining.com

  2. #22
    I have a bunch of thoughts on this. It will not conform to others. I need some time and will try to get something up later today.
    Just a Hairy Special Snowflake supply clerk with no field experience, shooting an Asymetric carbine as a Try Hard. Snarky and easily butt hurt. Favorite animal is the Cape Buffalo....likely indicative of a personality disorder.
    "If I had a grandpa, he would look like Delbert Belton".

  3. #23
    Sort of a quick reply. My thoughts on this are Master or expert at what? For a long time, this forum in particular has been huge at drills and numbers on certain drills. I would guess you could define folks as Masters of whatever drill and you can get a cool title and join the ranks of Chuck Taylor and Dr. Piazza. For me, what makes John's work exceptional was coming from the direction of what do successful folks do rather than what do failures do. How do we get performance under pressure.....the key is performance at what. IF the answer is shooting drills, then by God we have lots of experts and masters. My worry is a simple definition of some quantifiable we lead people to train to the quantifiable. It is the biggest failure I see in our little shooting world right now. How do we quantify not shooting? to me that is where the mastery lies. And not the age old b.s. of being a master of avoidance....by never being at risk. No, I am talking about the true test for me of how well we do threat assessment, threat evaluation and threat elimination as a whole.

    Years ago I was doing some extensive work with an HK 45F with a LEM. Did a bunch of "Tests" and really focused on that drill to build my LEM skills and working that pistol. I did that to the point that I was able to (on one day...one time) take a fifty round box of quality ammo and shoot 5 back to back perfect Tests. That day I mastered "The Test" with that one gun. It isn't to me quantifiable as anything more than that. I have seen many folks do the same with the FAST test and other different assessments. They are that to me, means of assessment of one set of skills and not necessarily a means of total definition. There was a recent LE shooting that may be one of the best shootings we have seen in a long time. Dedicated guy shooting a pistol geared to excel at drills. Shoots a ton of speed and evaluation drills. In a real event from a compromised position did an exceptional high speed draw and single X ring hit in low light with an amazing level of efficiency and was truly a display of mastery with his pistol and equipment. If it had not been a young black male who was a total non threat with his hands raised in the air in the surrender position, it would have been awesome.......but I don't want to be that Master of the pistol. I ran this by my wife and her world. As a former bird hunting guide and clays shooter I asked about the relationship between hunting field performance and trap field performance. She said she has seen a bunch of expert trap shooters who have never seen a real bird, and tons of expert hunters who are not particularly good trap shooters. SO, who has mastered the shotgun? Then add in action and anti personnel work with the the shotgun that is another world all together.

    In a nutshell, for where I believe John is looking for mastery and expertise I would like to see some course that presents 100 turning assessment targets and 3 are shoot targets. We score only the time and hits on the three with any coverage or shots on the others as penalties or disqualification. That to me would be interesting.
    Just a Hairy Special Snowflake supply clerk with no field experience, shooting an Asymetric carbine as a Try Hard. Snarky and easily butt hurt. Favorite animal is the Cape Buffalo....likely indicative of a personality disorder.
    "If I had a grandpa, he would look like Delbert Belton".

  4. #24
    I am a word guy, so I am going to throw in my take on it.

    You may have mastered a skill...but have you ever expertized it?

    I know plenty of "experts" in a given field who can wax on for hours about X, Y, or Z...yet when the time comes to demonstrate their expertise in a practical manner, i.e. actually shooting to that level of expertise, they fall woefully short. They have not mastered the skill.

    However...the expert who can perform the skill related to their intellectual expertise has mastered it.

    Words mean stuff.

    We all know the Gun Shop Commando who can speak with expertise on every single make, model, and specification of every gun on the shelf, and he can go on to talk about "getting off the X" and the "Tactical Reload" and the (insert cool tactical sounding word here)...so, in some respects he has an expertise on firearms, but when you put a gun, live ammo, and a shooting problem involving all of those skills in front of him, he falls apart because he hasn't mastered those skills.

    For example, we often take video at matches. Not to post on YouTube, but more to see where we screwed up and to improve. I was watching a video of me at a USPSA match in Prescott that was a simulated bank robbery. I was shooting Single Stack. Apparently, I had a malfunction, but I don't remember it. I don't remember clearing it. I don't remember it at all. No, this isn't alzheimers...I just cleared it...and kept on shooting. TAP, RACK, BANG. I actually had to back up the video for a second to see it. I asked my daughter and she said she saw it when it happened.

    I could tell someone how to clear that particular malfunction all day. That would make me an "expert". But doing it, without conscious thought, and stopping to diagnose the nature of the stoppage...is a demonstrated mastery of the skill.

    An expert can pick up any gun on the shelf and tell you all about it. The master can take any gun on the shelf and FIGHT with it.

    If that makes any sense.
    Last edited by Kan S LaTrans; 07-23-2018 at 09:53 AM.
    When everyone around you is running, screaming, and losing their minds...look for the quiet old gray haired cop because he's about to kick down some doors and sort some unruly bastards out.

  5. #25
    Member John Hearne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Northern Mississippi
    I tried putting this politely now let me put this bluntly. We are talking about the field of psychology and motor learning. This is a field of study that has existed for decades. It is populated by some very smart people who speak the same common language. They have chosen to use certain terms to differentiate different performance levels. They do not give a shit about your opinions in regards to the terms they use. For them "expert" or "expertise" is the highest level of obtainable performance. The level of performance you see in world class musicians. These are people who have put in the 10,000 hours and then some and are the absolute experts for their field. There are an infinitesimal percent of the people in this area. For them, someone who is not an expert can still have mastered a particular set of skills. I may learn to play tennis, I may be able to play it well and beat all of my local competition, but that doesn't make me an expert and likely to appear in the Olympics or at Wimbledon. That is how "expert" is defined in these circles. If you'd like to tell Dr. Richard Schmidt (R.I.P) or Dr. Tim Lee that their long established terms are wrong, I wish you the best of luck.

    For those of you who need pictures:


    We are talking about raw mechanical skill with a pistol or other firearm. We're not talking about deterrence, de-selection, or avoidance. We're talking about putting the bullets in a particular size target, at a certain speed, at a certain distance. Karl Rehn has done some stellar work on quantifying performance differences between disparate fields. His take is that the highest level of pistol shooting is represented by a 4.5 FAST or >120 on the Rogers Test. Karl's next level down is a 5.0 FAST, 110 on Rogers, or IPSC Master.

    This is where you provide your input. If you think the IPSC A zone is utterly unrealistic and prefer to shoot a bullseye based course, tell me what your standards are. If you think passing the Texas CCW course shows that you are an expert, please share that idea. If you think someone with expertise with the pistol is someone who can shoot a sub 5.0 FAST and also shoot a 290 on the Advanced Super Test, let me know.

    As an example:
    Low Level Mastery: All in the 8 ring on the Hateful 8
    High Level Mastery: All in the black on the Hateful 8
    Expertise: All in the black and at lease 76/80 on the Hateful 8

    Low Level Mastery: 93 or better on the 5 Yard Roundup
    High Level Mastery: 96 or better on 5 yard round up
    Expertise: 99 or better on 5 yard round up

    (And may the gods bless you Gabe for actually answering the question)
    • It's not the odds, it's the stakes.
    • If you aren't dry practicing every week, you're not serious.....
    • "Tache-Psyche Effect - a polite way of saying 'You suck.' " - GG

  6. #26
    Too late to edit. Guess I misunderstood. Can a moderator please delete my posts.
    Just a Hairy Special Snowflake supply clerk with no field experience, shooting an Asymetric carbine as a Try Hard. Snarky and easily butt hurt. Favorite animal is the Cape Buffalo....likely indicative of a personality disorder.
    "If I had a grandpa, he would look like Delbert Belton".

  7. #27
    Site Supporter taadski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by Dagga Boy View Post
    Too late to edit. Guess I misunderstood. Can a moderator please delete my posts.

    No, please don't delete them. They lend good perspective, despite thread intent.

  8. #28
    Hammertime
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Desert Southwest
    Quote Originally Posted by Dagga Boy View Post
    Too late to edit. Guess I misunderstood. Can a moderator please delete my posts.
    I found it valuable even if drifting from OPs desires.

    I have most experience with the Advanced Super test (ST from holster)

    Low level mastery: 270-285
    High level Mastery: all in Black or >290
    Expertise: all in Black using half time limits (Super Test on Steroids.)

    Dot Torture:
    Low Level Mastery: Clean at 5 yds
    High level Mastery: Clean at 7 yards
    Expertise: Clean at 10 yards.

    500 Aggregate:
    Low Level Mastery: >425
    High level Mastery: >450
    Expertise: >475

  9. #29
    Member John Hearne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Northern Mississippi
    Quote Originally Posted by Dagga Boy View Post
    Too late to edit. Guess I misunderstood. Can a moderator please delete my posts.
    No worries. Your thoughts, even about the subject not at hand, are always appreciated.
    • It's not the odds, it's the stakes.
    • If you aren't dry practicing every week, you're not serious.....
    • "Tache-Psyche Effect - a polite way of saying 'You suck.' " - GG

  10. #30
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Erie County, NY
    I think that one problem is trying to draw sharp boundaries between categories that have fuzzy boundaries. It reminds me of the old IQ diagrams from the Stanford-Binet IQ tests and similar ones. The questions were objective and the scores quantatively determined. At various cuts on the chart, you were defined in a category such as:

    Levine and Marks 1928 IQ classification[56][57] IQ Range ("ratio IQ") IQ Classification
    >175 Precocious
    150–174 Very superior
    125–149 Superior
    115–124 Very bright
    105–114 Bright
    95–104 Average
    85–94 Dull
    75–84 Borderline
    50–74 Morons
    25–49 Imbeciles
    0–24 Idiots

    or

    IQ Classification
    Above 140 "Near" genius or genius
    120–140 Very superior intelligence
    110–120 Superior intelligence
    90–110 Normal, or average, intelligence
    80–90 Dullness, rarely classifiable as feeble-mindedness
    70–80 Border-line deficiency, sometimes classifiable as dullness, often as feeble-mindedness
    Below 70 Definite feeble-mindedness

    Are these boundaries absolute? No.

    So in our discussion, can a numerical score on a series of performance tests be used to categorize? Are the distributions of scores on some composite score of all the difference tests indicating discrete categories, or a normal curve centered on some score (based on those in the serious shooting population), or a skewed distribution?

    Name:  shooting distribution.jpg
Views: 352
Size:  30.8 KB

    The actual shapes and widths are not known but just for example purposes.

    The performance aspect doesn't touch knowledge based 'expertise', if that is relevant as compared to the motor performance situation.

    That's my one of my two cents - are the categories discrete in reality, such that the scores indicate little overlap, or is some composite motor test distributed with more overlap, leading to fuzzy boundaries?

    Another issue is test-retest reliability which can be defined statistically. The score should be stable in a reasonable time period. One might even argue for age related scoring as done in some IQ testing.

    Is categorization the goal? Would a single score like the SAT be better - like Shooting and Tactics?
    Last edited by Glenn E. Meyer; 07-23-2018 at 12:14 PM.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •