Agreed, but these days there is pressure to put out content.Originally Posted by Sidheshooter
FWIW Ken was never averse to new technology. He was running Aimpoints on ARs before they were common. He would go on about guys gaming matches, but he was right there with them looking for advantages. That said, I think his best video contributions are about history and evolution of firearms, competition, and training.
"Gunfighting is a thinking man's game. So we might want to bring thinking back into it."-MDFA
Beware of my temper, and the dog that I've found...
It was nice to see a well-articulated explanation of the technique and the theory behind it. If I lean towards one idea, technique, or theory I like to have the best possible understanding of all the possible avenues. It is interesting that at p-f, the dominant theory is the one coming through the Craig Douglas school-of-thought, and the Cooper lineage retention shooting is the outside idea. In the rest of the gun world, that is inverted. One thing I've noticed about a contrarian minority opinion (e.g. Austrian Economics) is that they minority tends to know the theory and lineage of the majority theory much better than the majority can articulate the minority position.
When you need to have your ass kicked and get shot in the taint with sims to understand why, maybe that keeps people ignorant?
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
Outstanding video just posted by Craig on this topic:
https://www.facebook.com/38499303836...6?vh=e&sfns=mo
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
I'm curious about the various lineage-type thoughts that are cropping up in this thread. I know that Hackathorn worked at Gunsite for awhile and was pretty close with Cooper. Is that why the modern technique and Cooper keep getting mentioned here?
I've got a couple of books by Gabe Suarez. The first one is The Tactical Pistol (1996), which has an introduction by LTC Cooper. On p. 95, Suarez demonstrates a retention shooting position that isn't all that different from Douglas's. It's not full-blown thumb-pectoral index. The gun is a little lower, but it's not extended out in front of him like in Hackathorn's technique, and it's not canted out away from his body with the magwell doing the indexing like in the Bill Rapier method linked earlier in the thread. So it's quite similar to Douglas's technique.
On page 96 of that book, there are a couple of pictures of the Speed Rock with some words of very faint praise--roughly, Suarez says you might want to do this if you can't move. He does not present it as a good close-range shooting technique. The chapter is really all about moving. In his book Tactical Pistol Marksmanship (2001), he writes up a scathing indictment of the speed rock (136-137) and again demonstrates a kind of Douglas-esque retention shooting position. (138) I know Suarez is "controversial" and such, and I'm not interested in a debate about his merits as a trainer or as a human being, but it's interesting to me that a straight-up Cooper disciple who later developed into a Glock-shooting isosceles guy doesn't seem to have passed through a phase of doing anything like what Hackathorn demonstrates in his video.
Anyway, I guess I'm just rambling, but the point, if there is one, is that I'm interested in the lines of development here. They seem muddy to me. Is this all going to be in Karl Rehn's book? When can I buy that?
Hm. What could have prompted such a post?
I dig it. Ken Hackathorn is a wealth of information, he's showing his way to solve this problem. As Craig says, we teach a way not THE way. In a world of good, better, best I think what we do is best otherwise we'd be teaching something else.
What I'd really like to talk to Mr Hackathorn about is what we see happening with the pistol at the 7.36 mark. That 45 sits fairly flat, and snaps right back in line. That's some good stuff right there.
"There is magic in misery. You need to constantly fail. Always bite off more than you can chew, put yourself in situations where you don't succeed then really analyze why you didn't succeed." - Dean Karnazes www.sbgillinois.com
Man, he’s not holding any trade secrets back in that clip; that’s a slice of the great info and polished presentation that alumni pay for, repeatedly. That short vid is this week’s free lunch...
”But in the end all of these ideas just manufacture new criminals when the problem isn't a lack of criminals.” -JRB
[Kind of] stopped taking his advice on combatives when he reccomended a laser grip alone was suffice for low light application of a pistol...
A bit dated, but knowledge is based on accepted best practices of that time frame.
A more modern approach for close distance, as depicted in this video (3 yards ish), might preferably be a higher nearer line of sight draw, with a two-handed muzzle flat index. Allowing for excellent two-handed retention and two-handed shooting with the ability to press straight to the target as the situation dictates or to quickly retract into a one-handed body index.
For a truer close to contact distance, for many years, we have been using and teaching variations based on what you see in SouthNarcs video. We also teach it in a similar CWR progression, that is compartmentalized in the early phases for safety, progressing into various iterations of training live fire and via Simunition in FoF.
In addition, we will move from a support hand index on the sternum, to a spear elbow utilized for offense or defense and a variety of other support arm clinch techniques. Being aware of body parts and index is important obviously and the progression of training from live to FoF is key. While we think we are pretty up to date on our technique and methodology, I would look to guys like Craig and Paul here when it comes to the Recent, Relevant, and most Realistic approaches today.
Reply With Quote