"Also, in most scoring disciplines any grease ring touching the target is counted as in. Certainly for USPSA and IDPA it is."
I fully understand that. I started competitively shooting with guys who have sub 100 IDPA serial numbers in the early 90s.
Many tactical trainers take the exact opposite approach, particularly those with Spec Ops backgrounds.
At the expense of sounding snippy, If you had ever live trained, particularly in a tactically oriented class with a trainer, you would know that.
I am not your attorney. I am not giving legal advice. Any and all opinions expressed are personal and my own and are not those of any employer-past, present or future.
Also in the interest of this thread, that means your mechanics aren’t as solid.Originally Posted by vcdgrips
It’s not about speed, it’s about efficiency and rock solid mechanics.
If you have dead nuts efficiency and a monster master grip, you’ll be fast because you see what you need and the shot goes where you want it.
For grins, I did the FBI Bullseye challenge with one of the most terrible trigger guns at 25 yards.
10 shots unsupported at 25 yards. I took as much time as I needed. It was 32 seconds total (I think the allotted time was minutes). I didn’t rush, that’s all the time it took to do that with not a bullseye gun.
Different rules for different games. When I do Federal Air Marshall drills, the bullet holes have to be within the line so that’s my metric.
Riddle me this: why would you ASSume that my scoring would follow nebulous training class parameters rather than the disciplines I shoot in?
And Gabe White himself scores like USPSA / IDPA without it having to be entirely within bounds if I’m not mistaken. So are you calling him out? Or are you just trying to make yourself feel better?
Also, when I do defense type drills it’s a different metric. But you have to define the vision goals.
1. Your mechanics are better than mine as well. Feel better?
2. There is nothing nebulus about being all in for the "higher" score to count.
3. The "hostage" target illustrates hits that are far too high on the forehead to ensure as close to instant incapacitation as possible as they are well above the "T-Box"
Have you had any instruction in the intersections of shooting and anatomy/physiology?
Edited to add: Gabe White is the first and only person to shoot a perfect 125 from concealment at the Rogers School. Go to the Rogers School and do that before you compare yourself to Gabe White in any way.
Last edited by vcdgrips; 01-13-2021 at 02:05 PM.
I am not your attorney. I am not giving legal advice. Any and all opinions expressed are personal and my own and are not those of any employer-past, present or future.
You must establish a baseline. Find a few drills that are repeatable and time your performance shooting the drills. Your time is not your best performance it must be your typical or average performance. Once you have data on your abilities then you work to reduce the time it takes to achieve an acceptable score.
Here are a few suggestions to try,
1. Yes. It’s not about speed, it’s about mechanics.
2. Agreed, but you ASSumed a non-standard scoring parameter. I told you that when those are the rules, I play by those rules. And you ASSumed it to further your agenda.
3. Actually, please note the cant of his head downward on the target. You are probably used to shooting at 2 dimensional targets. The T-box is actually VERY dependent on heat tilt since the structures you are thing to hit are actually towards the back. Shooting forehead with the head tilted down is quite reasonable and likely more effective than shooting face with a chance to actually miss all the CNS structures laterally.
Without going into it in detail, I have had a LOT of instruction on anatomy in 3 dimensions. More so than random class instructors. Think 3D, not 2D.
At speed, lower forehead with that kind of target is entirely reasonable and actually more what you would try and hit on other types of animals too.
“You are probably used to shooting at 2 dimensional targets.”
Now who is ASSuming (yeah I caught the first time...)
No -I have actually shot 3D targets at Gunsite, Thunder Ranch, with Randy Cain and with multiple agencies.
You do not have to set out your education, training or experience for anything you post here on this forum.
i.e. the lack of a training resume or your background re 2D v 3D targets, tactical anatomy etc.
Just don’t expect to be as believed or as taken seriously by many on the forum if you do not.
I am not your attorney. I am not giving legal advice. Any and all opinions expressed are personal and my own and are not those of any employer-past, present or future.
Not wanting to get in the middle of the Johnson measuring contest, but even considering 3D and head tilt, those rounds wouldn't likely stop motor nerve impulse to the hostage taker's trigger finger.
Speed doesn't matter if you miss the off switch, which in that case would be the spine above C-4 going to the brain stem. Additionally, pistol rounds sometimes deflect off the thicker helmet (fore lack of a better term) structure of the forehead and even if they are successful in penetrating, they may not deliver sufficient hydro-static shock to sever the brain stem.
Nonetheless, good shooting, comparably my Johnson is .75"
Illustration for you guys with the area you’re trying to hit circled.
Chin down. Forehead.
Face neutral. Traditional T zone.
Reply With Quote