Training Method

[HK35]

The reload technique that we teach (in the high compressed ready position, done without looking, utilizing an overhand rack to get the gun back into battery) is taught because we have found it to be the most reliable method over the widest set of plausible circumstances.

-Rob

Rob,

That's a much better way of explaining why you teach said method!

I tried reloading without looking and it's actually not that bad as long as you index your weapon properly. With that I mean the arm and elbow in contact with rib cage and gun in your workspace giving you a consistent point of reference for the magazine well.

[ZombieTactics]

well my perception of their position is not only that competition is worthless, but that its actually a negative because it builds "bad habits" that will carry over to a SD situation. so i cant join you on that one. i dont agree with that perspective at all.

I think the point is that it can build bad habits if winning the competition is your only goal. That's an observation not unique to this thread. It's been one made by quite a few people who actually compete. It's also pretty close to the opinions of people like Jeff Cooper and Ken Hackathorn ... (who originated/founded things like IPSC/IDPA, etc.) so it should not be seen as especially controversial. Whether it will have negative effects (for SD) is mostly up to the individual and how he works competition into his personal goals. IMHO.

but as to the 2nd point, i do not know any comp shooters who consider competition alone a sufficient training regimen for SD, and i dont see any posts here that say as much. please quote them if i am wrong.

I'm not going to start a fight by quoting someone from another thread, who has not participated in this one. I would invite you to review the earlier "Manually rack or ..." thread however, and tell me if none of the comments there come across in precisely this way. This is particularly so regarding force-on-force courses or exercises. I get a strong "you don't need that (SD training) because the timer is the final authority" mentality. Maybe I am mistaking it, but it sure appears that way to me.

[USM0083]

When it comes to "gun games" I believe it comes down to taking the techniques from that venue and applying what works appropriately where the rubber meets the road.

Certainly there is some value in competition shooting. Much of it will derive from what the shooter hopes to accomplish.

When I shot IDPA, I did so with my duty rig and pistol. I wasn't competing against anyone but myself. I tried different techniques that I saw and used what worked for me, in the context of a LE environment. Due to my equipment, I was slower on the draw and reloads, but made up lots of time with efficient movements. When I did FoF training at FLETC, I tried out these techniques to see what worked and didn't. My technique has changed slowing but constantly over the past decade.

I can certainly see how shooting in competition can negatively afffect your abilities outside that venue.

One of my better shooters, who also shoots IPSC, consistantly scores 285 to 295 out of 300 on our course of fire. We just transitioned to an M&P .45, from a Sig P228. He shot a 288, a very good score. He told me he was really trying to shoot a perfect 300. I told him that was his problem, he was trying too hard. It either happens or it doesn't. Perfect each step of the process (as much as possible) and you will reach your goal. Another part of his problem is that he treats his duty weapon like his race gun. Shooting a race gun all the time has impacted his ability to work the stock trigger on an M&P.

I've said it before: train in mutilple diciplines and with mulitple instructors, and apply what works for your circumstance.

The issue that a lot of beginner to intermediate (and some advanced) shooters have is that they started out not knowing anything. They may have gotten some training (good or bad) and have latched onto that training as gospel. I see this out of .mil and LEO personnel.

Live, learn, adapt.

[ZombieTactics]

... The issue that a lot of beginner to intermediate (and some advanced) shooters is that they started out not knowing anything. They may have gotten some training (good or bad) and have latched onto that training as gospel. I see this out of .mil and LEO personnel.
...

Yup. I refer to this as the "walk on water" syndrome. The experience of learning to anything at all useful with a firearm is inherently exciting and engaging. People form "tribal allegiances" based upon that initial expereince. They're also personally and emotionally invested, as their sense of pride-in-accomplishment is sourced from that experience and that "tribe". From there on, any challenge to the associated methods, techniques and "tribal ritual" is to be shunned and ridiculed, as though it is an insult to the club, league, military branch or favored trainer/personality.

[JRV]

So after reading through this thread again. I will start by saying I could have been more CLEAR with my explanations of certain methodology & opinions.

I am overly passionate (to a fault at times) about the program I teach. When I look back over the way I articulated CFS methodology throughout this thread I could have been more clear. Also for allowing myself to get off topic, for letting it become about personalities/personal and not focusing on the training.

So I apologize for those things.

[ZombieTactics]

This thread is a perfect example of that. You tube videos and script like answers to repeated questions.

It might have something to do with the "prosecutorial" nature of some questions as well. A good question to ask yourself is if you are adding any light or value to the conversation, or just a lot of heat and noise. That's not necessarily directed only at YOU by the way, the same principle applies to everyone across the board.

[gesundheit]

train in mutilple diciplines and with mulitple instructors, and apply what works for your circumstance.

This x million.

Just trying to keep it real.

Well people can keep it real without being confrontational, no?

[The Virus]

This x million.



Well people can keep it real without being confrontational, no?

Yes, most of the time. But in this case the reality was such.

[ramzar]

... over the years, I have found that very few things actually benefit greatly from demos. Training time is always limited. Demo'ing my ability to perform a drill, I find totally useless (unless I want to impress students for some silly reason)... I find it important to EXPLAIN a drill and make sure students understand it. At the end of the day, if you have to choose between watching someone do a drill OR shooting a drill yourself, which will benefit you more? Ultimately, that is the choice, because training time is limited. I'd rather teach more and let my students shoot more and skip demos with a low value. Other things are very important to demo, but, as stated, demonstrating them slowly is most important. Our reload technique is one of this those things. Today I did about 15 demos of various presentation techniques (in slow motion, without actually firing a single shot) during an advanced pistol handling class that deals with unorthodox positions. Students generally don't have any clear idea what they are supposed to do without demos of the actual motions that are most efficient in these areas, so the time for the demo is well worth it. But, if I bothered to take a shot at the end of the presentations, that would require me to only demo at angles that I could point into a berm AND for students to wear eyes/ears through the demo... both of which detract from my ability to teach efficiently and the student's ability to learn as efficiently as possible. So, we may have some semantic issues here... there are plenty of "demos" in our program, but NO Demonstrations of our shooting ability... in fact, when I do shoot in a class (unless checking a firearms sights for a student, etc), I rarely shoot at a target.... for example, when shooting to get to slide lock and slo-mo demo a reload.

Even though this different viewpoint on demoing the drills is a little alien to me it's not uncommon:

Firearms training: Shoot to thrill or teach the skill? Do firearms instructors have the right and privilege of discharging several hundred rounds during the course of instruction?

So, I'll strive to get more acclimated with the concept...

[ramzar]

The reload technique that we teach (in the high compressed ready position, done without looking, utilizing an overhand rack to get the gun back into battery) is taught because we have found it to be the most reliable method over the widest set of plausible circumstances.

Next time we're at the range we'll practice the CFS reload and then once proficient we'll compare it to ours and see what the clock says. Time is the final arbiter for us in self defense. The drill will be pistol with one round loaded and shooter in compressed ready. Upon command deliver one round, slide lock reload and deliver the next round. We'll look at total time plus time to reload.

We'll definitely practice this CFS reload technique perhaps as soon as next week. We'll also time it. Worst case is that it's another tool in the toolbox. You never know...

[ramzar]

In regard to the competition thing, I would say that my personal position is that there are better ways to spend your limited training time & resources than entering competitions and that if you are actually trying to win competitions (or "get the best score you can"), you are probably compromising your technique/gear/tactics to suit the competition rules.

As I and others have mentioned before competition does help your weapons handling, marksmanship, etc. but it can diminish your self defense abilities if it's treated as a game to score.

However, even though there are better ways to practice/train for firearms self defense we will keep hitting the giant wall -- the price of admission.

[USM0083]

Good article Ram.
Something to think on, but I still wanna see it done.
If you add the total time of actual shooting by the instructor in a one day class, it's probably under 6 minutes.
Assuming the instruction remains the same and there is a demo at the end.
The average IDPA stage is probably under 30 seconds. Using that as reference it's just a fraction of a 8 hr course.

So I say let the instructor step up and put it on the line, walk the walk so to speak.

I generally demo everything, first at my full speed, gradually bringing my speed down to about 30%. I also demo everything left handed. I'll used a blue gun mostly, but if I'm doing trigger manipulations I use a real pistol (unloaded and checked about six times.)

I usually won't shoot live, unless someone is making excuses like their sights are off, or there is a mechanical problem I need to work out (I'm an M&P armorer). Depending of the group I have and the issue that might arise, I may shoot a portion of our qual course, to show what's possible.

During 5 days of pistol training in June, I fired under 100 rounds.

[brian5271]

As I and others have mentioned before competition does help your weapons handling, marksmanship, etc. but it can diminish your self defense abilities if it's treated as a game to score.

However, even though there are better ways to practice/train for firearms self defense we will keep hitting the giant wall -- the price of admission.

Well said!

This is the point I have been trying to make. I know competitions are not the best practice / training there is, but it is the best I can afford on a regular basis and after all, it is a hell of a lot better than sitting at my computer playing Call of Duty.

[ramzar]

Well said!

This is the point I have been trying to make. I know competitions are not the best practice / training there is, but it is the best I can afford on a regular basis and after all, it is a hell of a lot better than sitting at my computer playing Call of Duty.

You need the self-discipline to treat the competition as firearms self-defense practice/training on demand. Use your stock (or near stock) pistol with normal holsters, etc. Use proper tactics, cover, etc. Don't get all excited to shoot fast and improve your score. Don't game it. Make your hits count. It may not improve your ranking in the competition ladder but ultimately it's self gratifying. You don't need to treat it so seriously at all times but when you do be serious and don't game it that day.

Any practice/training is better than none since these are perishable skills after all. Know your personal limitations and the limitations of the various training regimens: dry practice, competition, self defense firearms courses, force on force, simunitions, air soft, etc.

There was an article about the downside of competition but readers also commented about the upside. A balanced approach is needed.

The Downside to Competition: Upon completion of a defensive shooting school, students are often enthusiastic about finding ways to maintain that level of training.

It's worth re-inserting Ron Avery's pertinent thoughts on competition as well (from that other thread):

Another recent article (July 16, 2012) by Ron Avery written for PoliceOne.com:

Will competition get you killed? -- The younger generation of police officers are becoming interested in competition as a way to “put their skills to the test”

In summation, after weighing the pros and cons he says:

I also know that there is a chance of being infected with a “gamer” mentality and see it all as a video game with you in it. As with everything, there are pluses and minuses. The bottom line for me is performance. If it takes you higher up the mountain, it is worth doing.

In another article on myths he raised the BS flag:

BS: “Competition will get you killed.”

Reality — Competition is not the only training you should be doing. You definitely need other forms of training along with it. But you definitely should be competing. Competition is a necessary component of a well-structured training program. It’s one of the ways you test and toughen yourself.

Whether done formally or informally, you need to test and validate your skills and get a sense of “where you are” in terms of performance as it relates to other people. In competition, you don’t get to control the environment or the process; you are being subjected to the test.

Provided that you are properly engaged mentally, it will give you a very real measure of what you can actually do and is a strong indicator of real world performance, provided the competition is related to the skills to be performed in the real world environment.

If you are competing “just for fun” or to “learn a few things” then you are not mentally engaged at a meaningful level that will show you were you are in terms of performance. You have to be willing to go for it and risk failure in order to find out how good you really are.

Thoughts — I’ve trained many different varieties of clients over the years. For me, it is an undeniable fact that the higher end competitive shooters that I have trained and interact with perform at the highest levels of any shooters in the world. This is also related to performance on tactics and strategy as observed in addition to shooting skills.

This is over and above the typical “name brand” assortment which includes US Army Special Forces and Delta Force operators, Navy SEALs, FBI, DEA, U.S. Secret Service, you name it on down the list of those I have personally trained.

Given the right value and belief systems along with proper tactical training, those that engage in high level competition consistently outperform all others in the field. Competition won’t get you killed. It will make you better than you are right now. Just don’t think it is a substitute for correct tactical training or proper mindset. It is a vital ingredient of a high performance training package.

[ZombieTactics]

Just as a "coda" to this thread ...

I can now attest that both JRV and Firesnake77 :

• Can shoot
• Can teach
• Run a safe class
• Are more impervious to withering desert heat than humans should be.