Training Method

[FireSnake77]

Hey Calguns Fam,

I wanted to start a new thread since the "Manually rack..." thread has deviated so far off topic.

There was some talk about how to prepare for real world incidents. I wanted to provide my insights into training methods as it relates to defensive firearms training.

First, lets look at some concepts:

• hicks law: when faced with more than one choice, the brain will require more time to respond with the appropriate one.
• effective vs. efficient: untrained people can pick up a gun and shoot a threat. This makes that person effective. What separates that person from a trained person is their level of efficiency.
• stimulus-repsonse: to respond without cognitive process, the conditioned response must immediately follow a stimulus that most accurately simulates the indicators that require such action
• context: what is best for you to do is relevant to how the context of circumstance defines what is most efficient

With that out of the way, Combat Focus Shooting focuses on Counter-ambush. There was a question of how well can you prepare for an ambush when you know you are going to be ambushed in training.

The reality is, although you are in a heightened level of anticipation of an ambush, the unpredictability of whether the startling moment requires the need to shoot, where to shoot, whether or not there is multiple targets, where the targets are located, etc can absolutely be simulated.

Even in a heightened level of readiness, not knowing those variables still cause startle responses in well designed drills including force on force training scenarios.

This is because the variables require the brain to rapidly process stimuli on the cognitively level before the autonomous body mechanics of shooting can take over.

In regards to technical aspects of shooting, let's look at how to train the Critical Incident Reload.

First, by loading magazines to randomized capacity, this eliminates the cognitive pattern of knowing when you are going to need to reload.

Thus the stimulus is a recognition of slide lock following an unpredictable number of rounds fired. Next using tactile feedback and proprioception to find the mag well in the high compressed ready position allows you to commit your eyes to the singular task to observing the threat or environment. Lastly, as you are reloading, you should move laterally to inhibit the threats ability to do harm. There are other details, but I'm going to limit it to these.

The critical incident reload will work with all semi-auto's, is consistent with pistol manipulations including non-diagnostic linear malfunctions, 360 degree presentations, close quarters weapon retention, etc.

This method as I understand it is discouraged from competition shooting as you are required to stay ON the X during your reload.

This method is inappropriate for some military units as their s.o.p.'s are uniquely defined by issue weapon, objectives, bureaucracy, etc.

Everything has their limitations. If you are looking for personal defense training, define your freedoms and find training methods that are appropriate for your context.

Rather than just increasing the quantity of drills, question the science and critical thinking that has contributed to the development of such drills and training programs. What are habits being created? Does it take into account that I am in danger? Does it develop how the brain processes information as well as my body mechanics? Or is it limited to body mechanics?

I hope this helps everyone make an informed decision when considering defensive firearms training.

Sincerely,
Mike Dasargo
10X Defense
Combat Focus Shooting Instructor

[ZombieTactics]

I was watching some old footage of the 1976 Olympics the other night, as my wife was showing how much has changed re: gymnastics. Nadia Comăneci's "perfect 10" performance probably could not win her a national or regional championship in 2012, much less even qualifying for the Olympics. The sport has advanced, and the average high-level competitor has to do things regularly which would have been considered impossible or insane back in 1976.

1976 is an interesting year, because that's when Jeff Cooper started API (which became Gunsite), and founded IPSC.

I am struck at how little anything changes in the firearms world, and how resistant it is to change. It's 2012, and while there have been (IMHO) minor, evolutionary changes. What constitutes the "state of the art" (according to many) is mostly the same. For the most part, anything new or different is looked upon with biased skepticism or outright derision.

I am thankful that people like Pincus (and others) are willing to weather the derision of people who are stuck in the past. I have no real idea whether anything I.C.E. teaches is really an "advance" or if CFS is just an interesting bit of pseudo-scientific marketing hype. Maybe the pinnacle of firearms proficiency really is shooting a 100-year-old handgun design at paper targets.

But I am fully aware that it is 2012, not 1976, and so I'll be finding out for myself.

[ZombieTactics]

^^ You asking me or Mike?

[GM_77]

I am struck at how little anything changes in the firearms world, and how resistant it is to change. It's 2012, and while there have been (IMHO) minor, evolutionary changes. What constitutes the "state of the art" (according to most of the community) is mostly the same. For the most part, anything new or different is looked upon with biased skepticism or outright derision.

I disagree, I think training is changing and catching up with the athletic progression we've seen. I've taken quite a few courses and I've taken them from all types of people and this is what I see. Also let me be clear this is just my observation please do not take what I am saying as "old vs new", we can only stand so tall because we've stood on the shoulders of giants.


The older training method is the megaphone instructor that yells commands to draw and fire on a target, do reloads etc. They tell you to do it a certain way and you follow it. Front Sight, NRA, and many local California shooting schools do it this way. Keyword that fits their ideal is "Gunfighter". Names of schools are "Gunschool" or something related to firearms.

The current style is to put thought behind why you are doing something. Why do you draw this way, OODA loop, flight fight response, scan and assessment, power stroke etc. It is good evolutionary step but unfortunately the application of science and critical thinking gets fumbled a bit. I think most schools have merged this style with the older training method and most schools are at this state. The best example I can think of is Magpul and key word that fits their ideal is "Operator". Typical names of schools are "Operational Tactical Fighting" or something related to fighting, tactics, operator, combat etc.

Words like "Operational Athlete" are signs that the cutting edge is starting to influence the current training market.

The state of the art in training is coming from the Special Forces training methods that have shown them results.

They merge science, sports science and sports psychology and their vast experience in the field to nurture the ultimate professional athlete. Here is a excerpt from a 2008 TV show that shows a small aspect of this. Its a little long but good as it shows the R&D and then quantifies the results.

A lot of these instructors have studied how athletes train to perform at such high levels. How they train motor skills to react properly under stress, how to maintain a winning mind.

Keywords that fits their ideal is "Performance", "Mind" and "Athlete". Names of these schools are nondescript, "Pro Performance, Costa Mesa" or something like that.

Here is a good interview with JD Potynsky of Northern Red. His thoughts on trends is spot on in my opinion and I think the stuff that guys like him teach will become mainstream within the next 10 years.

[ZombieTactics]

From interview with JD Potynsky of Northern Red, linked above by GM_77:

Q: What kind of trends are you noticing in the industry, in terms of things becoming more mainstream?

A: I think we're going to see a shift away from all the real "tactical" gear. So, for a long time, it was really popular to be in the most tactical pants you could find... the vest, the kit, everything else. I think you're going to see that start to go away. One of the things you'll see us doing... I train in jeans. Even if I'm running light armor and need to carry mags, I'm training in jeans. I'm wearing "acceptable" footwear... boots, running shoes, whatever.

The trends follow what the guys in the military are doing. Eventually, the guys aren't going to be running around in uniform everywhere... so I think that's one change that we'll see. We'll see guys that are like hey "I need to be ready to fight in my jeans, in my sneakers." I know it's a small thing, but I think you're going to see it start to go away... especially for the open enrollment guys... you're going to see more of that type of stuff.

Lighter and slicker is always going to continue to get more popular; minimalist. You see it in your shoes, your guns, it's going to happen with your kit. That's where the gear and the equipment is going.

It's nice to know I am cutting edge, lol.

[GM_77]

From interview with JD Potynsky of Northern Red, linked above by GM_77:


It's nice to know I look cutting edge, lol.

Fixed!

[JRV]

From interview with JD Potynsky of Northern Red, linked above by GM_77:


It's nice to know I am cutting edge, lol.

I train for what the context I would need said skills. I carry when & where my permits allow me to legally. Living in a state where I could carry everyday really influenced my training.

That being said I took a course from a instructor who normally only teaches special t-shirt military & LE. It was actually the first time this instructor taught to civilians. (BTW I was lonely in that group of non LE and military) That being said everyone else was wearing a kit. I was in a t-shirt jeans, tennis shoes. I was carrying OWB which I normally don't but was also using my back pockets to hold my AR mags. I wasn't any less efficient or capable of running my rifle or handgun.

I'm a pistol guy. I can run a rifle & I can shoot a rifle. I've spent a lot of my training resources on pistol because that is what I carried a majority of the time. A Glock 19 and a 380 or heavily reworked j-frame in a front pocket.

So it's not about looking like tactical Tom. It's about training frequently & realistically in the context you will need those skills in the most probable circumstances. I will never wear a kit unless I take a buddy up on a contractor job overseas. So why would I train in one? I wouldn't, because it isn't realistic for me.

[FireSnake77]

can you summarize your point?
Is it train for competition if you compete and train for combat if thats applicable?

Somewhat, but more precisely, define the context of what you are doing so you know what context you are training for.

In regards to technique:
In competition, it is more efficient to use the slide release or slide lock as a slide release to shave time off your score. For personal defense, it is more efficient to overhand grip and manually rack.

On a team or competition, it's less dangerous to take your eyes off the target to look at your reload than if you are by yourself in a personal defense scenario. In a personal defense scenario, it is safer and more efficient to utilize tactile feedback and proprioceptive feedback to reload in a high compressed ready position while the eyes are committed to observing the events that are occurring in your proximity.

In regards to training paradigms:
If you are a detective, swat, or military, you will want to train with a team as that is the most plausible time that you will need to use your firearm. So training with military/S.O.F./ paradigms may be appropriate

If you are a civilian, Police Officer, Armed Guard, static post, executive protection, then counter-ambush is a more appropriate training paradigm.

__________________________________________________ ______________

Repetition creates habits. Define what habits you are creating, and assess whether it's the most efficient for what you want to do.

Mike D.

[ramzar]

In competition, it is more efficient to use the slide release or slide lock as a slide release to shave time off your score. For personal defense, it is more efficient to overhand grip and manually rack.

For many slide release is fastest and just as reliable/efficient for either competition or defensive situations.

On a team or competition, it's less dangerous to take your eyes off the target to look at your reload than if you are by yourself in a personal defense scenario. In a personal defense scenario, it is safer and more efficient to utilize tactile feedback and proprioceptive feedback to reload in a high compressed ready position while the eyes are committed to observing the events that are occurring in your proximity.

The most common reload for any situation is to bring your pistol in so that it's just underneath your eyes so that you can momentarily see the mag well for faster and more efficient reload while keeping your eyes on the threat.

In regards to training paradigms:
If you are a detective, swat, or military, you will want to train with a team as that is the most plausible time that you will need to use your firearm. So training with military/S.O.F./ paradigms may be appropriate

If you are a civilian, Police Officer, Armed Guard, static post, executive protection, then counter-ambush is a more appropriate training paradigm.

Marksmanship and weapon handling are key to any training regimen and applies across all disciplines. For mindset & tactics viewer discretion applies.

Personally, variety is the key to effective training as long as prerequisites are met.

[ZombieTactics]

This is somewhat paradoxical since many LEO/Mil people also train for and participate in competition. Following this train of thought LEO/Mil should never train or compete and competition shooters should never be in an LEO/Mil environment?

I think you;ll find that they are among the first to note that it is not ONLY competition they find valuable, and that they are particularly careful not to adopt a "competition mindset" in their daily lives, or sometimes even in the competitions in which they participate.

This was clear from some of the quoted texts in that "other" thread: training with a tactical/self-defense focus is extremely important, not simply some trivial afterthought as a tack-on to the awesomeness of skill gained/honed in competition. This is an opinion I share with those authorities so quoted.

This is one reason why the "it works in competition so it must be the best" method of reasoning is problematic.

This point seems to be often lost in the discussion, so I though it worth mentioning.

[FireSnake77]

This is somewhat paradoxical since many LEO/Mil people also train for and participate in competition. Following this train of thought LEO/Mil should never train or compete and competition shooters should never be in an LEO/Mil environment?

Correct. Except the never part. It's the repetition that creates habits.

Repeatedly training for competition will create habits that aren't optimal for counter-ambush circumstances. Competing once in a while may not hurt your personal defense habits.

BJJ tourney's are fun. BJJ sport techniques can be effective in the streets.

But BJJ sport habits aren't the best for personal defense.

Combatives guys probably won't win a BJJ tournament, and BJJ sport guys may have a harder time in street fights.

M.

PS
I don't mean this to sound like a plug, but I can only speak to this context because it only happened as such:
Every competition shooter that I'm aware of that has gone through CFS counter-ambush training, has either reduced their competition time or quit competing.

[FireSnake77]

For many slide release is fastest and just as reliable/efficient for either competition or defensive situations.



The most common reload for any situation is to bring your pistol in so that it's just underneath your eyes so that you can momentarily see the mag well for faster and more efficient reload while keeping your eyes on the threat.




Marksmanship and weapon handling are key to any training regimen and applies across all disciplines. For mindset viewer discretion applies.

Personally, variety is the key to effective training as long as prerequisites are met.

Slide release is fastest to charge your weapon. But it is not the most efficient for personal defense because it can cause cognitive delays with the following inconsistencies:

-malfunction clearing
-you have to use your eyes to find the slide lock/release on foreign pistols rather than keeping your eyes up

You may have to take slightly more time to overhand rack, but that time frame has minimal chance of cognitive delay.

If you're eyes have to do more tasks (vision sprint between target and reload), then it is not more efficient.

You don't NEED to look at your reload when you apply tactile and proprioceptive feedback to reliably find the magazine well.

When you have a variety of choices, the stimulus-technique selection process gets delayed by cognitive interference.

It is more efficient and faster to respond by habit.


This specific post is not to say ONLY DO THIS. It is to discuss what is addressed as most efficient for personal defense.

If you own a pistol with a slide release, and you accept the possibility that you might have to pick up another pistol and you still choose to habituate slide release, then do it knowing your risk/reward.

Rather than dropping brand, hype, or any appeal to authority, the point is to have a discussion that critically and honestly examines training methods and techniques so people can make an informed decision about:

the RISK vs. REWARDS of types of training and training habits.

All the best,
Mike

[FireSnake77]

FWIW,

I enjoy learning military team tactics, and plan on competing for the fun of it.

M.

[ramzar]

Slide release is fastest to charge your weapon. But it is not the most efficient for personal defense because it can cause cognitive delays with the following inconsistencies:

-malfunction clearing
-you have to use your eyes to find the slide lock/release on foreign pistols rather than keeping your eyes up

You may have to take slightly more time to overhand rack, but that time frame has minimal chance of cognitive delay.

If you're eyes have to do more tasks (vision sprint between target and reload), then it is not more efficient.

You don't NEED to look at your reload when you apply tactile and proprioceptive feedback to reliably find the magazine well.

When you have a variety of choices, the stimulus-technique selection process gets delayed by cognitive interference.

It is more efficient and faster to respond by habit.


This specific post is not to say ONLY DO THIS. It is to discuss what is addressed as most efficient for personal defense.

If you own a pistol with a slide release, and you accept the possibility that you might have to pick up another pistol and you still choose to habituate slide release, then do it knowing your risk/reward.

Rather than dropping brand, hype, or any appeal to authority, the point is to have a discussion that critically and honestly examines training methods and techniques so people can make an informed decision about:

the RISK vs. REWARDS of types of training and training habits.

All the best,
Mike

The release of the slide and reload of magazines in a quick, reliable and efficient manner are not mutually exclusive no matter competition or self defense. There is no one size fits all. You have to find the right balance for you personally.

[FireSnake77]

The release of the slide and reload of magazines in a quick, reliable and efficient manner are not mutually exclusive no matter competition or self defense. There is no one size fits all. You have to find the right balance for you personally.

Agreed. What is most efficient is also determined by gear requirements and physical limitations.

I was teaching a 4 ft. 10" asian girl with small hands that was borrowing a sig p226. How she had to efficiently manipulate the pistol was different from what I normally teach.

Good point,
Mike