Boyd's OODA cycle question

Rather than reject, offhand, what other instructors have to offer you it might be a better idea for you to learn how to let go of some of your ego and genuinely pay attention for a change. Who knows? You might actually learn something.
Click to expand...

I didn't reject what the instructors were offering, but simply being observant to the fact that they didn't meet the standard they claimed to maintain. I learned that even professionals aren't nearly as vigilant as they claim.
 
Night WAtch,

Be careful about the complacency that is caused by thinking you are paying more attention than you are.

Train for the ambush, for the surprise and for when you will be off balance. You can try to be as alert as possible and avoid as much as possible, but plenty of people who think they are in condition red-yellow-stripe-orange-dot-whatever get into car accidents, trip on the curb, flinch when their kid comes around the corner unexpectedly and even over-estimate their abilities from time to time.

-RJP
 
You're walking your dog just after sunset on a street in a mid-size town.
Click to expand...

I understand your intent, but when one is walking with a 3 year old, 88 pound Doberman, one tends to not be hassled by strangers very much. ;) :D

Because you are alert ("condition yellow") and you understand the whole OODA loop thing, does not mean you can't be taken by surprise. It only reduces the chances that you'll get the short stick.

As you approach, he moves toward you and asks you for change.
Click to expand...
At this stage, he's exhibited TWO signals of a potential problem. Loitering and panhandling for change. Both are enough to cause me to be suspicious. Together, they're enough to put me into Condition Red (I might have to defend myself against this person).

You decline politely, but he blocks your way and starts talking loudly to you.
Click to expand...
He has now has my attention as a probable threat and my hand will be close to my weapon. At the same time, if I'm walking a Doberman he gets his "protect" command to start barking. I guarantee flashing white teeth at crotch height will be a serious distraction for the BG.

At the same time, when one is confronted like this, moving laterally where possible changes the dynamics for the aggressor. You didn't freeze in fear or confusion. You can move to put a wall at your back, or you can move towards the street where you have room to maneuver.

If alone (no dog), simply moving somewhat, blading your body and taking a balanced stance will tell your adversary that you're not going to be easy. Unfortunately, it's not always possible to see behind you, which is why moving laterally may allow your peripheral vision to pick up on that move. But if their plan is sufficiently good, you can get nailed despite any ninja training you have.
 
exactly.. my somewhat lame examples were mainly to showcase my point that the first O in OODA is often the least trained of the four "steps" and perhaps the most powerful!
 
exactly.. my somewhat lame examples were mainly to showcase my point that the first O in OODA is often the least trained of the four "steps" and perhaps the most powerful!
Click to expand...

Doggieman - I think I see a disconnect here.

Remember that OODA is an ongoing process, not just one loop for the event. In the description above;

the Observation was the loitering person panhandling.
Orientation was "this guy is asking for something to get closer to attack".
The Decision made is to move laterally and
The Act is to implement the decision to move.
=== Reset OODA Loop ===

Now we repeat the loop as his response to your action develops. Between the time you act and observe his reaction, your brain processes 1 or more hypothectical responses (he'll advance, he'll play meek and apologetic) and layout temporary solutions. When you observe the reaction, if it matches any that your brain has already "mapped out" the decision is to respond with the appropriate action quickly. Thus, the secondary OODA is observe his reaction, orient it in the context of the situation, decide on the "best fit" of your options and act on the decision. The the loop is reset yet again.

Assuming that you saw the loiterer and when he approached, you stepped to the side, this gives approximately 1/2 to 3/4 of a second for your brain to "think ahead" of the loiterer's next action. For someone alert and with some training, this is enough time to put together some reaction pairs (if he does "X", I'll do "Y") or multiple pairs from which to select.

Because your prediction of his next move is filtered through your orientation filters most people will judge what his next likely move will be, based on their knowledge, culture, experiences, etc. This is okay as long as this orientation is similar to his. But if your orientation is wrong (e.g. assuming criminals won't get violent in an area with lots of people) then he does something unexpected, thus getting "inside" your OODA loop and possibly you lose.

I should probably not use the term "reset" as the OODA loop is supposed to be running continuously. But I think it's important to note that every action on either party's part does require you to re-run the loop and re-evaluate the circumstances.

Also - this happens very fast and training is an enormous help here. With training, the brain can recognize clues and automatically match them up with a response because "I know this clue and I know what to do". Little thought needs to occur to match a response to an action.
 
Big difference in the A in OODA

The entire state of mind of a reasonable individual is largely determined by their status in life. If you are a LEO you have a different level of conscience than say a CCW and a CCW has a different state of mind than the unarmed average guy on the street.

I do not carry concealed. In my mundane state of existence it is simply too much bother. CCW is not an easy thing to do. It takes a level of intensity that I am unwilling to sustain. Point being, if I am walking down the street and I see a guy loitering, I would immediately evaluate him. If he appears threatening... (i.e. gang attire, many tattoos, very large, etc) I would either cross the street or reverse direction. If he looks like some punk kid I would probably address him verbally in a friendly chatty manner ("Hey Dude, whas happining!")

If I were CCW I would prepare to produce my weapon and ignore him. If he confronts me, I immediately retreat, probably to the middle of the street.

An LEO would have another agenda all together. Again point being, the "action" cannot be preconceived. Flight or fight? An unarmed 63 year old is probably not going to do either very well.
 
Originally posted by Rob
Night Watch, Be careful about the complacency that is caused by thinking you are paying more attention than you are.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: OK, Rob, I'll remind myself of your kind words the next time I have to reach for a weapon the same way I did 4 months ago, when I stopped an armed thief, cold, in his tracks - or the time before that, or the time before that, or the time before that. (Are you starting to get the message?)

You and the boys can mouth off all you want about your hypothetical theories and imaginary responses; I've already been there several times over; and, I've got the: police reports, ball caps, and T-shirts to prove it.

Lately, there's been too much of this witless ego confrontation going on around this board; I'm quickly growing tired of it. When the time comes that I need any of you, 'commandos' to manage my CQ thinking or responses, I'll just hang up my guns and face the fact that I've finally grown, 'too long in the tooth', and would be better off staying home behind locked doors.

The truth is that I, most likely, wouldn't even be alive right now to answer you; if I didn't understand, full well, how to manage these situations. When I say that the average person waits too long before taking defensive action you really should listen. If, however, I've come across as an internet tough guy, well, I apologize. That wasn't my intention to begin with; and it isn't now, either. Enough said? ;)
 
The irony coupled with the tone in your posts is possibly distracting from your assertions.
 
Last edited:
That said, your advice is sound; after all you're advocating cycling your OODA loop prior to the aggressor doing so. It is the classic model, the basic model, the foundation upon which to build from.

The rub, not that there necessarily needs to be one, seems to be in the disagreement over the assertion, "the foundation upon which to build from."

I advocate its necessity. The others seem to be, too. I take it that you do not.

The important thing on forums such as this is to share knowledge, despite disagreements, for the advancement of the community.
 
Uh... Nightwatch? The Rob you're addressing is none other than Rob Pincus. I'm think I'm safe in saying that he's been there, done that, too ;).

Here's a little on Rob's background.

Disagreement is fine, but I think a little more politeness is in order, especially given that this is TFL, where politeness makes us stand out above others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top