Bullseye for SD training?

one-handed shooting

It's true that slow-fire bullseye is not, in itself, self-defense training. But having observed posts on SD training for years now, I wonder if anyone does any systems thinking to the process.

To me, the ability to shoot accurately with an unsupported hand is a critical SD skill. The answer that I'm almost sure to get is "They switched to two-hand in IDPA and the other sports, so that's been proven to be successful." It is successful in those scenarios, but they presuppose that you have two hands available. Of course that leads to the "training for one arm wounded" arguments, but I think that it's simpler to point out that if you're attacked on the street you may very well be holding a bag of groceries, some other purchase, your kid or grandchild (young and light enough to carry). You have the choice of dropping what you're carrying (drop the bag and sacrifice the dozen eggs, but precludes dropping human cargo) or shooting with an unsupported hand.

This is an even worse problem with the training of women. Ignoring the "teaching my girlfriend" amateurs on the range (shudder), I still see professional trainers teaching with the female student in jeans or sweats with pistol in holster or on the bench being taught to pick the pistol up with both hands and punch forward. Excellent advice except where is her pocketbook? Women have been trained from an early age to retain that pocketbook at all costs. Her entire life is in there. Unless you're going to train her to drop that thing while going for the firearm, you're setting her up for a delay in response as she tries to figure out what to do in an emergency situation. Training to shoot one handed bypasses that problem.

I am not a firearms instructor, I'm just mentioning some observations that I have made. If I'm just being naive, well, at least I have put out something to which others can respond.
 
Watch a Gabe Suarez video on gunfighting and see if standing there while acquiring a nice sight picture and squeeeeeezing the trigger is realistic and likely to get you anything other than killed. Try that in the wrong situation, and you could obsorb more lead than the Dalton gang in Coffeyville, Kan.
Click to expand...

NOBODY is saying use Bullseye exclusively, we're saying use Bullseye to develop fundamentals and relearn/practice.

Along the same line, thinking you can always use two hands is silly. I've discussed this with Suarez a couple times (before he band me from his web site).

Try to get a good two hand grip after someone knocked you on your butt at an ATM or a similar scenario. Try getting a two hand grip while your crawling through a window.


Bill Jordon was mentioned. Yes he was a bullseye shooter, he was also a combat shooter. But Drawing and shooting with one hand AFTER he had the fundamentals down.

No one teaches " squeeeeeezing the trigger", they teach smooth activation of the trigger, there is no law that say smooth cant be fast. Again look at ISU rapid fire shooters. They don't "squeeeeeze" the trigger, but they do activate it smoothly. If they didn't they couldn't get five shots off in 3 seconds on five different targets at 25 meters and still hit the target.

Bullseye teaches fundamentals that build muscle memory that carry through on all aspects of pistol/revolver shooting, even two handed shooting.

Some of you seem to say we want all shooter to step up to the line with a pistol box, line up or scopes, blacken or sights, before each and every shooting encounter.

No sir, we're talking about the fundamentals taught in bullseye, which includes proper grip, sight alignment, and "SMOOTH" trigger control and follow though.

But excluding stance (taught in Bullseye), The stance should be practices setting down, laying down, crawling toward cover, etc. etc.

Point shooting is necessary at bad breath distance where you use your free hand to the face distracting the target while you draw and shoot from the hip.

If you have time to get a two handed grip, you have time to get on your sights.

Its not the first shot that wins a gun fight, its the first hit, and you don't get hits without fundamentals.

I'll give you a real life example of what I'm talking about. Season before last, I was antelope hunting. Saw a critter and decided on a stalk. While crawling throught the grass, trying to avoid cactus I came nose to nose with a rattler. I had one hand free, rifle was in the other and I'm sort of leaning on it. I was able to draw my revolver and because of fundamentals learned in Bullseye I was able to quickly dispatch the snake before he got me.

If I'd have turned loose the rifle he probably would have tried to get me, I couldn't use the rifle, it was out of position and besides I don't carry a round in the chamber while hunting.

But I do practice drawing from weird postions and I do practice bullseye with my 642. And mainly I do a huge majority of my carry revolver practice with one hand. The exception is using two hands practicing on hostage targets, again with the fundamentals gained in bullseye shooting.
 
Its not the first shot that wins a gun fight, its the first hit, and you don't get hits without fundamentals.
Click to expand...
You have no idea how many times I have used that line, some on military team members but mostly with young law enforcement officers, police and deputies, still green, still wet behind the ears, still learning to shave and they all want to be quick draw McGraw because "The first shot wins the fight."
 
I stand corrected;

The International Shooting Union rules call for 8-6-4 seconds not 7-5-3 as I posted.

Been a long time since I've shot ISU Pistol.
 
As a decorated keyboard commando...

...I can provide 2nd- and 3rd-hand accounts of gunfights conducted without injury with both combatants using "spray and pray" at distances under 6 feet. People get weirdly dysfunctional.

During an assassination attempt on Harry Truman by Puerto Rican nationalists, one Secret Service agent carefully pocketed his brass for later reloading. He did so per his hours of training at the range.

You practice how you play, and vice versa. I know it'll get me funny looks at the range, but I'm going to do just that: I'm going to train the way I'd react to a real situation. I'll just have to bring a change of pants for the ride home. :D
 
jimmythegeek said:
...You practice how you play, and vice versa. I know it'll get me funny looks at the range, but I'm going to do just that: I'm going to train the way I'd react to a real situation....
Click to expand...
Yes, BUT --

One also needs basic marksmanship skills.
 
You know of course that this is not a new controversy and that writers were stating (or overstating) their opinions 70 years ago on this very subject. Their backgrounds were not necessarily that dissimiliar either. It was just that they saw things differently for one reason or another. But compared to some of today's writers, they don't seem quite as dogmatic as they do now.

On the one hand, some believed you had to be a really good pistol shot, although they were usually referring to revolvers, before you could move on to more advanced shooting. Ironically, the more advanced shooting as they referred to it often meant some form of point shooting.

But on the other hand, some believed that competitive handgun shooting was detrimental to combat shooting. It wasn't that they thought bullseye shooting was bad, merely that it didn't contribute to combat shooting. Their idea of training had a pass/fail basis and no other scoring system. However, to be fair, the different crowds had different people in mind, too. The former did not picture large numbers of pistol packers being run through a training course while the latter almost saw it no other way. It should be of no surprise that their approach to training was different. It should also be mentioned that the products of the latter theory of training were also more likely to actually engage in gunfights.

At the same time it should also be mentioned that many of the better known gunwriters who actually carried a badge, many of whom were in the U.S. Border Patrol, also were competitive handgun shooters. We also assume they had some actual gunfighting experiences but they tended not to write about such things.
 
scored a 643 tonight on a 900 course

It'll do for a start. I'm a Marksman!!! 71% They don't have a ranking for Spaz. I need to improve a lot to move up, but it's do-able.
 
Started on Bullseye in 1970. Shot my first Police Qualification course in 1982. Shot my first Action event in 1990.

Top qualifier in my department 10 years in a row

All rounds on target in my Action events. Slow because I did not want to hit the good guys in the scenario.

Most of the shooters in the event hit their targets at less than 70%. Most were first round miss.

In a gun fight the first to hit the adversary normally wins. Yes there are exceptions which have been discussed in this forum and many others.
 
For me the active word the OP uses is "Competition", getting involved in competition in and of itself is a positive action. Coaches, team members, and even the people you compete against, provide a wealth of information.
You learn from instruction and tips and from observing the people you shoot with.

Competition makes you a better shooter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top