Cheaper Instruction....

Personally, I don't have a problem taking courses from local guys / at a local facility --- in fact, often I prefer it. It is way less hassle than getting to some of the big prestigious schools - with guns, ammo, etc ...if you have to travel more than 500 miles.

One way to overcome people asking for references - is to ask your students to consider giving you a a recommendation that you can publish anonomyously - to support your business. When you get critiques back at the end of a class - contact a student that gave you one you liked - and ask for permission to use it in your marketing.

Personally, some of the big name schools ..have their way of doing something ...and its their way or no way .../ so its another reason why I tend to shy away from some of those guys or places. I want knowledge / and training - but I want it from someone with the flexibility of considering it from my perspective as well / not just 100% their way.

As an example: I'm not a Glock lover ..in a prestigious 3 day class..instructors basically said, if you are not shooting a Glock, you made a mistake in weapon choice. Out of 20 shooters (half shot Glocks, 3 of us shot 1911's / a few XD's, Rugers, H&K's & Beretta ....). A couple of times on the firing line ---one instructor wanted you to stage a trigger on your weapon ... taking all the slack out, taking part of the trigger pull out of the equation ... but on a custom 1911 ( that is absurd ! ) ...my 1911's break like glass - with no slack, no slop ... / and I got tired of hearing about how valuable a skill it was / and that custom guns with triggers that break like glass were a waste of money. Now, I understand his point - on making a 10lb trigger pull more like a 4lb trigger / and he could have done the same thing - made his point / but recognize that not all guns have to have triggers staged - and we would have been fine. But these instructors were not flexible / they were preaching a Glock mantra ( and I think the pro shop attached to the range / was a big Glock dealer ) ... I won't go back to that school / and I've told at least 50 people about their lack of flexibility ...on triggers and several other issues ( range time, lack of organization, poorly prepared texts, redundant reading, etc --- probably costing them at least 30 students just because the way I was treated and how the class was run ( and some of my buddies love Glocks ). So big and prestigious isn't always the way to go .....its a business / listen to your students / teach what you think is right ...but listen and I think you'll have some repeat customers and some good classes locally - just give it time - and good luck.
 
I would say that the best instruction comes from the guys who are good enough to make a living at it on the national/global level.
Click to expand...

Not always. I've had local instructors who are every bit as good as the Hollywood instructors. And I agree that most of the time the material is exactly the same.

Judging by the reviews I've read online by students... I get the sense that many students are more like cult followers. People obsess on every piece of gear and article of clothing that the instructors use. There's a guy who posted a pic of himself shooting next to Costa on another forum, and you had to look close to try to figure out which shooter was Costa, and which shooter was the lacky!! The guy had the same haircut, gear, facial hair and clothing .:rolleyes: These goobers actual morph into their instructors due to their infatuations.

Are the big name instructors good? Of course they are. Are they that much better? Not in my opinion. Either you're a good instructor, or you're not.
 
Cheaper Instruction?

In the mid 90's I also was a Certified NRA Instructor and taught a ton of people, more women than men. I was also getting up to speed on IPSC and found people who had the skills that I wanted and got them to teach me for a fee. I found them by watching them at matches I attended so I knew ahead of time which skill sets I wanted to get better with. This year I took my first CRG class and learned a lot more. We were told in the class that this group of folks does not have all of the answers needed, but neither does any of the others. If you take this course a couple of years from now it will have changed to keep up with current trends of how to skin the cat. You have to learn from several different teachers to improve the skills you need. Only you can know this. That is why all of the Big Name schools have such a detailed listing of the classes and a Call Us if you have questions about your ability to attend. The lesser name schools I have seen some require you to take their first, second, third, fourth step classes and no body gets to graduate without taking all of their classes. I sent in my experience level to the school I atttended and the reply was "You will do well". I am now looking for a class to attend later this year. I will pay for good teaching. I also need to drive to it so it will be within a days drive and there are alot of opportunities within 400 miles of where I live.
 
I dont get it... I look at some of the experience, and experiences of members. I see the questions, and opinions of member. In my opinion many of the members could be instructors in their own right.

As it happens I am an instructor/teacher. Not with firearms and tactics, but with technical subjects. I attended courses teaching me to teach. It's really not rocket science. I'm sure that 90% of people could do it.

Strangely enough. Teaching has nothing to do with knowledge of the subject. If a teacher is knowledgable of the subject... thats great. I personally worry with a teacher who never says "I dont know".

Getting back to teaching "Firearms, and tactics". Other than training provided by former employers I have never taken an organized shooting course from a private instructor. I'd like to ask those who have... Did they find the instruction objective, or subjective in nature?


Glenn
 
I plan on taking a class or two.

However, I wonder if some of the attitude against people that don't take classes isn't marketing hype.

I have read hundreds of stories of people that used firearms to defend themselves. I can not recall one story where the person had "training." Most said they went to the range.

I am not against training, but I don't agree with the idea that a American citizen cannot arm himself unless he attends a name brand combat class.
 
I don't agree with the idea that a American citizen cannot arm himself unless he attends a name brand combat class.
Click to expand...
No, but if you are going to carry seriously, I think it is prudent to gain all the experience and knowledge you can.

As I stated earlier, I learned a lot from hands-on with an instructor that I hadn't learned in years of reading and watching DVD's. Was I trained 'enough' to handle something if it came along before taking any classes? All I can say is 'maybe'.

Do I have better knowledge now? Yes, I do.
 
I plan on taking a class or two.However, I wonder if some of the attitude against people that don't take classes isn't marketing hype.
Click to expand...

This attitude is only shared by those who haven't taken classes from legitimate instructors. I'm sorry, but standing in a booth blasting away at a stationary target does nothing to improve your defensive skills.
 
I'm sorry, but standing in a booth blasting away at a stationary target does nothing to improve your defensive skills.
Click to expand...
Yeah... it does.
Click to expand...
I'm with ranburr on this one.

It may help you shoot better, tighter groups. Which does absolutely nothing to the attacker that is upon you before you can even get your gun up and aimed (or even out of the holster for that matter).
 
I have watched people draw their guns out of the holster and muzzle flash themselves and others and shoot three - four rounds and not even hit an FBI Q-Target from 5' away because the gun wasnt lined up with their arm properly. They had stated "I just took the NRA Home safety course and that was more than they will ever need for instruction, it's not rocket science you know." I packed my gear up and left.

DD
 
I'm in agreement with ranburr. Shooting at a stationary target in an indoor firing lane doesn't compare to quality training by an instructor. Not even close to comparison.
 
OK Please keep in mind that this is only my opinion...

Shooting live ammo at any target from your service, or personal protection gun will establish habits, and muscle memory.

The proper sight picture is a habit. Regular practice at any target will able the shooter a faster aqisition of the sight picture.

Presentation, and grip are habit, and promote muscle memory. In a self defense situation I believe that economy of movement, and an ingrained natural grip will serve the shooter well.

Under stress we tend to rely on our learned behaviour, and muscle memory. If things are happening very fast we can not afford to do a mental review.

I'm not suggesting that there is no need for formal training. In fact I truely believe anyone who carries a firearm on a regular basis would be a fool to not get some formal training. Problems I have with some formal training is too much information. To rigid a regimen. Instructors who cant see the forrest for the trees.

I am not an instructor. I am an instructee, with experience.

I believe that practice makes perfect.

I dont feel the need to pay someone to tell me that I'm hitting the bullseye wrong.


Glenn D.


:D
 
As I said, I am not against training per se. I have signed up for a class, and plan on taking a Suarez class. I am doing it for two reasons. First, I think improving my self defense skills is a good idea. Second, I think it will be fun.

Not having taken any classes to this point, I do not believe I should not carry a gun. Nor do I think that I will not prevail,if called upon to defend myself or my family.

First, very few bad guys are trained operators. Second, the armed victim has the element of surprise, in that the bad guy is not expecting a fight. Third, I have watched a number of DVDs. Fourth, I have practiced shooting and moving. Fifth, I have shot handguns since I was a kid.

Sixth and most importantly, I have read about many plain ole citizens defending themselves without formal training. If you listen to the marketing, you would be led to believe that none of these people would have been successful, since they did not have high end training.

Again I am not saying that training is not valuable. Someone that has been trained definitely has more skills than someone that has not been. I just don't buy into the idea that everyone needs to go to a high end class, or they should not be armed.
 
Glenn Dee said:
I'm not suggesting that there is no need for formal training. In fact I truely believe anyone who carries a firearm on a regular basis would be a fool to not get some formal training.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you mean anyone except you :confused: :
Problems I have with some formal training is too much information. To rigid a regimen. Instructors who cant see the forrest for the trees...I dont feel the need to pay someone to tell me that I'm hitting the bullseye wrong.
Click to expand...
skifast said:
and plan on taking a Suarez class
Click to expand...
Plan on having some of your sacred cows slaughtered ;)
 
Glenn Dee,

You are describing skills that will make you a first rate target shooter. Not much more than that.

Skifast,

Once you get into a class with Gabe, you are going to discover how little you really know.
 
Skifast,

When you get to take a class, if it’s a good one, you may be surprised? By the time I first attended Gunsite, I already had over a decade of conventional pistol and service rifle match shooting behind me, and had placed nationally in air pistol in '89. So, I figured I was well prepared to defend hearth and home. After the basic pistol class at Gunsite, I felt like I’d known next to nothing, previously. I had used how I imagined self-defense scenarios playing out to rationalize the adequacy of my preparation. In fact, I hadn't known even a minority percentage of what was important to dominate an armed confrontation of the self-defense kind. I also realized there was a lot more to learn. A one-week class isn’t enough to get it all, but it is sure enough to create a huge advantage over an untrained opponent.

The value of the training certainly wasn't just about the combat mode shooting mechanics. That may even be the least of it. It was the mindset lecture, which Cooper validated beyond the taped version with stories from his own experiences and those of his students, and more in the Q&A session afterward. It was the live fire simulators I couldn’t access any equivalent to on my own. It was simple things like how to go around corners or open a door that weren’t concrete to me before attending class and actually trying them in the Fun House. But more than that, it was the psychological advantage of getting individual critiquing from experienced instructors who had “seen the elephant” (a Gunsite instructor requirement) and have them express confidence that what I could demonstrate to them was ready for prime time. No imagination needed to fill in holes.

On the other hand, the bullseye background certainly eased my training. In my 250 class, I was the only student to clean the school target during final exam day. In both rifle classes I took, I won the shoot-offs at the end of class. That was the advantage of the service rifle match background. It made it easier for me, for example, to make standing snap shots on 100 yard poppers. That was psychological. A Highpower match doesn't involve snap shooting, but the popper just looked mammoth compared to the bullseye on an SR-1 target, so I couldn’t believe it wasn’t easy to hit, so it was.

I agree that range practice is valuable for neurological reasons. Anything you can do to grow brain connections that bypass conscious processing will speed things up in a pinch. Not even range time, but just dry fire practice can do a lot because you get better feedback about muzzle disturbance when it isn’t masked by recoil. Also, it mitigates association between dropping the hammer and muzzle blast and recoil, and that helps neutralize anticipating the recoil. The old bullseye shooter’s rule of thumb was to dry fire three rounds for every live round down range.

Gunsite promoted dry fire practice, too. They even teach safety measures for it. Their experience was you could typically go no more than two weeks without pressing a trigger before you started to lose your edge. Muscle memory has maintenance overhead that has to be met, as any competitive athlete can tell you.

When I took my NRA rifle instructor training, the councilor conducting it was Web Wright, who had a bronze star from combat in Vietnam and, at the time, still had a couple of world records standing in 300 meter International rifle. He said he’d been asked whether he found combat or match shooting stress more difficult to manage. He said, hands down, matches were tougher. In combat everything went into slow motion and in all the noise and confusion he went on auto-pilot. There wasn’t time to think, so he just did what needed to be done. In a match, though, there was all the time in the world to think about what could go wrong, and to let that affect your performance.

So, match shooting, and not just individual practice has training benefits. As Kraig said, it’s not an either/or choice. You can participate in all forms of training and practice and it can all benefit your shooting.
 
Smince.


Nope I meant everyone. Including me. In my origonal post on this thread I mentioned that I have been trained by my employer. I recieved training at least twice a year, and sometimes as many as four times a year. Depending on the assignment.

I am not a huge fan of know all, done all, our way or the highway super schools. But thats just my personal prefference.

As far as becoming a first rate target shooter? why not? In a self defense situation.. The B/G is a target... no? ...

Maybe I should attend one of these courses. I might have a change of heart.

My opinions are based on my own experiences and those of the people I have worked with. Though few they are. It works for me.


Glenn D
 
One of the fellows at that first Gunsite pistol class I took, which was about half private and half public sector students, was a hostage rescue team member from a friendly nation. He had just come from a week of training with former West German Stasi, and was off for some kind of intensive training week with our Green Berets after the class. He said he trained 9 months a year then was on call for 3.

An apocryphal tale: When I studied Chinese martial arts with the late Dr. Fred Wu, he liked to give an opening lecture to students in which he described an island where scorpions and a certain species of snake and a certain species of bird lived. The snake knew to climb to the birds nest when it was away and would ambush and kill it when it returned. The bird knew to get behind the scorpion and bite off the sting to get a meal. But because the snake always took its prey head on, when confronted by the scorpion it was stung and died. So the snake defeats the bird who defeats the scorpion who defeats the snake. Which has the superior style?

One size never fits all. Exposure to different ideas and doctrine are how you find what fits you. Part of the role of instructors is to instill their system, which is impossible to do in an orderly and timely fashion if the class is full of obstructionists. So, when in Rome, do as the Romans do. Embrace it. See what you can learn that way? But never hesitate to learn something different, regardless of how much brag the source does or doesn't put on it. You never know when or where you will encounter some little thing that makes a light go on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top