developing courses of fire

S

stuckatwork

New member
Hello,

A bunch of us at work have formed an action shooting club of sorts. In fact wejust had our first match this weekend. It went well and everyone had alot of fun. ***NEED TO BRAG ALERT*** Yours truly took the best shot of the day, two out of three on the head of a standard IDPA torso target at 100 yards off hand with a Beretta 92FS. (appluase) :D

(don't ask me to do that again) ;)

Anyway,I amlooking forsome suggestions for courses of fire that use both pistol and rifle. Does anyone have any that they are willing to share? Thanks!



------------------
You can find the price of freedom, buried in the ground.
 
I once recreated the subway "Bernie Goetz-style geek faces off with punks" scene from Predator II. Three targets at 1 to 3 yards, shooter with made-safe gun in briefcase on the lap, sitting in a folding chair.

Funny thing, even those who were laughably slow to present the weapon still hosed the targets desperately fast. Some from both the "fast" and "slow" draw groups STILL had invisible misses!

I like to approximate situations drawn from the current year's citizen and LEO shootings, occasionally using situations where there was no one to shoot back at the BGs.

Try replicating the LA bank robbery situation where the perps were wearing body armor, and see how many of the IPSC folks whine about 50+ yard head shots being "unrealistic" or "impractical!"
 
IPSC folks whining about impracticalities? Hey we actually have fifty yard shots in our matches. I believe you are bagging on the wrong sport IDPA is the sport that the suggest no shooting over fifteen yards. I will take and make fifty yard shot all day with my IPSC guns.
 
OOPS!! I've been brainwashed (brainfaded?) by all of the IDPA folks' chanting about "practical" and grafted their bad logic into the I Practical SC group.

By their logic, airline pilots should *only* practice normal landings because landing gear failures are SO RARE!!

BAH!!

I say train for the extremes, and train harder for the more difficult skills.

Love the IDPA rationale, but they are as kookie in many ways as the ISPC gang's been with the "keep the rules simple" mantra which led to snap-in/pop out when you sit in a car seat holsters that *still* passed the retention test.

Mandatory concealed carry (for all but a few specialized scenarios) is just as silly and restrictive, IMO.

The "box" is a good idea.

Anyway, back to designing courses of fire...I used to design each month's shoot with one course of fire scored Comstock, one scored for points with a par time, and one scored with time is your score. Factored all by the best performance being 100 (percent) and all other scores being some lesser two-digit number, and just added all three for the aggregate.

The idea was to test, respectively, DVC, pure accuracy under time limit, and pure speed shooting. Balance the skills.
 
Go to the USPSA web page and download some of the classifier stages. They're boring to shoot for an IPSC shooter, but may be fun for some IDPA shooters.
 
IDPA believes in part that targets should remain at close yardage so all shooters will be able to hit them. This is to encourage new shooters and it works. The cowboy shooters have a similar philosophy. Assuming everyone can hit them, the stop watch does the rest.

I too shoot at a lot of long yardage targets and I enjoy it. But I also agree with IDPA's philosophy. There is room for both schools of thought. Like Leatham said, "...just because the COF is close or simple doesn't make it easy." The El Presidente is close and simple. Doing it in five seconds sure ain't easy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top