Gaming vs. Training

B

Bartholomew Roberts

Moderator
Recently, I was listening to one of the American Warrior Show podcasts hosted by Mike Seelander. He had Rob Leatham on as a guest. That podcast inspired this post; but first let me wind the clock back on my own training.

I started shooting IDPA around 2000; because I wanted to become better trained for concealed carry and at that time I didn't know any other place to practice those skills. When I would shoot, I would see guys scout out the scenario. They would look at it, practice movement, they'd even do dryfire runs. At the time, I considered this "gaming" and an unrealistic approach to the real purpose behind the sport.

Fast forward to 2008 or so and I have done multiple shooting schools and I am doing simunitions work in force-on-force scenarios. One of the things I realize very quickly in doing this is that your weapon handling skills have to be autonomous - like walking or driving. You have to be able to execute them flawlessly without conscious thought because you already have a whole lot to think about and if you aren't at that level, your OODA loop gets overwhelmed quickly.

Flash forward even further to the podcast, Rob Leatham talks about a guy with multiple combat deployments with special operations telling him competition is more stressful than being in a firefight because in a firefight, things just happen and you respond to it. In a competition, the stress of planning his next move and thinking through the scenario was greater to him. And that is where I had the thought that what I had discarded as "gaming" was actually a skill that was really useful in a fight - being at the level that your weapon manipulations were so autonomous that your brain was freed up to worry about things like foot placement, movement, most efficient use of time, etc.

It occurred to me that while the worries might not be the same, the ability to operate the weapon autonomously while having brain power free to assess the situation was a very critical skill in a fight.

Thoughts?
 
Our brains work on many levels.
Skill (how to do it) comes from the sub conscious and decision making (when and if to do it) comes from the conscious mind.
Having to take time to think about how to do something is way too slow.
But reacting without thought leads to errors.
But it takes a lot of practice and training to get to that point for each part of the brain doing what it does best.
 
OK, IDPA is a game (as are PPC, USPSA, CAS, etc.). Some folks "play nice" (using their actual carry weapon, holster & ammo carrier) while some are "gamers" (using the biggest allowable handgun, holster that barely meets the requirements, lightest allowable ammo). Big deal.

I shoot IDPA because it's fun and any trigger time that mimics use of my actual carry gun is good familiarization/practice. Since I carry a snub revolver, I have been shooting SSR (revolver) class, albeit with a 4" revolver. Since IDPA now recognizes new classes, including short-barreled revolvers, my next match may well see me using my snubbie.

While I'll never be a national competitor, the practice under stress and competition against my fellow shooters will certainly do me no harm if & when I need to use my weapon defensively. Personally, I believe there is a "stress innoculation" value in competitive shooting, games or no.
 
I agree with SCBair. I shoot somewhat irregular IDPA and this question came up the other day. Though some IDPA rules are contrary to what you would do in a survival situation I figure it still must help one keep a certain amount of cool under pressure to think a way through a course of fire. Or maybe not and I am just full of it. Either way, like others, I participate to get trigger time in an unconventional environment. It sure can't hurt.
 
It occurred to me that while the worries might not be the same, the ability to operate the weapon autonomously while having brain power free to assess the situation was a very critical skill in a fight.
Click to expand...

Have been saying that for about 20 years now. I "train" a few SWAT guys, but it is purely on shooting techniques and fundamentals. They "train" me back with some team tactics and such. We both benefit.

I call it the cognitive stack, and most people can handle at most 5 items. If weapons manipulation, movement and safety are ingrained, then you have more to be able to solve the fluid problem. If you have to think about those things, then you have little, if any left to solve problems. Competition presents a static problem, and it is different, but you still see the safety get set aside when people are going balls to the wall. There are not a lot of people who have competed at a high level for a significant amount of time without a DQ, but Greg Jordan, also a cop and very top level competitor has never DQ'd.

You throw a blind stage, an induced malfunction, or a new condition at some competitors, they fall apart. In most cases, the well trained LE/Mil often end up with those types of stages giving them their best scores.

All trigger time is good time, but competition, by itself is not training in actual tactics, regardless of what Joyce thinks. I think the vast majority of people understand that as well. :D
 
All trigger time is good time, but competition, by itself is not training in actual tactics, regardless of what Joyce thinks. I think the vast majority of people understand that as well
Click to expand...

I concur, and some people understand that. there are more than a few that think IDPA is REAL world tactical training.:rolleyes: We are just card board assassins because they do not shoot back and after you have a few matches behind you the stress level drops dramatically waiting on the buzzer. You want stress find a place with a simulator and see what its like to have the potential to loose your life in a simulated world
 
There is no ' Gaming vs. Training'.

Even gaming is a form of training as it sharpens the mind at finding a way.

I find benefits with virtually any shooting game. The trick is to keep it in perspective and know the difference between playing a game and playing for keeps.

Deaf
 
In IDPA, I've found that beginners think they are training. People into it for awhile are quite aware of the game aspects. However, the practice of basic skills, some stress, etc. are quite useful.
 
Well, while I've always recognized the usefulness of weapons manipulation skills from IDPA, it was the "walkthroughs" and trying to plan out the stage I saw as "gaming". After all, it isn't like you get a walkthrough of a real life scenario. It wasn't until listening to the podcast I realized those guys were developing an important skill though - teaching their brain to think through other problems while manipulating the weapon autonomously.
 
I have been competing in IDPA and IPSC for nearly 30 years. I never view competition is training. It is mostly a fun game with some practical skills that can be used in SD. Most of important for me, it is a way to verify my training (dry practice and other non-competition shootings) under stressful conditions. Secondarily, it is a good way to stress test equipments and ammunition.

I agree that walk though and planning the stage is very gaming. However, from an administrative (governing body, match director, range owners…) prospective, it is a necessary task to minimize risks. In real life, you don’t know where the BGs are located, once discovered, you maybe breaking the 180 degree rule to quickly put rounds on target, but this is unthinkable in a competition where the #1 goal is safety, thus the walk though to minimize surprises.
 
Last edited:
There's ways to make things more life like.
Running stages in the dark, or at least very low light, if the proceedings are being held indoors, for example.
Or a night match if outdoors.
Wearing gas welding goggles works in daylight, too.
Another way is not revealing the layout of the course of fire until the shooter enters the area.
No run throughs then, of course.
And blocking off the range into separate areas with vision barriers.
If possible use a 360 degree range, too.
Or use the side berms as a front and back range if possible if a 360 isn't available.
There's plenty of things that can be incorporated in a match, training or practice session to increase some sense of reality a bit more.
 
Last edited:
Gun games can certainly foster good gun handling skills and marksmanship but context is very important. Consider how you take shots, how you position yourself and how you navigate a stage while being timed. Consider how many things you do simply because its the "rules" of the game. Consider how you "mimic" the use of cover only to the degree that you are forced to.

After all that, consider how you would actually go against a threat if it were real, if the danger were real and the badguy on the other side of that wall posed a real threat. Gun games do it all different, why not.. its a game. Gun games are more of a timed dance which incorporates marksmanship. Tactical training is practice for the real thing... gun games are practice for more gun games.

Can you draw certain aspects from a gun game and apply those elements to fighting training,.. sure, but why? If you want to participate in a gun game sport.. great. If you want armed self defense training, that's something different in my estimation.
 
Last edited:
It sounds as if anything that introduces variables and stress into a shooting activity is helpful. Even plinking at jugs and cans thrown downrange provides good training; you are shooting at indistinct targets at varying ranges, that also give instant feedback for hits--as well as being fun. Periodically shooting an unfamiliar gun on occasion provides a cognitive challenge.
 
What is really helpful is:

Proper Context
Proper Mindset
Proper Tactics
Proper Strategics

In regards to lawful self defense training its- fight like you train... not- train like you game.
 
Action pistol shooting is not "training"* or "practice", but it is going to test some of the skills you learned via training and honed in practice. It is, as the OP noted, a way to pressure test your ability to run your gun with a high degree of automaticity.

Great Brian Searcy quote from a S.W.A.T. article back in '09:

"Having shot almost every type of competetive [sic] sport from skeet to bull's-eye to Service Rifle and IPSC, Searcy believes it is impossible to improve without shooting in competition, as you will inevitably plateau if shooting only on a square range by yourself. The stress of being against the clock, against other shooters and having an audience watch you forces you to develop the mental management necessary to execute the correct subconscious weapons handling skills under pressure."
Click to expand...


*No matter how much the fishing vest crowd would like to pretend it is. ;)
 
RE: Tamara's post #15--
Massad Ayoob has made the same point many times; that's one reason he competes in so many shooting sports as well as trains continually.
 
I have been shooting IDPA since 2003. I use my carry gun, holster and before I retired in 2011 my carry ammo.

I love the trigger time and the scenarios though I know its not "training".
 
Not all "move-n-shoot" practice is equal.

If you're only gaming it (e.g., IDPA IPSC), you ain't training. Sure, you'll get some level of benefit from the gaming, but only for that static application.

For a comprehensive skill-set, you need to incorporate into your regimen Force-on-Force/2-way simunition-type training (with multiple peeps/actors, no stationary paper, everybody scooting & moving), along with current handgun and/or carbine defensive training.

That will add the most effective cumulative benefit to your armed defensive skill-set.
 
I recall an article a couple years back... an idpa competitor was carjacked and forced at gunpoint to a money machine. Somehow, he got the gun away from the assailants and according to witnesses, "shot the h-ll out of them".

Yeah, gun sports aren't force training...but I'd put my $ on a uspsa GM vs a street thug any day!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top