IS TRAINING OF ANY USE - PART 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
a minor correction to Dr. Rob; women have better *fine motor coordination* than men, but generally not as good gross motor skills. which makes perfect sense in the natural selection viewpoint, as men had to go out and chop wood, bonk saber-tooth tigers, and fight the neighboring tribe, whereas the womenfolk had to make the clothing (a critical survival issue back before houses and central heating), do minor surgery, etc. specialization can be a powerful survival trait.

when "core memory" was developed for computers, the computer industry found that they *had* to use women for making it. core memory consists of these tiny little iron rings called "cores", about which really tiny copper wires are wound. if I recall correctly there were 3 coils on each core; one to set the bit by magnetizing the ring, one to unset, and one to "read" the core. men did not have the fine manual dexterity to wind those little coils, so the computer companies brought in hundreds of women to sit there looking thru a microscope winding coils.

I have been expecting women to start beating men at the shooting sports, since they have a natural advantage (again, on a statistical basis) in trigger control. judging from the recent NRA highpower championships, it may have started. :0
 
re: "women have better *fine motor coordination* than men, but generally not as good gross motor skills."

Interesting point. In shooting competition where adrenaline is NOT a factor, maybe women can exceed mens performance.

My understanding is that under extreme stress, with an "adrenaline dump", your fine motor skills disappear and gross motor skills are left. Would this mean that men, with their better gross motor skills, have an advantage under high stress? Any of the M.D.'s care to comment?
 
I've been evaluating many arts of training in Pistols/Rifles and other weapons.

If you take all advises from them all, you will be in limbo.

I think the best solution is to see which is fitted to use in an actual situation whenever it arises.

I read "Smith-Wesson-com Academy, one of the Writer discusses very well the pros and cons of Sight Shooting and Point Shooting. He uses Colonel/s Applegate and Cooper as main author of these two methods of shooting.

I read US Army Markmanship website and it articulates many ways of stances and training in shooting.

All are good to read and good to practice.

I just remember an uncle of my wife who is a Judge and at the same time a Religious Minister of one Christian Sect. We discusses a lot of religions, then he advise me and gave me an example like "If we eat a fish, we only take the skin and disregards the bones". So, in reading and accumulating many trainings, those that we cannot really understand just leave it that way.

My first training in pistol is very informal. No gadgets, like ear protection, sunglasses, target paper or any thing. Except that I target twigs of trees, trunk of mangoes on our yards and sometimes bottles of San Miguel Beer.

Only lately that I have target shooting on combat as they are talking when I join gun club where the police, military, agents are members, and only when I was in the city that I experienced on shooting at close ranges with fees.

But my informal training with my hand guns helps me in some formal competition for I am already used to handle a pistol or revolver beforehand.

Before I take formal Martial Arts schooling, I am already knocking down banana trees on our back yards.

So, I can say that "Training has many usage" be it informal without famous certificates from famous gun school and martial arts school, if you are doing it properly then there is a use and you develop a skill, nomatter what, it is by the book or outside the book.

I have no formal education in assembling Dsktop Personal Computers but I can assemble and and make it into a running systems. For I trained myself to make one and study parts by parts by my self in actual and with the help of books and manuals.

Thus training is important and has use. Perhaps, some guys are exceptional, who did not shoot pistols and revolvers but knows very well to handle already. Or perhaps someone who did not go basic in karate or boxing and went to a club and challenge the well practiced students and he became a champion.

I always agree that training has no substitute, it always has use.

thank you,
 
"You nor anyone else has yet to post a validated source for MMR and you won't find one."

Good grief, we don't have to go over this AGAIN do we??? I see a circular trend here, and I am going to try to bow out of it ("throwing pearls before swine" comes to mind).

Personally, I sense a troll here more than anything else.


Long Path - Excellent post! Took the words right out of my mouth. Pluspinc has some nice statistics, but we have to look a little deeper, because these kinds of statistics do not tell the whole story. Criminals hit more because they are assasins and they effectively sneak up and shoot victims point blank. These criminals are calling the shots and making the rules. They create the arena and you come and play in it when they choose, by their rules. This gives them a distinct advantage and more likelyhood of hitting the target (but really, we have seen how poorly bad guys miss their targets...I have a very hard time believing that they hit their intended target %91 of the time. They might hit somebody, an innocent bystander, but that does not mean they hit their target)
Action beats reaction. They don't have to think about someone shooting back because they are shooting an innocent person. The person that is defending himself has a whole new set of issues to deal with.

[This message has been edited by Red Bull (edited March 04, 2000).]
 
Being new to this forum I find it interesting. I attended a few basic classes from Plusp. I just spent two years in Ireland and used his concepts every day. Ireland is very tense at all times and such knowledge is very good.
I'm glad to be home where the law allows me to defend myself. Ireland is an armed camp but nobody talks about it. I found it amazing how many weapons from the big war still remain in private hands, but you have to get to know people to discuss it.
 
Interesting thread. I work in emergency medicine professionally, and until recently was an avid skydiver. I enjoy adrenaline and its effects. Here are my observations FWIW.

"percieved" stress, that is the amount of stress you are feeling, plays a tremendous role in my performance- both mentally and physically.

When my percieved stress is low I am able to perform all physical tasks with ease, and am also able to remain objective and maintain situational awarness.

When my percieved stress is high I notice a small amount of fine motor loss but am still able to perform complex motions such as tying sutures, weild a scalpel accurately, manipulate airways, etc.... I am also able to maintain objectivity and situational awarness BUT it is much more difficult.

What causes my percieved stress to increase? Oddly enough it is not the situation. Because of extensive training and repetition, the most heinous trauma's/emergencies can be handled adeptly. No, my percieved stress skyrockets when I do not have a "handle" on the situation, i.e. things are gong bad, I don't know why and therefore cannot put into motion an effective plan of action. To be sure I do something, in fact all that I can, but my stress level increases dramatically.

Through training, training, training, and more training I notice a only small loss of fine motor coordination when the skills are performed under stress. The battle to remain situationally aware is more difficult but with pratice can also be mastered.

I have noticed no difference between men and women, with respect to performance under stress, in my job or leisure activities.

IMHO

regards,

Olazul
 
I'll be taking my first professional training next weekend with Chuck Taylor. To his credit, PlusP grudgingly admitted that someone could possibly, just maybe,perhaps, it's possible, learn something from Chuck :)
[Link to invalid post]
 
Covert, I don't think gross motor skills are much of an advantage unless things deteriorate to a retention situation or bonking the BG with the proverbial Heavy Blunt Object. now if we are talking about clubs, sticks, and stone knives, then I'm pretty sure the male has the genetic advantage (again, statistically speaking).

olazul's comments are quite interesting. I'll couch my discussion in terms of the brain as a general-purpose computer. perhaps when the input data (the situation as perceived) matches the current running program (i.e. "stop the bleeding and stabilize life signs" or "defend myself from the bad guy"), then the stress level stays moderate and the response follows the "program" output. in situations where the input data doesn't match up with the program, then the brain starts checking data instead of "running the program" which might be called panic.

a lot of research on the mind indicates that the brain essentially does case-based reasoning. in other words, "four legs, antlers, rather small, must be whitetail deer. either shoot at it or ignore it." perhaps in stressful situations, the brain functions efficiently when all the data matches a case for which the brain knows the correct response and likely outcome. when the data doesn't match a known case (e.g. a T. Rex comes lurching down Main Street headed straight for you), then maybe panic ensues because the brain can't find an existing case and thus the corresponding program to run.

well, its a theory...
 
The T-Rex wasn't on Main Street, it was on 3rd in San Diego.

Oh, we're not talking movies?

Harken and hear the ONE TRUE PATH:

Train the mechanical motions of operating your machinery so it can be done with as little conscious thought as walking and chewing gum. Do not call it muscle memory lest you offend hair-splitters. But have your automatic physical operations in place.

Think and visualize to prepare yourself mentally for whatever threat level you consider important to be prepared for. Like the in-flight engine failure drill, this will serve you well and minimize the "let's stop and thing about what all this means and what I should do" pause in your actions.

Once you have done all this training, you will be better prepared for any situation which unfolds in such a way that you can actually respond to it. Was it Wild Bill Hickok who was shot in the back of the head while playing cards? Okay, IF you're not aware that a loony tune out for blood is in the room, no training can prepare you for that situation.

Maybe PlusP is correct, but ONLY for the ohcrap situations which result in the panic response. Belive me, the real-life footage I saw of the first day of Waco murders showed a lot of LEOs popping away with various levels of adherence to their training. But delivering suppressive fire to a building from behind a patrol car 100 yards away when you know there are plenty of other targets for your opponents to choose is quite unlikely to elicit panic.

Stress, yes, but not the panic that Darrel seems fixated upon.

So, training works. Until you panic. Good guys are more likely to enter panic mode because the bad guys are in attack mode before you know they're a threat.

But I say that the proper training and mindset will minimize the chances of getting into panic mode. Your genetics will be a factor, but I seem to remember that some folks could overcome their genetics and get sexually aroused at the sight of a sewing machine... Plug that into your over-used sex analogies.

Even if you're one who's "genetically" most likely to go into deer-in-the-headlights freeze panic mode, you should still train for those situations which do not elicit panic.

Oh yeah, point shooting is okay out to maybe five yards (next week I might say ten, who knows?).

Have we beat this horse dead enough yet?

And yes, Darrel, it should be taught as bone-simple as possible.
 
A last wack.

Current shooting methods are not used
in cq gunfights.

Sighted shooting is not used.

Point Shooting is not used.

Point you gun and blast away is used.

I suggest P&S. It is a natural method
of aiming instinctively and shooting
that is automatic, fast, and accurate,
and can be used when firing multiple
times.

It is not Sighted shooting of some type
or Point Shooting as used and understood.
 
okjoe:

How do you know? You ever been in a gunfight? I have and I used my sights (in combat, in Vietnam). It works...I'm still here and although I didn't take time to acquire a perfect sight picture, I distinctly know that I acquired a flash sight picture.

The majority of instructors out there who teach and write (and who have combat experience) write and teach of flash sight pictures. Hmmm...I think I'll go with what I know works and what the best of the best out there go with.

Mike
 
Ok, one more go around. For elaboration on my position, please take a look at the post in Part One of this comedy.

C'mon Plus, none of the criminals that I am aware of hit 91% of the time in a gunfight. A gunfight is one thing, sneaking up behind someone and blowing his mind all over his partners while they're standing around is another thing altogether. Anyone, even someone using a rusty gun with the sights ground off and a bent barrell, could probably do that. Big deal!

The difference between the good guys and the criminals is not one of shooting skill or technique, it is a matter of deliberation. Most "good guys" are reluctant to kill, hence hesitation, hence poor performance. Bad Guys, because they are bad guys, have no such rstrictions and are more capable of "violence without hesitation".

If we need to look at anything we need to look at the development of a pseudo-predator attitude that will go "offensive" when attacked instead of turning into digested pita bread soup when someone becomes threatening.

As far as the "2 dimensional paper targets are a waste of time because they don't shoot back" b.s. - Square range training and shooting paper targets is a developmental step in the acquisition of skill.

If you want any sort of development, you cannot take a highschool kid, put him in an Indy Racer and say "GO"! This is just what many trainers are advocating. Training is training, it is not an entertainment session. You want to be entertained, go to Disneyland!

You learn the basics on a square range with paper targets. You graduate to moving and shooting the same targets. Next you use closer 3D depictions of humans for the same drills. You involve some force-on-force with simmunitions later and then turn up the heat with heavy role-play scenarios. But you never forget the square range and paper targets because its the basics that will save your ass every time.

I'm curious Mr. Plus, just how many real gunfights, against real tattooed, on parole, enemies of our country criminals-bent-on-killing-you have you been in?

Gabe Suarez
HALO Group http://www.thehalogroup.com
 
I have enjoyed both the first and second threads very much. Hell, I was having the same conversations 20 years ago and nothing has changed. I just want to thank Gabe for casting his "pearls before swine" by adding some common sense and hard fought experience to this discussion.

I for one refuse to put the MIM parts and factory tube back in my .45 and start "spraying and praying" in the dark in the name of formal self defense training. There isn't a darn thing wrong with paper targets, timers, and being ankle deep in brass...
 
6forsure:

No,never with a pistol...but, I thought we were talking about using sights. Is the principle that much different between a long gun and a short gun?

One more thing, my experience after training at Gunsite in the early 1980s and in the military and in IPSC/IDPA have taught me one thing: use your sights and hit the target. Don't use them and miss...period.

Mike

[This message has been edited by Mike Spight (edited March 05, 2000).]
 
In my view based on conjecture, competition shooting doesn't prepare for combat. It does, however, prepare for "oh damn my gun isn't working!" case so you'd fix the jam or misfeed rather than freeze up.
 
Oleg:

If that's the case, the only way to prepare for handgun combat is to go out and engage. Not that many people, including professional LEOs, ever have that opportunity.

Short of a gunfight, training and competition are about as good as it's gonna get. Jeff Cooper has also written that the shooting of big game, along with compeition, will help prepare one for a gunfight. Jim Cirillo, prior to his stint on the NYPD Stake Out Unit, was a highly ranked PPC shooter. The late Bill Jordan and Charles Askins were accomplished compeition shooters and gunfighters....Hmmmm, sounds like something works here.

Mike
 
No need to knock PlusP to defend yourself.

I am not here to defend him or you. He is
a big boy I am sure and can take care of
himself quite well.

I say that P&S works and that it is better
than what any of you trainers propose as
a good cq shooting method.

I came up with the idea of the P&S index
finger rest after seeing the shootout of the
state patrol/sherrif and the two brothers
who were wanted by the police in a tv
video.

One of the brothers and the cop were about
15 feet or less apart. Both dumped their
guns and hit nothing but air.

I thought to myself: "they need help!!!."

It's like this, I thought you trainers and
the cops knew what you were doing with
guns. It was obvious to a non shooter
like me that something was wrong.

How many of the 20,000 dead in Vietnam and
cops since then would still be alive if you
trainers knew how to train. Bravado and bs
doesn't cut it with me.

The 900 + videos show that current training
methods are not used in gunfights.

How many videos have you seen and can
reference that show your shooting methods
hitting or killing the bad guys as you
gun folk like to call them???

Got facts???

Police acuraccy rates per the FBI suck, If
the FBI or you trainers knew how to train,
they would be better. More killed crooks,
less crime, and etc...

It seems to me, most folks would be better
served using hand grenades than attending
shooting schools.

Blaming the dead or shot for being dead or
shot, is a copout, no pun intended.

Edited 6:17 Pacific Time

[This message has been edited by okjoe at aol.com (edited March 05, 2000).]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top