Practical Vs. Tactical

[Lurper]

Obi we have been agreeing too much lately so, I have to post this.

Incidentally, having some successful gunfighter say he thought his competition experience helped him is just that ....anecdotal....how would he know for sure?

It is still hard to predict who will do well in an armed confrontation

It isn't hard to predict. That is why all of the best units train fanatically every day. I know we are talking about the civilian arena, but the crossover is obvious. Those who train harder perform better, those who train under pressure perform better under pressure. There is plenty of empirical evidence that shows that pressure comes from within and managing that pressure coupled with training to the point that shooting mechanics become second nature make for performance in real life. Why do you think FOF, FATS, kill houses, etc. all came about. It is proven that training under pressure/stress improves performance under stress. I don't think anyone can really argue that point.

If just one person said that competition helped them, that would be one thing, but there are many people who say that. These are not just average LEO's etc., they are legendary in their skill.

For civilians especially, competition can be extremely valuable because many don't have access to the types of facilities that offer FOF and other advanced types of training. But most have access to clubs that hold competitions.

 

[threegun]

Lurper, The reason why I and other know you are right is because every professional at whatever activity trains until the activity is second nature. This doesn't guarantee that said professional won't choke at the moment of truth however said professional is no worst for the training.

Obiwan, You seem to think that we (those in support of competition as a way to enhance the ability to survive a gunfight) don't already understand that competition doesn't guarantee success in a fight. We understand this clearly as NO training equals a guarantee. Many on this board however disregard competition as useless and that is our problem. What type of training is best....only the individual can answer that based on what his or her stress level raising requirements are. Mine are low. Yours may be higher. Sucks to be you because you are going to need more costly training to train under high stress levels.

 

[RockyMtnTactical]

Anything that gets you trigger time, that gets you more familiar with your weapons (second nature), that puts some amount of pressure on you to consider time/accuracy will improve your chances in real world scenarios...

There are different levels of training. The most basic is what most shooters do, shoot at the range.

Weapon familiarity, mag changes and malfunction drills, weapon transition, shooting with time and accuracy being judged would be the second level IMO.

Training with others and against others would be the third (and highest) level it would seem, outside of real engagements.

 

[Bruxley]

For realistic training and scenarios, what school of shooting do you think will best serve you in the real world outside of the range?

Realistic folks.. Not muscle memory training. Scenarios not course. We so easily forget the premise eh.

Paintabls, by the way, are a 6 where SIMUNITIONS are a hard 10 on the pain meter. Paintballs do not prepare you for a sim hit.

Realistic training and scenarios..........why is there such a debate?

AHH argument for arguements sake....again.

Please guys. Here for info, wisdom, benefit of combined experience, at least I am. I'll join a debate team if I want to flex argument tactics and training.

 

[OBIWAN]

So that nobody misunderstands where I am coming from

I see the ability to make rapid accurate shots as about 25% of the entire skill set.

A very important 25%.

And a very perishable skill..one that needs practice as well as training...but those two are not the same thing

Training adresses a lot of the other 75%...and most (but not all) competition is much more practice than training IMO


"It isn't hard to predict."


Then your skills should be very marketable...because those "best units" throw a much larger group into training than come out the other end

Wonder why they waste their time?

The SEALS need Lurper...think of the $$$ savings if the only guys attendings BUDS were the ones that had IT



There have been plenty of cases of very well trained, skilled people screwing the pooch when TSHTF

Even people that have survived previous encounters have found themselves floundering and were not really certain why

Why is it that some people wash out of advanced training

I agree that any/all trigger time is good...as long as you are not reinforcing bad habits

One of the bad habits that I see competition reinforcing (with some people-not all) is the utter dependence on the handgun

Other than NTI I know of no "competition" where the whole force continuum is stressed

When is the last time you saw OC used at an IDPA match

Too many people see every encounter as a nail and their pistol as a hammer

Threegun gets it "This doesn't guarantee that said professional won't choke at the moment of truth however said professional is no worst for the training"

But who specifically has said they "disregard competition as useless " I have somehow missed that

 

[Lurper]

Then your skills should be very marketable...because those "best units" throw a much larger group into training than come out the other end

Wonder why they waste their time?

It isn't hard to predict. If you have a spectrum that goes:

no training---------------moderate training---------------------daily training

It isn't hard to predict that the farther to the right you go on the spectrum, the better the performance. That is proven everyday. Performance under pressure has no coorelation to washing out in training. Plenty of the top IPSC shooters have consulted with the military and LEO's top units. In fact there is more and more research that indicates what may lead to better performance. See the latest Force Science Newsletter.

Here is the philosophical difference:
In my experience, that of my friends and the shootings I have studied, tactics for civilians are useless. The single most important ability is the ability to hit the target quickly. Historically, the person who scores the first hit usually wins. Therefore, hitting quickly equates to survival.

Now, there are tactics that come in handy. If you are forced to clear your house for example (I teach that you should retreat to a safe room and wait for police). Clearing your house or investigating a noise outside should only be done under the most dire of circumstances. Seeking cover is usually pointless asl well. How much cover do you really have in your house? Most walls are not impenetrable, so seeking cover isn't really possible. Seeking cover when you should be engaging the target can be fatal. The single best way to survive is to remove the threat, the fastest way to remove the threat is to put lead on the target quickly.

All of the things mentioned have value in regards to the second part of the question, it is just a question of which is the most applicable.

 

[threegun]

Lurper, I agree in that most civilian gun fights that I have seen (on tv or web) and all the gunfights which my friends were involved required no tactics just draw and fire or aim and fire. Of the three friends involved none used tactics or even had any tactical training and all survived. Only one was wounded and only because the home invader was to close to her husband and she had to hit him in the side of his torso to avoid hitting hubby. The perp fired back hitting her in the arm before she ended the fight with a head shot. In any case the major requirement was hitting the bad guy ASAP. One fight ender was a leg shot of all things. A hit to the calf no less. Gun was dropped perp fled fight over. Of the things I've seen speed and accuracy were the savior. My limited research mimics what you are stating.

 

[Danzig]

Simunition (known to us military folk as UTM (ultimate training munitions)) are wonderful for training. And incredibly painful. Nothing like pain to remind you when you screwed up!

 

[Covert Mission]

Off the top of my (flat) head...

I shoot USPSA, have shot a lot of IDPA, have taken many tac pistol courses from multiple trainers, and have LE firearms training. It's all good, each in it's own way.

The competition keeps your gun handling skills polished. It's said that shooting skill (accuracy) are degraded 30-50% under extreme stress. If you compete and practice (perfect practice!) regularly, by my theory your shooting will degrade less under duress than if you don't compete and practice. As Larry Vickers says, "Speed is fine, but accuracy is final" and of course, the more of each, the better. I recall an IPSC or IDPA competitor who responded to the aid of a cop under fire, and engaged and took out 1-2 BGs. He later said..."It seemed just like just another shooting problem, like at a match. My experience kicked in, I hit my targets fast and accurately, and then it was over." Sounds simple, doesn't it? Maybe he didn't stop to think beyond doing what he had to do to end the fight. I'm sure stress kicked in greatly afterwards.

FOF scenarios, well done, teach you to use your brain, not just your trigger finger. The brain is the ultimate weapon. The best FOF/"real" type thing I've experienced was a live fire match where we had photorealistic bad guy targets that popped up and appeared where they weren't moments before (like outside the door as you exited the room that you just cleared, complete with real hostage), rooms to clear, outdoor cover hiding multiple BGs including pop-ups, live screaming witnesses to deal with...VERY stressful. Was like responding to a mass shooting. The course of fire lasted about 3-4 mins, felt like 20, my heart rate was probably 180 at the end, and my legs were rubber. No incoming sims or Airsoft....that would have been even better. It was incredibly stressful, but a great learning experience that no IDPA/IPSC can equal.

I'd love to do the NTI sometime. I think I'm gonna try to set up a local Airsoft match with BGs shooting back sometime. If you get a chance to shoot a video laser simulator, they're very cool. Our SO has one where to controller can shoot at you with Airsoft if you're not using cover, are too slow, etc.

It's all good, and as much as you can get of each is better. Be safe.

 

[Luis Leon]

IDPA, IPSC, 3-Gun & Multi-gun matches

All the above have made me a better gun handler. And its the main reason I attend matches. To practice weapons manipulation, basically, mag changes on my AR, feeding my pump shotgun fast, and then actually shooting them. Shooting while moving, weapon transitions, watching your 180, finger out of triggerguard, etc. For me shooting, reloading, clearing malfunctions while on the clock have made a big difference. I realize none of the above make me an operator and I have no delusions, I just like to play those games. And have become proficient with all my weapons, pistol, shotgun and rifle because of all it. I will say that my video gaming skills really did improve because of IDPA, slicing the pie and all.

I will be taking my first official handgun course in August, Combative Pistolcraft 1 and 2. I expect to learn some real-world relevant stuff. But at the end of it all I will still be just a regular guy.

regards,

Luis Leon

P.S. I've shot dozens of matches and I still get very excited over the courses of fire and going to town on the cardboard, steel, and clays with my guns

 

[David Armstrong]

Even FOF so coveted by many isn't a guarantee of handling GF pressures.

Nothing is a guarantee. However, I've been in and talked with lot others who have done IDPA, IPSC, FoF, and real gunfights, and while NONE have ever said that IDPA or IPSC was at all like the real thing, many have said FoF was as stressful as a real gunfight.

 

[David Armstrong]

Thosands david? Just as cooly? Thousands? You got anything to back that up? I'd like to see your stats on that!

Why? Every time you’ve been given stats on other stuff you’ve ignored them, denied them, or argued about them. But yes, deaf, THOUSANDS. THOUSANDS of soldiers and police officers have operated quite cooly under combat conditions without ever playing a gun game. THOSANDS of DGU incidents have occurred, with relatively few of them involving gun gamers.

Askins wrote in his book that the pressure of matches was HUGE.

So what? My mother feels that there is HUGE pressure driving in a major metro area. But that has nothing to do with gunfighting. Nobody is denying there can be pressure. The question is if the pressure of playing a game equates to preparing one for the pressure of an actual gunfight.

 

[David Armstrong]

Please cite said research.

Check any valid stress research. In fact you are the only person I’ve ever seen to claim that pressure can only come from within. Heck, a common classification splits things up into internal and external stressors.

Most research in fact does say that stress can be controlled and even many of reactions that some claim cannot be.

Nobody disagrees, AFAIK, at least to some extent. Stress can be controlled. Stress reactions can be controlled. The questions are how it can be controlled, how effective the control is, and so on. But all the research indicates that given the right circumstances involuntary stress reactions will occur. The statrtle factor is still there, even if it is way off in the background. But you can still be startled. Can you train to reduce the onset of the occurrence? Sure. But that doesn’t do much for you when the onset still is reached. Of course, that also ignores the fact that few people will have the resources to even begin to have enough training/experience to start anything other than the most rudimentary process in this area.

There are 3 reasons...

You left out what is probably the most common and likely reason--there is a large amount of evidence that contradicts this stuff you keep tossing around.

No. Sorry that is not wrong. Training establishes mechanics and skills. Applying those skills under pressure is what builds them.

Gosh, I guess all those military classes about training, and all those LE instructor seminars, and all those years in academia were wrong. Or perhaps they are right and you are wrong. I know which one I’ll put my trust in. Training builds mechanics and skills. Establishing pressure enhances the training function.

You can choose to believe your experts, I'll believe mine. But don't say the facts don't exist.

When you make statements that are theoretical and not factual, I will point out that the facts do not exist. I think that may be a part of the issue here. You seem to take theoretical questions that are still being discussed and questioned and presenting them as if they are some sort of established fact instead of (frequently) some fringe idea that is rejected or minimized by the majority of those in the field.

 

[Lurper]

When you make statements that are theoretical and not factual, I will point out that the facts do not exist. I think that may be a part of the issue here. You seem to take theoretical questions that are still being discussed and questioned and presenting them as if they are some sort of established fact instead of (frequently) some fringe idea that is rejected or minimized by the majority of those in the field.

You are not the only person here who possesses more than one degree David. You are not the only person here with experience. I have more than two decades experience (real, not academic) and have been in more than my share of confrontations. I have trained some of the best military and police units in the world and have talked to many who have BTDT on many occassions. I also have made it a point to study the effect the mind has on shooting as have several hundred others over the past decades. I have cited the studies and the authors of the studies (while you still have not), so to say they are "theory" is a bit of a stretch. People like Lewinski, Avery, Bassham, Shaw, Jordan, NASA, Askins and hundreds of others have spent many years studying and writing on the subject. So don't say the facts don't exist, they do. You simply choose to dismiss them because they don't fit into your paradigm.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Quote:
But yes, deaf, THOUSANDS. THOUSANDS of soldiers and police officers have operated quite cooly under combat conditions without ever playing a gun game. THOSANDS of DGU incidents have occurred, with relatively few of them involving gun gamers.

Just as cooly as Askins and Jordan? DGU incidences are, as you have said many times, are mostly just 'scareing' them with the sight of the gun. That ain't what Cirrillo, Jordan, Askins, etc... were doing david.

Quote:
So what? My mother feels that there is HUGE pressure driving in a major metro area. But that has nothing to do with gunfighting. Nobody is denying there can be pressure. The question is if the pressure of playing a game equates to preparing one for the pressure of an actual gunfight.

david, you mother ain't in a gun fight nor matches. Askins and the rest were. So what your mothers pressure on the highway has nothing to do with it (but I will say driving Dallas LBJ rush hour in an ice storm, as I have done, does bring the heart beat up quite a bit.)

 

[David Armstrong]

You are not the only person here who possesses more than one degree David. You are not the only person here with experience.

Don't believe I ever said any such thing, so tossing stuff like that out is pretty irrelevant.

I have more than two decades experience (real, not academic) and have been in more than my share of confrontations. I have trained some of the best military and police units in the world and have talked to many who have BTDT on many occassions.

Me too. Again, I'm not sure what any of that has to do with the discussion, though, as it is totally irrelevant as I ahve not questioned or challenged any of that.

I also have made it a point to study the effect the mind has on shooting as have several hundred others over the past decades.

Gosh, so have I. In fact, I've even conducted some of that research. But again, that seems to have nothing to do with what is being discussed here.

I have cited the studies and the authors of the studies (while you still have not), so to say they are "theory" is a bit of a stretch.

So would you like me to tell you to go read things from Grossman and Siddle? Or would you prefer the more academic and formal material, such as Schayfeli and Enzmann's work in 1998, or Kroes and Hurrell's examination of job stress back in 1976, or we could note Hurrell and Klismet, or Basawitz, or Finn and Esselman, or any of hundreds of others, that disagree with the picture you are painting? If you want to have a battle of dueling citations, I can certainly do it, but I've rarely found it to be productive. Personally, I prefer to discuss the issues, and the issue here is that there is lots of theory out there that you try to present as fact.

So don't say the facts don't exist, they do.

Yes, facts do exist. However, much of what you have presented is not considered factual, it is theoretical, and disputed by others in the field.

You simply choose to dismiss them because they don't fit into your paradigm.

That is an interesting statement given that you have no idea what my paradigm is.

 

[David Armstrong]

Just as cooly as Askins and Jordan?

In some instances yes, in others no. Have we now stooped to trying to establish a "cooly scale" to make a point? That seems a bit of a stretch even for you, deaf.

DGU incidences are, as you have said many times, are mostly just 'scareing' them with the sight of the gun. That ain't what Cirrillo, Jordan, Askins, etc... were doing david.

Once again your lack of knowledge or understanding leaps out, deaf. Yes, Cirillo, Jordan, Askinns, etc. all had numerous incidents where they drew down on the other party and did not need to fire.

david, you mother ain't in a gun fight nor matches.

Deaf, you don't know my mother, but I'll make a bet that she has been in more gunfights than you. see, there is the difference. Some people can address this topic from a position of experience, while you can only address it from playing games and your imagination. Big difference.

So what your mothers pressure on the highway has nothing to do with it ...

That is my point. Pressure from one situation might not have anything to do with pressure in another situation. I'm glad that you can see that.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Sitting in the Harrisburg Airport after the NTI. The stress of that event is a paradigmatic shift from any match. Folks there feel that IDPA is useful and do play at it but it is nothing like this level of FOF.

We had a fair representative of military that were highly placed in firearms training development and served under fire in past and current wars. They were getting tips for training regimes and they shared useful points of views.

As a snobby old fat professor approaching 60, it is quite exciting and the best sort of thing I could do without law or military experience to approximate fighting for ones life. Trying to disarm a nationally known trainer in a multiply party close up sims fight is not something you do at IDPA - remember I like IDPA.

None of the gang I talked to there thought IDPA had this type of equivalent stress.

Somethings I did well, somethings crappy - quite a test of skills under pressure. You win the day, you lose - you make great shots and then OOPS.

One example, the IDPA noshoots are trivial. The NTI or FOF ones are not and you are under pressure to deal with them while be shot at.

The good FOF also has for the civilian a set of moral quandries and force choices that IDPA doesn't.

Regard the gun games as skills practice. You don't have to beat someone with a cane as your gun went belly up at a match.

 

[JoshB]

I'd say training with SIM rounds is the best you can get. I've done training with blanks, but there's nothing like having someone shoot at you with something that HURTS!!! It's amazing how different people act when they're getting shot at with something that acually causes a little pain. If you're close enough, they'll leave a welt and get too close [or in sensitive areas] they will break skin. It was really some of the best training I've had.

 

[Hansen]

# 3 by far.