How do you do it?

[Team Sergeant]

Not only would I not take a class from a "competitive" shooter I would never refer anyone serious about personal defense to a "competitive" shooter.

In my opinion a competitive shooter is a game player and nothing more. IMO Too many have taken classes from competitive shooters only to pay dearly for such classes-skills. Might I point out that 99.99% of all police officers are killed (in gun fights) by amateurs, sad but very true.

And who are teaching many of the skills these officers are utilizing, most are competitive shooters that have never faced any threat more serious than a paper target. But because of their "speed" they demand hundreds of dollars per hour in order to "teach" their skill to our countries LEO's.

I'll chime in and critique his style if you like.
That fellow in the AMU video has but one thing on his mind, speed. He's a perfect example of a "competitive shooter". Why? No one I know, except a "competitive shooter" wears their mags or "mag" in front such as he demostrates. No one I know uses a "race gun" in a gunfight. No one I know has the time or inclination to practice hours a day on just mag changes. No police officer I've ever met wears a belt and just “one” mag. Most competitive shooters wear nothing but a mag or two on their belt. Tell you what, place a real police work belt on your AMU shooter and I’ll bet it seriously degrades his “speed”. Or hand him a factory Glock the same Glock that ten's of thousands police officers carry each and every day and then have him do a video.

Most "competitive shooters" I've read about have had zero in the way of combat training, or "counter terrorism" training which I mention only because of many "competitive shooters" now sport "Counter Terrorism" or "Special Operations" somewhere in their bio's in order to sell themselves to law enforcement.

I think most people are being fed a whole lot of crap concerning shooting techniques and the worst part is good men and women are dying because of training given by "competitive shooters".

[HOLLiS]

Gene, thank you for the post. I enjoyed reading it. I think, as I read TS post, I came to a different conclusion to his post than you. There are cross trained shooters and they are, I believe, not being discussed here. The course in competitive shooting is known and some times very repetitive. LEO shoot outs and Combat shoots require adaptation to a constant changing environment. I guess the only repetitive aspect is the constant change.

TS mentions Game player. Running the course, in itself, is a skill. Running a repetitive course over and over to improve ones skill, is what game playing is about. A IPSC shooter could be a good combat shooter, but by just being a IPSC shooter alone means the person is a IPSC Shooter and nothing more. Not to demean IPSC, but it is a "game". I like cowboy shooting, I like the changing scenarios, but the scenario is known before the shoot. The scenario in combat/LEO vs. Criminal shoot out is not known till after the actual life and death shoot out.

In a prior post, TS gave some great advice, if you want to learn IPSC, learn from a IPSC shooter, LEO shooting from a LEO, Hunting from a hunter, and so on. All the different competitive shooting have something in common, regardless of how bad or good you shot, you go home after the end of the day. That in itself establishes the major difference in competitive shooters and combat shooters.

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Gene Econ

The best pistolero we had in the 1st SFG while TS was on board was and still is a competitive 3 Gun Shooter. A very competitive one at that.

I was there when you were there and I don't know who you're talking about???

The "best" pistol shot I knew in 1st Gp was a former member of a certain CT unit and was on the ground during Operation Eagle Claw. While most knew him very few knew of his skill with a pistol.

TS

[NousDefionsDoc]

I finally found the video. He's very fast with his set up. It's obvious he's put in the time. But I think it is comparing apples to anvils. I wonder how fast he is 10 seconds after the hammer man missed and smashed his hand on the Haligan tool? Or after humping the ram through the jungle for 2 days?

Yep, he's fast. No doubt about it. With his set up. In his environment. Under controlled circumstances.

Now, let's twist The Loop in knots, play on their ground, and make the range two way.

[Gene Econ]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

Not only would I not take a class from a "competitive" shooter I would never refer anyone serious about personal defense to a "competitive" shooter.... Might I point out that 99.99% of all police officers are killed (in gun fights) by amateurs, sad but very true....That fellow in the AMU video has but one thing on his mind, speed.....Most "competitive shooters" I've read about have had zero in the way of combat training, or "counter terrorism" training which I mention only because of many "competitive shooters" now sport "Counter Terrorism" or "Special Operations" somewhere in their bio's in order to sell themselves to law enforcement.....I think most people are being fed a whole lot of crap concerning shooting techniques and the worst part is good men and women are dying because of training given by "competitive shooters".

TS:

Hopefully I didn't chew up your comments too badly.

I would take a class from a National Level competitive shooter -- but not as you are mentioning in terms of LEOs or for personal defense. LEOs hire guys based on national titles and the guys train them accordingly -- for a huge sum of money. Thats capitalism mixed in with stupidity. I would hire a National Level shooter to coach me -- but he would have to be totally dedicated to coaching me to attain the goals I have set and I would not do such a thing unless I have defined my goals very clearly. He would dance to my tune and I know and can state my tune very clearly.

I too have problems with guys who never served a day in their lives bragging on their ability to train guys to be warriors in the military. They have no clue of course and SO units flock to them like flies on shit. They do incessant drills at a huge cost and they get guys who are temporarily good. A month later, the same guys are no longer good and think it is because they didn't shoot enough ammo. The problem is that these competitive champions don't spend the majority of time training the guys how to think like a champion. The one big difference between a national champion in anything and the average shooter is the champion has trained his mind to be a champion. The shooting skills can be perfected very quickly as these physical skills are about ten percent of the equation. The other 90 percent concerns how to think.

I don't have problems learning how to succeed from any sports champion -- no matter his discipline. A soldier can be a thousand times better as a soldier if he believed and emulated the thinking process of someone like Lance Armstrong for example. His shooting skills would improve dramatically as well as any other skill. That is what you will get from a National or International Champion -- a means of thinking that allows you to be much, much, better than anyone else.

As for police officers being killed by amateurs in gunfights, I have not yet seen any facts that can directly relate the unfortunate deaths of these police officers to being trained (stupid for the agency IMHO) by a competitive shooter. Show me the facts that directly relate their death to something they were trained to do by any instructor at all. Their deaths were unfortunate but are probably due more to their inability to be mentally prepared for the situation than a lack of weapons training. The problem is that their weapons training probably followed the flawed techniques used by any bureaucracy to train a statistical average of people. Insted of training them to be situationally aware while shooting -- they insisted on the stupidity of incessant drills in the flawed belief in that thing termed 'muscle memory' would save their lives in conditions they had never trained in.

If anyone thinks that AMU shooter is concentrating on making his magazine changes faster -- you are incorrect in your assumption. First off, how does anyone know what is going on in his mind? I have a clue though, and here are my views on this specific issue. He is removing the magazine change from conscious thought so he can focus his attention on what he needs to do to win. In this case, he is focusing his attention on his calls from his previous magazine and from his calls he is making a specific decision on how to approach his next target array. It is a bit faster than that though. His eyes took in his calls and results from his previous magazine or two, and he has visualized how to approach his next target array and the rest of his course of fire in a manner that shows him perfection. He will do what he has envisioned and this is termed taking decisive action. He may win or lose but that isn't entering his mind more than likely. He is allowing himself to be totally situationally aware and to do what he has decided to do -- to perfection. This doesn't mean the guy doesn't practice. He does but now he has a plan of action that is both mental and physical and he sees nothing but success so his body gives him success.
Is this way of training somehow incompatable with preparing men for combat or police officers to face conditons that no one could dream of?

As for his high speed gear. The Army is only about fifteen years behind the civilian world in terms of equipment that works far better than what is issued. I see a day when SO will used compensated pistols and dot sights. When the web gear allows for faster access to weapons or ammunition. When a carbine is made that fits the shooter perfectly while he is wearing all his body armor -- and for the same reaons a competitive shooter chooses such a design -- to be faster and more precise. I may not like a bunch of the crap that competitors use to be better but if such gear makes a soldier better and can take the beating -- why not go for it?

Enough for now.

Gene

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Gene Econ

TS:

Hopefully I didn't chew up your comments too badly.


Gene

Chew away, we can settle it on the range shoulder to shoulder using off the shelf guns, off the shelf ammo and holsters, case of beer to the victor……

This is where we differ. I would not refer anyone that I know to a competitive shooter for training unless they desired that training for IPSC or to become some sort of competitive shooter themselves.

Competitive shooter’s have zilch to offer in the way of tactics and in fact procedures they execute in the course of shooting their scenarios will get one killed in a world where the range is “two way” and there is no timing buzzer to start or stop the action.

Another good reason not to take classes from a competitive shooter is teaching simple muscle reflex exercises (such as the AMU shooter in the video) that has little purpose in the world of police officers and military. My point being the military (and just about every police officer I trained) do not wear competitive mag holders/carriers on their gear due to the fact they work in rough terrain and wear gear that will retain those magazines in a real combat situation. Teaching them a magazine change they are not used to or not utilizing their “work” gear is ludicrous, if you doubt me as some police officers how many have tried to “load” a flashlight into their empty weapon……

I would like to see police officers and conventional military with an improved approach to marksmanship and less on the “speed” training. Speed is nice, sometimes, but accuracy is a must. You can be the fastest in the world but if you cannot hit the water for falling off the boat then you can forget about winning any fight.

Originally Posted by Gene Econ

I don't have problems learning how to succeed from any sports champion -- no matter his discipline. A soldier can be a thousand times better as a soldier if he believed and emulated the thinking process of someone like Lance Armstrong for example. His shooting skills would improve dramatically as well as any other skill. That is what you will get from a National or International Champion -- a means of thinking that allows you to be much, much, better than anyone else.

I’ll stick with taking shooting classes and the mindset that goes along with it from combat veterans as I've yet to hear about a national sports champ capable of standing toe to toe with the al-qaeda idiots and succeeding.

TS

[mumbleypeg]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

Chew away, we can settle it on the range shoulder to shoulder using off the shelf guns, off the shelf ammo and holsters, case of beer to the victor……

TS

Admin edit - Do you really think you should get involved in this part of the discussion? Stay out of it and don't try to be clever. - NDD

[Guy]

Ask that guy in that video...

"How he did, shooting a stock gun/ammo against a person who shoots for real?"

Take care.

[Gene Econ]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

Chew away, we can settle it on the range shoulder to shoulder using off the shelf guns, off the shelf ammo and holsters, case of beer to the victor…… ...Another good reason not to take classes from a competitive shooter is teaching simple muscle reflex exercises (such as the AMU shooter in the video) that has little purpose in the world of police officers and military. ...Teaching them a magazine change they are not used to or not utilizing their “work” gear is ludicrous, if you doubt me as some police officers how many have tried to “load” a flashlight into their empty weapon……I would like to see police officers and conventional military with an improved approach to marksmanship and less on the “speed” training. Speed is nice, sometimes, but accuracy is a must. You can be the fastest in the world but if you cannot hit the water for falling off the boat then you can forget about winning any fight. I’ll stick with taking shooting classes and the mindset that goes along with it from combat veterans as I've yet to hear about a national sports champ capable of standing toe to toe with the al-qaeda idiots and succeeding. TS

TS:

Again I 'chopped' up your paragraph. When I say this I mean I tried to reduce the original message to major points. Hopefully I did not change your intent or take these out of context. I don't have much more than out of the box pistols so you wouldn't need to supply me with one but I won't turn down your offer for ammunition. Must be nice to get your hands on a case or two of factory loads once in a while. Win or lose -- you can have the beer. Makes me piss too much and I can't take the alcohol well anymore. Don't understand why either!

This discussion has been quite useful to me as I have always wanted to understand the logic of soldiers who reject competitive shooting in terms of any tie in with military training. I will admit that you have come the closest to stating things that I can understand -- although I will disagree with your points almost completely.

The guy tried to load his flashlight into the pistol because the training focused more on 'muscle memory' than the reality called situational awareness. One thing a champion shooter can do is train guys to be very aware of conditions and to be extremely decisive in action. Unfortunately, systems buy into repetitive drills as opposed to reality of situations so a outfit who hires a champion shooter only demands he teach a shooter to be a better shooter without the burden of reality. Not my problem, the problem is one of the outfit who hired the guy and who could not articulate their requirements in the contract. Too bad that police officer didn't realize he was pulling out a flashlight instead of a magazine. Bet that trained him to be more aware though. He, he, he.

There are from six to eight combat veterans who work with me in training soldiers from two Stryker Brigades here on the skills involved in combat marksmanship. We use techniques of sports psychology in almost all of our training and we have seen a quantum improvement in situational awarenes and marksmanship skills as a result. It is interesting that none of them have rejected any competitive marksmanship techniques that I have used either. They know that these techniques of positive coaching and mental attitude are related to competitive shooting and they don't seem to care. I haven't heard one of these guys say a word to anyone about their combat experiences although they will try to set conditions in training that are related to their experiences from time to time. They just don't seem too concerned about having a CIB.

Most of our efforts as of late have been in training leaders who have multiple combat tours. This isn't because anyone is forcing these leaders to take our training and learn our techniques of training. They want to see what we are doing as they have a desire to make their own training and skills better. Honestly, none of them have cared about combat experience. Not sure why but I have found that to be the rule rather than an exception. They don't say much about their combat experiences either but they normally say that the training is more focused on reality. They will also use the philosophies and concepts in their own trainig and for a change they are able to see a cause and effect -- positive or negative -- and they become very fast at changing conditions in order to keep their men focused on a clear end state.

The 'speed' issue seems to be a common thread in thinking. I don't view speed as a stand alone issue and if guys start going to fast for performance, we slow them down using the identical coaching techniques used in High Power rifle competition in fact. My observations from talking with these combat veterans is that universally they believe they aren't fast enough. Very few believed they weren't precise enough. The reason why they thought they were precise enough is that they normally shot the guy who shot at them. Or they shot enough to make the other guy stop trying to kill them. The usual facts are that they simply didn't see the threat until it threatened. Human nature demands a solution, even if the circumstances are beyond the ability of a human to control. So, these combat veterans settled on speed being the issue instead of accepting a very specific circumstance that they had no control over. So far we have found that using sports psychology techniques allows for a logical method of putting things into perspective in terms of perceptions that most guys will accept -- thus allowing them to work on things that they can control and that they need to perfect. Such as precision over speed which normally is more true than not. That is one of many examples but basically we use sports psychology along with the training and we have seen positive results.

I thought of this and wanted to put it out to see how folks think.

Lets say I meet an NCO or Officer who has a CIB and is also Presidents Hundred and Distinguished. Oh yes, these folks do exist and more so than one would believe. How do I know he is using competitive techniques or combat experience when he offers suggestions or coaching? How can I tell if his mindset is one of a competitive shooter or a combat veteran?

I have a fire to put out so must go. I welcome comments on this entire issue as it is broadening my own knowledge.

Gene

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Gene Econ

This discussion has been quite useful to me as I have always wanted to understand the logic of soldiers who reject competitive shooting in terms of any tie in with military training. I will admit that you have come the closest to stating things that I can understand -- although I will disagree with your points almost completely.

You speak of military personnel that have earned the Presidents Hundred and Distinguished awards but not of those that have graduated from combat related schools such as SOTIC, SFAUC, etc, etc. I think you know if given a choice of personnel, which would be selected to go on a combat related mission. We also know who is being tenaciously recruited by the civilian contractors for PSD work in extremely hostile environments and who is being offered six figure bonuses to remain in the US military and why.

As a former SF Master Sergeant I can tell you the Presidents Hundred and Distinguished awards don’t mean a hill of beans to me when I look at a soldier, and truth be told I’d probably have the same view of the Presidents Hundred soldier as I would the soldiers on the Divisions Golf Team. What I’m alluding to is I would not regard their coaching of combat troops in a positive light. While they might be just fine working with basic trainees teaching BRM and coaching the Army Marksmanship Team they just don’t cut the mustard when it comes to teaching combat soldiers. Think about it, if they were so skilled then why don’t they teach at the schools that actually instruct the men that go toe to toe with the real bad men in this world? I’ll tell you what I think, is that shooting competently is but a small slice of what it takes to stand toe to toe with the most ruthless individuals on this planet and prevail. And this for no other reason is why I would not want a civilian with no military-LEO experience teaching someone to go into harms way.

I disagree with your use of “sports psychology” in order to enhance a soldier’s combat effectiveness or shooting skills, I do agree with the Roman woman’s quote: “Come home with your shield or upon it.” This is a mindset that cannot be handed down by those that have never faced anything more than a paper target. Shooting straight is but a small aspect of combat. It’s not a sport and in my opinion should not be approached as such. If one has never loaded a magazine with the intent of killing a man, then, in my opinion, they have no reason to be teaching others this skill.

I will tell you that in my twenty years one 30 minute talk by Maj Howard taught me more about combat than all the combat schools I've ever attended. It is with COL Howard in mind that when I teach someone the weapons skills they need to engage and win on today’s battlefield with their marksmanship training goes a heavy dose of the combat mindset.

Originally Posted by Gene Econ

The guy tried to load his flashlight into the pistol because the training focused more on 'muscle memory' than the reality called situational awareness.

In my opinion this scenario is caused by tunnel vision brought on by a lack of proper training in stress related environments. As you suggest this person lacks SA, SA can be taught but only if we continue to place individuals in high stress situations. Few military units have the ability to constantly place soldiers in high stress situations instead the military (after Pres Reagan) decided to embark on a “safety first” mindset which removed most chance conventional combat soldiers would develop a keen sense of SA. Only since 9/11 has conventional combat troops faced high stress situations that taught them a higher level of SA, and yet another reason I would not want civilians teaching combat soldiers their skills.

A bit of preemption on my part, I also do not consider the stresses the competitive shooters undergo during a competition the same stresses a soldiers faces while performing his duty in harms way. As has been mentioned before, the pucker factor is much different when the range is “two way” or a person is actually in harms way.

TS

[Gene Econ]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

As you suggest this person lacks SA, SA can be taught but only if we continue to place individuals in high stress situations. Few military units have the ability to constantly place soldiers in high stress situations ....A bit of preemption on my part, I also do not consider the stresses the competitive shooters undergo during a competition the same stresses a soldiers faces while performing his duty in harms way. As has been mentioned before, the pucker factor is much different when the range is “two way” or a person is actually in harms way.TS

TS:

Your views on competitive shooters and sports psychology are clear. No need to continue that one. Be happy you are retired and are doing something you enjoy and in your own manner.

Stress is an interesting issue and I am curious as to your techniques in training guys to handle stress while involved in combat weapons training. I am curious if you have determined any consistency in stress between individuals and if you have been able to categorize these in any sort of specific terms. I think what I am asking is this. Can you manipulate conditions to cause specific types of stress and if so, how do you train the guys to reduce or eliminate these factors?

Gene

[The Reaper]

Sims force on force training is a good start, IMHO.

TR

[kgoerz]

Ok after using all these new High Speed Pistols out on the market. I finally bought a Kimber Desert Warrior 1911. I posted this question on another board, but want to see what you guys have to say. They kind of high jacked the thread. For a Speed reload (Gun go's dry and you have to insert a new mag) Is it better to reach over the top with the weak hand and rack the slide to chamber a new round (Like most Glock users) or use your weak hand to hit the slide release as you bring your hand up to re-grip the pistol after inserting a fresh Mag. My muscle memory has me reaching over the top with the weak hand and pulling back on the slide to release it and chamber a new round. I want to stay with what I know already, but it feels weird reaching over the top on a 1911. What is the preferred method of the two, or is it user preference???

[NotME]

I'm not quoting a textbook here, but I say go with the move that relies on gross motor skills and rack the slide! Besides working every time, it will also transfer over to almost any other semi-auto handgun. If you're re-loading under fire, you might not even remember whether you're shooting a Glock or a 1911.
How is the Kimber? I've been admiring them for a while now?

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by kgoerz

Ok after using all these new High Speed Pistols out on the market. I finally bought a Kimber Desert Warrior 1911. I posted this question on another board, but want to see what you guys have to say. They kind of high jacked the thread. For a Speed reload (Gun go's dry and you have to insert a new mag) Is it better to reach over the top with the weak hand and rack the slide to chamber a new round (Like most Glock users) or use your weak hand to hit the slide release as you bring your hand up to re-grip the pistol after inserting a fresh Mag. My muscle memory has me reaching over the top with the weak hand and pulling back on the slide to release it and chamber a new round. I want to stay with what I know already, but it feels weird reaching over the top on a 1911. What is the preferred method of the two, or is it user preference???

K:

I was a drop the slide release kind of guy till recently.

I am currently trying to change to the pull the slide fully to the rear and let it go to streamline the muscle memory for stoppages and reloading. I elieve it is slightly slower, but more reliable and simpler.

Change is hard.

TR