Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Some thoughts on training

I will add that I am a huge proponent of dry fire and air soft for aspects of "tactical" training. Too many times we use our square range time for drills that are best done dry. I know when my first agency finally got a 360 degree shoot house everyone wanted to go guns blazing on everything we did and I am honestly surprised nobody got killed in those first few months. A better plan would be to run room clearing drills a couple hundred times dry before ever firing a shot. Also in a basic academy class I got to observe an instructor teaching weak hand draws with a hot gun to people who had little pistol experience. I was amazed nobody left with extra holes and it was a horrible use of limited range time. This is a skill that could have been shared when there was extra time during lunch instead of watching another 30 minutes of "Cops".

Nobody needs a custom 1911 or multi thousand dollar classes to become proficient or know their limits. My Dad is getting old and knows his physical skills are not what they used to be and is compensating accordingly. Over the years he has dropped from a .45 to 9mm to a Ruger .22 because that is all he can handle but you can be damn sure he is pretty surgical with his placement. He also knows he has limited penetration and terminal efficiency and keeps that in mind at all times.

I encourage everyone to take a good look at their gear, look at themselves in the mirror and take the time to really understand their own abilities and liabilities regardless of what they carry.

After years of avoiding optics I am finally going to run one on a fighting rifle. I have a whole new learning curve of what I can do better or what I might have to compromise. I would bet a months pay check I could pass the basic qual after a quick zero but that does not mean I have learned how to exploit the options an optic gives in a fight. I am on a tighter budget than ever and plan an drying firing a ton, using the .22 kit for anything under 50 yards and acclimating to a new trigger before I would consider carrying it when it would matter.

My philosophy mirrors the eloquent Mr. Chamberlain. I never pushed for speed...I practiced to be smooth. Anytime I shot a match and shot smooth I shot the best I could be. Any time I wasn't smooth...you loose.

I shot IPSC from its inception in the 1970s to 1995 when I just could not stand the unrealistic scenarios any more. I've run as realistic tactical shoots since 1992 but rarely get to shoot in them.

Started shooting IDPA in 2013 knowing it was also a joke but needed trigger time so I just shoot it my way and accept the penalties. I always use cover even if it costs me time and reload behind cover instead of waiting till I run out of ammo which everyone else does. With their inevitable 12 round scenarios they remind me of the Gamesman of early IPSC who designed all the shoots around the 7 round .45 1911 Magazine...sad.

But it isn't ones ability with a gun that wins gun fights...it is mindset and tactics. You can be the best shot on the Square Range and get killed by a punk that never even shot his gun before he stuck it in his pants....and then in your face.

As to learning tactics, there are some pretty good schools out there but they all lack one thing...the ability to kill you if you screw up. And that is a major problem for the student as he knows even if he screws up he still goes home. After you search your first building knowing there is a badguy inside you'll understand what I mean...

So practice, read, visualize and talk to those who have been there and done that as it is the best you can do, and it is far better than doing nothing....

Bob

So, my thoughts are, above all else, hit what you intend to hit. Once you can do that, push the pace until you can't do it and then back off and work on the accuracy again.

after doing Kenpo for a long long time, I realized that the jujitsu boys would kill you if they got you on the ground!

I do a lot of simunitions training and I've never, ever felt as stressed about it as I do in a competition.

In my opinion, the people who compete with the attitude that "it's just training" and DON'T try to win are doing themselves a tremendous disservice.

In May 2007 I was the Primary Instructor for Combat Marksmanship for an entire Special Forces Group and trained with dudes from other SF groups and other DOD agencies. I shot my first pistol match in May 2007 and I found out there was a whole lot I didn’t know about shooting. It was very humbling to see what those competitive shooters could do with a pistol. I was not as good as they were and I wanted to be better than I was. I’m still not as good as I want to be. I worked on it and trained and competed as often as I could. I learned a lot from shooting with those guys and competing and being under that kind of stress. I did and still do take away may lessons that make me a better shooter and made me a better Green Beret. Outside of more efficient techniques, gear and manipulations( the stuff that most shooters incorrectly focus on) a HUGE take away is seeing faster and more aggressively. What you see and process and how fast and aggressive you can do it make the biggest difference. An easy translation of me was doing CQB after competing. I am much more aggressive with my vision as a result of competing and it pays huge dividends being able to receive visual information and process it faster. I encourage every person that carries a gun of a living or for self defense to go out an compete, find out if you are a stood at shooting under stress as you want to be. If you are as good as you want to be then quit competing. I wasn’t and am still not as good as I want to be. Also worth mentioning, I find it very easy to separate tactics and shooting.

I'm gonna guess that if Frank Proctor says competition translates to real life scenarios, he probably knows what he's talking about.

Reminds me of the guy who rode the motorcycle to Mill Creek.

I had no idea you had even posted on this thread. But since you brought it up I have a question....

You weren't there to win, but to test yourself....And what measure did you use to determine how well you did in the "test"?

I feel a sarcasm attack coming on.

Dam it now I feel compelled to get some khakis, and Oakleys, and a drop leg holster.

Reminds me of the guy who rode the motorcycle to Mill Creek.

If it's the same guy I'm thinking of, he blew up a Mini 14 at an early iteration of a 3 gun match.

Wearing camo fatigues, he would just appear at the start and disappear into the sunset as soon as he was done. Strange duck although that's not much of a clue considering. I don't know his name. Never did.

I'm gonna guess that if Frank Proctor says competition translates to real life scenarios, he probably knows what he's talking about.

So, rather than be ridiculed

What are you talking about?



Who ridiculed you? Lemme know and we'll go beat them up together.

It looks like a number of the participants on this thread, like myself, are a little long in the tooth. Since we’re “ranting” about training here are a couple of mine:

About a year ago, I attended a “tactical handgun” shoot for a fairly new club. One participant in particular caught my eye; he was a young man dressed in BDU’s, had a drop-thigh holster and wore a tactical, magazine-laden vest. He was wearing military gloves of some sort. I don’t know about the rest of his body, but tattoos graced his neck and both ear lobes had grommeted sized rings that you could hang a carabiner from. He wore a cap with the American Sniper “punisher skull” logo on it and had a long narrow goatee that hung down to his magazine vest projecting a James Yeager wannabe look. When told to “load and make ready,” he drew his handgun, brought it to center-chest and pushed it straight out into the most beautiful Isosceles Triangle stance that you’ve ever seen. Taking a quick sight picture on the first target, he brought the gun straight back to center-chest, tilted the gun 45 degrees starboard and smartly inserted a magazine. Racking the slide via a firm sling-shot, he brought the gun back to center-chest and then down into the holster. As he assumed his start position, he lowered his chin, slightly hunched his shoulders and shifted his weight to the balls of his feet causing him to lean toward the first target. He looked like an over caffeinated panther getting ready to pounce on a gazelle. When the buzzer went off, he drew the gun back to his center-chest, pushed the gun out into a perfect Isosceles stance and double-tapped the first three targets so quickly that I could hardly count the shots. With his finger straight along the frame, he ran to the barricade at the second and final position and engaged the last three targets with double-taps at an Uzi-rate-of-fire cadence. After the sixth shot, he brought the gun back to center-chest and checked his 6 looking over his right and left shoulders in a tactical genuflect that would make Rob Pincus turn green with envy. He unloaded and as we walked to the first bank of targets I asked him where he had trained. He said that he’d never taken a class from anyone, but spent alot of time on you tube and had bought some dvds! I don’t remember his total score but on the six total targets, two had no hits what-so-ever, two had one peripheral hit each, no targets had two A hits. The kid was a paragon of protocol and style and certainly looked tacti-cool, but couldn’t hit his butt with both hands.

He’s apparently used to pushing himself beyond his ability; problem is, that all he’s done. I get a little miffed at the condescension directed at training on a “square range” with stationary targets from a static position. I’m afraid that there’s a whole upcoming generation of Gen X’ers or Millennials whose sole skill is impersonating what they see on you tube.

Since I’m ranting about training, another burr under my saddle is the proliferation of shooting schools being run by Delta/SOCOM/Recon/Seal/Rangers just back from the desert with “modern” combat techniques. I briefly subscribed to an online training site run by a Seal that promised “new breakthough” techniques and tactics. What a joke that was. His first lesson was to put a mark on your front site to focus on. How’s that for break-through revelation! What most of those guys don’t know is that in the late 70’s and 80’s, most of those organizations went to the square range, stationary target, static position schools to learn to shoot! I was fortunate enough to have been in the first class that Ray ever ran at the Chapman Academy. Since I lived close, we became friends and I helped him with some classes. I remember the Seals coming to the Academy to work with Ray. Yes, he had a moving target (the Bianchi Cup mover), but the only moving that was done was a modification of the old Mexican Defense Course. They also went to Berryville to work with Bill Wilson and to MISS to work with John Shaw, two guys that never wore any kind of uniform or heard a shot fired outside the confines of IPSC, much less in anger. Apparently all of the square range, static training didn’t get them all killed as they kept coming back.

People decrying competitive shooting, primarily IPSC and IDPA would benefit by shutting up. “That stuff will get you killed on the street” is a mantra for those who aren’t good enough to be competitive. “What you do in practice you’ll do in a fight,” is spouted by shooters who primarily use the excuse of bad tactics allowed in competition to mask their inability to handle match pressure and/or shoot under the close scrutiny of judgmental observers. Are there silly rules? Yup. So what. It’s not “training” it’s “testing.” Man up, shoot and shut up!

OK, I get that things have progressed and that there are probably more advanced techniques and training styles; that doesn’t negate the virtue of past training techniques, nor the value of placing yourself on the line to compete once in a while, even if it’s bowling pins or cowboy action shooting, it’s pressure.

Sorry for the rant----

Well, since Gmoats got started I'll chime in too.

I really believe that the reason "gamers" get such a bad rep is that nobody understands what they're doing....They just think "I can't hit a target that fast, so nobody else can either".

Sure, some folks spray-n-pray, but not the winners. In Production Division of USPSA the winners are hitting a 6"x11" target with 90% of their shots, regardless of the distance.

And they're doing it with guns that are nearly identical to carry guns, with the exception of barrel length. A lot of the carry guns posted here wouldn't be legal. So don't blather on about "race-guns".

And yes, they are reliable. As least the winners' guns are reliable. I beat someone at a match last year by 0.03 seconds, over six stages. A few months later I was beat by 1.5 seconds over six stages. ONE malfunction in a match is enough to ruin you. Sure, the losers are fighting their guns. But that's because they're losers. People who take the sport seriously don't have malfunctions. And when they do, they lose.

And yes, the stress is simulated. But until people are shooting at you in anger, the stress will be simulated. Even in the holy-grail of simunitions training, the stress is simulated. I do a lot of simunitions training and I've never, ever felt as stressed about it as I do in a competition.

For the weekend warriors, and there's nothing wrong with that, who shoot a local match with their friends a few times a year--I'm sure the stress can be somewhat ignored. But I've even seen those people, people with tactical training and jobs that require them to deal with stress on a daily basis, with hands that couldn't stop shaking just before a stage starts because the thought of having to shoot in front of everyone, and have everyone know exactly how well or how poorly they can shoot, absolutely terrified them.

I don't mind shooting in front of people anymore. I shoot in front of strangers on a nearly daily basis. But when you've invested $400 into a match, taken time off work, spent two days away from your family and have people who've invested money into your shooting expecting you to do well, there's a whole different kind of stress that comes up. There is no practice, there are no do-overs. You step up to the box and you can either perform on demand or not.

And the value of that stress, being required to perform cold and on demand with the whole world knowing if you sucked or not, cannot be over-emphasized.

In my opinion, the people who compete with the attitude that "it's just training" and DON'T try to win are doing themselves a tremendous disservice. I can "train" all by myself and work on specific weaknesses. DEALING WITH STRESS is the most beneficial part of competing. And when you deny yourself that stress in the name of "training", what you've done is denied yourself the most useful training you could get out of the entire day.

Yes.




Dave