quote:

Originally posted by Poacher:
He does state you will be fast when you need to be.

A very wise person once said: Under stress, a person does not rise to the level of their expectations, they will fall to the level of their training.

Training should be: Crawl, Walk, Run. That should mean crawling until you are nearly perfect, then walking until you are nearly perfect, then start running.

The problem is many people want to skip the "Crawl," and "Walk," because frankly it's boring, and go straight to "Run." As a result they suck at "Running." Some others will do nothing other than "Crawl," and as a result, they too will suck at "Running."

If all you ever do is crawl, you won't suddenly "be fast" under stress.

If one receives The American Rifleman or Shooting Illustrated official NRA publications there is a column in each issue titled "The Armed Citizen". Thou not rich in depth thus detail of the incidents. The willingness to be combative was apparently more important than expertise in weapon handling.

I'm not saying the ability to handle a weapon is not important but the willingness to be combative seems to be the more important of the two.

My shooting experience thus combative experience is and was the military. My MOS dictated my personal weapon a 1911-A1 which I used an escaped with my life as opposed to my opponent. I learned the lesson that generations before me learned a handgun is a nice supplement to a rifle.

If a person see's as an example IDPA is a training venue their welcome to that viewpoint.

Here is another take;
Two guys face each other at 7 yards, they both draw and shot at each other. One gets the shot off at 1.0 seconds and delivers a center mass shot. The other guy gets his shot off at 1.3 seconds and delivers a center mass shot.

What is the end result? They are both shot.

Now we take two USPSA/IDPA/ISPC etc... shooters and have them face their target at 7 yards. One gets his shot off in 1.0 seconds and delivers an A Zone/O down shot. The other guys gets his shot off in 1.3 seconds and gets an A Zone/0 down shot.

What is the end result? The first guy wins the game.

quote:

Originally posted by Orive 8:
Here is another take;
Two guys face each other at 7 yards, they both draw and shot at each other. One gets the shot off at 1.0 seconds and delivers a center mass shot. The other guy gets his shot off at 1.3 seconds and delivers a center mass shot.

What is the end result? They are both shot.

Frankly the odds of continuing to deliver an accurate shot 0.3 seconds after being hit center mass are really low. Also, since some folks are capable of about 0.2 second splits, the odds of someone continuing to deliver an accurate shot 0.3 seconds after being hit by one round, and 0.1 seconds after being hit by a second round, are even lower.

quote:

Originally posted by Orive 8:
Here is another take;
Two guys face each other at 7 yards, they both draw and shot at each other. One gets the shot off at 1.0 seconds and delivers a center mass shot. The other guy gets his shot off at 1.3 seconds and delivers a center mass shot.

What is the end result? They are both shot.

Unfortunately for us, the bad guys don't wait for the buzzer. "Go" will occur at the time of their choosing that stacks the odds in their favor. We will be up against much larger time and position disadvantages right from the start. Being slower is sure not going to help, but I doubt that a few tenths under ideal conditions would translate to the same in real life.

When you start [and continue] shooting at someone, you have to assume you’re going to kill them. That’s why we call it ‘deadly force.’ Doing so needs to be a decision not a reflex.
Claude Werner /The Tactical Professor

Engage the threat, until it's no longer a threat. Fast, slow, sights, no sights, up close, or at distance. Do what you have to do.

I use a shot timer at my local range. I get a lot of raised eyebrows because being a "faster shot and a "better" shot are two different things. My reply s if I can do it accurately faster isn't that better? I have never been in a gunfight it it would take a hell of a lot of evidence to convince me that getting quality shots on target first isn't the way to go.

quote:

Originally posted by PPGMD:

quote:

Originally posted by Gibb:
In CQB school the mantra was "slow is smooth, and smooth is fast".

I still strive to train that way today.

I hate that phrase, because it has lost all meaning IMO. Because if slow = smooth and smooth = fast then slow = smooth = fast or simplified slow = fast. In reality slow is slow, smooth is smooth, and fast is fast. There is no direct relationships between the three.

Fast may appear smooth to someone not accustomed to watching a faster shooter, but fast is almost always jerky because you learn where you can go balls to wall, and where you have to go slow.

And the only way to learn that is with a shot timer forcing yourself to go faster and faster. For example you don't get a sub-second draw with a 7 yard A zone hit, by standing there practicing 1.5 second draws. No you get it by practicing 0.7 second draws only caring that the shot hits the target, so when you slow down to see your sights it is only a 0.9 second draw.

I understand both points, and honestly, I believe the truth is in the middle.

Bruce Lee talked about muscle memory. He said you had to do something approximately 10,000 times for it to truly be "muscle memory."

Now, I don't know about the number, but there IS truth to that.

If a shooter does not have a basic grasp of the fundamentals, they will be at a HUGE disadvantage. That is pretty much impossible to argue with. You MUST be able to preform a solid grip, draw, presentation, find the sights, and lock out in order to shoot accurately.

If you have no concept of the basics, you will fail under stress.

If you have NEVER practiced under stress, you will be slow.

Choosing ONLY ONE method of training/practice is setting up for failure.

In other words, you can take a novice shooter and make him miss fast, or take a bullseye shooter and make him hit slow.

YOU MUST TRAIN BOTH.

But IMO, YOU MUST TRAIN FUNDAMENTALS FIRST. If you can do the fundamentals each and every time under stress, then you can start to speed up.

Once you have that, speed it up, and train faster.

In the martial arts training I've taken, I'd learned this... If you can't do it correctly, you can't do it. If you have to have it slowed down to do it correctly... YOU CANNOT DO IT CORRECTLY FAST ENOUGH.

Start out slow and master it properly. Then add speed.

Either extreme is a fool's errand IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by DMF:

quote:

Originally posted by Poacher:
He does state you will be fast when you need to be.

A very wise person once said: Under stress, a person does not rise to the level of their expectations, they will fall to the level of their training.

Training should be: Crawl, Walk, Run. That should mean crawling until you are nearly perfect, then walking until you are nearly perfect, then start running.

The problem is many people want to skip the "Crawl," and "Walk," because frankly it's boring, and go straight to "Run." As a result they suck at "Running." Some others will do nothing other than "Crawl," and as a result, they too will suck at "Running."

If all you ever do is crawl, you won't suddenly "be fast" under stress.

DMF says it much more briefly than I did.

quote:

Originally posted by lowflash:
If one receives The American Rifleman or Shooting Illustrated official NRA publications there is a column in each issue titled "The Armed Citizen". Thou not rich in depth thus detail of the incidents. The willingness to be combative was apparently more important than expertise in weapon handling.

I'm not saying the ability to handle a weapon is not important but the willingness to be combative seems to be the more important of the two.

My shooting experience thus combative experience is and was the military. My MOS dictated my personal weapon a 1911-A1 which I used an escaped with my life as opposed to my opponent. I learned the lesson that generations before me learned a handgun is a nice supplement to a rifle.

If a person see's as an example IDPA is a training venue their welcome to that viewpoint.

If I am reading what you are saying correctly, the NRA magazine shows people that are LUCKY. There is no correlation to skill, willingness, etc. Your local paper has the same type of data. Over the years it is full of dead people. Many of which share attributes with the people from the NRA magazine. They just met some one luckier. It reminds me of people who do their financial planning with hitting the lottery penciled in as their retirement ideas.

Fast hits, fellas.

You can do all the other stuff, wax poetic, etc. But, at the end of the day, it comes down to be able to hit stuff quickly.

I also smell just a hint of "COMPETITION KILLS" in this post. I chuckle a bit when that comes up. When you look at all of the guys that have retired from real deal Tier One outfits in the last 10 years, they all say the same thing. Competition is a great way to test your skills. Hell, when Pat Mac was the NCOIC of the Firearms branch at the Unit, he coordinated competitions on base and off base so his guys could get better. Larry Vickers, Kyle Lamb, Frank Proctor, Pat Mac, Kyle Defoor, and the list goes on. All guys that will tell you that competition doesn't kill, and that fast hits matter.

I still do not think that is what Clint is saying (but only he can clarify). He states he has students that show up and all they want to do is go fast. Speedy inaccuracy is not much good.
Learn to shoot. Learn to shoot fast. Learn to shoot and move. Building blocks.