The real world benefits of competing aren’t found participating at the match, they are found preparing for the match. Participating in competitive events merely serves as a yard stick as to how effective these preparations were, with the bonus of meeting and visiting with nice people in a fun environment.
This translates perfectly and exactly to whatever else you might set as a goal. The rulebook and match program are the OPORD and the match is the mission. The results spell out how well your preparations went. Plus, despite myths to the contrary, the fundamental skills trained are the same. Your gun can’t tell the difference between Pepper Poppers or terrorists. More ranting on that here:
https://firearmusernetwork.com/seal-team-six-training/
Soldiers, cops and most gun owners rarely train. Usually, they receive instruction, an introduction to concepts. Perhaps they practice these concepts occasionally, such as during annual qualification. They may expend ammo and range time but skills rarely increase measurably.
No public sector or CCW skill assessment requires demonstration of improvement once minimums are met. A minimal skill level that passes raw recruits at the academy or in basic will continue to pass twenty year vets.
Competition is one of the few venues where actual training – that is, purposely programmed skill development – is measured and encouraged. It is also one of the few venues where you can test the entire range of your marksmanship and gun handling skills at high levels under the stress of a timer, audience, and empirical measure.
Competition is also one of the very few environments where participants actually TRAIN, that is, have a measured means of determining skill and purposely drive skill up based on that measurement. Most people that bother with “training” receive someone’s, or some organization’s, idea of instruction and stop there. “Experienced” trainers have attended multiple instruction courses that never demand skill increases. It’s like a person that attends a barbell certification course annually but never touches a barbell between these sessions. Even after twenty years this “experience” won’t leave him any stronger for it.
I challenge you to find an open enrollment tactical class where paying students are FAILED. That is, they don’t receive any acknowledgement of attending unless they hit some minimum, pre-determined skill performance requirement. Most give everyone a certificate of attendance, provided your credit card clears and you don’t hurt anyone.
See if you can find an open enrollment tactical class or military/law enforcement qualification beyond intro/basic that enforces a required skill progression. One that sends students home the morning of day one, possibly without refund, if they fail to meet tested minimums.
Tactical Timmy (military, law enforcement and civilian) takes instruction, but he rarely trains. Not until he is held to any progressive skill standard.
George Harris
Nov 10, 2014 @ 08:42:04
Try Sig Sauer Academy Instructor courses or Jeff Gonzales courses at Trident Concepts. If you don’t meet the standard set forth before the class you don’t get a certificate of completion. I’m sure that there are a few others but many are as you referenced above.
LikeLike
karlrehn
Nov 10, 2014 @ 08:49:47
There are several schools that require meeting a standard: Bill Rogers, Gunsite, Tom Givens/Rangemaster, and my own school (KR Training) just to name a few. Students that meet standards get a “passing” certificate; those do not, get an “attendance” certificate but cannot proceed to the next course in the sequence without passing the pre-req course. What they do at the Rogers school is mark the certificate Basic/Intermediate/Advanced based on the best score shot during the course.
LikeLike
John M. Buol Jr.
Nov 10, 2014 @ 09:01:13
@George Harris, @karlrehn
Thank you gentlemen! Courses such as you suggest are excellent training as well as instruction.
Note, I didn’t mean to imply there were no good courses enforcing skill standards, only that too many fail to do this. The challenge is to find those that do, such as the courses you suggest.
LikeLike
John Tate
Nov 11, 2014 @ 10:29:19
An insightful comment in your last: “[Find a course] that sends students home the morning of day one, [ … ] without refund, if they fail to meet tested minimums.”
The Firearms Instructor Training Program (FITP) of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) uses this scheme.
I was scheduled to go. I might have trained a bit before hand, but the fact that my department wouldn’t pay, and the $1,000 fee was going to come out of my pocket, ensured that I did train before hand. It wasn’t so much paying the $1,000; but I wasn’t going to lose it by paying for an empty seat.
The pistol qual course was the make-or-break standard, at 85%. FLETC has pneumatic, pivoting targets. The target backing is held in place by rubber bands so they won’t tear with the rapid jerk of the pivot. Bottom line: two seconds for the “quick draw” stages is TWO seconds.
So I obtained a copy of the pistol qual course (it was no secret), and I practiced. I shoot a Colt Mod 1991; .45 ammo was and is too expensive to blast away for hours. So I used a lot of dry fire and a Colt “ACE” to save a few cents while building coordinated muscle memory. I also bought a shot timer.
For training, I shot every stage at one yard-line further than required, with a 10% time reduction. For example, I’d shoot the “5 yard line” at 7 yards; the “10 yard-line” at 15 yards, etc.
After hours and hours and rounds and rounds, I was doing OK.
Then, I went to the class. Funny how your luck improves with practice! Not only did they not send me home, but I earned the “Distinguished Weapons Expert” certificate for excellence in combined pistol, shotgun and rifle. ((Historically, no more than 10% of a class earns that. In my class, 3 of 38 did.))
As I said, knowing I’d be sent home and lose my $1,000 was very motivational!
LikeLike
John M. Buol Jr.
Nov 11, 2014 @ 10:35:41
I was aware that organizations claiming to train personnel follow this up with enforced performance standards. I’m glad to hear the examples.
The point of my little rant was these are the exception, not the rule.
LikeLike