Mindset gets bantered about a bit in the tactical community. While you’ll never truly know how your resolve will unfold until faced with the actual challenge or threat, there is an easy way to build a winning mindset now.
The best way to develop a winning mindset is to do challenging things and try to win at something.
Here is a great video about someone with outstanding mindset. Despite being shot seven times with a .45 at close range, Officer Jared Reston still managed to respond with controlled, aimed fire as he had trained and ultimately put his assailant down.
Notice he didn’t fall victim to the things various self-described tactical cognoscenti (many whom haven’t won anything worth mentioning or been in a serious fight) claim always happens. Despite multiple life-threatening injuries Officer Reston responded to the level of his training and did the things necessary to get good hits and win his fight.
Officer Reston also conducts classes via his Reston Group Not surprisingly, the Reston Group establishes and enforces measurable performance standards for students.
Click to access restonstandards.pdf
Mindset is not a catchphrase. It is developed by training to a high, measurable standard and attempting to succeed under challenging conditions.
The best way to develop a winning mindset is to do challenging things and try to win at something.
More wisdom from Jared Reston:
Firearm User Network 
Tyrus Moulder
Nov 27, 2014 @ 09:51:51
John,
First off, I appreciate the fact that you take the time to put out what I consider to be valuable firearms training commentary. I agree with your stand on adherence to the practice of measurable standards for firearms training. Your comment referencing the “tactical cognoscenti” and what they say “always” happens in a gunfight needs some clarification. If the reference refers to the physiological and psychological effects of the HPA-Axis response to a perceived threat, the statement is too generalized.
Everyone, including me, you, and Officer Reston, are subject to the effects of the human survival mechanism. How the threat is perceived, the skills an individual brings to the fight, and chance will combine to determine a fight’s outcome. Lower skilled (less prepared) people (soldiers, police officers, citizens) will likely experience significantly greater (more debilitating) effects as a result of their survival mechanism’s inability to effectively cope with the unfolding violence. People like Jared Reston train to overcome the possibility of grenading under pressure. They have done all the right things before the fight ever happens. They practice realistic skills; they understand the dynamics of a fight (action versus reaction, the use of cover, the effective employment of one’s weapons, etc.); they have a well developed survival mindset; and they understand the human factors that are involved in a life-threatening encounter.
As a law enforcement trainer it pains me to know we (as a community) rarely get the chance to train as much as we should. Seeing officers rely on the limited training they get in addition to qualification is like waiting for the inevitable bad thing to happen while hoping to prevail with the limited skills they will inevitably bring to the table.
The science is just as important as the skills training John. Don’t discount it because some talking heads make a lot of outrageous claims.
LikeLike
John M. Buol Jr.
Nov 27, 2014 @ 13:00:06
>> The science is just as important as the skills training.
Of course, you’re right. The problem is “the science” often isn’t. “The science” is too often replaced by popular, regurgitated myth accepted as fact.
According to some, “the science” says all humans respond to startle/threat by reflexively throwing their hands up. The Combat Focus Shooting/Rob Pincus crowd make a fetish of this, claiming all humans are preordained to respond to all threats in this manner, including distant threats. Of course, according to them, failing to do this is failing to address reality and creates a bad habit. Pincus is on record for claiming participating in organized competition creates this sort of bad habit.
This is based studies down by researchers such as C. Landis and W. Hunt. However, other studies and research has indicated startle response can manifest in up 30 other ways, or possibly not at all, as reported in Culture, Experience, and the Startle Reflex by Ronald Simons At best, there is enough research to indicate “the science” can’t predict the response of all humans in all situations.
Interestingly, others have claimed purposely programming raising your hands prior to shooting is a bad habit, of course caused by competition.
https://firearmusernetwork.com/2012/11/15/does-competition-shooting-kill/
I guess if you do it in a match it’ll getcha killed, but if you do it because Pincus/CFS it’s “the science.”
Point shooting advocates claim “the science” prevents humans from purposely using their sights while under close range, while under stress, or when injured. I guess Officer Reston didn’t get that memo.
Competition shooting is one of the closest things to actual science concerning human performance with firearms under stress. It represents empirical data measuring results of tens of thousands of subjects over decades. Additionally, some of the most effective warriors in history have been high level competition shooters. But “the science” says we should ignore all this.
There are many things we should take away from credible research when that research is credible. Too much of what’s passed off as “science” are really random, popular, bullshit claims.
LikeLike
Tyrus Moulder
Nov 28, 2014 @ 10:01:15
Ultimately training and experience are the keys to improved performance and survivability in a gunfight. Training cannot be limited to reliance on one’s performance on a qualification course shoot as an indication of the skill one will have available to them in a life-threatening encounter. Skill-based behavior–the ability to do something without the need for consciously working through the process of accomplishing the task–is the ultimate goal. Behavior at this level of performance takes tens of thousands of repetitions of the same behavior done correctly every single time.
This is where the majority of our nation’s LEOs fail–a commitment to practice. In a real fight, you don’t have what you don’t have. In other words, you only bring the skills and experience you have developed and earned to the fight–nothing more. If you’re lucky, your adversary will be just as terrible as you in terms of his fighting abilities as you. Relying on unprepared opponents, however, is unrealistic because you’re counting on luck not skill to get you through the fight.
The answer to the question of what’s the best program for developing the skills for surviving a lethal encounter is not simple. It’s a combination of preparatory activities that challenge the individual’s personal abilities and provide the opportunity for steady improvement through regular practice. Competition shooting (IPSC, IDPA, bullseye, etc.) has real quantifiable value in the development and sustainment of one’s gunfighting skills.
Competition alone, however, is not enough. You have to ensure that your students are getting exposure to realistic situations that create the conditions where hormonally induced stress is a factor; you have to ensure that your students are well- versed in the legal and moral aspects of using force; and you must ensure your students understand the science involved in every force encounter.
In regards to the science, I am not an advocate for relying on someone’s word in a magazine article or YouTube presentation. Like formal competition, there are plenty of sources of relevant force encounters research and training available. Two such training opportunities I strongly recommend are the California Training Institute’s force encounters analysis course and the Force Science Research Center’s force science analyst certification course.
Training to avoid is anything that ignores the basic principles of marksmanship or makes unsupported claims about the human factors involved in a gunfight. Science, like competition, can be a valuable part of a well- rounded training program, and it shouldn’t be ignored because of a handful of folks providing bad information to their paying customers.
Happy Thanksgiving John, and keep up the good work.
LikeLike
John M. Buol Jr.
Nov 28, 2014 @ 10:15:13
Same to you. Thanks for reading and for your great comments!
LikeLike