Why do some competition-focused shooters make fun of tactical training, force-on-force or shoot-house exercises?
Much tactical training is not effective training. Too often, it is misplaced and performed by personnel not yet skilled enough to benefit from it.
Shooters of low skill claiming to be tactically oriented that make fun of competition as untactical fare poorly in such events (if they ever show up…) due to a lack of fundamental skills. Instead of realizing and correcting their low basic skills they instead insist on tactical training, force-on-force and/or shoot-house exercises.
This is endemic in military and police circles who just can’t be bothered to ever learn fundamental skills to decent levels. Civilians attending Operator Fantasy Camp are likely worse. There’s no emphasis to train solid fundamentals. Everyone thinks they understand fundamentals because any novice can quote some training institution’s description of them. Novice shooters know the fundamentals. Master shooters apply the fundamentals.
Skill standards good enough to pass qualification in basic/academy will continue to pass a twenty year veteran. No public sector marksmanship training procedure requires any shooting skill progression beyond basic. Not one! Many tactical trainers don’t even bother to establish any skill baseline. Some insist such a thing isn’t useful.
Can’t pass a simple ball-and-dummy drill or suppress flinch well enough to pass a dot drill? Never mind, we need Simunitions and force-on-force training.
Can’t complete El Presidente with 12 hits somewhere on target (never mind elapsed time or score)? Doesn’t matter because that’s gaymer shit. We need to prepare for Dynamic Critical Incidents in the shoothouse.
Can’t shoot a series of shots well enough to be called a group from any position beyond prone supported? Doesn’t matter, we’re designated marksmen preparing for tactical environments.
Then some novice-level turd billing himself a tactical trainer tells these fools that practicing for and participating in local competition will somehow instill bad habits. Said turd creates a slick website and develops an Internet following with his sycophants parroting his nonsense. Hopefully, none of these people will ever be called to depend on the “skills” they spent thousands of dollars on classes with their hero.
It doesn’t matter what’s true, only what gets repeated.
I appreciate it isn’t possible to insist on high level skill upon graduation from recruit/academy training. It’s called basic training for a reason. The problem is the complete lack of required progression.
The first time musician plays “Hot Cross Buns” after learning how to hold the instrument. The first time programmer codes up “Hello World.” The first time shooter completes a simple qualification at academy, basic or CHL class. All good.
There’s a problem if the musician or programmer remain stuck on “Hot Cross Buns” or “Hello World” ten or twenty years later. Yet, a cop or soldier can successfully qualify on the same academy/basic qualification course throughout their career. They forever remain at novice levels unless they get involved in higher-level programs, such as competition. Worse, Dunning-Kruger effect fools them into believing their service experience merits value in this realm and an equally ignorant public believes them.
Force-on-force is extremely useful. So is a better application of fundamental skills. Too bad the personnel who remain at beginner levels demand the former and ignore the latter.