Auditory Start Not “Realistic”

1 Comment

Converting light to bioelectrical signals that the brain can react to takes longer than biological sound signals to be processed. It’s evident already that the timer with auditory start signal is consistently faster because the OODA loop significantly shortened. The audible stimuli cuts out the “observe, orient and decide” and leaves just “listen and act.” The orient happens before the timer ever starts.”

These are fair points. An auditory start signal to start timing an already-known, pre-oriented event is the best case scenario, equally for everyone.

All humans will be slower with other variables at play including those with whatever tactical training is currently fashionable. A known-in-advance drill begun with an auditory start signal after the person has prepared and made ready is the best-case scenario in terms of reaction time and performance, probably unrealistically so.

However, a person that is measurably slower with the easiest possible evaluation will be even slower-er with those other variables in play. A fixed, known-in-advance drill shot on motionless, non-threatening targets is much easier than real life. A failure on such a drill means the person will just get much worse when things become more varied and serious.

Once again, “failure” means missing a reasonable standard by a fair margin, something that wouldn’t happen if fundamentals were squared away.
https://firearmusernetwork.com/circus-trick

Timers and Standards for Gunfights

Leave a comment

For the average Joe/Jane on the street who isn’t trying to beat Bob Vogel at the next world shoot, it is possible to expend too much effort developing speed while neglecting other important aspects of self defense but rarely do I see people investing so much effort in refining their ability to deliver fast, accurate hits on demand that they’re neglecting other bits of the equation. That’s much more of a theoretical problem than a real one, I’m afraid.

Assuming you’re not trying to become the next USPSA champion, there’s certainly a rational balance to be reached, but the clichés parroted endlessly don’t encourage the employment of reason in finding that balance. They tend to drive the conversation towards eschewing the use of a timer or the use of standards to measure performance because once you start to put things up against hard standards it becomes pretty clear that a lot of “tactical!” is just suck dressed up with black paint and silly furniture. Nobody likes to admit that they suck.

I don’t know who came up with this concept of “cowboy quickdraw” but that person should be flogged in the town square. Police and ordinary citizens are reaching for a gun IN RESPONSE TO AN AMBUSH. They need the gun NOW.

Situational awareness gives you a few seconds heads up that something is happening…it is not a magical power that repels all boarders so you don’t need to worry about the hard skills of actually using the weapon. There is no situation where you truly need a firearm in which getting it into play slower is to your advantage.

– Tim Chandler

I feel the timer is there to make up for the fact that targets in real life are not standing still indefinitely like they usually are on a range. It’s pretty easy to not take speed seriously when that’s the case.

– Robert Vogel

You’ve got the rest of your life to solve that problem… how ever long that is.

– John Farnam

There is a timer in every gun fight. The other guy is holding it and it has a button that makes a very loud beep. It’s called a gun.

– Nate Perry

Establishing Hard Standards

1 Comment

MountainGuerrilla

One of the subjects we discuss in this blog, a lot, is the importance of having quantifiable metrics of performance. A large part of that is what I call “soft standards,” i.e. “I did better than I did last time,” and “I performed the drill/skill correctly.” On the same hand however, there is a time and a place for “hard standards.”
“Hard standards” are simply a published set of metrics that a given group of people are expected to be able to achieve, on demand, without specific preparation or warm-up. As individual practitioners of…dare I say…the “Heroic Ideal,” soft standards really should be more important to us than soft standards, but hard standards do have a very important role to play as well.
In the first place, it allows us the confidence to accept fate stoically. “What is, is.” If I have met a hard standard, on demand, without preamble…

View original post 5,289 more words

Why police should participate in competitive shooting sports

1 Comment

Wisdom from Dave Porter

Different competitive shooting disciplines teach different skills, but all use Cooper’s “Speed-Accuracy-Power” to some extent. Even slow fire NRA high power rifle requires 20 shots in 20 minutes at 600 yards. Does anyone think a Police Marksman would be called upon to make faster shots at that distance?

IPSC and 3-Gun, as the author notes in the article below, are very fast indeed, at ranges from very close to intermediate.

I think it extremely noteworthy that, following 9-11, when the Army realized that the average Soldier’s gunfighting skills were generally woefully inadequate, they tapped their competitive shooting teams to design and teach courses like Squad Designated Marksman and Close Quarters Marksmanship. (taught respectively by the Army Rifle Team and the Army Pistol Team)

In my own 26 years of service, the best instruction I experienced BY FAR was taught by competitive shooters. When it became my job to provide weapons instruction for troops going into harm’s way, I modeled my instruction after theirs, and I started competing myself.

If you want top level instruction in ANY field of human endeavor, you find the enthusiast. Teaching an enthusiast/expert how to instruct is far more effective than assigning a trained instructor a task which doesn’t really interest him.


Why police should participate in competitive shooting sports
by Ron Avery
https://www.policeone.com/training/articles/189973006-Why-police-should-participate-in-competitive-shooting-sports/

Some thoughts regarding ‘force on force’ training.

2 Comments

It’s common to see Force On Force drills that attempt to teach something which is affected by a student’s foreknowledge. For instance, a student knows that he’s in a FOF class, he’s got a loaded sim gun in his holster, and he knows that the drill is testing his reaction time or ability to do a specific task. His anticipation of the need to shoot is sky high. If the technique works, all it shows is that the student could do it when he had advance warning of the event. Would it work if he wasn’t already primed for action? The trouble is that this can’t be tested in FOF, because there will always be that anticipation. FOF drills must be carefully selected so that the skill being developed or tested isn’t negatively affected by that anticipation. They also can’t be used to justify training that benefits from anticipation, a fault I see all too often.

– Grant Cunningham

It’s common to see Combat Focus Shooting drills that attempt to teach something which is affected by a student’s foreknowledge. For instance, a student knows that he’s in a CFS class or about run a Figure 8 Drill (or Lateral Motion/Wind Sprint/Defensive Shooting Standard) and he knows that the drill is testing information processing, pattern recognition, his reaction time (but without actually being timed) or ability to do a specific task. His anticipation of the need to react to a verbal command and probably shoot is sky high. If the technique works, all it shows is that the student could do it when he had advance warning of the event. Would it work if he wasn’t already primed for action? The trouble is that this shares the same flaw as every drill – for CFS, competition, static/fixed/square range, or FOF – and can’t be tested as such because there will always be that anticipation. All drills must be carefully selected so that the skill being developed or tested isn’t negatively affected by that anticipation. They also can’t be used to justify training that benefits from anticipation, a fault I see all too often.

Here’s a better take on introducing FOF:

The Force on Force Drill

Over 81,000 NRA Members Celebrate Freedom in Atlanta

Leave a comment

The 146th NRA Annual Meetings and Exhibits was held in Atlanta, Georgia at the Georgia World Congress Center April 27-30, 2017 were attended by over 81,000 participants and 800+ exhibitors.
More

All Shooting Organizations are Bad!

6 Comments

Organization

or·gan·i·za·tion [awr-guh-nuh-zey-shuhn]

A definition

More

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: