223839 Bullies, 3663 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 11 to 20 of 34
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 12 34 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Scrapper is offline
    Scrapper's Avatar

    Fear and bullets.

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Dayville, Connecticut, United States
    Posts
    4,286

    Posted On:
    8/12/2013 11:42am

    staff
     Style: MMA

    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    But at what point are the fundamentals strong enough to transition to tactical stuff? how much time does one invest in "proper" mechanics before the returns start to diminish as compared to the high-speed/hard-core "tactical ted" stuff?

    I am asking this as a thought experiment to all the amateur and pro shooters we have here. If you were to design a program for teh uber-noob who has no plans of ever becoming a tier one (or two or even three) operator, but may need to engage in pistol combat at some point (insert MacGuffin here), how much time/energy/money/effort do you sink into the base fundamentals before teaching actual fighting.


    (Clever people may be spotting my "kata v. sparring" or "street v. sport" parallels here...)
    And lo, Kano looked down upon the field and saw the multitudes. Amongst them were the disciples of Uesheba who were greatly vexed at his sayings. And Kano spake: "Do not be concerned with the mote in thy neighbor's eye, when verily thou hast a massive stick in thine ass".

    --Scrolls of Bujutsu: Chapter 5 vs 10-14.
  2. Diesel_tke is offline
    Diesel_tke's Avatar

    Light Heavyweight

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    4,006

    Posted On:
    8/12/2013 11:46am

    supporting member
     Style: stick,Taiji, mountainbike

    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil View Post
    Definitely a possibility. You guys who regularly train in a team environment can assess how common those shortcomings are better than I can.
    Well, I know a few guys that couldn't shoot their way out of a paper bag but they love cool toys. Every time I've shot with them, they were way more concerned about looking cool. They didn't even check their targets after each round of fire.

    But most everyone I know huts also, and we spend lots of time sighting in our rifles and plinking. So you have to be able to shoot or get laughed at.

    And I think some just forget about the fundamentals over time. Worried more about the cool stuff.
    Combatives training log.

    Gezere: paraphrase from Bas Rutten, Never escalate the level of violence in fight you are losing. :D

    Drum thread

    Pavel Tsatsouline: kettlebell workouts give you “cardio without the dishonour of aerobics”.
  3. Devil is offline
    Devil's Avatar

    His heart was visible, and the dismal sack that maketh excrement of what is eaten.

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    6,632

    Posted On:
    8/12/2013 11:47am

    supporting member
     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrapper View Post
    But at what point are the fundamentals strong enough to transition to tactical stuff? how much time does one invest in "proper" mechanics before the returns start to diminish as compared to the high-speed/hard-core "tactical ted" stuff?

    I am asking this as a thought experiment to all the amateur and pro shooters we have here. If you were to design a program for teh uber-noob who has no plans of ever becoming a tier one (or two or even three) operator, but may need to engage in pistol combat at some point (insert MacGuffin here), how much time/energy/money/effort do you sink into the base fundamentals before teaching actual fighting.


    (Clever people may be spotting my "kata v. sparring" or "street v. sport" parallels here...)

    That's a very good question. I don't know the answer. (Disclaimer: that may not keep me from saying some **** after I think about it for a few minutes). lol.
  4. Diesel_tke is offline
    Diesel_tke's Avatar

    Light Heavyweight

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    4,006

    Posted On:
    8/12/2013 11:50am

    supporting member
     Style: stick,Taiji, mountainbike

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrapper View Post
    But at what point are the fundamentals strong enough to transition to tactical stuff? how much time does one invest in "proper" mechanics before the returns start to diminish as compared to the high-speed/hard-core "tactical ted" stuff?

    I am asking this as a thought experiment to all the amateur and pro shooters we have here. If you were to design a program for teh uber-noob who has no plans of ever becoming a tier one (or two or even three) operator, but may need to engage in pistol combat at some point (insert MacGuffin here), how much time/energy/money/effort do you sink into the base fundamentals before teaching actual fighting.


    (Clever people may be spotting my "kata v. sparring" or "street v. sport" parallels here...)
    That's an interesting question because you only have a short amount of time to prepare someone to work on the street. Most academy lengths are a few months. So in that time you have to get fundamental shooting, tactical shooting, and legal stuff all thrown in. Plus the cost of rounds. And that may be where people get screwed up. Learning tactical and fundamentals at the same time.
    Combatives training log.

    Gezere: paraphrase from Bas Rutten, Never escalate the level of violence in fight you are losing. :D

    Drum thread

    Pavel Tsatsouline: kettlebell workouts give you “cardio without the dishonour of aerobics”.
  5. submessenger is offline
    submessenger's Avatar

    Transmaniacon MC

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Delray Beach
    Posts
    1,602

    Posted On:
    8/12/2013 1:51pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ

    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrapper View Post
    But at what point are the fundamentals strong enough to transition to tactical stuff? how much time does one invest in "proper" mechanics before the returns start to diminish as compared to the high-speed/hard-core "tactical ted" stuff?

    I am asking this as a thought experiment to all the amateur and pro shooters we have here. If you were to design a program for teh uber-noob who has no plans of ever becoming a tier one (or two or even three) operator, but may need to engage in pistol combat at some point (insert MacGuffin here), how much time/energy/money/effort do you sink into the base fundamentals before teaching actual fighting.


    (Clever people may be spotting my "kata v. sparring" or "street v. sport" parallels here...)
    From my amateur/enthusiast/SD perspective... I have no advanced training - yet. Fundamentals I would consider a number of the things already mentioned - grip, trigger control, sight picture. I would throw in basic firearm operation and the situationals like "when to draw," and "when to shoot." The person should be able to handle FTF/FTE easily and know how to handle duds, squibs, and hang fires. All of those are fairly objective, I think, and can be measured/graded without much difficulty.

    And, of course, the person should be able to hit a target. Ideally, I would say 100% COM at 5 yards, which would be at worst about 66% at 8 yards, right? I don't think I would have accuracy at 8 yards as a prerequisite to "advanced," training, but it may be an interesting tool to gauge the performance of the individual and of the advanced training methods, should you bookend the training with range time (which you should, because how else are you going to tell if you're better?)

    Here's where the line starts to get fuzzy for me. Comfort with the firearm, which may be very subjective. Production should be fluid and controlled. The person shouldn't get the shakes after firing a few rounds (I've taken several friends out for their first shot, this happens a lot). The person should be able to maintain positive control of the firearm, and have an innate awareness of where the gun is and where the barrel is pointing.

    The objective stuff is probably a few hours (5 max I would say) of dedicated training. Accuracy will probably require one-on-one interaction with an instructor, but can be combined with range time. The subjective stuff will come with range time, and will depend on the individual.

    Here's the key point - and I think this is where I put words in devil's mouth, you can't just pass the fundamentals and be done - you have to practice them regularly, so maybe a refresher course should be a prereq to advanced if you haven't done a fundamentals track in, say, the last 12 months (maybe it is, see first paragraph where I say I haven't taken any advanced courses, yet).
  6. Scrapper is offline
    Scrapper's Avatar

    Fear and bullets.

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Dayville, Connecticut, United States
    Posts
    4,286

    Posted On:
    8/12/2013 2:04pm

    staff
     Style: MMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    The variation in individual learning curves will be a factor as well.

    I imagine that at various competencies you transition to the next element.

    If you have an eight-inch group at fast fire at 8 yards, then you are probably good enough for drawing, moving, shoot-and-move, etc stuff. For most people, that's going to be two long training days minimum, probably more. But that feel's too early to be moving on to me,

    because then you are back at square one when all the new elements make you a wild spaztard again.
    And lo, Kano looked down upon the field and saw the multitudes. Amongst them were the disciples of Uesheba who were greatly vexed at his sayings. And Kano spake: "Do not be concerned with the mote in thy neighbor's eye, when verily thou hast a massive stick in thine ass".

    --Scrolls of Bujutsu: Chapter 5 vs 10-14.
  7. Mr. Machette is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,673

    Posted On:
    8/12/2013 2:17pm

    Join us... or die
     Style: FMA, Ego Warrior

    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrapper View Post
    Does it really matted if your trigger pull is flawless and your follow-through picture perfect if your bad guy is no more dead than the guy who sprays like a spaztard but gets hits?

    My heart says "Yes!" but my brain asks "why?"
    IMHO it does.

    You want your rounds on target. Not flying through the air hitting whatever or whomever happens to be in their way. That point alone is a major fundamental.

    Being able to shoot while doing acrobatics or contortions is cool but what's it worth if you can't hit the BG?

    Heck if you want to you can shoot and miss without any expensive training at all! You can even strike a sweet pose. Throw on some high speed / low drag wrap arounds and a tactical vest. Have fun with it!
    Last edited by Mr. Machette; 8/12/2013 2:31pm at .
  8. tgace is online now
    tgace's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    1,272

    Posted On:
    8/12/2013 2:22pm


     Style: Arnis/Kenpo hybrid

    3
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    IMO It's all a trade off of accuracy vs speed. If one guy can one hole it at 7 yards and another can dump two mags at "minute of COM" into two targets in 1/4 the time Ill take man number 2. If you are missing the target entirely at a blazing pace then you better slow it down.

    Then there's range to the target. At bad breath range there's a little wiggle room in regards to the fundamentals..trying to hit a guy at 25 yards? Way different story.
  9. slamdunc is online now
    slamdunc's Avatar

    Extraordinarily Ordinary

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,161

    Posted On:
    8/12/2013 2:25pm

    supporting member
     Style: TKD, CMA & American Kenpo

    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrapper View Post
    The variation in individual learning curves will be a factor as well.

    I imagine that at various competencies you transition to the next element.
    I agree with your addition. I have a much easier job in teaching a basic class to women than trying to coach veteran police officers (egos tend to get in the way). If someone has the fundamentals down tightening the group isn't that big of a challenge.

  10. submessenger is offline
    submessenger's Avatar

    Transmaniacon MC

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Delray Beach
    Posts
    1,602

    Posted On:
    8/12/2013 2:26pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrapper View Post
    The variation in individual learning curves will be a factor as well.

    I imagine that at various competencies you transition to the next element.

    If you have an eight-inch group at fast fire at 8 yards, then you are probably good enough for drawing, moving, shoot-and-move, etc stuff. For most people, that's going to be two long training days minimum, probably more. But that feel's too early to be moving on to me,

    because then you are back at square one when all the new elements make you a wild spaztard again.
    I somewhat agree - consider any respectable belted art: your mastery of the art is not just based on your ability to digest the material, but your ability to apply that knowledge over a long period of time and in progressively more difficult scenarios.

    In the civilian world, quality firearms training seems to be sparse (probably a whole other discussion, there). The upshot is that it's only in very small circles (some military, some LEO, very little civilian) that *continuing* training is required or even desirable, which is a marked difference from other "martial arts."

    It may just be that guns are easy enough to use and get the desired result without any training.

    Am I rambling yet? I think I'm rambling...
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 12 34 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.