< Back to the Main Site

Author Topic: Avoiding the gamer trap  (Read 3804 times)

Offline sjwsti

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 541
Avoiding the gamer trap
« on: July 30, 2011, 10:31:08 AM »
Good read that sums up the pitfalls of sport shooting.

I have nothing against competition shooting, I did it sucessfully for several years. And for a novice shooter interested in self defense its a great starting point.

But once you have the fundamentals of balancing speed and accuracy down the techniques it begins to ingrain can be detrimental in a street fight. Unless your like the author and will use proper tactics in competition and could care less how you score.

By nature Im too competitive and I show up to win, and thats why I gave it up completely. And I can tell you, from experience, that it is much harder to unlearn a technique that has embedded itself in your subconscious than it is to learn it in the first place. 

- Shawn


http://www.warriortalknews.com/2011/07/avoiding-the-gamer-trap.html


By Alex Nieuwland – Suarez International Staff Instructor in South Carolina

I’ve heard all of these comments, some of them recently.

“All of this realistic training to win gunfights is getting in the way of my IDPA.”

“Practicing with my reloads that barely make power factor and barely cycle my gun has made my gun handling worse instead of better.”

“I can’t stop myself from walking backwards instead of pointing my toes in the direction I’m going. I’ve been a gamer for too long!”

All of these shooters had fallen into the gamer trap. I know I had, so I could relate.


 

Participating in gun games, just like most things, is good in moderation. When taken to extremes, however, it becomes easy to fall into the “gamer trap” where winning the game instead of winning your upcoming gunfight becomes priority #1. As Jim Cirillo, who was an accomplished competition shooter as well as the winner of many gunfights, put it: “It may take extra time in a sports match, but in reality it would save lives. To hell with the score!” [1]


To head off the criticism that I’m just a hater bashing gun games, let me say this: Gun games are fun, and I’m a big proponent. In every Concealed Weapons Permit class I teach, I spend some time explaining the various attractions offered by Steel Challenge, IDPA, and USPSA. For example, Steel Challenge is a great way of testing your draw, sight picture, and trigger press, and finding your balance between speed and precision. IDPA and USPSA offer marvelous opportunities to come try out your carry gear for a very reasonable fee. In my area, where indoor ranges don’t allow drawing from the holster, rapid fire, or shooting on the move, they are a great gift to the shooter inclined to get better at those things. In addition, they offer a great opportunity to spend time with some like-minded individuals.

As part of teaching any Suarez International defensive pistol class, however, we always ask the question: “What’s more important: Shooting the bad guy or not getting shot?” Occasionally, we get a taker for “shooting the bad guy,” but most folks wisely opt for “not getting shot” first, immediately followed by “shooting the bad guy.”

This is where the fundamental difference between winning your gunfight and winning your favorite gun game comes in: there is no bad guy shooting at you during the game. As a result, gun games allow one to focus entirely on the “shoot the bad guy” part of the equation, to the detriment of the “not getting shot” part. Sure, IDPA enforces the “IDPA lean” that places 100% of your lower body and at least 50% of your upper body behind cover, but that still leaves a LOT of your body sticking out from cover for the BG to shoot. This is particularly evident when a right handed shooter tries to take a left-handed corner without switching the gun to his left hand, and vice-versa. When we teach taking a corner in our HRO-CQB: Fighting in Buildings courses, we reduce the amount you expose to the bad guys to no more than the arm holding your pistol and an eyeball by switching hands depending on the tactical situation.


In addition, in IDPA there’s no penalty for shooting from close to the cover where debris and bullets skipping off the edge of the cover would still be a concern to you if someone were actually shooting at you, in addition to giving away your exact position and exposing you to a potential gun grab. When I started shooting IDPA 10 years ago, I did what I saw most of the other shooters do and hugged the cover. This placed me closer to the targets so I could shoot them more easily, and made it easier for the safety officer to see that I was leaning out properly. It also meant I had fallen into the gamer trap.


To overcome my gamer habits and squeeze the maximum benefit out of the time and ammo I spend at a match I have come up with some personal guidelines that have lowered my scores, but have allowed me to climb out of the gamer trap I had fallen into.

Here they are:

1.Mindset: I realize that this is “just a game”, but I want to maximize its potential for realistic testing of my skills and equipment. I realize that using these guidelines will probably hurt my score, but I’m willing to accept that because my overall goal (winning my upcoming gunfight) is more important than my score in a gun game.
2.Use of cover: I will take left handed corners left handed, and right handed corners right handed. I will strive to stay as far back from cover as the stage design allows.
3.Concealment: I will use a concealment garment whenever the rules of the game allow it.
4.Equipment: I will use what I carry as much as the rules of the game allow. For example, in IDPA’s Stock Service Pistol division I use my Glock 19 with Warren Tactical sights from a strong-side outside the waistband holster (Dale Fricke Gideon Elite). In USPSA’s Open division, however, I will use my Glock 19 with Trijicon RMR red-dot sight from an inside the waistband appendix carry holster (Dale Fricke Seraphim). Clearly, I have no hope of winning in USPSA’s Open division competing against true raceguns with an RMRed Glock 19, but that’s not the point. As long as they let me use it in their game, I’m happy. Click here for more info on using what you carry for competition.
5.Proactive reloads: I will do a proactive reload (retaining the partially used magazine) wherever it makes tactical sense, whether I need to or not to finish the stage.
6.Emergency reloads: I will rip the magazine out and retain it during emergency reloads, unless the targets are very close.
7.After action assessment: I will ask the first two questions of the Suarez International after action assessment (“Did I hit him, did it work? Does he have any friends?”) before I unload and show clear.
8.Use of ammo: I will be generous with my bullets. If I feel that a target needs to be shot again, I will shoot it again.
9.Ammo selection: I will use ammo that closely replicates the felt recoil and point of aim/point of impact of my carry ammo.
10.After Action Review: I will videotape my performance in the stages for later critiquing. Did I do my reloads correctly? Did I stay away from cover? In other words: What do I need to be working during my upcoming practice sessions?
11.Competition: I will strive to bring a shooting buddy who is using the same guidelines and only compare my score with him or her.
Hopefully, these guidelines can serve as encouragement to shooters who have so far avoided falling into the gamer trap, and perhaps allow some that have to realize the problem and climb out as well.

Want to share your thoughts? Join the discussion here on Warrior Talk.

References
[1] Jim Cirillo in Guns, Bullets and Gunfights: Lessons and Tales from a Modern-Day Gunfighter; Paladin Press, 1996, page 65.
"It's not what you know that will get you into trouble; it's what you know that isn't true"

www.88tactical.com

Offline Ram Ringer

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Location: Lincoln Nebraska
  • Posts: 138
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2011, 02:29:42 PM »
Great post, but I do have to say at first I thought you were talking about Dan's new arcade area.
"The Most Important Political Office Is That Of The Private Citizen"  Louis Brandeis

Offline JTH

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2300
  • Shooter
    • Precision Response Training
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2011, 11:04:10 PM »
This is really long---sorry, folks.  :)  I've been hearing a lot of "don't compete, it'll get you killed/don't learn from competition shooters, they'll get you killed" from a number of various places lately, so I'm going to talk a bit. 

Just thought I'd reply to this---primarily because this topic comes up time and time again.  Some quotes from people who've been there, regarding learning from a competition shooter first:

SmittyFL posted in the BrianEnos forums back on July 29th, 2003:
"I was in the military a few years back, this was before I started shooting competitions. It was in a special operaitons unit, so we did a lot of shooting, and a lot of tatics training. I was just learning about IPSC and steel matches when the higher ups at our unit said they were bringing a professional shooter (civilian no less) to teach us for a week. A small group of us were selected to attend the training. Many in the group weren't to excited to have some guy we didn't know try to teach US how to shoot. When the time came, we learned this guy's name was Jerry Barnhart. I had vaguely heard of him, and I was looking forward to it, but as I said many of the guys were skeptical.

He may of sensed this, or just knew it because of his training experience with tactical type units. But his opening introduction I think put all of our guys at ease and is my definition of practical shooting.

He said "I have no background in the military, I've never been in law enforcement, I will not try to teach you anything about tactics. What I do do is shoot guns fast and accurate, and I'm one of the best in the world at it. Do you guys think learning to shoot faster and more accruate will aid to your training?"

It was a great week, and everybody was all ears. We learned a lot and became better marksman because of it.

Being able to hit what you're shooting at extremely fast.....is practical."


---the guy who posted this is Shannon Smith.

Shannon Smith bio: 
"Shannon Smith is a USPSA Grandmaster and IDPA Master competition shooter competing in 10-15 major matches per year around the country. The top ranked shooter in Florida, 7 time and current USPSA State Champion, 2 time and current IDPA State Champion. Regular top 10 finisher at National level matches. Shannon finished 3rd in the world at World Shoot XV in Bali, Indonesia 2008. He also was a member of the gold medal winning US team.

Owner and lead instructor with FAST academy, LLC, his tactical background includes six years in special operations with the US Army’s 2nd Ranger Battalion at Ft. Lewis, WA. Serving as team leader and squad leader; qualifying expert in all aspects of special operations. He attended numerous schools relating to special operations, small unit tactics, leadership, firearms and ground fighting while in the Army. He brings this experience as well as a sense of humor and ability to relate to the student to his teaching style."


So, as you can tell, he doesn't have a problem with keeping competition shooting, combat shooting, and self-defense shooting separate.  Quite the contrary.

Another comment from him on the FAST website:
"Working with Military
Posted by Admin | Posted in Training | Posted on 21-07-2010

Had an awesome week with elements of the 101st Airborne this month. I was fortunate  to teach an M9 course with a select group of senior NCO’s and a couple officers. What an honor to work with our military. Hopefully I will have similar opportunities in the future. All feedback was positive and I think the boys got some great training.

This goes with anything I suppose but you just don’t know what you don’t know. I wish I had been smarter about training when I was in the military. There used to be a lot of talk in the ‘tactical’ world about competition shooting teaching bad or even dangerous habits that would ‘get you killed’ on the street.

I think most trainers have realized that is not the case any longer. Many elite military units as well as law enforcement departments have been hiring top competition shooters for some time now because frankly they are the best shooters on the planet.

Once you allow yourself to get away from the square range mindset and employ techniques that are second nature to competition shooters you realize what can be accomplished. Training becomes much more realistic, not to mention just plain fun also.

I was presented a coin from the Battalion Commander and a certificate of service and kick ass tee shirt from the Battalion Sergeant Major. As I stated, it was an honor working with these men and I wish them safe travels wherever they may go.

For more information on FAST academy’s work with military and government units, contact us here."


When I asked him for permission to quote what he said, in addition to giving permission, he said:

"Hell it's not really even up for debate now a days. That quote was 8 years ago and the incident was 13 years ago. With the war for the last decade I guarantee the top tier units in the nation hire the top competition shooters to teach them how to shoot better. Local LE units don't do it as much due to budget constraints but most the federal units including all your tier one SOCOM units do it. I promise.

I train competition shooters as well as tactical shooters. What I try to stress is you have to disconnect "shooting" from "fighting with a firearm". They are two different skills that should be learned separately then joined together.

The competition background shooters aren't there to teach you tactics or how to fight. They (we) are there to teach you how to run the gun to the best of it's and your ability. How to shoot Fast and Accurate.....period."


Now, that was all about learning from a competition shooter.  But you'll note in there that oddly enough, he doesn't have a problem keeping these things separate.  And unsurprisingly enough, most other shooters who do this sort of thing don't either.  (Example:  Mike Seeklander, Travis Tomasie, Max Michel, Bill Rogers...)  Heck, the Army Marksmanship Unit gets PAID to go shoot competitions with full race gear, and yet oddly enough, they are the ones who promulgate better shooting tactics in their branch of the service.

Now, if you think that competition shooting will help your defensive tactics, then indeed, you are setting yourself up to be shot.  On the other hand, if you think competition shooting is a game, and your self-defense training is different, then it really isn't going to be a problem.

After all, how many NASCAR drivers do you suddenly find zooming through street traffic at 100+mph?  Seriously, do people think they are going to have a problem differentiating between someone trying to kill them, and a paper target, IF they have been actually training in defensive tactics?

A couple of good quotes from a separate forum ( http://pistol-forum.com :)
"I think such instances stem from people whose only exposure to firearms is through the competitive world and have little to no quality firearms and/or tactics training. Consider that if your only exposure to tactics was IDPA how little you would fair in a gunfight. You might as well be watching an action movie for tactics training.

I draw a distinction between firearms and tactics training. A person can be quite skillful with a firearm but have absolutely no actual tactical knowledge to impart. Even people with tactical knowledge may be teaching tactics that are not relevant to the student's world. "
(from http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?662-Merging-Competition-and-Training&p=9988&viewfull=1#post9988 )

For example, military tactics, LEO tactics, and standard self-defense tactics are three VERY different things.  Of course there is overlap---but there are some significantly important differences.

Someone else:
"I see a lot of "tactical" trainers who recommend you shoot the match like it's training.
I disagree completely.
I suggest you shoot the match like it's a competition.
The reason is, the match will force you into doing things "wrong" and I think having a solid mental distinction between competition and training helps stop you from ingraining bad habits.
If you go into it with competition on the mind you won't be as likely to blur the line into pseudo-training.
Also, there aren't enough repetitions of bad habits in a match to overcome the good repetitions you should be putting in at the range. "
  (from http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?662-Merging-Competition-and-Training&p=10002&viewfull=1#post10002 )

Chances, participating in various competitions will give you chances to shoot in ways you never will have a chance to do otherwise, at targets you don't normally have access to, and will cause you to do it under slight stress which makes a difference.  If you want to be a better shooter, shoot some competitions.  If that screws up your self-defense tactics training---you need to be practicing your self-defense tactics more. 

Lastly, put quite simply:
"If you cannot separate competition from fighting, you probably shouldn't do either. " (from http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?662-Merging-Competition-and-Training&p=9995&viewfull=1#post9995 )

Again, this argument comes up again and again---and you know what?  People who compete tend to be better shooters.  And none of the competition games will teach you tactics. 

I note also that I rarely see a USPSA stage that remotely resembles any sort of self-defense situation, so I don't have a hard time treating it like a game.  :)

I do agree that if all of your "defensive shooting" training is simply practicing for competitions, you are setting yourself up to get killed.  But then again, I like to think that most shooters are bright enough to tell the difference, and more importantly, realize that to prepare for self-defense situations, you need to _practice_ self-defense situations.  Competition games are something else completely. 

I often like some of the things that Suarez has to say---but I disagree with almost all of the points in this article. 

1) Mindset---this is a game, and it _shouldn't_ be treated like training for real, because it doesn't resemble anything real.  (And yes, that includes IPDA in my opinion.)  Practicing self-defense should be done outside of playing competition games.

2-4)  Play the game as it is intended.  If you want to run it as if it was serious, go ahead---but if you aren't military or LEO, if it WAS serious, wouldn't the best choice be to RUN AWAY?  Seriously, folks--this is a game. 

5) Proactive reloads--if you want to waste time in the game, go ahead.  I'm not sure how it will help you, as this should be in a separate spot in your head compared to self-defense training.

6) Why would we want to keep hold of an empty magazine?  (Assuming "emergency reload" means what it does everywhere else, which is "the mag is empty and the slide is locked back, reload NOW!")  Do you normally carry spare loose rounds to load it with later? 

7) I don't see asking myself that question 16 times in a stage, but hey, to each their own.

8 ) Considering the targets don't fall down or react at all (other than falling steel), this doesn't make sense to me.  I tend to add extra rounds on a target when I feel I haven't made good shots, but that is how the game is played.  In real life, I certainly wouldn't just shoot twice and call it good---but real life wouldn't resemble this at all in the first place, and how the criminal reacts tells you what you should be doing.

9) I actually agree with this---as long as I'm shooting a gun that closely matches my carry gun.  This is one of the reasons that I shoot Production division---I've carried this gun before, using ammo very like this.  On the other hand, if I shoot Open, my ammo selection wouldn't resemble carry ammo and all, and it wouldn't bother me, because there isn't any similarity in situation anyway.  That all being said, just about every person who has written something about shooting who has actually _been there_ pretty much agrees that using cheap plinking ammo for practice isn't a big deal, because under stress there just isn't that much difference in terms of what you notice.

10-11)  Indeed, videotaping your performance works on many levels--you can look at what you did to become a better competitor.  (Better at the game.)  You can also look at what you did to become a better shooter.  And having a partner to do it with is a good thing---shooting partners are great to train with.  Having this tell you _anything_ about your ability to handle a self-defense situation seems ridiculous to me, however.  And besides, if your partner isn't the same level of ability, "comparing" won't tell you much from a self-defense perspective.

Anyway---if you think competitions prepare you for self-defense situations, then yes----you are in trouble.  If you don't, then you aren't going to have a problem. 

Last comment, really:  From my personal experience---I taught myself to shoot.  Then I started competing at shooting.  And I've spent the last 20 years learning and teaching self-defense tactics (empty hand initially, then after awhile, weapons also).  And you know what?  When I went to the Rogers Shooting School  (known primarily for teaching government groups such as FBI HRT, Delta, SEALs, and other special forces groups along with many, many law enforcement officers) not only did I get the highest score on their qualifier out of the entire class, but I scored an "Advanced" level on 5 out of the 6 attempts at the qualifier---and it included such things as the correct use of cover, reloading appropriately, etc. 

The average score for people on their first attempt at the classifier is 37 out of 125.  I scored 109, which is one point away from Advanced.  I then scored Advanced the entire rest of the week---and not once did any of the instructors (law enforcement, military, and FBI past/present all) have any problems with the way I handled their tactics.  (In handgun or CQB carbine, which I also scored Advanced every time I shot their classifier.)

Do competitions, people.  You'll become better shooters because of it.  And you'll have a lot more fun shooting. 

And practice self-defense tactics when you practice, because those tactics will keep you alive so that you CAN shoot back if necessary.  If you need to take classes in SD tactics, Signal 88 teaches some, Shawn teaches some at the Bullet Hole, and I teach them through Precision Response Training.  There are places around here to learn how to defend yourself.  And plenty of places to compete, also.

It isn't hard to keep them separate.

Ok, I'm done now.  :)


 
« Last Edit: July 30, 2011, 11:07:58 PM by jthhapkido »
Precision Response Training
http://precisionresponsetraining.com

Offline bkoenig

  • Gun Show Volunteer
  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 3677
  • Aspiring cranky old gun nut
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #3 on: July 31, 2011, 06:49:47 AM »
I've seen a lot of posts on the interwebs lately about how competition shooting is bad for you.  Apparently it's the latest fad among the mall ninjas.  Personally, I don't really have the money to drop on a bunch of training classes (although I do plan to take a carbine or pistol course some day) so competition is my training.  I know participating in 3 gun has made me a much better shooter in a practical sense. 

And you know what's funny?  Participating in "traditional" shooting events like Appleseed, CMP High Power, etc has helped my 3 gun shooting.  Any type of shooting helps, the key is to learn from every shot.  A lot of people are gun owners.  Very few are actually shooters.

Offline Lorimor

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Location: Platte County
  • Posts: 1077
  • Relay 2
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2011, 07:47:34 AM »
My favorite guru has always told me it's just fine to shoot competition.  He encourages it! 

HOWEVER, at the same time, the shooter with SD/HD on the mind, should shoot the game as much as reasonable/possible with that on the mind.  (and realize that they will incur time penalties and not win anything but still have a good time and maybe learn some stuff.)

Some of the scenarios will teach you bad habits, e.g., I don't believe it's healthy to stand in the middle of a doorway and blaze away.  Learn to lean!

I like IDPA's emphasis on the use of cover and the use of everyday carry gear. 

No, the average Joe won't be clearing houses (it's a darn good way to get killed) but still, effectively using cover and shooting from weird positions is good.  There may come a time when you're hunkered down behind a '58 Buick or flat on your back.)  For me anyway, it's a good time to practice what I should know. 

Frankly any trigger time is good IMHO and the more that participate, the better. 

We all do it for our own reasons though and should respect one another's motivations for doing so.  (as long as it's done safely.)

"It is better to avoid than to run; better to run than to de-escalate; better to de-escalate than to fight; better to fight than to die. The very essence of self-defense is a thin list of things that might get you out alive when you are already screwed." – Rory Miller

Offline sjwsti

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 541
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #5 on: August 01, 2011, 10:05:27 AM »
I posted this article because the author had come to many of the same conclusions I had over six years ago, (not sure what the mall ninjas were saying or if it was a fad then..) thats when I had the opportunity to attend a two week SWAT school. The final exam was the most stressfull, elaborate and realistic force on force scenario I had ever participated in.

When placed under a level of stress that, prior to that day I had never known, my reactions were not what they should have been. I reverted back to what I had done in countless IPSC and IDPA matches. My mind was completely focused on only shooting and not equally focused on that tactics involved in not getting shot.

That day I knew that I had got all I could from sport shooting. I had learned how to shoot quickly and accurately at various targets at varying distances. But the types of  movement and unrealistic use of cover had become a liability.

Are we smart enough to know the difference between self defense tactics and sport shooting? Consciously yes. Subconsciously it is a different story. When the threat is at close range and the time frame is compressed the subconscious takes over.

When you practice tactics on Sat, shoot IPSC on Sun. what happens on Mon. when a schizophrenic wants to cut the demons out of you with a box cutter? I say its 50/50 what your going to do. Thats not good enough for me.

Any practice is good practice Not true. Continued programming of your subconscious with poor tactics, whether at the range on your own or during sport shooting, can get you in trouble.

Before this gets any longer I will leave you with the experiences of two students during one of my classes this year.

Student (A) Only has a couple of years of experience shooting handguns. His primary focus is self defense and has attended a couple of Advanced classes. When he shoots recreationally it is to work on his tactics and toward obtaining his CCW permit. He isn't involved in sport shooting.

Student (B) Has been the victim of a violent crime and has many years of shooting experience. Has attended multiple high profile shooting schools and spends more time on the range than most of the employees. Sport shoots regularly. 

Neither student had ever participated in a high stress realistic FOF scenario. Individually the students were placed in a situation were they were faced with an active shooter who had already shot at least one person before turning the gun on them and advancing.

Student (A) Immediately moved to the closest most effective cover. Didn't expose any more of his body than he had to, made effective hits and continued to shoot until the threat ceased. Scanned 360 degrees, moved and reloaded. When asked what was going through his mind he said " I was doing everything I could to be a hard target, getting to cover and shooting until he was down, then I looked for more bad guys and moved"   Shooter (A) got a gold star.

Student (B) Started near marginal cover and upon seeing the bad guy (who was pointing a weapon at him) promptly abandoned cover to move out into the open, closing the distance to get an easier shot. Several shots were fired, bad guy goes down, Student (B) continues to stand there and wait for instructions. When asked what was going through his mind he said " I`m not sure, I just knew I had to shoot him"

Both students learned quite a bit about how effective there training regimens were.

Now if every thing we do is simply a conscious choice and continuous repetition of poor tactics in practice and competition doesn't matter, how do you explain the different reactions of the students. Afterwards Student (B) could tell me what he should have done, but not why he didn't do it.

Ive seen this happen on a regular basis since I started doing this type of training. So no matter how many famous gun slingers you quote saying sport shooting doesn't effect your tactics I'm not buying it. That hasn't been my experience.

There is a lot more I could go into but my ADD is kicking in.

- Shawn
"It's not what you know that will get you into trouble; it's what you know that isn't true"

www.88tactical.com

Offline JTH

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2300
  • Shooter
    • Precision Response Training
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #6 on: August 01, 2011, 05:36:26 PM »
Opinions vary.  Which is why I don't particularly like to base my decisions on anecdotes--I prefer to base it on aggregate data. 

Effective practice means effective technique when you need it.  (Which is not saying the same thing as "all practice is good," which I never said.)  If you practice effective self-defense, then that's what you'll do.   "Going to advanced classes" really doesn't mean much, unless the students actually practice what they've learned. 

I could give examples of experienced law enforcement screwing up by the numbers, and complete newbies getting it right, all under different circumstances---and yet those ALSO would be mere anecdotes.  Singular examples, which merely mean something a particular person did once.  Only in aggregate can we actually tell trends.

And oddly enough, the trends from people who actually DO those things (both competition, AND have been in defensive situations), say that it isn't a problem.  Sure, some people practice only competition techniques, and so that's what they do even when it isn't appropriate.  This isn't a surprise.  (Quite a few do just fine even with that because they can hit what they shoot at.  How many people read about people defending themselves with handguns in the NRA magazine every month?  How many of those people needed to do anything other than have a gun and shoot it well?  This isn't to say that you shouldn't be able to do more---but it is certainly true that being able to hit what you are shooting at under stress is kinda important.)

Anyway--the people who do a LOT of both, find that competitions enhance their firearms ability.  If you don't believe that, ask Ted Puente, Petros Milionis, Rob Vogel, Ben Stoeger, and any one of the other LEO USPSA GMs out there.

Matter of fact, asking Ben Stoeger would probably tell you the most----he was a USPSA GM before he went to the academy.  You know what?  He didn't have any problem with LEO tactics regarding firearms.  He even talked about the fact that he had it relatively easy compared to some others, because they had to thinking about shooting and about learning tactics.  All he had to do was think about tactics---because for him, shooting effectively was unconscious.  This includes both basic range work, and FOF work.  His "competition reflexes" didn't get him into trouble at all.

But again, that is just one person---so that may just be him.  However, put his experience together with all the other LEOs in the aggregate, and you know what?  It isn't a problem.

Again, though---opinions vary.  Everyone's got one, and that's all right.    Just remember, if you read it on the Internet, it MUST be the truth.  :)

(sjwsti:  I note that it doesn't surprise me that you've seen all sorts of different reactions from people during FOF.  That's going to happen on people's first tries all the time--I'm pretty sure you've seen reactions that were perfect, and reactions that made NO sense at all---and I'm betting the one thing that made the MOST difference in how well they did is whether or not they had done FOF before, which is why I'm a big fan of adrenaline-based scenario training.  It IS certainly true that we tend to remember circumstances that support our opinions---which again, is why I prefer to base my opinions not on merely my own personal experience, but on aggregate data.)
Precision Response Training
http://precisionresponsetraining.com

Offline JTH

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2300
  • Shooter
    • Precision Response Training
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #7 on: August 01, 2011, 07:08:54 PM »
Oops---just remembered one last thing:  You might ask Mas Ayoob about his opinion about whether or not shooting competitions messes up your tactical thinking.  :)

For those who don't recognize the name (anyone?  didn't think so!  :) )...

"About Massad Ayoob

Massad Ayoob has been handgun editor of GUNS magazine and law enforcement editor of AMERICAN HANDGUNNER since the 1970s, and has published thousands of articles in gun magazines, martial arts publications, and law enforcement journals. He is the author of more than a dozen books on firearms, self-defense, and related topics, including “In the Gravest Extreme,” widely considered to be the authoritative text on the topic of the use of lethal force.

The winner of the Outstanding American Handgunner of the Year Award in 1998, Mas has won several state and regional handgun shooting championships. Ayoob is one of approximately ten Five Gun Masters among the 10,000-member International Defensive Pistol Association, and was the first to earn that title. He served 19 years as chair of the Firearms Committee of the American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers, and several years as a member of the Advisory Board of the International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association. In addition to teaching for those groups, he has also taught for the International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors and the International Homicide Investigators seminars.

Mas has received judicial recognition as an expert witness for the courts in weapons and shooting cases since 1979, and has been a fully sworn and empowered, part time police officer for 36 years. Ayoob founded the Lethal Force Institute in 1981 and served as its director until 2009, and now trains through Massad Ayoob Group. He has appeared on CLE-TV delivering continuing legal education for attorneys, through the American Law Institute and American Bar Association, and has been retained to train attorneys to handle deadly force cases through the Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network. Ayoob served for two years as co-vice chair of the Forensic Evidence Committee of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. He also appears in each episode of Personal Defense TV (Sportsman’s Channel)."

---from http://massadayoobgroup.com/?page_id=165
(bolded emphasis mine)
Precision Response Training
http://precisionresponsetraining.com

Offline sjwsti

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 541
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #8 on: August 01, 2011, 08:07:25 PM »
At what point do my experiences of over more than a decade as an instructor stop being anectodes and morph into data? Over the last six years Ive trained (and continue to do so) with some of the best instructors in the industry, three separate SWAT teams and a very motivated and skilled group of locals.  Do I have to put it on a chart or have it published?

I have had personal conversations with Henk Iverson about this very topic. If you need credentials he has them. He has combat experience as a former member of the South African Military. Experience as a Police officer in South Africa and experience as a member of the South African Special Police Task Force (look it up, there is a great documentary on you-tube about these guys). He is currently under Govt contract instructing Special Forces and when we last spoke in the fall he was in the running to obtain the contract for Delta also.

He advises against mixing self defense and sport shooting. He feels the same way about sport fighting. Once a certain level of skill is reached there is no longer a benefit. So you are right, opinions vary, even among the "experts".

I could quote others that feel the same way but I dont have the keyboard stamina that you posess JT  ;D So I`ll just copy and paste some links.

- Shawn

http://www.striketactical.com/newsletter/?id=20&archive=1

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT SPORT SHOOTING IN GENERAL?

Henk Iverson: Sport shooting is just that, SPORT. Sport shooting has its place in our industry. I come from a sport shooting background, having been an IPSC shooter most of my police officer days. I represented the South African Police Service National IPSC Team and have SA Police National Colors for both open class as well as limited class.

We all love to shoot and IPSC taught me to shoot under pressure, in front of crowds of onlookers, in front of tough competitors. IPSC taught me to control adrenalin and use it to my advantage, even to this day.

As long as a sport shooter does not CONFUSE sport and proper training. Sport shooters need to know how the body reacts to a "survival adrenal dump" in a real life gunfight. When survival mode kicks in, your sub-concious mind takes over the fight, meaning your body will react EXACTLY as it has been trained. If you use a red dot scoped, compensated 38 Super competition pistol and practice contantly with that equipment, neglecting your duty gun and holster, you might be in for a deadly surprize!

I do not teach sport shooting or sport shooting techniques. As my friend John Farnam often says, there is a huge difference between gamesmen and gunmen!

The "Range Effect" A Deadly Syndrome
By Ralph Mroz

The range is flat, open, unobstructed, well lit, safe, unidirectional, stress-free, and clear of distractions. The street, or wherever else you'll have to fight for your life, is not. Range targets are flat, static, facing head-on, quiet, non-personal, and non-threatening. The person trying to kill you isn't. So obviously, range training, no matter how "practical' or "tactical" is not real-world training. This is not a hypothesis, nor an opinion. It is a plain fact. You can shoot high-speed, low-drag drills all day against paper (or steel) targets and not touch the reality of a genuine encounter.

Three Stages:

We are stuck in the second of three stages of gun skills development. These three stages are:

Grounding in the basics:

Beginning fundamentals need to be developed at this first stage. Safety, basic gun handling, marksmanship, trigger control, sight alignment, etc. (No matter haw advanced we are, we can all use occasional brushing-up on these most basic of skills.)


Range drills - simple to complex:

Progressing from beginner-level bull-eye shooting in stage 1, it's common and prudent to move on to progressively more difficult range drills. Drills such as shooting from cover, while kneeling, while prone, weak-handed, while moving, one-handed, etc. It's here that shooting for speed as well as accuracy is introduced, as is shooting at multiple targets, decision targets, and so on.
Most of the training today-either police academy training and even at national-level schools, stop at this level. But while static shooting at targets can get ingeniously complex and difficult (look at any IPSC match), it's still just shooting at paper. 


Force-on-force scenarios:

This next level of training, the place that we logically ought to be aiming for, is to replicate as closely as possible the fights we'll be in. This kind of training requires the use of real guns (or something very similar) modified to fire non-lethal projectiles. Here, we're talking about targets that think, move, and shoot back! (Admittedly, even in a simulated force-on-force exercise, we don't duplicate the level of stress you get in a real fight - afterall, we know we're not going to get killed. But it's the closest thing we have available now) Stage 1 is where we all start. Stage 2 is where we develop useful skills and instinctive motor movements under stress. Stage 3 is where we learn to actually fight.

Each stage has a point of diminishing returns. No one would argue that refining marksmanship, or breath control, or trigger control in stage 1 past a certain point is meaningless in terms of practical survival skills. What we seem to have forgotten is that there's a point of diminishing returns in stage 2, too. Shortening a little time between A-zone doubles, or shaving small fractions of a second off a reload, or working on minute decreases in draw time, is increasingly irrelevant past a certain point.

Once we've reached that point, it's time to move on to stage 3 training. But today, few trainers and students move beyond this static-target, intermediate stage of training. Indeed, many trainers today seem to actively promote their student's retardation by indefinitely perpetuating the stay at stage 2.

Feeding the Marks:

Why? There are cynical and not-cynical reasons. Certainly few students are really ready for force-on-force encounters. Their skills just aren't there yet, or they don't posses the other attributes necessary in a fight: fitness, strength, speed (of body movement), empty-hand skills (most real encounters occur within touching distance), and just plain fighting spirit. Also, this is the stage where the gamesmen live (some, such as IPSC master-class competitors, at awesomely high levels), and many shooters are primarily interested-whether they admit it or not-in playing games. For most people, games are much more comfortable and much more fun than replicating a real-life encounter. That's fine, but we shouldn't confuse skill at games with fighting skill.

From a cynical point-of-view, trainers have a vested interest in keeping their paying customers at stage 2. By making the drills here ever more complex, and by making arbitrary standards increasingly difficult - way past the point of any likely practical necessity - they insure a continued supply of students striving to meet these goals. If they then add the lure of their own self-anointed badge of mastership - usually some title including the words "Combat" and "Master" - then the student is even more driven to accomplish these artificial and arbitrary objectives - and to keep on paying to learn at the master's feet.

This is an old con - I've seen it for the last 25 years in the martial arts. Most martial arts schools keep their students busy by endlessly practicing street-useless “katas” and ineffective "advanced techniques". They grant their badge of mastership - the black belt - to people who've never punched much more than empty air. Very few do full contact/full speed sparring. This is, afterall, just good business; realistic training doesn't make the instructor look as perfect as empty-air drills, and scares the marks - I mean the students - away.

Do I wish I could break multiple bricks with my bare hands, or score a 10-yard A-zone double tap in one second from the holster? Sure. But I'd much rather have spent the training time necessary to accomplish those goals in the ring getting hit and developing a reliable left hook, or in a "fun"-house learning how to shoot thinking opponents before they "kill" me. 


Are all trainers really this deceitful? No, but it is in their best interest to perpetuate - perhaps indefinitely - their students stay at stage 2. Not the least of the reasons is that so long as they can reliably out-perform their students on stage 2 artificial drills, they continue to look good and attract more students. By contrast, anyone who's ever participated in a force-on-force exercise knows that sometimes, no matter how good you are, you lose. Real life is harsh, and is mostly a matter of probabilities. I know that I can shave two-tenths of a second off my draw and fire time if I practice hard enough, but the only result I can be sure of if I pursue force-on-force training is that I'll lose somewhat less often.

The Range Effect:

All of this results in what I call the "range effect." That is, the creeping prevalence of artificial behaviors and skills into stage 2 training. This is exactly what happened in Japan to the old Budo martial arts. These were genuine inter-personal combat disciplines, with their training dictated by the realities of constant war. When peace came to Japan, these practical disciplines devolved into the "arts" we see today on every street corner, each as different as one sort of art can be from another, but all alike in their lack of realism.

We see the range effect in operation whenever a teacher insists that the "proper' way to execute a 180 degree turn is to pirouette on a toe, or when he (or she) explains in excruciating detail the exact way to perform a simple side-step. We see it when we are told that the "right" way to shoot is to isolate our upper bodies so as to eliminate any extraneous movement, and thus get the sights on target faster. (While that's true, and while I do get accurate shots off faster that way, if someone is trying to kill me, you can bet that my behind will be in motion!)

We see the range effect in an emphasis on stepping-back techniques as a response to close-in threats (see the chapter on Extremely Close Quarter Shooting video for the numerous fatal flaws in this technique.) We see it brought to ridiculous heights by subjecting stage 2 students to hostage targets in front of "shoot" targets. And so on, and so on. (If you think that you can really shoot a moving bad guy taking cover behind a moving hostage while you're moving, then try out for your local SWAT team as a designated entry marksman. It's irresponsible to even suggest this to anyone else! Hostage/bad-guy targets, which are perversely so much a main-stay of stage 2 training, have no place in the responsible training of most people.)

The range effect, the game mentality of too many shooters, the self-interest of trainers, and the humbling difficulty of truly realistic training, all combine to make stage 2 training self-perpetuating. But there's a faint trend developing in the right direction. We are starting to see some trainers move to force-on-force training. This will truly be the area to watch, explore, and research in the next few years. Lets just hope they don't invent some sort of competitive league - complete with a rule book and a board of directors - for it.




"It's not what you know that will get you into trouble; it's what you know that isn't true"

www.88tactical.com

Offline JTH

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2300
  • Shooter
    • Precision Response Training
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #9 on: August 01, 2011, 09:58:08 PM »
At what point do my experiences of over more than a decade as an instructor stop being anectodes and morph into data? Over the last six years Ive trained (and continue to do so) with some of the best instructors in the industry, three separate SWAT teams and a very motivated and skilled group of locals.  Do I have to put it on a chart or have it published?
 
Nope.  But just as my experience has shown me something different---neither one of our experiences are significant enough on their own to actually be the basis of an informed opinion.

Quote
I have had personal conversations with Henk Iverson about this very topic.
Snip Iverson's resume, which was impressive...
Quote
http://www.striketactical.com/newsletter/?id=20&archive=1

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT SPORT SHOOTING IN GENERAL?

Henk Iverson: Sport shooting is just that, SPORT. Sport shooting has its place in our industry. I come from a sport shooting background, having been an IPSC shooter most of my police officer days. I represented the South African Police Service National IPSC Team and have SA Police National Colors for both open class as well as limited class.

We all love to shoot and IPSC taught me to shoot under pressure, in front of crowds of onlookers, in front of tough competitors. IPSC taught me to control adrenalin and use it to my advantage, even to this day.

As long as a sport shooter does not CONFUSE sport and proper training. Sport shooters need to know how the body reacts to a "survival adrenal dump" in a real life gunfight. When survival mode kicks in, your sub-concious mind takes over the fight, meaning your body will react EXACTLY as it has been trained. If you use a red dot scoped, compensated 38 Super competition pistol and practice contantly with that equipment, neglecting your duty gun and holster, you might be in for a deadly surprize!

I do not teach sport shooting or sport shooting techniques. As my friend John Farnam often says, there is a huge difference between gamesmen and gunmen!

You'll note that his conclusion is very different from yours?  You say that competition shooting will effectively get you killed.  (Yes? ---that it will cause you to have poor tactics, and that you shouldn't do it.)  He says that sport shooting has its place, "As long as a sport shooter does not CONFUSE sport and proper training. "  He then says "If you use a red dot scoped, compensated 38 Super competition pistol and practice contantly with that equipment, neglecting your duty gun and holster, you might be in for a deadly surprize!" ---which is completely true.  Unfortunately, it doesn't say that sport shooting will ingrain bad habit/tactics---it says that if you only practice with your competition race gun, you are in trouble.  Which I completely agree with. 

I like Mroz, have his book and read a lot of his stuff.  You'll notice that what he says agrees basically with Iverson---but just like Iverson, he says that improper training will get you in trouble (the "square range" problem) which is also true, but not supportive of what you have been saying. 

If you read Mroz carefully, what he is saying is that games (IPSC or just standard range drills) only go so far as to train you for self-defense purposes.  (Which makes sense.)  He then says to be truly prepared, SD students should go farther and go through FOF drills.  (Which makes sense.)  He says that many people STOP at the range/game stage, and consider themselves prepared, and that this is a bad thing.  (Which makes sense.)

He also says that playing the game/range drill is a good way to practice accuracy/speed.

But nowhere does either one of them say that merely playing the game will cause problems.  Iverson doesn't say that at all, and the farthest Mroz gets is telling people to be careful about instructors who only get you to the range drill/game stage, and then stop, keeping you there.  He says, "The range effect, the game mentality of too many shooters, the self-interest of trainers, and the humbling difficulty of truly realistic training, all combine to make stage 2 training self-perpetuating. " ----and I agree, that is a problem.  On the other hand, truly good realistic FOF training really hasn't been around for that long.  Kenneth Murray (basically the person who started really good FOF training) talks a lot about how many people don't really know how to safely run a FOF class, and discusses the history of FOF training and how it has changed/evolved over the years in his book.  Good stuff. 

FOF training is important, but I've said from the beginning that adrenaline-based scenario training is important.  Good thing several of us around here teach it.  (I believe you do, as do I.  Signal888---hmm.  Do those guys do FOF?  I don't recall.)

That's a digression.  Back to the point:  Mroz's point seems to be that stopping at the games point doesn't appropriately prepare you.  Iverson effectively said that same thing by saying that if all you do is games, you won't be prepared.  I can completely agree with that.

And still---they don't say that sport shooting will get you killed.  Treating it like self-defense WILL, but that is something different.

I like how Mroz says:  "Lets just hope they don't invent some sort of competitive league - complete with a rule book and a board of directors - for it. "   --let's hope not.  Of course, people play AirSoft and Paintball all the time in leagues, and many teenagers seem to think it makes them shooters.  [sigh]

Lastly---reading Iverson again, I note:  "having been an IPSC shooter most of my police officer days" ---so he didn't have a problem with SD tactics and being a sport shooter.  Again---he just says you can't let your sport training be your tactical training.

Makes sense to me.  (And Ernest Langdon, too.  http://www.theppsc.org/Staff/Langdon/Ernest.htm )

Again---I try not to make my decisions based on a small data set.  There are lots of police officers, military folks, trainers, instructors---and many, many, MANY of them don't see a problem with sport shooting.  Matter of fact, your two article authors don't either.  The Army doesn't, otherwise the Army Marksmanship Unit wouldn't spend so much time doing all the different USPSA events that they do. 

Opinions vary.  But a lot of trainers with much more experience than you or I don't see the problem. 
Precision Response Training
http://precisionresponsetraining.com

Offline Lorimor

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Location: Platte County
  • Posts: 1077
  • Relay 2
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2011, 06:50:37 AM »
I'd like to get in on some good FoF training.  I have been carefully tuning my Airsoft with a Sawzall and an anvil.  I now have it spitting 6mm biodegradable BB's at just over 1800 fps.  It's ready. 


:)
"It is better to avoid than to run; better to run than to de-escalate; better to de-escalate than to fight; better to fight than to die. The very essence of self-defense is a thin list of things that might get you out alive when you are already screwed." – Rory Miller

Offline JTH

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2300
  • Shooter
    • Precision Response Training
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2011, 07:43:56 AM »
I'd like to get in on some good FoF training.  I have been carefully tuning my Airsoft with a Sawzall and an anvil.  I now have it spitting 6mm biodegradable BB's at just over 1800 fps.  It's ready. 
:)
Okay, note to self---if Lorimor ever comes to one of my classes, he HAS to use one of my AirSoft guns, not his:)
Precision Response Training
http://precisionresponsetraining.com

Offline sjwsti

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 541
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2011, 10:19:06 AM »
I find it fascinating how we can read the same thing and come to two different conclusions. But I think I can find some common ground here.

    You say that competition shooting will effectively get you killed.  (Yes? ---that it will cause you to have poor tactics, and that you shouldn't do it.)  He says that sport shooting has its place, "As long as a sport shooter does not CONFUSE sport and proper training. "  He then says "If you use a red dot scoped, compensated 38 Super competition pistol and practice constantly with that equipment, neglecting your duty gun and holster, you might be in for a deadly surprize!" ---which is completely true.  Unfortunately, it doesn't say that sport shooting will ingrain bad habit/tactics---it says that if you only practice with your competition race gun, you are in trouble.  Which I completely agree with. 

So we can agree that shooting competition by itself doesn't suffice for SD skills. But you cant ignore the first part of what he says

Quote
Sport shooters need to know how the body reacts to a "survival adrenal dump" in a real life gunfight. When survival mode kicks in, your subconscious mind takes over the fight, meaning your body will react EXACTLY as it has been trained.

I believe that every time you pick up your gun you are training. You are feeding information to your brain. When you mix SD skills with competition skills how do you control what your subconscious will decide to use under stress ( Im sure we can agree that there is such a thing as muscle memory)?

Try looking at this from the perspective of the average shooter. The person who isn't an IPSC GM or SpecOps operator and hasnt been exposed to any form of high stress shooting. Realistically most gun owners will never have any type of training at all. Only a small percentage will seek out CCW permits and for most the training will stop there with the required minimum. Of this small number of serious armed civilians there is a handfull who will seek out advanced skills or ways to improve those skills (competition).

I believe, as does Mroz, that of this small number most will stop at the second stage of training. Go and talk with some of the B, C and D class shooters and I bet that most use matches as training for SD (we both agree this is bad).

Most of us are on limited budgets and cant afford to shoot competition at at high level and do enough repetition of SD skills to offset the poor tactics of competition. Most will choose to do one or the other out of necessity. So for the average shooter with a CCW permit who wants to be prepared to survive a violent attack, and doesn't have the time or the cash to do it all, were should they spend their limited time and money?

I think we can both agree that skipping the steel match and working some wounded shooter drills would be time better spent.

- Shawn
"It's not what you know that will get you into trouble; it's what you know that isn't true"

www.88tactical.com

Offline bullit

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 2143
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2011, 03:13:14 PM »
There is a lot of "theory" and "opinion" in the above.  I say this respectfully as I have my own.  There is really no way to come to a "right" answer.  I think "recommendation" is more the word to use.  Statistically, most reported self defense shootings are by "average Joe/Jane" gun owner.  Most have had no training other than learning how to operate a gun.  A great example is the Armed Citizen column printed monthly in American Rifleman since the late 1950s.  In fact, it is not possible (at least legally) to design a prospective study of "gamers" vs "tacticians" to prove this point.  SD shootings are retrospective in nature.  One then has to question how many shootings the "experts" have actually particpated in.  How did they really react?  How many were/are competitive shooters on the side?  How many were not?  Tough questions to get answers to.  In May, I attended with a few other NFOA brethren, Rangemaster's Tactical Conference in Tulsa.  With the utmost certainty, there were at least a handful I know who have been in gunfights as LEO and military.  They were competing right along with the rest of the crowd even though they would be returning to the proverbial frying pan on Monday. 
Having been a victim of violent crime, I did not respond near to the level I always thought I would.  The important part was I survived.  Lots of lessons learned, but I am not fooling myself that I will automatically react better the next time.  I pray to God I do, but one never knows.  That being said, I still PRACTICE, PRACTICE, and PRACTICE.  I TRAIN, TRAIN, and TRAIN.
The late Jim Cirillo, of the famed New York stake out squads  (17 gunfights with 11 confirmed kills) was an avid competition shooter.  In fact, he credited his competition participation to how he handled the aforementioned shootings.
As an instructor myself,  I do see some issues that "gaming" that can likley pose if the "flag goes up".  Commonly I see guys press checking over and over.  As I heard Rob Pincus say..."STOP THAT!  Once you load your weapon, the bullets don't get up and walk away."  Another example is number of shots fired i.e. "2 to the chest, 1 to the head"...then look over pistol at target.  One can easily conclude where is could end up in reality.  I am sure there are other examples one could come up with.  In conclusion, I think this topic makes for good discussion, but one must be careful as presenting it as dogma.  That is all for now...must get back to the Debt Ceiling crisis.

Offline JTH

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2300
  • Shooter
    • Precision Response Training
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #14 on: August 02, 2011, 03:21:42 PM »
I find it fascinating how we can read the same thing and come to two different conclusions. But I think I can find some common ground here.

[snip]

So we can agree that shooting competition by itself doesn't suffice for SD skills. But you cant ignore the first part of what he says

Quote
Sport shooters need to know how the body reacts to a "survival adrenal dump" in a real life gunfight. When survival mode kicks in, your subconscious mind takes over the fight, meaning your body will react EXACTLY as it has been trained.

But that isn't the first part of what he says.  The first part from Iverson says:
1) Sport shooting has its place
2) he comes from a sport shooting background
3) he did sport shooting throughout his police career
4) Sport shooting can teach a number of things.

AFTER that, he says you just can't afford to confuse sport shooting with SD training, and gives a specific example. 

I don't see at all how that is in any way a warning to "avoid the gamer trap."  Just not at all.  As Mroz says, sport shooting can be used quite well to increase shooting skills. 

Quote from: sjwsti
I believe that every time you pick up your gun you are training. You are feeding information to your brain. When you mix SD skills with competition skills how do you control what your subconscious will decide to use under stress ( Im sure we can agree that there is such a thing as muscle memory)?

Hmm.  So, you never shoot slow fire for group size?  You never stand in the open and just shoot a target? 

No, I don't agree that there is such a thing as muscle memory (one of my pet peeves, actually).  There are certainly mental pathways we can ingrain as choices, but the concept of "muscle memory" is quite faulty.  Drives me nuts when people use that term.

Anyway---I don't see "every time I pick up a gun as training."  Just don't.  While that may feed information to my brain, it just plain does not always do it in any way that is retained.  Matter of fact, MOST of the time it isn't retained.  (Which is why good, concentrated, sustained practice is difficult for many.  The focus required for good solid retention is not easy.)  Now, if every time someone picks up a gun, they are unsafe or stupid, then yes, over time those habits will be ingrained.  However, every time I pick up a gun, I'm not training.

But, let's take some sport shooting training---specifically, some standard competition drills:  quick and efficient draw to an accurate first shot.  Practice for an effective sight picture on near shots compared to long shots.  Quick efficient reloads.  The ability to shoot accurately and immediately move.  The ability to move to a point and be able to start shooting accurately immediately upon reaching that point.  The ability to shoot accurately while moving.  The ability to shoot weak-hand only, and strong-hand only.

These are all shooting skills.  Certainly not defensive tactics.  Do tell, how many of these shooting skills are in any way detrimental to SD tactics?  They don't replace SD tactics, but they aren't supposed to.  How will these "get in the way" of my SD tactics?  Shouldn't they support them, so that any shooting I have to do will be unconsciously competent, so that I can spend my cognition on effective tactics?  Isn't everything on that list of drills something that an SD-focused shooter should also be drilling?

Quote
Try looking at this from the perspective of the average shooter. The person who isn't an IPSC GM or SpecOps operator and hasnt been exposed to any form of high stress shooting. Realistically most gun owners will never have any type of training at all. Only a small percentage will seek out CCW permits and for most the training will stop there with the required minimum. Of this small number of serious armed civilians there is a handfull who will seek out advanced skills or ways to improve those skills (competition).

I believe, as does Mroz, that of this small number most will stop at the second stage of training.

I agree that most shooters don't expose themselves to high stress shooting, that many don't undergo any professional training, and that small numbers of these will CCW.  As part of that, I'll certainly agree that a small percentage of shooters try to find ways to improve their skills.  (One of which, as you say, is competition---and so yes, I wish more people would go out and compete once in awhile. :) )

So, other than my parenthesis, above, we are in agreement thus far.  But then you say:

Quote
Go and talk with some of the B, C and D class shooters and I bet that most use matches as training for SD (we both agree this is bad).

And I don't agree with that at all.  I think that most people use matches as fun shooting training--which is SD training only with respect to shooting skills, as opposed to SD tactics.  I can't think of a single person I shoot with at ENGC who expects their USPSA match to help them tactically.

Hm---other than practice at remembering plans, reacting under stress, tracking maps in your head, and similar things.  Useful for SD tactics, but aren't actual tactics themselves. 

So no, I don't think most USPSA shooters think that way.  It may be possible that IDPA shooters might think that, I don't know.  If they do, that is unfortunate because it really, really doesn't, no matter how IDPA is advertised.

Quote
Most of us are on limited budgets and cant afford to shoot competition at at high level and do enough repetition of SD skills to offset the poor tactics of competition.

Poor tactics of competition?  Hm.  If you mean IDPA, I have no argument.  If you mean USPSA, that doesn't make sense, because as there are no SD tactics, they can't really be poor. 

Most people won't shoot competition at a high level.  Sure.  Most people don't race cars at a high level either.  Or shoot golf (boring!) at a high level.  Or any other sport.  This, however, doesn't mean that people can't play games for fun---in shooting, as in everything else. 

You seem to think that (for example) practice of USPSA shooting skills (examples of which were listed above) somehow contains "tactics" that will need to be overwritten with good SD tactics.  I disagree.  I find that the shooting skills that I practice for USPSA make the shooting part comparatively easy when I do advanced-level SD work, which is all about tactics so that you can take the shot you need without getting killed.  USPSA doesn't teach me tactics--so there isn't anything for me to re-train.

Mroz even SAYS that competitions are good level II training!

Quote
Most will choose to do one or the other out of necessity. So for the average shooter with a CCW permit who wants to be prepared to survive a violent attack, and doesn't have the time or the cash to do it all, were should they spend their limited time and money?

I think we can both agree that skipping the steel match and working some wounded shooter drills would be time better spent.

I think---that the skills needed to succeed in a steel match involve no tactics at all, merely pure shooting skills.  I see no reason to believe that the skill of being able to quickly engage targets with high accuracy is somehow a problem.  You picked steel matches--and yet, out of most of the shooting sports, this is the one that most rewards pure shooting skills.  Plenty of people shoot Steel with a production gun, in a standard hip holster, not fancy race guns.  So---especially for steel matches, I think people should try them out.  Give them a bit of stress, and find out how their draw speed and accuracy REALLY are, instead of hitting a pop can at their home range with their buddies.

I don't see the financial problem---most people who shoot competitions aren't high-level, nor do they spend hours and hour practicing for them.  It is a fun game, so they go out, shoot the game, and have some fun.  If, in your practice for SD, you don't have enough money to spend $15 to have a fun morning shooting a steel match once every two months, your life choices are going to be more of a problem for you than your shooting choices.  (I mean the generic "you", not Shawn specifically.)

I will say that I think being able to shoot accurately and quickly in the first place is more important than wounded shooter drills.  This isn't to say that people shouldn't also practice those---but first, be able to shoot quickly and accurately.  One-handed gun manipulation is after that. 

I also think that wounded shooter drills work a lot better if you can shoot one-handed, both strong and weak.  Do you dive right in and try those?  Or do you practice some accuracy first?  Do you then put it on a clock, to give yourself some stress?  Then work it into a small scenario?  How is this different from the competition shooting skills I listed above?

And doesn't trying it out in a different venue, under different circumstances, to see if the shooting skills can hold up under light stress, make sense?  If the shooting isn't there, the scenario training, while useful, is considerably less effective. So---put it in competition. 

People have to be able to shoot.  Competition is one way to give a different test of shooting skills.  Here's something---take Steel Challenge, for example.  Since there are no tactics involved (you stand there and shoot, that's it) ---isn't this an perfect example of something that would be excellent for Mroz's level two training?  After all, once people hit Mroz's level III, it isn't as if they should stop practicing the level II material.  Shooting skills still have to be improved, ingrained, and tested.  Steel Challenge is pure shooting skill!  SD shooters (who are really interested in improving) should definitely shoot one once in awhile, because a different type of stress, a new situation, and new points of comparison are very important for true SD training!  So they get smoked by the guy with a race gun who practices steel challenge all day.  So what?  There are plenty of people in Production division to shoot against, to compare technique to, to discuss shooting skills with.  Seriously, isn't that what we want out of our training? 

Obviously we disagree here, and that's fine---but it doesn't change the fact that Iverson and Mroz, and many other people who are law enforcement and military trainers (like Ayoob, Langdon, and Rogers, who between them have literally trained more shooters than the both of us have ever met)---find no problem with competition shooting as long as, Iverson says, "As long as a sport shooter does not CONFUSE sport and proper [SD] training."

[Edited because I realized a sentence I wrote didn't say what I meant.  Whoops.]
« Last Edit: August 02, 2011, 06:14:19 PM by jthhapkido »
Precision Response Training
http://precisionresponsetraining.com

Offline bullit

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 2143
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #15 on: August 02, 2011, 04:11:59 PM »
I forgot to add that Mr. McCullough of recent Omaha Walgreen's infamy is/was a competition shooter.  Not sure how much "tactical" training he had.  Seemed to fair alright.......

Offline NE Bull

  • 2011 NFOA Firearm Rights Champion Award winner
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 3501
    • A "friend's" blog
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #16 on: August 02, 2011, 04:49:17 PM »
I will say, the July Rock Your Glock taught me one thing, a person cannot hit crap with sweat in his eyes in the scorching heat of 2:00 in the afternoon!
“It is not an issue of being afraid, It's an issue of not being afraid to protect myself.”
 Omaha Mayor Jean Stothert
 "A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that."  Shane

Offline sjwsti

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 541
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #17 on: August 02, 2011, 10:17:35 PM »
OK, Ive got one more in me and then someone else can have the last 2-300 words ;D. This horse is beaten to a pulp and deserves to rest in peace.

I come from a competition background also. And the foundation I built there shows in my shooting today. Thats why I recommend it for novice shooters. But I left it behind, because that worked for me, and I believe I'm a better fighter today because I moved on and was able to concentrate on other things.

Quote
In conclusion, I think this topic makes for good discussion, but one must be careful as presenting it as dogma.

I certainly hope I didn't come off as sounding dogmatic. As an Instructor I never want to become so invested in something that it cant be immediately replaced if I learn something more effective. No one knows it all and I'm always learning and always moving forward. JT is a hard nut to crack and if I came off as sounding inflexible it was not intentional.

The reason for my original post (if anyone remembers or even cares at this point) was to give information that I thought might be valuable to some of the forum members.

As a teacher, my job as I see it, is to provide students with as much information as possible allowing them to make informed decisions about what will work best for them.

If you decide that sport shooting works for you, thats fine. Some of us are of the opinion that there are pitfalls for the self defense oriented shooter. The original post contained some strategies that would allow you to sport shoot and either avoid or at least minimize the pitfalls. Thats it, no more, no less.

Quote
No, I don't agree that there is such a thing as muscle memory (one of my pet peeves, actually).  There are certainly mental pathways we can ingrain as choices, but the concept of "muscle memory" is quite faulty.  Drives me nuts when people use that term.

Really, your going to make me say this...
I know that our muscles don't have little brains with short and long term memory. Its simply a common term and I'm sure everyone on this forum knows what I meant. (BTW, adjust your filter and keep the condescending remarks in your head)

You continue to use the word "choice".  I think you will be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't believe that you can ingrain a conditioned unconscious response through repetition that isn't a conscious "choice" 
It seems as if your saying that the unconscious mind doesn't exist. Well,  Wikipedia has a little something to say about that...

Quote
The unconscious mind is a term coined by the 18th century German romantic philosopher Sir Christopher Riegel and later introduced into English by the poet and essayist Samuel Taylor Coleridge.[1] The unconscious mind might be defined as that part of the mind which gives rise to a collection of mental phenomena that manifest in a person's mind but which the person is not aware of at the time of their occurrence. These phenomena include unconscious feelings, unconscious or automatic skills, unnoticed perceptions, unconscious thoughts, unconscious habits and automatic reactions, complexes, hidden phobias and concealed desires.

 
But here you concede that maybe it does exist...
Quote
Now, if every time someone picks up a gun, they are unsafe or stupid, then yes, over time those habits will be ingrained.
So you can ingrain a conditioned unconscious response through repetition but only the unsafe or stupid ones?

I can tell you that we have worked very hard to ingrain safe and smart unconscious responses. And those responses manifest themselves during high stress training on a regular basis. Maybe you have never experienced an unconscious conditioned response to extreme stress. You should.


Theres more but who in the world gives a crap by now  :D

Either way its been an interesting back and forth. Thanks for helping me brush up on my typing skills, Im going to go ice my index fingers.

Be safe!!

- Shawn







"It's not what you know that will get you into trouble; it's what you know that isn't true"

www.88tactical.com

Offline Chris Z

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2007
  • Location: Lincoln NE
  • Posts: 2496
    • Nebraska Concealed Carry Training
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #18 on: August 03, 2011, 07:17:21 AM »
I forgot to add that Mr. McCullough of recent Omaha Walgreen's infamy is/was a competition shooter.  Not sure how much "tactical" training he had.  Seemed to fair alright.......

Alot of good discussion here to think about.......... But to confirm your statement Bullit, no Mr McCullough had no formal training, just a hunter and a every-other-weekend USPSA shooter.

His hit ratio in the Walgreens incident one-handed shooting from 20ft away was 5/8. or 62.5%

A week after this OPD fired 18 shots at a driver trying to run them over on 84th & I-80, 4 Officers with a combined 55 years experience (as the news media gloated on), their hit ratio 4/18 or 22.2%. (Kohl's Shoplifter)

I find it amazing how biased the news media is against the average citizen as they were questioning why he missed 3 shots, yet gives the Police a free pass and don't even mention the 14 shots they missed. I would guess that the 22% hit ratio is more likely normal when you are facing a life/death situation like these officers were, and the 62% hit ratio that Mr McCullough had was proof (in my small brain) that competition shooting has SOME value.


Offline JTH

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2300
  • Shooter
    • Precision Response Training
Re: Avoiding the gamer trap
« Reply #19 on: August 03, 2011, 09:09:30 AM »
[snip]
As a teacher, my job as I see it, is to provide students with as much information as possible allowing them to make informed decisions about what will work best for them.

Absolutely.  We just have to be careful that what we are saying not only is something we truly believe in, but that what we believe in is actually true.  :)  And we need to be careful that when we say something, we carefully state the difference between "This is TRUE!" and "I believe this is true."

Which, by the way, I think you did.  I happen to disagree, and so we had this long conversation.  :) 


Quote
Really, your going to make me say this...
I know that our muscles don't have little brains with short and long term memory. Its simply a common term and I'm sure everyone on this forum knows what I meant. (BTW, adjust your filter and keep the condescending remarks in your head)

That wasn't condescending.  It is a pet peeve of mine, and I never said you believed anything like that.  It is a common term---but many people who use it don't actually understand kinesthetics, nor do they understand how to build effective reflexive responses.  As such = pet peeve. 

Quote
You continue to use the word "choice".  I think you will be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't believe that you can ingrain a conditioned unconscious response through repetition that isn't a conscious "choice" 
It seems as if your saying that the unconscious mind doesn't exist.

I don't believe I ever said anything like that at all.  As with my pet peeve, please don't read more into what I wrote than what I actually said.

I said:
Quote
Now, if every time someone picks up a gun, they are unsafe or stupid, then yes, over time those habits will be ingrained.
To which you replied:
Quote
But here you concede that maybe it does exist...So you can ingrain a conditioned unconscious response through repetition but only the unsafe or stupid ones?

You'll note the important section of what I said was over time.  You said you practice all the time.  I said I don't.  Doing things once, or even several times, is generally not sufficient to ingrain any sort of conscious competency, much less unconscious reflexive usage, unless there is a significant amount of emotional/physical background (and normally, trauma) in the one repetition.  As such---if you want to build reflexive reactions, unconscious responses, or unconscious habits, you only have a couple of ways to do it:

1) respond once under extreme emotional/physical stress (such as when attacked, when in an serious accident, etc),
2) consciously practice with focus and precision a number of times, or
3) unthinkingly repeat actions often over a much longer period of time.

Each will build a set of unconscious reactions/responses/habits.  You'll note that because of this, picking up a firearm by the slide once will not cause you to screw up your grip on the handgun the next time you pick it up. Either you do something without thinking often over time, or you do something while thinking about it for less repetitions---both get results.  But that is exactly why I said that I don't practice all the time, and why I don't believe that every time I pick up a gun suddenly I'm training.  (If so, then I've spent a lot of time training to clean a gun.) If what I'm doing is to have an effect, then either my attention needs to be focused for that time period on what exactly I'm trying to ingrain, OR I'd have to do it often over time.

The trick, of course, is to pay attention to how many times we unconsciously do something that is detrimental to our goals.  :) 

(I also note that option 1, above, is often the best way to quickly ingrain very bad responses to high-stress situations.)

Quote
I can tell you that we have worked very hard to ingrain safe and smart unconscious responses. And those responses manifest themselves during high stress training on a regular basis. Maybe you have never experienced an unconscious conditioned response to extreme stress. You should.

Ah.  Would it help to know that I've been teaching martial arts and self-defense for 15 years?  And that conditioned responses to high-stress situations is what that is all about?  That I've helped attack victims re-wire their conditioned responses to trauma into something useful?  That I was a mental health worker with a number of randomly violent patients?  Or that I was a correctional officer for a number of years, including on the CERT team, so oddly enough, "extreme stress" has occurred?  Or that I've gone through "high stress" training under a number of different circumstances for a number of different reasons?

The thing is, while all of the above are true, none of it should matter.  Again, this shouldn't be based on merely our opinions or even our personal experiences---because our personal experiences don't give us a wide enough set of data to really see what is going on.  So instead of making this about your experiences and my experiences (other than as an initial point of information) this should have been about what the vast majority of instructors see in their students, and about discussing the topic, not basing it on "who's done more" ---or insinuating that someone else probably doesn't know what it is really like, because they haven't "been there".

I do know what it is like.  In this case, however, that isn't necessary for this discussion, as there is a large body of evidence gathered by many teachers for many years, on this topic.   And their response is quite simple:  Shooting competitions is perfectly fine, and can be done while still ingraining effective self-defense tactics.  There is no "gamer trap" that occurs merely because people shoot competitions.

« Last Edit: August 03, 2011, 09:30:22 AM by jthhapkido »
Precision Response Training
http://precisionresponsetraining.com