In your post, however, you mention Rob Pincus speaking of timer drills. I believe you are taking his words out of context.
Actually, he's recently said that timers not only aren't necessary, but are in fact detrimental to learning how to shoot.
Way back when, his comments were merely that an over-emphasis on the timer wasn't good (thank you, department of the obvious), but lately he's been saying a lot more than that.
Granted, this is the guy that says dryfire practice not only doesn't help, but makes you worse.
He merely says timer drills are not necessarily essential in the cases of people training for self defense, that there are far more things for them to work on and to not get hung up on timer drills. Especially practicing just one particular drill to get fast at it and obsessing over that drill.
As is normal for him, while he started out saying things like that, he's gone much further than that recently. He also has a tendency to use weasel words when making statements like that, so that when he gets called on it, he says "you are taking what I said out of context."
For example, "not necessarily essential" is a great weasel-word statement---because
no one has said that for self-defense practice, timers were essential in the first place. So he's making an argument against something no one ever said.
Which is separate from whether or not timers are a really good idea.
In a similar fashion, getting "hung up on"
any particular drill concept isn't a good idea, and his arguing against it is another way for him to sound reasonable while arguing against something that no one argues FOR in the first place.
Mostly, the only people who practice a particular drill to get fast at it (and obsess over it) are people who are practicing that drill because it is central to what they do. This would be people who do western quick-draw competitions, people who do bullseye competitions, and the like.
No one says that they are making a mistake doing that. No one argues against people who do that. Obsessing over the drill that practices directly what you need to be good at IS the way to get really good at it.
At the same time, no one says that obsessing over a drill when the goal is self-defense is a good idea. So again, Rob is phrasing things so it looks like he is making a good argument---even though it is against something that
no one argues for in the first place.
None of that changes the fact that every single trainer of physical skill out there knows that objective measurement is the best way to find the most efficient fashion to improve. And in terms of self-defense, there are certain physical skills (regarding gun-handling) that should be worked on...which means that objective measurement would be an important idea. Pincus continually speaks out against this sort of thing, probably because he doesn't do any of it in his classes, and probably shouldn't because then there would be actual data showing whether or not his classes are useful.
Interestingly enough, like I said, lately he's made stronger statements against timers, practicing shooting skills (as opposed to what he calls "defensive skills"), and actual objective measures of shooting skills. Making it even more obvious that he thinks that shooting skill sufficient for self-defense will magically appear when needed.
"Slow is smooth. Smooth is fast. "
Actually, slow is just slow. Go to any match (or watch the shooters trying a fun stage at the NFOA meeting) and you'll see plenty of slow people who aren't smooth.
And smooth isn't necessarily fast, either. (Similarly, watching people at a match, you'll see people who ARE smooth. But they aren't fast.)
It is certainly true that many people who are fast are indeed very smooth. But you don't get fast unless you practice to be fast. And much of that "smoothness" is simply because they aren't performing an extraneous motion, not because of any particular wish or attempt to create a flow of motion.
"It isn't the first shot in a gunfight, it's the first hit that matters." -- Wyatt Earp
Yup. But since you don't know how fast the other guy is, assuming you'll have plenty of time isn't really a good idea, I think.
It seems to me that some fundamentally important gun-related physical skills (that should be a priority for physical practice) would be efficient draws and accuracy at speed. If you aren't ever taking any sort of measurement of those physical skills, how do you know that your practice is working at making you better? (How it "feels" often bears no relation to how well it is working.) If you don't know what you are bad at, how do you know what you should be working on?
