Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 86

Thread: Combat Focus Shooting AAR

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9
    Feedback Score
    0

    Combat Focus Shooting AAR

    Augusta, GA, April 6-7, 2013
    Aprox. 15 people (1 woman). Mostly civilian. A few LEs and ex-Military.
    Aprox. 850 rounds fired
    I used a Glock 17. One double feed and three failures to feed. The three failures to feed were due to a weak magazine spring. Most of the others students were using the usual suspects, Glocks, M&P. No 1911s. A couple of odd guns that broke. Don’t know what they were.


    I know I’m a bit late in writing this up. I’m glad of that since over the last 16 months my opinion of the class has drastically changed. It was the first formal firearms class I’d attended and afterward I felt great about what I’d learned. The class was enjoyable and well run. At the time, I felt Mr. Pincus had a great curriculum and it gave me a lot to practice. Since that time, I’ve watched more videos, studied more books, and taken a few more classes from other instructors (Hackathorn, Proctor, and a couple of lesser names) and I now look back on the Pincus class with some skepticism. Now, I can’t say I’d recommend his system to anybody. Not that the class was bad, I just think there’s much better out there for the same price. While Pincus is an excellent marketer of his system and himself, I question some of his theories and techniques now. His system is called I.C.E. (for god’s sake, don’t pronounce it “ice”) which stands for Integrity, Consistency, and Efficiency. His system is dubious on efficiency aspect but I guess the I.C. System wouldn’t sound as cool.


    The Good
    Although I wouldn’t recommend his class there was plenty of good that he taught:

    Multiple Shots: We always shot strings of fire (2-5 rounds at a time), never just a single shot. I liked this approach a lot. Pistols are inherently weak and it’s a mistake to assume a single shot will stop a threat. I took this class during the ammo drought of ’13 so it was good to be forced to fire the precious ammo in larger quantities than I could make myself at the range alone. Since the class I’ve started shooting strings far more frequently and feel I’m better for it.

    360 Degrees of Threat: The best drill we did was the Figure 8 drill. This simulated a 360 degree range and pushed us into quick thinking. Multiple targets were set up with numbers. Instead of yelling “2” he might yell “square root of 4.” You never knew where the threat was going to appear and helped train turning and threat processing.

    Think Before You Shoot: Pincus put emphasis on processing the threat before drawing and shooting. Most of the time he wouldn’t simply yell, “up” but instead say a number or shape or even a combination of the two. He could have taken this even further but even this level was nice.

    Speed and Accuracy: Strong emphasizes was placed on having a balance of speed and accuracy. If Pincus saw someone’s groups too tight he told them they need to shoot faster. Most of our shots were placed in an 8” rectangle. Inside this is a good hit and everything else is a miss. There were no great hits, just hits and misses. Frequently he had us shoot at a 2.5” circle after getting our shots on the large area. This helped us on transitions and ensured we didn’t forget pure accuracy.

    Scan and Assess: Seems all the instructors teach this. What I like about Rob’s approach is he made sure we were really assessing not just turning our head. Sometimes he’d ask what the RO was wearing or how many fingers he was holding up. This helped us not just go through the motions but actually take in our surroundings.

    Sprints: during the class there were a few drills where we had to sprint back and forth between cones. At any point the threat was called out and we had to fire, sometime one-handed. This was great because we’d be firing at random distances between 5 and 20 yards of the target with an elevated heart rate.

    Structure: The class was kept professional and I appreciated the structure Rob imposed. I always felt like there was a game plan we were following as we progressed. It never felt like he was just winging it. There was a good balance of range time broken up with rest while listening to him teach. He’s a good presenter.

    The Bad


    One Eye Closed: Rob gave a long lecture complete with illustration on why it’s undesirable and even impossible to accurately fire with both eyes open. I found this odd as I spent most of the class firing with both open with no issues. I hardly think I’m the only one capable of such feats. Although for pinpoint shots I needed to close one eye, hitting the 8” area at 7y was no problem. Although I think it’s fine to always fire with one eye closed why not leave both open if you can?

    No Timer: The whole class Rob pushed the importance of having a balance of speed and accuracy. Rather than just firing into a berm, we used targets to quantify our accuracy. This makes sense and allowed us to see what we were doing well and what we needed work with. Makes perfect sense. Wouldn’t it also make sense to quantify the speed aspect of that equation? Of course. He thought this was a bad idea as it encouraged people to “game the system” and start trying shortcuts to get better time. I found this reasoning lacking and ignored it. Since the class, I purchased a timer and it’s been a huge help in my development. Wish I would have bought one years ago.

    No Dry Fire: Nothing has been more important to me in my gun training than dry firing. Every major champion I’ve ever studied has highly recommended a course of dry firing to improve. No serious logic was given as to why to we should abandon a time proven technique but he was adamant it was a bad technique. Absurd.

    You Shouldn’t Use a Weapon Light: The small amount of time I've spent shooting with a handheld light made me greatly appreciate the ease and speed of a weapon mounted one. So why not use it? The old excuse you hear over and over is you may sweep someone. It’s dangerous. Well, so is using a gun. Get over it. Not that a handheld light isn’t very useful and has its place but it’s hard to beat the weapon mounted lights.

    Press Checks are Useless: While I don’t think they’re very important I certainly feel a little more peace of mind after doing it. He had no real logic of why not to do this, so I ignored it.

    Bring the Gun Back: While shooting multiple targets, we were instructed to bring the gun back to our body after firing at the first target and then drive it out again to the second. How is this efficient? If the I.C.E. system truly valued efficiency then you’d move the gun from one target to another. That’s one move instead of two.

    Always Power Rack the Slide: After a slide-lock reload he insisted that we do a power rack to get the gun back in battery. This once again calls into question his idea of efficiency. Anybody can see using your thumb to release the slide is far quicker and more efficient than a power rack, it’s not even close. And don’t give me the this nonsense about it being a fine motor skill. So is operating the trigger and mag release but nobody complains about that. If you train to use your thumb it’s fast and easy. Never had a problem with this in the stress of competition.

    Point the Magazines Backward: This was one of the more bizarre techniques he suggested. Seems everybody on Earth from novices to the highest level competition shooters places their magazines in the holster facing forward. This allows you to index the mag and guide it in more easily. Rob claims that facing the mag forward requires more space for you to pull out and load. For the life of me, I can’t see this. Wish I would have pressed him on this claim. Either way, he didn’t push this technique hard and said if you’re used to facing the mags forward continue to do so.

    The Ugly

    Little Man Syndrome: He had an inflated ego that was apparent almost the instant he arrived at the range. Can’t say that it bothered me too much or interfered with the training but his cockiness was unappealing.

    Side Steppin’: While I believe movement in shooting is important and often under-valued, doing a simple sidestep before you fire is just pathetic. Sure, it may add some confusion to your attacker but, seriously, how much good is a shuffle step going to do you? Moving your torso 1 or 2 feet isn’t likely to cause that much confusion to your attacker. Makes more sense to either stop and focus or just move quickly, not this in-between shuffle. It especially looks ridiculous when you see students clearing malfunctions or reloading while shuffling left to right to left like mental patients. Can’t imagine it being effective in the real world. Also can’t see how this was efficient.

    Tough Love: Seems he read somewhere that complimenting students for successfully completing a task is bad somehow. Don’t know the study or the logic behind it but it sounds odd. I’ve never heard of positive reinforcement being a bad thing. How do I know if I’m doing an exercise well if you don’t say, “Good job.” Saying his silence was the approval isn’t cutting it with me. The entire 2 days he hardly said anything to me. So was I doing everything perfectly or was he just not paying attention? I’ll never know. Not that I need constant positive reinforcement, but a few “good jobs” here and there would at least let me know he’s watching and I’m on the right track.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    CONUS
    Posts
    5,997
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    How much did you pay to attend the course?

    Would you recommend the course to a friend with limited firearm skills?
    Train 2 Win

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9
    Feedback Score
    0
    The class last year was $450. He knocked off $100 because of the high ammo prices at the time.

    While I wouldn't recommend the class to anyone, I don't think it would be a bad choice for a novice who just needs more trigger time and some professional guidance. I believe the positives of the class may outweigh the negatives if they're not getting too serious with competition or personal defense.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    1,476
    Feedback Score
    0
    Holy shit. I guess this review demonstrates why instructor background is important.

    Just a quick observation re never shooting a one shot drill; there is a time and place for this in order to diagnose various aspects of a shooter's technique if he is having trouble hitting the target or grouping properly.

    Perhaps this is not done so he doesn't have to analyze and fix shooter error? Maybe because he cannot do it?

    For the exercises where you were sprinting, did he have you in groups or did you do individual runs?

    I agree with your reasons for not buying into his thoughts on the things you listed in the Bad and Ugly sections.
    Last edited by Arctic1; 07-21-14 at 21:31.
    It's not about surviving, it's about winning!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9
    Feedback Score
    0
    Agree with you on using single shots in practice. I typically shoot a sheet of ten 1 inch dots at 5m to begin my practices as it focuses me on my trigger control and shows very plainly any flinching or less-than-perfect sight alignments. My problem for years was these single shot practices were all I was doing. Wasn't until after his class that I started doing mostly drills that used strings of fire like Bill Drills and El Presidente.

    I'm sure he could analyze a person's problems from their groups, it's just not something I saw him do. I guess since his system focuses on "combat" applications, single shots weren't as important to his curriculum.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,221
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Why is the original post written in such a small font? It is very hard to read.

    Edited to add: never mind my above comment. That's just my needless complaint for the week.
    Last edited by Ed L.; 07-21-14 at 22:43.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    1,665
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by lenny_quick View Post
    Side Steppin’: While I believe movement in shooting is important and often under-valued, doing a simple sidestep before you fire is just pathetic. Sure, it may add some confusion to your attacker but, seriously, how much good is a shuffle step going to do you? Moving your torso 1 or 2 feet isn’t likely to cause that much confusion to your attacker. Makes more sense to either stop and focus or just move quickly, not this in-between shuffle. It especially looks ridiculous when you see students clearing malfunctions or reloading while shuffling left to right to left like mental patients. Can’t imagine it being effective in the real world. Also can’t see how this was efficient.
    I'm not a fan of Pincus's methods (though I would argue that I would agree with his TTPs than, say, the local random NRA instructor teaching self-defense), but the side step is also taught by Tom Givens, whom I've never seen disparaged. In fact, Givens has stated that a student of his (a lady that owned/worked at a Stop 'n Rob, IIRC) utilized the side step to great effect during her self-defense shooting (store robbery, IIRC), as video footage showed the attacker visibly pause due to the side step, which gave the student time to draw and engage the target. Apparently, untrained/poorly attackers often will tunnel vision, and a simple side step affords one precious seconds to react, as the attacker's OODA loop gets reset, and as Surf noted, the average citizen/LE is facing a common street criminal when engaged in a shooting, and not some Spetsgruppa "B" Vympel operative, so even something as simple as a side step could have a disproportionate effect on the attacker.

    Obviously, the side step is not some kind of rote technique that is applicable everywhere (it's my understanding that Givens and many others teach it only as a technique to be used when close up, and not in a team environment, and obviously only if there is room/proper terrain to do so), so if Pincus is teaching it as something to be done in all and every shooting, then yes, it doesn't make much sense. But the technique itself has plenty of other supporters (some reputable, others not so much), though it also has many detractors (including some fairly reputable ones, as I understand it, such as "Super" Dave Harrington, though they certainly may only be against the side step being taught as a default response rather than a select tactic of limited, but real, utility).

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    CONUS
    Posts
    5,997
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Augusta, GA, April 6-7, 2013
    Aprox. 15 people (1 woman). Mostly civilian. A few LEs and ex-Military.
    Aprox. 850 rounds fired
    I used a Glock 17. One double feed and three failures to feed. The three failures to feed were due to a weak magazine spring. Most of the others students were using the usual suspects, Glocks, M&P. No 1911s. A couple of odd guns that broke. Don’t know what they were.


    I know I’m a bit late in writing this up. I’m glad of that since over the last 16 months my opinion of the class has drastically changed. It was the first formal firearms class I’d attended and afterward I felt great about what I’d learned. The class was enjoyable and well run. At the time, I felt Mr. Pincus had a great curriculum and it gave me a lot to practice. Since that time, I’ve watched more videos, studied more books, and taken a few more classes from other instructors (Hackathorn, Proctor, and a couple of lesser names) and I now look back on the Pincus class with some skepticism. Now, I can’t say I’d recommend his system to anybody. Not that the class was bad, I just think there’s much better out there for the same price. While Pincus is an excellent marketer of his system and himself, I question some of his theories and techniques now. His system is called I.C.E. (for god’s sake, don’t pronounce it “ice”) which stands for Integrity, Consistency, and Efficiency. His system is dubious on efficiency aspect but I guess the I.C. System wouldn’t sound as cool.


    The Good
    Although I wouldn’t recommend his class there was plenty of good that he taught:

    Multiple Shots: We always shot strings of fire (2-5 rounds at a time), never just a single shot. I liked this approach a lot. Pistols are inherently weak and it’s a mistake to assume a single shot will stop a threat. I took this class during the ammo drought of ’13 so it was good to be forced to fire the precious ammo in larger quantities than I could make myself at the range alone. Since the class I’ve started shooting strings far more frequently and feel I’m better for it.

    I agree with this concept. Never shoot only one round, and never the same number of rounds. You never know how many rounds it will take to resolve a conflict.

    360 Degrees of Threat: The best drill we did was the Figure 8 drill. This simulated a 360 degree range and pushed us into quick thinking. Multiple targets were set up with numbers. Instead of yelling “2” he might yell “square root of 4.” You never knew where the threat was going to appear and helped train turning and threat processing.

    Did he also teach to look up and down?

    Think Before You Shoot: Pincus put emphasis on processing the threat before drawing and shooting. Most of the time he wouldn’t simply yell, “up” but instead say a number or shape or even a combination of the two. He could have taken this even further but even this level was nice.

    Thinking is a good concept. A good instructor cannot argue with the concept of thinking while locating and engaging a threat.

    Speed and Accuracy: Strong emphasizes was placed on having a balance of speed and accuracy. If Pincus saw someone’s groups too tight he told them they need to shoot faster. Most of our shots were placed in an 8” rectangle. Inside this is a good hit and everything else is a miss. There were no great hits, just hits and misses. Frequently he had us shoot at a 2.5” circle after getting our shots on the large area. This helped us on transitions and ensured we didn’t forget pure accuracy.

    Accuracy is important. Nonchalantly slinging rounds is not a concept an instructor wants to teach. Speed comes with time and accuracy under pressure is of paramount importance.

    Scan and Assess: Seems all the instructors teach this. What I like about Rob’s approach is he made sure we were really assessing not just turning our head. Sometimes he’d ask what the RO was wearing or how many fingers he was holding up. This helped us not just go through the motions but actually take in our surroundings.

    Teaching this concept is important, but explaining the reasons is equally as important.

    Sprints: during the class there were a few drills where we had to sprint back and forth between cones. At any point the threat was called out and we had to fire, sometime one-handed. This was great because we’d be firing at random distances between 5 and 20 yards of the target with an elevated heart rate.

    Physical activity to elevate the heart rate prior to shooting should be done in any valid course.

    Structure: The class was kept professional and I appreciated the structure Rob imposed. I always felt like there was a game plan we were following as we progressed. It never felt like he was just winging it. There was a good balance of range time broken up with rest while listening to him teach. He’s a good presenter.

    The Bad


    One Eye Closed: Rob gave a long lecture complete with illustration on why it’s undesirable and even impossible to accurately fire with both eyes open. I found this odd as I spent most of the class firing with both open with no issues. I hardly think I’m the only one capable of such feats. Although for pinpoint shots I needed to close one eye, hitting the 8” area at 7y was no problem. Although I think it’s fine to always fire with one eye closed why not leave both open if you can?

    I disagree with Mr. Pincus on this point. Teaching to shoot with both eyes open out to 15 yards is something I feel is important. One would have to wonder which instructor that trained Mr. Pincus convinced him to teach shooting with one eye open. Did he give the names of instructors who believe his method is the best way to engage a threat with a firearm?

    No Timer: The whole class Rob pushed the importance of having a balance of speed and accuracy. Rather than just firing into a berm, we used targets to quantify our accuracy. This makes sense and allowed us to see what we were doing well and what we needed work with. Makes perfect sense. Wouldn’t it also make sense to quantify the speed aspect of that equation? Of course. He thought this was a bad idea as it encouraged people to “game the system” and start trying shortcuts to get better time. I found this reasoning lacking and ignored it. Since the class, I purchased a timer and it’s been a huge help in my development. Wish I would have bought one years ago.

    Whether an instructor wants to use a timer or not, they should have students with equal skills compete against each other to develop the ability to increase speed under stress while maintaining practical accuracy.

    No Dry Fire: Nothing has been more important to me in my gun training than dry firing. Every major champion I’ve ever studied has highly recommended a course of dry firing to improve. No serious logic was given as to why to we should abandon a time proven technique but he was adamant it was a bad technique. Absurd.

    Dry firing is very important to develop and maintain muscle memory and I whole heartedly disagree with Mr. Pincus on this concept.

    You Shouldn’t Use a Weapon Light: The small amount of time I've spent shooting with a handheld light made me greatly appreciate the ease and speed of a weapon mounted one. So why not use it? The old excuse you hear over and over is you may sweep someone. It’s dangerous. Well, so is using a gun. Get over it. Not that a handheld light isn’t very useful and has its place but it’s hard to beat the weapon mounted lights.

    Both techniques should be taught. The pro and cons of both techniques should be addressed during the course of instruction. A weapon mounted light is a good tool for someone with enough experience to use it safely. For someone who is not willing to put in the time to maintain efficiency with a weapon mounted light, a hand held light might be more suitable.

    Press Checks are Useless: While I don’t think they’re very important I certainly feel a little more peace of mind after doing it. He had no real logic of why not to do this, so I ignored it.

    Did he explain why press checks are not recommended?

    Bring the Gun Back: While shooting multiple targets, we were instructed to bring the gun back to our body after firing at the first target and then drive it out again to the second. How is this efficient? If the I.C.E. system truly valued efficiency then you’d move the gun from one target to another. That’s one move instead of two.

    Is this done from a static position or while shooting on the move? Is this for weapon retention or are there other reasons he explained for this?

    Always Power Rack the Slide: After a slide-lock reload he insisted that we do a power rack to get the gun back in battery. This once again calls into question his idea of efficiency. Anybody can see using your thumb to release the slide is far quicker and more efficient than a power rack, it’s not even close. And don’t give me the this nonsense about it being a fine motor skill. So is operating the trigger and mag release but nobody complains about that. If you train to use your thumb it’s fast and easy. Never had a problem with this in the stress of competition.

    If you are referring to the hand over technique versus the use of the slide release to charge the weapon, some instructors emphasize this technique to make an easier transition for malfunction clearing. What reasons did he give during the course?

    Point the Magazines Backward: This was one of the more bizarre techniques he suggested. Seems everybody on Earth from novices to the highest level competition shooters places their magazines in the holster facing forward. This allows you to index the mag and guide it in more easily. Rob claims that facing the mag forward requires more space for you to pull out and load. For the life of me, I can’t see this. Wish I would have pressed him on this claim. Either way, he didn’t push this technique hard and said if you’re used to facing the mags forward continue to do so.

    I disagree with Mr. Pincus on this one. Projectiles should always face the direction of the problem in my opinion.

    The Ugly

    Little Man Syndrome: He had an inflated ego that was apparent almost the instant he arrived at the range. Can’t say that it bothered me too much or interfered with the training but his cockiness was unappealing.

    That is not conducive to a good learning environment.

    Side Steppin’: While I believe movement in shooting is important and often under-valued, doing a simple sidestep before you fire is just pathetic. Sure, it may add some confusion to your attacker but, seriously, how much good is a shuffle step going to do you? Moving your torso 1 or 2 feet isn’t likely to cause that much confusion to your attacker. Makes more sense to either stop and focus or just move quickly, not this in-between shuffle. It especially looks ridiculous when you see students clearing malfunctions or reloading while shuffling left to right to left like mental patients. Can’t imagine it being effective in the real world. Also can’t see how this was efficient.

    Shooting on the move and being able to load/clear malfunctions on the move makes sense. With multiple students on a structured range, it is difficult to practice this concept. Presenting yourself as a stationary target is not something I would want to teach. Perhaps someone else can comment on the advantages of standing in one spot while engaging a threat and manipulating a firearm.

    Tough Love: Seems he read somewhere that complimenting students for successfully completing a task is bad somehow. Don’t know the study or the logic behind it but it sounds odd. I’ve never heard of positive reinforcement being a bad thing. How do I know if I’m doing an exercise well if you don’t say, “Good job.” Saying his silence was the approval isn’t cutting it with me. The entire 2 days he hardly said anything to me. So was I doing everything perfectly or was he just not paying attention? I’ll never know. Not that I need constant positive reinforcement, but a few “good jobs” here and there would at least let me know he’s watching and I’m on the right track.

    Positive reinforcement for properly demonstrating a concept is something I think a good instructor does. Was your class size large enough that the chief instructor was too busy watching the entire firing line to do this?

    Another thing an instructor should be willing to do is to tell a student they did not pass if they do not meet the minimum performance standards.


    Was the course designed to teach an individual defensive skills? Teaching a civilian defensive pistol skills is different than teaching people to work as a unit.
    Last edited by T2C; 07-21-14 at 23:34.
    Train 2 Win

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    West of the Atlantic
    Posts
    1,803
    Feedback Score
    0
    Here is a hint......Be extremely leery of anyone who has a "system".

    Pretty much all competent instructors have a "recipe" for successfully teaching their students. Most top rate instructors will however, over time, continue to change and develop their own lesson plans as they progress as students themselves. Foundations are key and some things remain tried and true, however one must also learn and advance their learning curve, personal skill sets and what they impart to their students. "Systems" often infer a dogmatic type of approach and any new technique outside of that "system" is generally very very slow to have any acceptance as a viable option. Now I am not talking about accepting any new "flavor" of the month, but the integration of proven technique is generally slow in adoption into protocol where a "system" exists. This often leads to "systems" in the shooting world to be very dated in their methodology. A "system" is also more than likely used as a marketing tool in which the target audience who have little to no formal training experiences and geared towards individuals at an early time in their training lifespan, who are easily influenced by a savvy individual.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    855
    Feedback Score
    18 (100%)
    How was the instructor in demonstrating drills you guys ran during the course?

Page 1 of 9 123 ... 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
  •