Thoughts on Valor Ridge (training)?

[DEPrepper]

I've taken this class. It's not unsafe at all. None of the four rules are broken at any point during training. I've taken three classes thus far. I have not seen any students express concern or unwillingness to continue.

The photo is perhaps a bit deceptive; much like "looking down a ski slope". It's hard to get an appreciation for the actual angle. The "overwatch" team is at least 100 feet above the "assault" team.

You're hitting targets at 250 yards out (the small steel at the very stop of the frame). You're hitting or missing by inches. I didn't see anybody miss by more than 6" off the steel when we were training.

Pushing past self-imposed limitations is a big part of your training. In the Rifle II, I was hitting man-sized steel at 700 yards. With an AK, using cheap ammo, and no scope. In my own opinion, I was likely the weakest shooter in the class.

You'd be amazed what you can do when you quit telling yourself that you can't or won't. Conversely, if you fight for your limitations, you will surely keep them.

The drill the students are doing at 4:29 looks really unsafe. I would refuse to participate in that drill if I was student.

[Gewehr3]

Maybe, it was just a matter of camera angle. It appeared to me that a line of students were shooting downrange at targets while other students were downrange also. A better video of the drill could help others understand the drill better.

[NCPatrolAR]

Some of that stuff looks questionable but seeing as Reid's background is with Tactical Response it only makes sense that his classes will be rehashes of what you'd get in Camden.

[DEPrepper]

I've trained with both. Although both teach martial approach, and both make it a point to "get over the 180"; that's about the extent of the similarities. The VR coursework contain a lot of material that's not in the TR curriculum.

Some of that stuff looks questionable but seeing as Reid's background is with Tactical Response it only makes sense that his classes will be rehashes of what you'd get in Camden.

[Tx_Aggie]

Maybe, it was just a matter of camera angle. It appeared to me that a line of students were shooting downrange at targets while other students were downrange also. A better video of the drill could help others understand the drill better.

That's exactly what's happening in that drill. One group of students is downrange (the "assault team") while another (the "over-watch team") is shooting over their heads at distant targets. DEPrepper is asserting that it's okay, and "safe" because the bullets fired by the uphill group should be passing about 100 feet over the heads of the group down range. It seems like the group in front is placing a lot of trust in the group behind them, and I would be hesitant to do that with guys (and their gear) I'd only known for a day or two.

[tb-av]

That's exactly what's happening in that drill. One group of students is downrange (the "assualt team") while another (the "overwatch team") is shooting over their heads at distant targets. DEPrepper is asserting that it's okay, and "safe" because the bullets fired by the uphill group should be passing about 100 feet over the heads of the group down range. It seems like the group in front is placing a lot of trust in the group behind them, and I would be hesitant to do that with guys (and their gear) I'd only know for a day or two.

I was wondering if the ridge shooters can even see the down range shooters. Aside from that one guy that is way over on the left up the hill. It would be interesting to see a camera angle from 8" off the ground.

[DEPrepper]

Real training is inherently "unsafe". Absolutely safe training isn't able to prepare you for real threats or real situations. Valor Ridge makes a big deal of the four rules. None of those rules were violated at any time. To confirm, yes, the "overwatch" team was shooting over their teammates. That being said, when you are missing by inches, a span of approximately 300 feet is more than adequate for reasonable safety. People often are conditioned into the 180 mentality; but there is no 180 in a real fight. It's just a change of perspective.

That's exactly what's happening in that drill. One group of students is downrange (the "assault team") while another (the "over-watch team") is shooting over their heads at distant targets. DEPrepper is asserting that it's okay, and "safe" because the bullets fired by the uphill group should be passing about 100 feet over the heads of the group down range. It seems like the group in front is placing a lot of trust in the group behind them, and I would be hesitant to do that with guys (and their gear) I'd only known for a day or two.

[DEPrepper]

Yes, and no. They are completely in your line of sight from your vantage point. That being said, when you're focused in on the 250 yard targets, you're only really perceiving the 50 feet or so directly around your targets.

I was wondering if the ridge shooters can even see the down range shooters. Aside from that one guy that is way over on the left up the hill. It would be interesting to see a camera angle from 8" off the ground.

[NCPatrolAR]

I've trained with both. Although both teach martial approach, and both make it a point to "get over the 180"; that's about the extent of the similarities. The VR coursework contain a lot of material that's not in the TR curriculum.

Back in the day I spent a bit of time with TR. Looking and listening to the posted video, along with other ones posted by Reid, I see/hear the following things that are shared by the two groups (in no order):

Terminology

Live fire bounding drills in an open enrollment lvl 1 carbine class w/ downrange students in relative close proximity to the shooting element

360 degree turning scans after each drill

Various lateral and vertically oriented peels in an open enrollment lvl 1 class

Gear set ups/recommended companies


Some differences of note:

Increased engagement distances for certain drills

Students not cycling the weapon after doing a tactical reload


That's a few things I noticed off the top of my head.

[DEPrepper]

If you noticed a student not running the action after a reload; that's the student. To my knowledge, these videos were shot during classes, so they were not rehearsed. Standard procedure is to always run the action (pistol or rifle) after a reload. As a general rule, the VR courses stress the fact that you shouldn't mess with your weapon unless there is good cause. "Topping off" isn't a focus. The round in the chamber is far more important than the ones in the magazine. Reloads happen when the happen, unless the fight is truly over.

No doubt that some similarities exist, but the approach and purpose are quite different; at least from my perspective. The "purpose" lecture at VR is really worth it.

I know that the TR courses aren't static; they change over the years. I've had friends whom had very different experiences, only separated by a few years.

Back in the day I spent a bit of time with TR. Looking and listening to the posted video, along with other ones posted by Reid, I see/hear the following things that are shared by the two groups (in no order):

Terminology

Live fire bounding drills in an open enrollment lvl 1 carbine class w/ downrange students in relative close proximity to the shooting element

360 degree turning scans after each drill

Various lateral and vertically oriented peels in an open enrollment lvl 1 class

Gear set ups/recommended companies


Some differences of note:

Increased engagement distances for certain drills

Students not cycling the weapon after doing a tactical reload


That's a few things I noticed off the top of my head.