What would you consider a split time on the ar-15 that show's "mastery"

Someone, please put me out of my misery and explain this. When shooting a target for speed or two or three targets, after a couple rounds of this your head memorizes where these targets are. Maybe not so you can aim with your eyes closed but where they are in the general 180 degree sweep in front of you. So for instance, after shooting the first one, you automatically pull the rifle toward the second and maybe without even looking. This seems a bit robotic to me.

I have never been in combat or have been confronted by someone with a gun but it seems to me that if there were multiple threats, you would not instinctively know their (even approximate) positions. You would have to scan and find them, then shoot. Am I wrong here?????

If not, they why the reliance in training on shooting the same targets in the same positions over and over?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Bullseye

Someone, please put me out of my misery and explain this. When shooting a target for speed or two or three targets, after a couple rounds of this your head memorizes where these targets are. Maybe not so you can aim with your eyes closed but where they are in the general 180 degree sweep in front of you. So for instance, after shooting the first one, you automatically pull the rifle toward the second and maybe without even looking. This seems a bit robotic to me.

I have never been in combat or have been confronted by someone with a gun but it seems to me that if there were multiple threats, you would not instinctively know their (even approximate) positions. You would have to scan and find them, then shoot. Am I wrong here?????

If not, they why the reliance in training on shooting the same targets in the same positions over and over?

---

Those are performance standard to track your training. Not to get good at a given drill, but to make you better at transitions, teach you visual patience, etc.

These drills can make you better at field courses or in shoot houses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lsllc

Those are performance standard to track your training. Not to get good at a given drill, but to make you better at transitions, teach you visual patience, etc.

These drills can make you better at field courses or in shoot houses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

So I am going to be "better" and impress some school I have paid 3K to attend who teaches exactly this? Sounds like a circular argument to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Bullseye

Am I wrong here?????

If not, they why the reliance in training on shooting the same targets in the same positions over and over?

---

Maybe "wrong" isn't the correct term, but you are looking at it from a different perspective would be my guess.

Its done for the same reasons fighters practice drills.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Bullseye

So I am going to be "better" and impress some school I have paid 3K to attend who teaches exactly this? Sounds like a circular argument to me.

---

Like I said, it’s for tracking your progress and self evaluation.

If you don’t like standards, then don’t do them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lsllc

Like I said, it’s for tracking your progress and self evaluation.

If you don’t like standards, then don’t do them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I do not rely on this sort of thing but sometimes I use multiple targets. What I am trying to get at is what are these standards good for if they really don't apply to self defense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Bullseye

I do not rely on this sort of thing but sometimes I use multiple targets. What I am trying to get at is what are these standards good for if they really don't apply to self defense?

---

Either you’re not understanding what we’re saying, or you’re intentionally being difficult.

These standards are a way to track your progress as a shooter; a benchmark. They aren’t scenario practice. They measure your ability to perform specific things you may encounter.

These are not force on force or scenario training.

How are things like drawing, transitioning, and follow-up shots not applicable to self-defense shooting? Really? You don’t understand why getting better are those things make you better equipped to use your firearm in defense of self or others?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lsllc

Either you’re not understanding what we’re saying, or you’re intentionally being difficult.

These standards are a way to track your progress as a shooter; a benchmark. They aren’t scenario practice. They measure your ability to perform specific things you may encounter.

These are not force on force or scenario training.

How are things like drawing, transitioning, and follow-up shots not applicable to self-defense shooting? Really? You don’t understand why getting better are those things make you better equipped to use your firearm in defense of self or others?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

"They measure your ability to perform specific things you may encounter"

Have you ever encountered threats who stayed upright in the same position over and over, never moving, adjusting? Tell about five of such experiences. No, just pick the best one and tell me about it.


I do understand you are measuring something. But that something does not exist in reality so why train for it?

Being able to move to one aiming point to another doesn’t help with a moving target. Ok, cool story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Bullseye

"They measure your ability to perform specific things you may encounter"

Have you ever encountered threats who stayed upright in the same position over and over, never moving, adjusting? Tell about five of such experiences. No, just pick the best one and tell me about it.


I do understand you are measuring something. But that something does not exist in reality so why train for it?

---

Standards are a test, not something you should train for. Its the same problem with current public education- wrong approach.

You should train everything, then run a few standards to see where you are...
Train a few months , do some competitions that test a wide variety of skill, do some standards, evaluate, train weak areas... repeat.

Edit: what do you propose as a standard?