Ron Avery on Gunfight Training: Hype, Myth, and BS

[C4IGrant]

Layer in the fact that all ranges within 1 hour of me are engineered for Bubba and his XD (i.e. 1 shot per second, no SHO/WHO shooting, no shooting from a holster), and competitive shooting is effectively the only outlet for action pistol shooting. SIDE NOTE: I used to practice at a range that allowed more freedom, however given the travel time (~1 hour each way) and other life commitments, I had to let my membership there expire. I only mention this to prevent the reader from assuming I've never been able to practice in a free environment, given local range restrictions.

I sometimes forget that not everyone has a range where they can do ANY drill they want to include moving and shooting. So for many, the only chance they get to do anything remotely "cool" is in a competition. I get that.

Instructors and Competition
I suspect a lot of tier 1 instructors don't do competitive shooting because they've either "been there, done that" from a competitive shooting perspective (e.g. LAV, I think) or they've "been there, done that" from a real world perspective and don't need to further pad their resume with competitive shooting achievements.

OR they don't think there is much value in it any more because you can almost miss fast enough to win. LAV (for instance) made several recommendations to IDPA in an effort to improve it.

At the end of the day, I just don't know how else a civilian is supposed to get the experience they get via USPSA/IDPA in another setting (training or practice). As such, TO ME, avoiding these type of events because they don't use appropriate tactics or you don't get enough trigger time doesn't make sense. Until someone creates another sport where appropriate tactics are forced via the rules, I guess we are all stuck with USPSA/IDPA.

This is easy. Form a "study/training/practice" group. Come up with your own drills and compete against each other. We do it every month here in Ohio where we combine training with competition. All without any of the negatives AND we do it for hours (not 2-3 minutes).


C4

[The Virus]

"OR they don't think there is much value in it any more because you can almost miss fast enough to win."
The second part of this statement isn't remotly true....

[C4IGrant]

"OR they don't think there is much value in it any more because you can almost miss fast enough to win."
The second part of this statement isn't remotly true....

It is a joke (kind of). When we say "miss" we are referring to anything out of the A zone.




C4

[The Virus]

I see what you did there.

[Jeff Franz]

It is a joke (kind of). When we say "miss" we are referring to anything out of the A zone.




C4

I can attest to this with an example from a match I used to RO. It is a 5 stage 2-gun match. One particular month, I shot 3 of the 5 stages completely clean, and only had a total of 3 C-zone hits between the other two stages. I paid attention to using cover (especially during reloads), shooting targets in an order that minimized my exposure to targets, even if it was not the fastest way to "game" the stages, etc. A good friend of mine who is purely a gamer did the old "run and gun" as fast as he could, and had a total of 13 seconds added to his time over the 5 stages for C and D zone hits. He didn't shoot a single stage clean. He loaded each magazine in a way that optimized when to reload, and didn't use cover at all. He engaged targets in an order that was faster, but left him exposed to other targets that had not been engaged. I finished 2nd to him by just over 1 second. Moral of the story is that the games often don't place much emphasis on accuracy or use of cover, only speed. That's fine, but I still try and get something out of competitions from a "tactical" standpoint. If I finish 2nd out of 50+ shooters, great. But winning is not necessarily my ultimate goal. I think if you go in with that attitude, there is something to be gained even from a self-defense, tactical point of view.

I do agree with Grant on the idea of having mini competitions with your training partners. I feel I gain more from those sessions than from attending matches. The pressure is there to perform in front of guys who I respect and are squared away shooters. However, I don't dismiss competitions as having zero value.

To the original point that was brought up by the OP, one thing I completely disagree with Mr. Avery on is that the old saying "you won't rise to the occasion, you'll fall to your level of training" is hype, or a myth, or bs, or however he put it. In fact, I would add that you revert to your level of PROFICIENCY, not just your level of training. I have seen that in many competitions. Like Grant, I offer instruction on basic marksmanship and weapon manipulations. I have had students take my "class" turn into a huge soup sandwich during a match when they were faced with a malfunction, even though they had been exposed to how to handle it. I have had other students that had taken my class have similar malfunctions that they cleared without losing more than a few seconds, and kept right on rolling. The difference is that the former knew the concept, but hadn't practiced it and his "lizard brain" - as Mr. Hackathorn would say - took over under the pressure of the clock and an audience, and the wheels came off. The latter had become proficient with the skill, and quickly applied the solution even under the "pressure" of competition and kept on going.

When I hear someone in the shooting community with combat experience opine how this or that technique taught by an instructor wouldn't work in combat because they have been there and that's not how it happened, I often wonder which group that shooter falls in. Is it truly a bad technique being taught by pretty much all of the big name instructors, or is it that they just weren't proficient with the technique and it went out the window when they were in combat?

[Surf]

Growing up guns were a way of life. For my father and a couple generations prior in W. Virginia they literally put food on the table for the family who had little. They were tools to put food on the table, used for self defense of the family and farm animals. However they were also used for recreation. Going out and just shooting with friends and family. I killed more tin cans, critters, varmints and food animals than I can begin to count.

I shot competition as a youth and it was just like competition in any sport I played be it football, baseball, whatever. There was a lot that I learned about life and being a good competitor just like any sport and all of the good that you want your children to take away from competing in any sport. I had a great bat as a kid and hit a great long ball. Doesn't mean that I couldn't effectively bash in some douchebags cranium with that bat if he was breaking into my home at night. I wouldn't be confused by the differences in defending myself and how to do it effectively because I played baseball. I wouldn't stand right in front of the window like I was in a batters box as some scumbag crawled through that window, just because I was a ball player. I can relate the same to firearms as a defensive tool, or as a sport, at least for myself.

Do I currently compete? No I do not, purely because I do not have the time nor the desire right now. I am on the range at least 3-4 days per week, sometimes more and the weekends are reserved for youth soccer, football, baseball, martial arts, ballet, gymnastics etc... My family gets my attention on weekends which is when almost all local competition is held. I cannot justify 4-6 hours on a weekend to shoot maybe 5 mins worth of competition, when I spend most of the week training / teaching. I would like to be involved in competition, if I had the luxury of time.

Our local shooting set up is not so user friendly for the local shooting community and competition is pretty much the only time they get to draw from holsters etc... Sucks, but it is the reality for most of the civilian shooting community here.

I also mentor a couple of local competition shooters and both are very defensive oriented and one is a prior super ninja with numerous combat deployments / missions. For some competitions or on some stages, they take it as a sport and play to win. Other times, they take it as a training opportunity and use good defensive or combat tactics and shoot the stages accordingly and be damned where they place. FWIW they often place in the top in standings when they do play to win. Take competition FWIW. I don't see firearms as needing to be exclusive to one genre of shooting. I hunt, I like to shoot paper or cans, I like to compete, I use them for work and for home defensive purposes.

Just my take on it.

[Magic_Salad0892]

True. Round count is irrelevant to quality time with a gun. We can do an hours worth of Ball and Dummy drills and never shoot 10 rounds.


C4

Another thing that's important, and they don't do this in competition a lot is knowing when NOT to shoot. Or practicing target identification/discrimination in VCQB, low light style.

Competition is a valuable tool. But I believe (for me, right now) that watching competition is more valuable because I can watch what other shooters do wrong. Take notes, and make sure I don't make the same mistakes. I can look at what makes other shooters faster, or slower, and either adopt certain practices, or change what I'm doing. Or learn tips on how to speed it up, or be more accurate.

Watching Todd Green, Rob Leatham, Ernest Langdon, etc. videos I've seen some of the most information soaked footage out there. Not in terms of tactics, but in terms of technique.

If I wanna watch tactics, I'll watch Vickers, Falla, or Defoor videos. Or Travis Haley's room clearing/VCQB stuff.

That's what competition is to me. Perfecting the techniques. Not the tactics.

However, how little time you actually shoot in a comp is very important. And you don't need to be on a match to be on a timer. Friends of mine time eachother, and run drills against eachother all the time. Am I always the fastest? Nope. Am I always the most accurate? Nope. Am I trying harder? Hell yeah I am. I want that goddamn $20 to pay for gas!

But it's still making me a better shooter.

[SHIVAN]

I see this comment over and over again in regards to justifying shooting competitions.
I'll be the devils advocate and say at any given shooting match, you will spend more time not shooting vs actual live fire .

Club matches will have anywhere from 4-6 stages depending on facilities. If the average stage was 30 seconds, you will have a grand total of 2-3 minutes of actual shooting time over the course of 3+ hours during the entire match.

If the goal is to shoot stages quickly, you will have even less time.

Is that 2-3 match-minutes actually beneficial to the shooter?

Since everyone "against" latched on already, and I noticed really only one rebuttal, I'll have to say...

No "gamer" I know, shows up to shoot without having logged a lot of rounds in practice. Sure there are some who just don't practice enough, but they're generally not your above average competition shooters anyway. It's apparent who logs the rounds, and who doesn't.

Is it any wonder that people like Julie Golob, Jerry Miculek, Doug Keonig, Brian Zins, Rob Leathem, Ernie Langdon, etc, etc, etc ALWAYS seem to be shooting something?

Sure, I suppose you can get B class (or higher) USPSA with raw talent, but it seems pretty demanding from the guys I know at that level, or above.

I also wager that it would be easier to take a top level IPSC shooter, who has never had a tactics class, and teach him tactics than to build up an average shooter on both tactics and shooting. Think on it for a bit.

[C4IGrant]

I can attest to this with an example from a match I used to RO. It is a 5 stage 2-gun match. One particular month, I shot 3 of the 5 stages completely clean, and only had a total of 3 C-zone hits between the other two stages. I paid attention to using cover (especially during reloads), shooting targets in an order that minimized my exposure to targets, even if it was not the fastest way to "game" the stages, etc. A good friend of mine who is purely a gamer did the old "run and gun" as fast as he could, and had a total of 13 seconds added to his time over the 5 stages for C and D zone hits. He didn't shoot a single stage clean. He loaded each magazine in a way that optimized when to reload, and didn't use cover at all. He engaged targets in an order that was faster, but left him exposed to other targets that had not been engaged. I finished 2nd to him by just over 1 second. Moral of the story is that the games often don't place much emphasis on accuracy or use of cover, only speed. That's fine, but I still try and get something out of competitions from a "tactical" standpoint. If I finish 2nd out of 50+ shooters, great. But winning is not necessarily my ultimate goal. I think if you go in with that attitude, there is something to be gained even from a self-defense, tactical point of view.

I do agree with Grant on the idea of having mini competitions with your training partners. I feel I gain more from those sessions than from attending matches. The pressure is there to perform in front of guys who I respect and are squared away shooters. However, I don't dismiss competitions as having zero value.

To the original point that was brought up by the OP, one thing I completely disagree with Mr. Avery on is that the old saying "you won't rise to the occasion, you'll fall to your level of training" is hype, or a myth, or bs, or however he put it. In fact, I would add that you revert to your level of PROFICIENCY, not just your level of training. I have seen that in many competitions. Like Grant, I offer instruction on basic marksmanship and weapon manipulations. I have had students take my "class" turn into a huge soup sandwich during a match when they were faced with a malfunction, even though they had been exposed to how to handle it. I have had other students that had taken my class have similar malfunctions that they cleared without losing more than a few seconds, and kept right on rolling. The difference is that the former knew the concept, but hadn't practiced it and his "lizard brain" - as Mr. Hackathorn would say - took over under the pressure of the clock and an audience, and the wheels came off. The latter had become proficient with the skill, and quickly applied the solution even under the "pressure" of competition and kept on going.

When I hear someone in the shooting community with combat experience opine how this or that technique taught by an instructor wouldn't work in combat because they have been there and that's not how it happened, I often wonder which group that shooter falls in. Is it truly a bad technique being taught by pretty much all of the big name instructors, or is it that they just weren't proficient with the technique and it went out the window when they were in combat?

Right and good on you for getting the most out of the "game."


C4

[mick610]

Since everyone "against" latched on already, and I noticed really only one rebuttal, I'll have to say...

No "gamer" I know, shows up to shoot without having logged a lot of rounds in practice. Sure there are some who just don't practice enough, but they're generally not your above average competition shooters anyway. It's apparent who logs the rounds, and who doesn't.

Is it any wonder that people like Julie Golob, Jerry Miculek, Doug Keonig, Brian Zins, Rob Leathem, Ernie Langdon, etc, etc, etc ALWAYS seem to be shooting something?

Sure, I suppose you can get B class (or higher) USPSA with raw talent, but it seems pretty demanding from the guys I know at that level, or above.

I also wager that it would be easier to take a top level IPSC shooter, who has never had a tactics class, and teach him tactics than to build up an average shooter on both tactics and shooting. Think on it for a bit.

I definitely agree with the last statement (not that I don't with the others!). With those high speed gun handling skills and the accuracy to go with them, that shooter should have plenty of time to concentrate on tactics etc......
Kelly N said it well, competition shooters have such a high volume that they can perform without much thought and may know the ballistics etc of their weapons as well or better than most. Malfunction drills are easy for them. Sure, being a GM doesn't make you a gunfighter but couple that with years of LE or Military time and you might just have something!