Very good analysis JohnKSa.
I still think this is flawed data. You cannot say with any degree of certainty that 4 hits are going to neutralize every enemy, so how can you give it a 100% probability of incapacitating an opponent? Sounds nice for a video game, but real life does not work that way. If that was the case I would carry the Beretta 84 (14 shot 380). This data does not take into account the effectiveness of the projectile being used, it lacks any credibility.
I think you are looking at it wrong.
No you can't say with any degree of certainly that an number of rounds will stop someone unless it hits some very specific targets. But you have to "draw a line in the sand" somewhere and build an analysis from that. Things can be tweaked as needed to make the simulation more closely reflect reality.
I don't think John is saying that this is "reality". What he is saying, is that given these reasonable assumptions, here is what you statistically get.
I think this is good information to take to the range to test. People should take these assumptions and try them out. Put 2 anatomical targets out and do some draw from concealment shooting as quickly as they would in a defensive situation at reasonable self defense ranges and see how they do compared to this data.
If they have one or more rounds in a vital area on their targets and they believe that they can do that on command on moving targets, they are good to go. If, however, they can't replicate Johns data on even a square range on non moving targets, they might need to re-evaluate their tactics/training or equipment. (In that order).