[David Armstrong]

Fairbairn et al. aside, the mechanics themselves demonstrate that the technique is slower. In my opinion, slower is inferior.

Again, the technique may or may not be slower. That is a factor of several other issues that go beyond the chamber condition. But fair enough, your opinion is noted. However, speed is again not the only factor, nor is it even the main factor to some.

Again, just because Fairbairn, Cooper, the IDF or USMC used the method bears no relevance on its efficiency.

You are going to have to define efficiency then. I think a proven history of succes does indicate efficiency, and something inefficient would not be practiced, promulgated, and popular among such a diverse population. It may not indicate maximum efficiency, but rarely is maximum efficiency needed. One might be able to make a point about the autoloader being more efficient than the revolver. That in no way negates the effectiveness and the efficiency of the revolver.

You can prove it by using a timer.

You seem to be stuck on this speed thing. If speed is your main concern there are many other factors that impact the overall speed of the presentation. Second, should there be a difference in speed, one must also decide if that matters. The fraction of a second we are discussing here probably doesn't matter much, if at all.

Best case scenario is that the "israeli draw" is going to slow you down by about 2/10 or more.

OK, let's use that as an example. IF the technique slows you down by 2/10 second, here is what that means. Let's assume a standard drawstroke of 2.0 seconds. If the attack occurs within the 2.0 second or less time frame, you cannot draw so the time doesn't matter. If the attack occurs in the 2.2 seconds or greater time frame, you can chamber, so it doesn't matter. So the only way it matters (in this format) is if the attack occurs within a very specific and very narrow time frame. Consider that there are numerous other factors (type of holster, position of carry, clothing worn, etc.) that can impact the overall drawstroke time to a greater extent, yet that never seems to get as much attention.

As for accuracy, after you cycle the slide, your weak hand is chasing the pistol or you are going to fire strong hand only. Either way it is not going to be as accurate as a properly mounted pistol. Add the crouching which means that the body, head (eyes), arms, gun (sights) are moving and the upward swinging style draw stroke and you have a recipe for inaccuracy.

I'm sorry, but this might be the difference between watching a video and actually having some training in a technique. From personal experience I can assure you that this technique does not lack for speed or accuracy. Your pistol should be in a properly mounted position either way, and the accuracy should be the same, there is no difference in final firing position, aiming, etc. The draw stroke is no more of an upward swing than other drawstrokes commonly taught. In fact when I went to Thunder Ranch I found the drawstroke as taught by Clint to be very similar to the drawstroke used in the Israeli Method taught to me.

Nothing is more important than hitting your target quickly (preferably before being hit).

We'll have to disagree. While that might be the second most important thing in a gunfight to me, there are a lot of non-gunfight issues that can also be very important.

Also, no one I know is just going to fire one round and stop. I will fire no less than 3.

And no one who is properly trained in the Israeili Method will fire one round and stop either. Again, I think you are trying to condemn a long-estableished and well-proven method of fighting based on watching one small segment of one video that may or may not accurately present the issue. If I'm wrong and you do have experience and training in the system, my apologies in advance.