The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 15, 2012, 11:38 AM   #26
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward429451
I don't want to try this demo with MLeake. He doesn't do it right.
That's funny right there.

I took a few years of martial arts training waaaayyyy back in the stone age. Washin-Ryu with Hidy Ochiai, if anyone cares.

One of the things I realized fairly quickly, and also fairly quickly realized that most newer practitioners don't realize, is that the early stages of learning are literally just enough to get you killed if you think you're ready to fight on the street.

Early training is much too regimented and structured to prepare someone for a No Rules street fight.

Certainly, there are things that can be learned quickly and can be very helpful but to the guy who thinks he's going to "take karate" and be able to fight people, he's in for some serious trouble.

I was friends with a guy who was a very high-level in several variations of martial arts. I don't remember the names now but he was 8th level black belt in at least a couple. He agreed with me and said that he figured it was somewhere in the 3rd degree range before most of the techniques were helpful in "unplanned", no rules street fights.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 12:36 PM   #27
Fishing_Cabin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 706
My experience with certain instructors hasnt been a good one in so much that, instead of teaching a student to succeed, they are set the student up for failure.

Going back to the disarm techniques, since Edward mentioned it...The simple drill of holding the pistol straight armed in front of you, for the opponent to take away/disarm, is pretty common, but also misused. I say this because most instructors dont teach beyond this, and a student presenting a firearm in a proper manner for being close is generally percieved as being wrong, since the instructor cant take it away, or has extreme difficulty in trying.

Had one want to do the drill with me, after the first couple of rounds of the same ole straight arm stuff, he went on to tell the class that he just showed how to disarm any police officer, and when I countered about lets try this as I would present a pistol in real life, in a close situation, he went on a rant about how law enforcement training/policy was wrong, etc... When we tried it later though, he never could disarm me, because I kept the pistol secured in the holster, did an open hand strike/push away/get distance/draw technique, which the instructor said was always wrong...This is just one example, because there are many ways to keep a firearm secured the best one can in a close situation. The most telling thing about this particular instructor thought the pistol was the only weapon on a duty belt...OC/Taser, cuffs, radio, flashlight, spare mags, clip knife, etc, are all good weapons someone can take away and use against an officer when your close.

Edit to add:

At least in my view, an instructor should help build on good things, creating a solid base, and expanding knowledge from there... Also, its good to keep a level of variety, so that the students dont fall in to tunnel vision either when looking at, or being in the middle of a situation. The "your doing it wrong" part also should be restricted... When I went through educational methodology so I can teach some classes, the main thing that was stressed was to find common ground with each student if possible, and work forward from there, as well as encouraging students to do better, instead of creating a situation in which the student can never succeed, or is alienated for some reason.

Last edited by Fishing_Cabin; November 15, 2012 at 01:17 PM.
Fishing_Cabin is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 03:16 PM   #28
Gaerek
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 939
Haven't read the whole thread yet, and haven't seen the article in question, but it's unfortunate, but there are a lot of reasons why that picture could have been like that, even if he did know (and that is VERY likely that he did) that isn't the way to do that. Depending on the publication and how they do business, there are several ways this could have unfolded. The likely process was something like this:

1. Author writes article
2. Editor reads article, and makes changes, and sends back to author
3. Author re-writes
4. Step 1-3 occur as many times as needed to get the article to where it needs to be
5. Editor (sometimes the author is in on this, but most of the time they aren't, unless they are specifically in the shot...gun reviews usually have shots of the author shooting) decides which types of pictures they want with the article.
6. Editor writes notes for photographer or illustrator on what they want. Such as, "Shooter shooting at silhouette from 5'."
7. At this point, they may use stock photos from an agency, or that they have on hand. This saves time and money. If they have a picture that is even close, they might use it (this by itself could account for the screw up). If not, it gets sent to a photographer.
8. Photographer sets up shots to match editors description.
9. After shoot, photographer submits edited photos to editor, to include in article.
10. Editor chooses the photos they think go best with the article.

In this case I outlined above, there's a good chance that the photographer didn't have the person shoot from retention. Even if the editor knows this is wrong (and likely they do) they might use the photo anyway, because of the cost of doing a re-shoot. Even using a photographer on your payroll, a single 1 hour photoshoot could cost several thousand dollars (lots depending on this, a minimum would likely be around $1000).

The best thing you could do is to write them and let them know their error. Hopefully, they'll write a correction or something in their next issue. It's always best to remember that things like this aren't always what they seem (Such as an inept author). For each article you read in a magazine, there were probably over a dozen hands on it for the different aspects, some with a lot of experience with the subject matter, some with little experience (photographers aren't hired for their knowledge of the subject matter, they're hired for their ability to take good photos).
Gaerek is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 04:03 PM   #29
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Ed and Single Six,

You both make very good points. Training to do things the same way, or assuming that an opponent will always present in a certain way, is a dangerous fallacy.

At beginner stages, when basic skills are being developed, there is a need to limit the way in which the aggressor presents - if the initial steps are too challenging, many folks just quit. Once basic skills are in place, scenarios should become more and more fluid as the student progresses.

Against a properly trained shooter, by which I mean one who has actually trained for up-close encounters and who is aware not only in thought but also in body movement, my chances of success drop significantly. They don't cease to exist, but they are much lower than they would be against a shooter who only practices at a range, shooting slow fire in controlled conditions.

The way I normally train at any given technique set, because this is how I was trained when I began, goes something like this:

1) Start from static, with aggressor grabbing; apply technique (this is hard in its own way - my style, aikido, uses redirection of force more than it uses force creation, and a static aggressor doesn't impart much force to be redirected).
2) Have aggressor grab, and apply technique as he is in motion.
3a) Have aggressor throw straight punch, and apply technique as he is in motion.
3b) Have aggressor throw hook or roundhouse punch, and apply technique as he is in motion.
4a and b) Same as 3, but with kick instead of punch.
5a and b) Same as 3, but with weapon (training knife, sword, or staff) instead of punch.
6) Multiple attacker drills, using same type of progressions as 1-5.

Obviously, somebody who is comfortable at the tougher end of 6 is a very different practitioner than one who is only comfortable at 1 or 2.

Also, while progressing through 1-6, at each step of the process, speeds should go from slow to faster. Most people try to start too fast. Going slowly actually is better for revealing points at which one has put oneself off balance, or is applying too much muscle.

(In aikido, position and balance are what make things work; application of raw force often causes techniques not to work.)

A couple things I find interesting:

first, that good techniques will actually work against the full range, from static grabs to multiple attackers; although the techniques will have to be adapted slightly, their basic mechanics don't really change;

and second, that position and distance generally matter more at any given point and in any given technique than what the hands are doing.

Beginners tend to fixate on their hands; advanced students get to superior positions, while keeping their own balance and taking away their opponent's balance.

My first goal is to not take a direct hit; my second goal is to achieve a position where I have multiple attack options open, but the opponent has very limited options.

Example, on rear flank of opponent, with my hips oriented toward him, and his hips oriented back where I used to be. He has to come around the long way, whereas I can hit or kick from either side, employ a weapon, bite the guy, etc.

Closer is generally better than farther away. A couple feet away from him, I have given him room to launch a kick, or to turn back toward me. Right up against him, I have him naturally jammed. He can't throw the kick; if he lifts a foot, our relative positions force him off balance. If he tries to throw an elbow or back-fist, my relaxed, unflexed arm is already in the way as a shock absorber. When he tries to move, I just stick to him and take him down.

Again, the opponent's training and skill set matter, too, but you'd be surprised how many people have trained for boxing / kickboxing / TKD type scenarios, where hits and kicks have to be to the front, and where fighters maintain some distance; yet those people often have no idea what to do with somebody who deliberately avoids being in front.

Movement matters. A lot.
MLeake is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 04:14 PM   #30
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,194
What we should do and what we would do are rarely the same.

I practice extended arm shooting. I compete with mostly extended arm shooting. I know inside a house etc. you need to tuck your arms in, and was taught "hip" shooting 20 years ago.

But if it came down to reality and muscle memory it would again end up extended arm shooting even at that range.

But I think in the reality of a situation draw what you can and stand how you can. The situation will dictate everything before you think about such niceties.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 04:24 PM   #31
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
zincwarrior, this is why as you train more, you start mixing up the scenarios more.

Assuming any one option will be available when things happen is a setup for failure.

Training at multiple options, until any given one can be done reflexively, offers better survival odds IMO.
MLeake is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 04:46 PM   #32
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
Could it be, zincwarrior, that you have just described why some writers suggest that competition is not necessarily helpful in real-life encounters? On the other hand, when those thoughts were put on paper, competitions such as exist now were still in the future. I'd have to say that part of the problem is simply the difficulty of incorporating in training (and competition as well) all of the dynamics of real life. Training generally has a lot of built-in problems related to safety and the limitations of what there is to work with as far as time, the site and so on, which is all true for competition as well.

I would also have to say that any form of training or competition that results in doing something that is unnatural, or rather, attempts to overcome a natural reflex, maybe should be rethought.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 06:01 PM   #33
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Could it be, BlueTrain, that in yet another thread your budget and energy levels once again drive you to deride training?
MLeake is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 07:26 PM   #34
ClydeFrog
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,798
Gary Paul Johnson; SIG P-220 "cocked"....

I agree. Many newer "gunwriters" have things printed I do not really stand by but there are a few top-notch armed professionals/LE officers with good insight.

An older scribe, Gary Paul Johnson(a former LAPD officer & SWAT commander) once posted a article photo of a standard(DA/SA) SIG-Sauer P-220 .45acp pistol saying the design was "safe enough" to carry with the hammer cocked on a loaded chamber, .
I'd pass on that little tidbit.
Many "experts" push the point shooting or CQB methods. I'd say these skills have merit but only for the advanced level shooters(tier 1 spec ops, SWAT, intel officers, EP agents, etc).
Point shooting to me, is like driving a car w/o looking out of the windshield.
ClydeFrog is offline  
Old November 16, 2012, 01:15 AM   #35
allaroundhunter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 6, 2012
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 1,670
Quote:
Point shooting to me, is like driving a car w/o looking out of the windshield.
I would say it is more like driving with your knee. It is doable, a little practice makes it easier, and you have your eyes on the road the whole time

When point shooting you never take your eyes off of the target, you just shoot on instinct and hand-eye coordination.
allaroundhunter is offline  
Old November 16, 2012, 07:15 AM   #36
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
You are correct, Mr MLeake, and since I made that posting, both my budget and my energy levels are nearly depleted. In that time, we have paid for a new transmission and a wedding. You know what those things cost?

But don't get be wrong. I'm not deriding training or competition, just bad training. After all, the title of the thread is "bad advice." Do all trainers and instructors give exactly the same advice?

Funny the things being said about point shooting. To me, point shooting IS like driving a car and looking out the windshield. My car doesn't have sights, so that's the way it has to work. You all make it sound like point shooting is like shooting at black cats in a dark alley. Or something like that. Anyway, when you're driving, you'd better have your eyes on the road. But I don't guess there's a target.

I would agree that point shooting, not referring here to hip shooting, requires a certain amount of hand-eye coordination but so does all other shooting. It also requires a certain amount of instinct, although I don't know how to quantify that or measure it. It is, I believe, a natural thing that has to be developed by practice. How much practice is another matter. Training? Sure, unless the instructor doesn't believe in it. He might not believe in revolvers either, for that matter.

In the matter brought up in the original post, if I'm not mistaken, it is a question of the balance between accuracy and weapon retention. If the weapon retention tactic results in misses, then there's still room for improvement.

You have the floor, Mr MLeake.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old November 16, 2012, 08:32 AM   #37
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
zincwarrior, this is why as you train more, you start mixing up the scenarios more.

Assuming any one option will be available when things happen is a setup for failure.

Training at multiple options, until any given one can be done reflexively, offers better survival odds IMO.
Oh I do quite often, as much as the local range permits and can shoot in any position or on the move. But I also realize I'd likely go into "muscle memory memory mode." Considering the most likely scenario is walking dogs, I'd likely be on one foot, holding a wiener dog under each arm...
zincwarrior is offline  
Old November 16, 2012, 01:23 PM   #38
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
BT, I don't think you'll find that I've ever said point shooting practice is useless. In fact, if you checked you'd probably find some posts where I've said my choices of carry guns have often been impacted by which guns point most naturally for me, and which guns I can shoot best one-handed from unsupported positions.

Lately, I've been practicing a lot more flash-sight and point than conventional target shooting.

ZincWarrior, I could see the dog issue; I've had to rein in my Jack Russell a time or two. Haven't had problems yet with my bigger dogs being approached by threats, but one never knows.

What I was referring to, though, was the tendency of supposed martial artists to pre-select a specific technique, and then try to apply it no matter what the opponent does. In aikido, at least, forcing the other guy tends not to work terribly well. Leading the guy (via strikes or feints) is something else, but even then, one should work with the response one gets, rather than try to carry through against the response one had hoped to get.

If the guy leans forward, then a technique which would take him over backwards becomes much less practical, for instance. The idea is to let him do what he's doing, then apply just enough input to carry him a bit past that. He does most of the work.

If one tries to force things, then one ends up doing way too much work.
MLeake is offline  
Old November 16, 2012, 03:30 PM   #39
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
ZincWarrior, I could see the dog issue; I've had to rein in my Jack Russell a time or two. Haven't had problems yet with my bigger dogs being approached by threats, but one never knows.
Me and the doggies seem to attract pitbulls.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 10:02 AM   #40
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
While I wouldn't go out on a limb, Mr. MLeake, and say I'm a proponent of point shooting, it was something I did now and then, but hardly to the exclusion of other styles or techniques. But there were some things I never did. They included what I'm calling hip shooting, by which I mean shooting with the handgun at more or less waist level (but not necessarily with it at the hip). I expect that shooting with the handgun right out of the holster at the hip or more likely, upper thigh, was something that only came along with the fast draw competitions of the 1950s. But shooting at waist level was certainly something mentioned in old literature.

I've also never done any fast draw with a single-action revolver, even though I had several single-action revolvers (never had a fast draw holster for any of them).
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 01:18 PM   #41
comn-cents
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 18, 2008
Location: Pac.N.W.
Posts: 1,804
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOlq1nW4N9I


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5sK8...=results_video
__________________
Be Smarter Than A Bore-Snake!
comn-cents is offline  
Old November 17, 2012, 05:10 PM   #42
poprivit
Member
 
Join Date: November 22, 2007
Posts: 17
Writing articles

Gaerek - I write for gun magazines. They pay around $100-150 per page. Unless you're famous or well-known, of course. For that amount of money, I have to script the article, provide the weapon/scenario; acquire the model replete with release, shoot the photos - no phone cameras need apply. I use a high-end Nikon digital SLR. Then I have to write 1500-1700 words, re-write as necessary; send in the completed, checked article and wait up to 5 months to get paid (if the article is used).

One of my last articles was for Smithsonian's Air and Space Magazine, and it had to undergo intense scrutiny for accuracy.

However, there are very few editors,or writers who can spend $1k/hour on a photographer or buy many photos through a Stock photography company.

Therefore, you pretty much get what the author can do. Some of my Africa Safari articles had to use the best photos myself and my highly-paid photographer could get ($0.00 spent - my wife shot the photos). It can cost over $5k to have a photog/videographer go on a safari. Takes a whole lot of $100-per-page to cover the cost. I call gun writing "professional starvation".
poprivit is offline  
Old November 18, 2012, 06:21 AM   #43
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
It has been a long time since I had any firearm training but here is a suggestion about training and what you read. First, read everything you can but don't mention a word of it to the instructor, unless I guess it was something the instructor gave you to read. This applies to all sorts of instruction, of course.

I suppose one reason younger people make better students is that they haven't had time to develop their own ideas and anyway, you know how your head gets thicker as you get older.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12926 seconds with 9 queries