Bullseye for SD training? - Page 2

**Frank Ettin** · May 24, 2012, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmythegeek

...You practice how you play, and vice versa. I know it'll get me funny looks at the range, but I'm going to do just that: I'm going to train the way I'd react to a real situation....

Yes, BUT --

One also needs basic marksmanship skills.

BlueTrain · May 24, 2012, 01:24 PM

You know of course that this is not a new controversy and that writers were stating (or overstating) their opinions 70 years ago on this very subject. Their backgrounds were not necessarily that dissimiliar either. It was just that they saw things differently for one reason or another. But compared to some of today's writers, they don't seem quite as dogmatic as they do now.

On the one hand, some believed you had to be a really good pistol shot, although they were usually referring to revolvers, before you could move on to more advanced shooting. Ironically, the more advanced shooting as they referred to it often meant some form of point shooting.

But on the other hand, some believed that competitive handgun shooting was detrimental to combat shooting. It wasn't that they thought bullseye shooting was bad, merely that it didn't contribute to combat shooting. Their idea of training had a pass/fail basis and no other scoring system. However, to be fair, the different crowds had different people in mind, too. The former did not picture large numbers of pistol packers being run through a training course while the latter almost saw it no other way. It should be of no surprise that their approach to training was different. It should also be mentioned that the products of the latter theory of training were also more likely to actually engage in gunfights.

At the same time it should also be mentioned that many of the better known gunwriters who actually carried a badge, many of whom were in the U.S. Border Patrol, also were competitive handgun shooters. We also assume they had some actual gunfighting experiences but they tended not to write about such things.

jimmythegeek · May 25, 2012, 12:51 AM

It'll do for a start. I'm a Marksman!!! 71% They don't have a ranking for Spaz. I need to improve a lot to move up, but it's do-able.

ltc444 · May 25, 2012, 10:31 PM

Started on Bullseye in 1970. Shot my first Police Qualification course in 1982. Shot my first Action event in 1990.

Top qualifier in my department 10 years in a row

All rounds on target in my Action events. Slow because I did not want to hit the good guys in the scenario.

Most of the shooters in the event hit their targets at less than 70%. Most were first round miss.

In a gun fight the first to hit the adversary normally wins. Yes there are exceptions which have been discussed in this forum and many others.

Buzzcook · May 25, 2012, 11:27 PM

For me the active word the OP uses is "Competition", getting involved in competition in and of itself is a positive action. Coaches, team members, and even the people you compete against, provide a wealth of information.
You learn from instruction and tips and from observing the people you shoot with.

Competition makes you a better shooter.

May 24, 2012, 01:24 PM	#27
BlueTrain Senior Member Join Date: September 26, 2005 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 6,141	You know of course that this is not a new controversy and that writers were stating (or overstating) their opinions 70 years ago on this very subject. Their backgrounds were not necessarily that dissimiliar either. It was just that they saw things differently for one reason or another. But compared to some of today's writers, they don't seem quite as dogmatic as they do now. On the one hand, some believed you had to be a really good pistol shot, although they were usually referring to revolvers, before you could move on to more advanced shooting. Ironically, the more advanced shooting as they referred to it often meant some form of point shooting. But on the other hand, some believed that competitive handgun shooting was detrimental to combat shooting. It wasn't that they thought bullseye shooting was bad, merely that it didn't contribute to combat shooting. Their idea of training had a pass/fail basis and no other scoring system. However, to be fair, the different crowds had different people in mind, too. The former did not picture large numbers of pistol packers being run through a training course while the latter almost saw it no other way. It should be of no surprise that their approach to training was different. It should also be mentioned that the products of the latter theory of training were also more likely to actually engage in gunfights. At the same time it should also be mentioned that many of the better known gunwriters who actually carried a badge, many of whom were in the U.S. Border Patrol, also were competitive handgun shooters. We also assume they had some actual gunfighting experiences but they tended not to write about such things. __________________ 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.

May 25, 2012, 12:51 AM	#28
jimmythegeek Senior Member Join Date: July 10, 2011 Location: Seattle Posts: 216	scored a 643 tonight on a 900 course It'll do for a start. I'm a Marksman!!! 71% They don't have a ranking for Spaz. I need to improve a lot to move up, but it's do-able. __________________ "Jeez, man, what's another word for 'stupid?'" "Tactical." -Tom Servo Marlin 795, 795ss, 39A Mountie, CZ-455 American, CZ-452 Scout, CZ-75 Kadet, AOM160 M1 Carbine, USGI M1 Carbine, M1 Garand, Dan Wesson PM7 1911

May 25, 2012, 10:31 PM	#29
ltc444 Senior Member Join Date: March 3, 2011 Location: Vernon AZ Posts: 1,195	Started on Bullseye in 1970. Shot my first Police Qualification course in 1982. Shot my first Action event in 1990. Top qualifier in my department 10 years in a row All rounds on target in my Action events. Slow because I did not want to hit the good guys in the scenario. Most of the shooters in the event hit their targets at less than 70%. Most were first round miss. In a gun fight the first to hit the adversary normally wins. Yes there are exceptions which have been discussed in this forum and many others.

May 25, 2012, 11:27 PM	#30
Buzzcook Senior Member Join Date: November 29, 2007 Location: Everett, WA Posts: 6,126	For me the active word the OP uses is "Competition", getting involved in competition in and of itself is a positive action. Coaches, team members, and even the people you compete against, provide a wealth of information. You learn from instruction and tips and from observing the people you shoot with. Competition makes you a better shooter.