[Jeff22]

"Mindset" is an important aspect of self defense. So is situational awareness and the technical skill to actually deliver accurate hits on target under the circumstances your are presented with.

You can have all the "will to win" that you want but that in and of itself is not enough. You still need technical skills, whether you are talking about empty hand skills, using a knife or impact weapon or a firearm.

I would suspect that the unarmed techniques that Fairbairn and Sykes taught would still be relevant today. When it comes to defensive use of the handgun, Fairbairn in his book recommended sighted fire at distances past about 4 yards, which is not any different than techniques taught today. The only difference is that he had a specific one handed technique he taught for close range, along with several other positions (like the quarter him and half hip) positions that are also somewhat similar to what is commonly employed today.

Hocking College in Ohio at one time taught their police academy students a variation of Fairbairn's technique (this was probably 20 years ago or so?) I haven't seen any articles about it in the police magazines for years so I don't know if they still do that.

Somehow this discussion veered off into the often repeated argument about whether or not USPSA or IDPA shooting is relevant to self defense, and if the techniques commonly used in those matches are relevant to self defense. Of course they are, in some respects. Neither of those disciplines is tactically "correct" but both are good ways to practice high performance shooting against multiple targets at varied distance. As a form of marksmanship skill development, they are entirely relevant to self defense provided that you use the gun and holster combination that you actually carry on duty or for self defense with your CCW permit or on your property. (I shoot a Glock 22 or 35 in production class in USPSA (or stock service pistol class in IDPA) and a Glock 19 in the concealed carry pistol class in IDPA (and now a Glock 43 in the back up gun class in IDPA)(I'm a cop and almost everybody I train carries a Glock)

What a guy does shooting a USPSA open gun out of a funny holster using a race gun with an optic on it is NOT relevant to you if your defense gun is a S&W Shield carried in a Bianchi Black Widow holster. (I use that as an example because that's one I'm familiar with). Also, 32 round field courses involving lots of running around may not be relevant to you, but an 8 or 12 or 16 round stage involving movement from position-of-cover to position-of-cover and engaging multiple targets at moderate distances would be.

A lot of people who criticize competitive shooting have never tried it. Sometimes it's because there is no club close enough, sometimes because their work or life schedule doesn't work with when the matches are, sometimes it's because people are often reluctant to try the unknown, and often it's because people don't want to test themselves and risk finding out that they aren't as good as they think they are. Sometimes it's because the courses of fire run at a local club emphasize "run and gun" stages that may be less relevant to the skill set you are trying to develop. That doesn't mean competition is "bad" but it might mean that the courses of fire they run won't be useful to help you achieve the abilities that you want to learn.

Same thing with training. You do NOT have to spend thousands of dollars flying out to Gunsite in Arizona or Thunder Ranch in Washington State (although that would be really neat). In most places of the country you can find a competent instructor who does two day(or three) classes for $300 to $500 and 600 to a thousand rounds of ammo. Most people aren't in a position to go to multiple classes in a year (although that would be really neat) but you can probably afford to go to one every other year or every third year or whatever.

Pick a class that is appropriate to the primary skill set that you are trying to develop. The armed private citizen would benefit from one kind of class, a police officer on patrol might benefit from a similar or slightly different class, and then a SWAT Team member or soldier would find a class with a different focus to be more applicable to their circumstance.

(I have always thought that there is room in the market for one day classes taught by competent instructors at a reasonable cost that focus on development of specific skills. National or regional traveling instructors usually have two or three or five day classes -- regional or local instructors might do shorter classes. A one day class would be easier for most people to afford and squeeze into their schedule)

There are so many people who would enjoy shooting in a match and enjoy going to formal training if they'd only try it, but it's really hard to get people to take the first step. And, you have to make a proper choice of both based on your current abilities and what skills you're trying to develop.