Is Duane Thomas a knowledgable gunwriter?

[DVC9]

Competition style shooting is fun, and in my opinion is a step up from bullseye training for a shooter concerned with defense.


Having said that, I would submit that the idea that competition shooting is superior or even equal to proper realistic tactical training is simply ludicrous. Further I strongly support the view expressed by Glenn Meyer.

In fact many well respected pistoleros have been noted as being adamently against "Gamesman" shooting because in there opinion it was counterproductive to good training. Among these as I recall were Bill Jordan, Chuck Taylor, and Charlie Askins.

3 -gun, I do in fact agree with you that not everyone can afford to take school based classes and therefore must find other methods. But do not delude yourself with whatever prowess you have developed for competition.
Good tactical skill courses teach "Gunfighting" plain and simple, they do not teach you how to be a "Match winner" in IDPA or IPSC, and certainly were not intended to.

This is why we have IDPA today, because the founders of IPSC became so disenchanted with the "GAMESMANSHIP" that developed in IPSC that Consequently some of these same guys like Ken Hackathorn founded IDPA. They tried to keep IDPA as real as possible, yet as Mr. Meyer stated, these men unequivically profess that IDPA is NOT a substitute for Tactical training in firearms.
You have drawn a parallel with other Martial Arts (Karate), yet this only serves to disprove your argument and potentialy question the quality of your training in them for self defense.
I mean no disrespect and am not trying to provoke you (as I expect I have), but think about it. A black belt unto itself does not make a fighter, any of us that have studied, know that our mastery of the skill only came when we sought out training that sent our bodies home bruised not just our egos.

I have aknowledged your point concerning school tng being unavailable to all. I also agree with your observation that there are many forums such as books and other practitioners whom you may learn proper tactics from.
Where we start to disagree is that I believe that having studied from those forums and learned from them, the majority of your training should reflect those lessons learned. Indeed if you are a good pratitioner of Firearms Martial Arts, you will most likely handicap yourself in some ways in a practical shooting match. For example, most hot rocks competitors rarely use the same gear on the street they do in a match, most law enforcement competitors still chose NOT to use their duty gear as it slows them down fractionally, how often do You "Check Six" after a string in your match or for that matter even take the time to do a zone check. In a real shooting are you going to inadvertantly drop down behind inadequate cover, because a board fence or plastic bbl were considered cover in your competition environment??
Maybe YOU won't, but it has happened. That is why the so called "Surrender" position was abolished in many competitions, because in real life guys threw up their hands instead of drawing their guns. In other instances dead cops have been found with loose brass or speedloaders in their pockets, because thats how they trained.

Not all schools measure up nor do all the instructors. But for those that do a good job they are teaching something you will never get as a "Gamesman".

Understand, I do not really care whether I change Your mind or not.
But many others read this forum and they may be struggling with the idea of how to approach tng, and I don't want your foolhardyness to affect their decisions. You see, I have been a competitor in IPSC, IDPA,bullseye, hi-power and about every other discipline for pistols and rifles in the country, but it was intense tactical training that saved my life as a young man not competition. M

[threegun]

Dave, I don't want to argue with you anymore. I was attacked by you for saying that formal shooting school was great but not necessary. I also was attacked for considering competition to be a level higher than tactical schooling if the competition shooter has proper knowledge of tactics. Finally, I was attacked for saying that the 25acp was less effective than the 45acp in stopping an attack. It was well known that you are a master of words david. I was even warned not to try to argue with you, that it was a no win situation.

I know it is possible to learn proper tactics without formal training....I did it. I believe that competition shooting has made me better under pressure....my scores prove it. You disagree and thats fine. I am proof otherwise. You have attended many FoF and tactical training courses and I none.

You get me a free ticket to a course and if the instructor says you are better skilled, I will reimburse you the cost plus your ticket. No formal training so you have this sewed up.

[threegun]

DVC9, You assume that competition is my only training. You also assume that I use special equiptment while competing. Well I posted earlier that the only difference in firearms I use in competition is the occassional use of my Glock model 35 instead of my 23 (carry gun), hardly a difference. I use my work holster and mag pouch also. I also practice daily at work with dry firing, drawing, reloading, targeting (choosing several targets and simulate firing), moving to cover (while simulating firing), maintaining a proper shooting platform (while moving), knife defense/draw/fire, ect. My boss demands this daily if we wish to carry (from every employee). Been doing it for over a decade.

You have not provoked me nor do I see discussion of our differences in opinion as disrespectful. On the contrary, I want to correct anything that I might be doing wrong as it only makes me better/safer. My problem with David stems from the truely disrespectful way he treated me. Especially since he has 10,000 bones in his closet.

[Capt. Charlie]

Ahem!...

I seem to recall that the distant beginnings of this thread surrounded the writing abilities of Duane Thomas?

I'm sure the original poster would be greatful to see it return there .

[BlueTrain]

I see no reason to read and study what most gunwriters have to say on the subject, although it probably isn't a good idea to go around quoting very much. Some early trainers went to a lot of trouble to learn about early gunfighters in the West to try and learn how they were successful and survived gunfights. Also, many well known gunfighters, practically all lawmen (and most of them from the Border Patrol!) were also competetive target shooters. But the form of target shooting was a lot different from IPSC, to be sure.

I was surprised at how badly many people performed in matches I've observed, or more correctly, how their guns let them down. That is an instance of the gamesmanship getting the better of them. I'm referring to how a 1911 that is accurized can be less reliable than a stock gun. The stress level should have made no difference.

Another thing many old-time shooters indulged in was trick shooting, which has just about disappeared but it probably irrelevant to combat shooting. Yet some lawmen (and trick shooters) were already very familiar with their guns and excellent shots before they became law enforcement officers--never having had any training. Perhaps a key thing is familiarity with their weapons that was achieved by constant use under a variety of circumstances, hardly any in a combat situation. The social circumstances today may prevent a person from achieving the same level of comfort with their guns, unfortunately, unless they lived way out in the country.

Personally, I thought what Duane Thomas wrote was interesting (but not especially interesting) and that he was informed on the subjects he wrote on. However, I thought his subject matter was rather limited and narrow in scope and started to become repetitive, something other gun writers also suffer from, including some with more and broader experience.

On the other hand, some highly respected gun writers from the past who wrote frequently, though not exclusively, on gun fighting were never in a gun fight. And I suppose there are many who have been through one or two who have never written the first thing about guns and gunfighting. And some gunwriters who had been through more than their fair share of gun fights actually wrote relatively little about gun fighting.

I might also point out that there is probably a large body of literature on the subject written exclusively for the consumption of lawmen all around the world that sees little circulation among the general public.