Loss of fine motor skills a myth!

[Lurper]

That's the real underlying argument STLRN:
Do we have control over these effects or not?
The old school answer is no, we don't. We are at the whim of what our body chooses to subject us to with no chance of any other outcome.

The new line of thinking is yes. Since these functions are all controlled by the mind, these effects can be limited. In the last couple of decades more and more information is coming to light that supports this.

I mean, think about it. There are people who have been diagnosed w/cancer who were cancer free months later without ever having gone through treatment. There are people who have been told they would never walk again who refused to believe it and did walk (read about the Miracle Man). I was told that I may never walk again, would always have a limp, would know when it was going to rain on, and on. I had an auto accident in 10/1985 and fractured my acetabulum (hip [hope I spelled it correctly]) and broke my femur - still have an 18" pin in it. I never have walked with a limp, which means that I can still walk, I don't know when it is going to rain, in fact I have done many physically demanding things after that including technical climbing.

There are people who control their pulse with their minds, there are free divers who do things that humans are not supposed to be capable of doing. Look at the 4 minute mile, that was supposedly out of man's reach. We don't have a clue to what the mind's full capabilities are and probably won't for several more decades. But I cannot and will not believe that the same mind that is capable of amazing feats like those above is not capapble of allowing us to do a task as simple as reloading or flipping off the safety while under stress. That dog don't hunt!

[mordis]

Lurper there is one thing you and lot of other people in the tatics and training forum seem to be forgetting or failing to give consideration, is alot of us dont have accsess to elaborate training faculties. Sure i could go to Robs course for how ever long it is in colorado, but When im done all me and lot of us have to come home to shoot at are static ranges. The only range i have accsess to during the winter months is the indoor range at H&H firearms here in ft.wayne. I cant do any practice there with regards to realisitic force on force, simunition, drawing and firing a shot or two accuratly or anything in the realm of mental training.

Most of us have no real way of training to deal with the stress of gun fight. Im not a cop so i dont have accsess to the police training, nor am i in the military. Alot of poeple come to this board looking for tips on training but, what is needed is a way for normal people to train in effective ways while staying with in the rules of our local shooting ranges.

Now me, i have accsess to large out door farm owned by my father in law, where i can go and do what ever type of shooting i want. But due to the crappy nature of indiana weather i am limited to the summer months only.

I personaly think both sides of the argument have there merits. Sure a guy with alot of training, runs into a senario in real life that closely mimiks something in training he has run a thousand times, hell likely have no problem. Its every thing else that he has to worry about.

I just wish lurper, and Rob if he is willing to post again in this thread, would state ways the average joe could practice combat fighting and the associated mental aspects while at our local ranges were there are strict rules, and at our local farms were we have ample room to stretch but no training aids and other equipment to speek of.

[Lurper]

Mordis, you are correct. I didn't say everyone could do it. I said everyone could be trained. I also know that I am blessed with good range facilities and as far as abilties go am not the average shooter or LEO.

What I have a problem with is someone telling me (and everyone else) that I will fall apart under pressure and there is nothing I can do about it. That is absolutely untrue. I can tell you things you can do to train yourself, but most people don't want to believe it. When I first started talking about visualization and self-hypnosis 25 years ago, people would get a glassy-eyed look and turn away. People used to joke that I ". . . made a deal with the Devil, that's how he got so fast." I got so fast and good because I kept an open mind when Dave Stanford told me about self-hypnosis and visualiztion. Three months later, I won the MD state IPSC Championship.

Most people can't keep an open mind because they are stuck on convention. Just like the ruckus that starts when I tell people here that the Weaver stance is not the best stance or when I tell them that you don't need to grip a pistol tightly. You would think I was saying Christ was a Muslim. Also, too many people want to think that their LEO range officer or their SWAT buddy or military buddies know what they are talking about. When it comes to pistolcraft, civilians have been years ahead in terms of technique and equipment.

Having had my little rant, here is what you can do:
Next time you go shooting, make a perfect shot. Remember how it looked, felt, sounded, smelled, everything about it. Remember how good you felt when you made it. When you get home, find yourself a quiet place to sit and relax. Take 10 slow deep breaths, in through your nose, out through your mouth. Try to reach the point where the little voice inside your head is silent. When you have reached that point, start to remember (by visualizing it) the perfect shot you fired. Relive the experience in vivid detail. Sight, sounds, smells, feelings, everything. See the front sight on the target in crisp detail (I can actuall see the serrations on mine), feel the trigger move every nanometer until the shot breaks, feel the satisfying surpise when the shot breaks. Feel the satisfaction of knowing that your round hit exactly where you aimed, because you know that that is where the sight was when the shot broke (because you kept your eyes open and on the sight). If you do that on a regular basis (preferrably daily), your shooting will improve.

You can adapt that same technique to whatever situation you want. There is one caveat however. If you don't know how to draw properly or you don't have a good technique then you are just reinforcing bad habits.


Don't let anyone fool you, shooting is 99% mental - no matter if it is combat, competition or hunting (once you have the basics down). The ability to focus your concentration is what enables you to complete complex tasks under pressure (let alone something as simple as flipping off a safety or reloading).

One other excercise you can do which will help is:
Take a blank sheet of white paper. Put a small red dot in the center of the paper. Find a quiet place and relax. Put the paper on a table or floor in front of you. Focus on the dot, clear your mind of thoughts and focus on nothing except the dot. It will be hard at first, that little voice will start going. When that happens, start over. Your first goal should be to be able to focus on the dot without hearing the little voice for 15 seconds, then 30, then 60, then 120 and after that, however long you like.

Those are only a couple of small pieces to a complex puzzle, but they are a starting point for everyone. Try them.

[JohnKSa]

There is as much research and evidence that shows that those reactions can be controlled.

I believe that nearly any reaction can be controlled with enough conditioning.

HOWEVER, the fact that a few people have taken the time and effort necessary to prove that it can be done is a FAR cry from proving that the reaction is a myth.

Your initial statement is not supported by the information presented. You have supported the idea that it's possible to train to the point that one can suppress the normal reactions in high-stress situations (at least of one particular type). You have presented nothing at all to suggest that the normal reactions are a myth.

[Lurper]

Jk
The myth that I was pointing out was that we have no control over those reactions, not the reactions themselves.

I also acknowledge that it takes a lot of training to reach that point. But the one thing that really sticks in my craw (and I've metioned it a dozen times already) is people saying that I won't be able to take off the safety, reload or anything else that requires "fine motor skills".

[matthew temkin]

Double tap;
C below

[matthew temkin]

May I suggest a simple solution?
Instead of trying to overcome these reactions that happen under stress how about training in a system that uses these reactions? Or stake our lives on simple equipment?
For example, why not choose a revolver or a Glock type weapon rather than spend countless hours trying to make flipping off a safety "foolproof."
I may be wrong, but I feel that that Lurper's real agenda here is to "prove" why target focused shooting is not necessary and can be replaced with aimed fire always if practiced 'enough".
Am I correct on this?

[Lurper]

Mr Temkin, I don't believe I have an agenda. If I did, that would not be it. I think on this issue, my point is that the mind is the ultimate controller of or actions/reactions and that people should spend as much time training their mind as they do training their body (even more IMO). By training the mind, you can control the reactions that some people claim are going to happen to everyone. That's all.

I believe that I have shown that aimed fire can be as fast as target focused shooting when someone is trained well. Yes, that is one of my favorite topics, but not the purpose behind this thread.

[matthew temkin]

Only actual combat can truly prepare one for combat.
And until one has such experience I think he should assume that he will not be able to control these reactions and should use something simple that works with them.
I disagree with your claim that sighted fire--up close that is--is faster than point shooting.
Point shooting can be accurate well before the gun comes up to the line of sight and can also be zippered up from a fast draw.
It also can be learned in a fraction of the time that fast aimed fire can be.
Something to be considered for someone who does not have unlimited time to train/practice.

[Rob Pincus]

Mordis,

I hate to sound like I'm trying to push books, videos or training at VTC.. but that is where we put this information out every day. The key phrase is "Working with what the body does naturally"... The whole premise of Combat Focus Shooting, for example, is to find the most efficient way to end a lethal conflict with a gun. That isn't done by spending months at a training facitlity or dry firing 3 hours a day.. it's done by making the thought process and techniques as intuitive and efficient as possible.


As has been pointed out several times int his thread, we KNOW that certain things are incedible likely to happen to a human in a dynamic critical incident... Your question brought me back in to the thread because your question is the one we try to answer every day: how do we prepare the average armed professional or self-defense oriented gun owner to work with all that stuff and still be effective in a realistic situation. Competitive shooters at the world class level are PROFESSIONAL SHOOTERS engaging in an athletic endeavor, not warriors preparing for combat and not CCW permit holders with regular jobs, tight budgets and limited training time.

-RJP

[685cmj]

Only actual combat can truly prepare one for combat.
And until one has such experience I think he should assume that he will not be able to control these reactions and should use something simple that works with them.

Lurper,
It probably sounded like my last post was somewhat sarcastic (the superman reference), but I really didn't mean it to be. Rob and Mr. Temkin put what I was trying to say better--it is clear to most of us that we have neither the time, money, nor facilities to go above the human response to some higher metaphysical plane, even if it is possible (which is certainly in dispute, especially when there is no way to actually practice the deadly fear condition!). So when our lives and family's lives are in deadly danger, none of us can afford to put our hope or trust in the fact that we won't have these kinds of normal reactions. If we lose that bet, we or a loved one may well die. Therefore, for the approximately 95% of us, we have to rely on the simplest possible methods and responses and equipment, always assuming the worst may happen. To do anything else is insanity. Now the other 5% percent will be 1% composed of people who really are supermen in that respect, and 4% of people who think they are but are wrong. Sometimes I think extraordinarily gifted people lose sight of reality just a bit. I just don't think any teacher ought to come on a public forum and encourage more students to join the 4% club! (By the way, I appreciated your double tap video)

[matthew temkin]

I have seen Lurper's double tap video as well as his body-head one.
Yes...he is fast and accurate.
But...I have taught hundreds of shooters to do the exact same thing--with equal speed and accuracy-- with one handed point shooting and to do so within an hour or so.
And not just standing still, but also in motion and from the hip/sternum level as well.
Just because something is simple and fast to learn (because if follows the body's natural reactions) does not make it inferior to the more complicated stuff being pushed.

[Lurper]

MrT
Only actual combat can prove whether you have trained effectively for actual combat.
You are assuming that I cannot use the techniques you discuss. I can assure you that I can "zipper' with the best of 'em. Also, I can and have taught people to get sub 1 second draws in 1 session. I don't like to do it, because there is much more to it than just fast draws. I can shoot on the move, standing, sitting, laying down, holding the gun left hand, right hand, upside down and sideways. There is nothing complicated about it. We are not opponents, we just have different perspectives.

I know that you and Rob don't mean to insult me, but frankly I find your comments as an attempt to pigeonhole me as a competitor thus in some way invalidating my opinion in the SD arena as just that. In fact, I am a warrior, I have a bushido I have lived by since my LRRP days. I have BTDT on more than one occasion. The fact that I am a professional shooter does not mean I do not have a warrior mindset, that my shooting technique or philosophy does not cross over into SD, nor does it mean that I think it is the only way (it's fair to say I think it is the best way).

I'd be happy to debate/discuss the differences in philosophy/technique in a separate thread (after discussion w/ Brownie, I know that there is a whole lot more common ground than one would think).

As far as simplicity goes, not too many things are more simple than flipping off the safety or hitting the mag release button. That is exactly the type of "fine motor skill" that many say you will lose control of. Bollocks!

We are obviously all passionate in our beliefs and evangelists in our own way. However, the world is a big place and there is room for all of us. I would rather revel in our commonality than fight over our differences. However, debate, discussion and an exchange of ideas is how progress is made.

I just find it rather simplistic and self-serving to say that the mechanics of shooting are any different no matter what the target or environment. It really is as simple as putting the sights on the target and pressing the trigger. To make it more than that is just muddying the waters IMHO. The arena does not matter, it can be competition, the range, the street, a war zone or your living room. What is necessary is reaching the level where you can do that regardless of the environment. That is my whole point. If a person wants to reach that level, the must train their mind.

[Hard Ball]

" There is as much research and evidence that shows that those reactions can be controlled."

Iwoukd still lipe to see some of this research.

[Lurper]

HB, I listed places you can start a couple of posts ago. The are tons of examples of how the mind can be trained. Read about visualizationa and the Apollo program, Lanny Basham, the "Miracle Man", olympic athletes and visualization, on and on. Google it . There are numerous sources - shooting related and not.

[matthew temkin]

Lurper..we will have to agree to disagree on the time it takes to train someone to be a good self defense shot.
I can do so in a matter of hours. ( which is why I could never earn a living in this racket)
And I see no reason to try to "train out" the body's natural reactions that occur under stress.
I teach point shooting and WW2 combatives, and these systems feed off these reactions--but will still work even if the user is cool as ice. ( a/k/a the exception to the rule.)
Does this apply to what you teach?
Or is your system based on training out these reactions?
No..I am not being a wise ass but to insist that someone must spend years training in a system that is designed to train out nature is doing a great disservice to those who need deadly force skills tomorrow as opposed to the next decade.
Besides..what proof do you have that someone--even with extensive physical/mental conditioning--will not revert back to nature in his first confrontation?
PS..I have seen even good shooters forget to flip off a safety during the "stress" of hunting and combat training.

[Lurper]

Mr.T,
Okay, this will breathe a little new life into the thread. lol
No one is saying you can "train out" the body's natural reaction. What I (and others) am saying is that those are no more natural reactions than remaining calm under stress. One of the key issues is that if the mind is a blank slate (in an adult, it never truly is), the person will not know how to act. However, we are socialized to believe through our media and culture that it is "normal" to lose fine motor skills, etc. when the SHTF. That is simply not true. A person is just as likely as not to remain calm. In the same sense, we are socialized to believe that we should fall down when shot. That also is not true. No more so than "knock down" power. These are all constructs created by persons with agendas.

The crux of our differences is that we operate in different paradigms. You believe that these reactions are natural and therefore uncontrollable. Your belief is based on "facts" from MD's, writers, trainers, experience, etc.
I believe that the mind controls everything we do and that if we learn to control our subconscious we control what we do. My belief is based on "facts" from MD's, PhD's, writers, trainers, experience, etc.
There is as much evidence to support both sides. Part of the problem is that there is no way to measure these events while the confrontation is taking place. You can simulate it, but there is again as much evidence from simulations that supports either argument, the same with anecdotal evidence.

I would ask you the same question: what proof do you have that someone -- even with extensive physical/mental conditioning -- will fall apart in his first confrontation.
I have seen people fumble the safety, etc., but I have also seen people as cool as a cucumber. What I want to know is what makes one person cool while the other crumbles and how did the cool one get that way!

If I can convince even one person to sit down and visualize a confrontation and to contemplate their actions, then I will have achieved my purpose. The mind is the key.

[matthew temkin]

You seem to confuse the issue.
I do not see losing fine motor skills as a liability, since there are systems and weapons that take this into account.
And losing the ability to preform fine motor skills is not the same as falling apart under pressure.
In other words, one can still kill a man with trembling hands if properly taught.
Ditto for tunnel vision, audio exclusion and other things that tend to happen quite often in most people when forced to fight for their lives.
Some people will panic no matter what.
But in most cases freezing up is a matter of having either no training OR unrealistic training which does not take these things into account.
Or training that convinces them that they will be as cool as ice when the you know what hits the fan.
Even a superman may die trying to fire his cocked and locked 1911, when a Glock 36 would have kept him alive.

[Lurper]

I don't recall saying that you saw it as a liability. What I did say was that you saw it as a certainty. Tunnel vision and audio exclusion are seperate phenomena which are caused by focusing the concentration. What sparked this thread was an officer's fear that - because he was told that he would "lose fine motor skills" when in a confrontation - he would be unable to hit the mag release button with his thumb.
I agree, some people will succumb to panic no matter what. That is what can happen when thrust into a situation for which they have no conceivable idea of what to do.
I would also argue that your last two sentences support my argument. What I am specifically advocating is that people train their minds to be able to focus concentration despite the environment and train their body/mind to the point where shooting becomes subconscious. That's all.

[JohnKSa]

Originally Posted by Lurper

No one is saying you can "train out" the body's natural reaction.

Originally Posted by Lurper

The myth that I was pointing out was that we have no control over those reactions, not the reactions themselves.

I also acknowledge that it takes a lot of training to reach that point.

??

Originally Posted by Lurper

However, we are socialized to believe through our media and culture that it is "normal" to lose fine motor skills, etc. when the SHTF. That is simply not true.

The research on the effects of extreme stress were done to EXPLAIN why the things that DO happen, happen. It's a stretch to say that the dissemination of the research results CAUSED these things to happen. Especially when one considers that these studies (particularly in the beginning) were focused on past trauma. It's difficult, if not impossible, to explain how the results of studies that hadn't been completed could have "socialized" the study participants to have experienced these effects in the past.

I think that if you're going to try to support the idea that the dissemination of the study results have caused the effects then the first step would be to prove that the prevalence of the effects has increased as the study results have been more widely publicized. Simply pointing out a few counterexamples is not sufficient.

I don't believe I've ever seen a study that states it that these effects are universal (in spite of the fact that they are often misquoted that way on the internet or in other media). Therefore the existance of a counterexample (or even many counterexamples) is not proof that the studies are flawed nor that the results of the studies are in question.

Furthermore, the article's most negative comment about the loss of fine motor skills relates to ONLY high heart rate. It says that high heart rate does not significantly impair fine motor skills. However, there is more to extreme stress than simply an elevated heart rate and the article says so explicitly: "The idea that a high heart rate causes a loss of fine motor skills is a myth. The culprit is fear or anger, not heart rate per se." As far as I can see, that says that in the absence of training, the loss of fine motor skills due to extreme stress (fear/anger) is a FACT.

That is not at all consistent with this statement:

Originally Posted by Lurper

What I (and others) am saying is that those are no more natural reactions than remaining calm under stress.

The article clearly implies that they ARE natural reactions but that training can help. Which is in direct contradiction to the first statement I quoted in this post.

It seems to me that you have not presented evidence to support your premise, and further that since your premise is unsupportable that you have shifted your premise as the thread has progressed...

[Lurper]

Oh, but I beg to differ my friend. Here is the last paragraph of the letter:

We much more noticeably lose psychomotor skills under fear
or anger, primarily because of our inability to focus
attention properly when distressed. The key is training.
With a proper training program that allows you to repeatedly
practice your skills while under a high degree of stress,
you will build your confidence and reduce the impact of
negative emotions so that you can maintain your fine-motor
dexterity when faced with real-life challenges. In other
words, good training can help you build a history of
successful performance under high stress.

I've taken the liberty of bolding and italicizing the parts that I thought were most applicable.

[JohnKSa]

I read that.

It's saying that those effects are natural reactions due to fear or anger and with enough training the effects can be reduced or eliminated.

I said that in my previous post and you responded that:

The myth that I was pointing out was that we have no control over those reactions, not the reactions themselves.

I also acknowledge that it takes a lot of training to reach that point.

Then later you said:

No one is saying you can "train out" the body's natural reaction. What I (and others) am saying is that those are no more natural reactions than remaining calm under stress.

First of all, there is a direct contradiction in those two statements. The first says that training can control the reactions, the second says that's not what you're saying.

But what I was getting at is the last part which says that they aren't natural reactions.

The article says nothing to imply that those reactions are not natural--in fact it seems to support the idea that fear/anger/stress normally causes loss of fine motor skills.

[Lurper]

JK
I disagree, the article and Lewinski himself does not say they are natural (nor that they are not). I said that I (and others) don't believe they are natural.
If they are not natural, then they cannot be "trained out".

My comments about socialization have nothing to do with studies. The mechanics of socialization are typically the media (all forms) and culture (family, social, educational, etc.).

The other excellent example of of this phenomenon is:
We are told that when you take someone else's life, you will feel remorse, guilt, shame and many other negative emotions. We are told that to feel that way is "normal". Further, we in the U.S. are socialized to believe that to feel elation over killing someone who was trying to kill you is wrong (socially unacceptable at best). Yet, you will find as many people who will tell you that they don't feel bad or don't feel one way or another about it. If you tell a "mental health professional" that, most will tell you that you are just suppressing it. That's because it is in their best interest.
Another example is grief counsellors at school.
Jesus, you would think prior to the 80's or 90's a student never died. Hell,we had 5 in one year at my H.S.. There weren't any grief counsellors then and as far as I know, we didn't grow up as a generation of feeling suppressing, dysfunctional sociopaths.

It is the same thing that the one doctor mentioned in the thread on soldiers & killing. He basically said that many people fall down when they are shot because that is what they believe they are supposed to do. The same applies to many other situations.

[matthew temkin]

And many people who are shot don't know it until well after the incident.
So what exactly is your point?
That the only reason why some people lose the use of fine motor skills is because they think they are supposed to?
And that if they are told that the power of positive thinking will allow them to do algebra and their nails while being assaulted that this will make it so?
Again..what exactly is your point?

[Lurper]

MrT
Please refer to the bolded text from Dr. Lewinsky's letter. That is my point. Taking it a step further: train the mind to focus concentration on a task regardless of the environment.