Number of Training Hits vs Number of Real Hits

[Guantes]

3D,

I agree on all counts. I have on a number of occasions experienced the "delayed reaction" after extremely hazardous pursuits and other events.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[10thmtn]

My FoF experience was in the Army, using MILES gear (think high tech laser tag). A bit different than the FoF training you did - larger numbers of players, greater distances, heavier weapons, etc.

However, I think Lima's observations are spot on. When you know the bullets aren't real, you take risks you otherwise may not. For example, when multiple "bad guys" attack in FoF, they may press their attack despite fire from the "good guy," whereas in the real world, most of the time the group of attackers will disperse after the first few shots. This exaggerates the number of shots that would be needed by the defender.

The lack of recoil makes one-handed running hits much easier than if you were using a harder-kicking real handgun.

FoF has merit, but you must guard against drawing lessons that are not valid in the real world. Training in an artificial scenario leaves you vulnerable to the "garbage in - garbage out" principle.

I got booted off another forum, because I disagreed with the prevailing wisdom that "came from FoF" that lasers are "useless toys." I pointed out feedback from real-world operators (civilian, LEO, and military) where lasers had proven useful. But because those lessons did not come from the artificial FoF exercises, they were dismissed. That's a shame.

Bottom line is that FoF is a tool, but not the end-all and be-all of training. Check the lessons you think you learn from FoF with the experiences of others in the real world.

[cz75luver]

The low hit-counts reported by police are trumped by the higher accuracy reported by CHL shooters (~15% vs ~60%). Those would be the aggregate FBI and LAPD numbers combined with Kleck's, et al. Note the tildes. If your research says 20-70, I'm not arguing. The general sense of the numbers tells me that the self-defense shooter actually does a pretty damn good job, all things considered.

Police want to go home at the end of the day. They usually have backup. They would generally prefer to avoid a lethal encounter and like the soldiers "shooting to make noise," if a wall of shots makes the BG dead or drop his weapon and end resistance, it's all the same. The ROE for officers probably doesn't provide large incentive for Dead-Eye-Dick out there. The officer can preside over multiple outcomes, almost any of which are not negative for the officer. The officer may be in multiple engagements over the course of a career.

The civilian defender is a different animal. He or she must get it right and the incentive for accuracy is sky-high. Failure can mean death, and depending on the situation that death could be a rather long and unpleasant affair. A missed shot that injures an innocent party could result in a life-destroying lawsuit or even jail time. In my city, this notorious case ended with the woman rescued by police suing the police for injuries she and her child sustained.

The citizen defender, even if acting in the bests interests of another, can face uncertain consequences, so we are forced to "wait until we can see the whites of their eyes," until the risk to life is dead certain, and that necessitates close ranges. The CHL owner may actually be better trained than the typical LEO. If there's one thing we've learned from reading on the boards, it's that most officers don't shoot 100 rounds a month, and many enthusiasts shoot that daily or weekly.

Of course there will be the "squeamish shooter" who, faced with actually pulling the trigger, simply can't do it. We have at least one dead LEO who had that problem and I'm sure there are many, many more of them.

So there has to be on our part some serious introspection: What are your weaknesses and how can you prepare in advance? FoF training helps to alert the student as to where weak points may lie. It's then the student's job to address those. Competition like IPSC can help with adrenaline familiarity. General physical conditioning may be the most important, in order to strengthen the will. Lima's question here is a toughie, because the answers will likely be unique to each person.

I have to say that this is probably one of the best posts I've read.

[glockman10mm]

They use the MILES gear in the military for a reason. While there are certain elements of of human fear and reactions tuT cannot be duplicated in a real fight, good training and conditioning is always a good thing. Much of the reason the hit percentages have gone up in war time gun fights has as much to do with the enviroment and terrain, as well as the weapons themselves. Higher rates of fire in the jungles in Vietam, as well as the distance. All training and practice is beneficial.

[64zebra]

Lima... on another good topic/post

and 3D +1 on your post

On Killing is an excellent book as well as On Combat, I recommend everyone here read both.

Our dept doesn't use airsoft, but rather Sims but its the same concept. I like the sound of the Sims gun being fired, the smell of the burnt gunpowder, and the recoil (although not full recoil of real rounds). I too have been surprised at the hits I've taken as well as given in some pretty stressful and awkward situations. I agree that FoF is not the catch-all, but it does get people to realize their mistakes in situations, see that some stuff doesn't work when someone is moving and shooting back, etc.

I think the issue of low % hits by LEOs in gunfights is influenced by various things, and is most likely varied around the country. IMO...training and mindset are the biggest two factors in why officers don't hit more in shootings. Lack of training either provided by dept or paid for by the officers is the first thing that needs to be remedied.

I wish I knew the answer as to why non-LEOs have a higher hit rate in shootings, but it would also be nice to see complete stats on all shootings and compare hit rates on shootings where it was against knife vs against another gun where shots are fired back, etc.

I had a huge long reply typed up, but thought that it detracted from your thread Lima, so I started a new one his this same area of the forum
reasons-for-not-hitting-targets-in-shootings

[limatunes]

This is all some great discussion (some of the best I've seen on here in a while if I can say so myself) and I thank everyone who has participated.

I agree that ALL training should be evaluated for its "real life" applicability.

I hadn't really thought of mindset DURING training. That's a very good point about really trying to imagine it to be real and working yourself up to as much of an adrenaline and fear high as you can get to simulate real life. Of course it won't be perfect but close is good.

This has been a good read and I hope the discussion continues.

Don't mind me, I'm just reading all this fine input as I really have no basis or experience to base my opinions off.

[SteveCollins]

There is merit to any training venue, whether it be good or bad merit. We can learn from both. Like I say in my classes, nothing is everthing, but everything is something. FoF is a tool, like any other.

Mindset is huge, and must be maintained during training and during our waking moments. You have to remind yourself, "today may be the day." Remember what you have to fight for, and what your priorities are. What are you willing to do to survive? If you don't have your mind right, all the training in the world is worthless. I submit that most who have issues in gunfights, or fights in general, haven't really thought about becoming the Apex Predator themselves, much less facing one. If you're not ready to destroy your opponent, shoot him to the ground, gut him from crotch to throat, you're already behind the power curve.

[Beans]

I agree with the mindset for SD. ((USMC 1961-1971 retired, Viet Nam vet, Former LEO, body guard/ security, bouncer Etc.) It is the willingness to enter into the arena that makes the difference. Learning from your mistakes, hopefully made in training, also enters into it.

In my experience I have found that I can make the training as real as I mentally want too. I could just slide through the training going through the motions or adopt a mindset that this is "real" and get something out of the training.

I can remember as a boot 17 year Old Marine doing grunt training in Camp Pendleton in the early 1960's and running into OPFOR and thinking if this would have for real I would have been DEAD. The next time the same mistake wasn't made.

I am not sure if they still train the same way but as a BAR man, 1961-1963 the USMC drummed into us that we had a life expectancy of less then 20 seconds after hitting the beech and what we did with that time would determine how much more time we had to live. We were shown a lot of Combat films taken by combat photographers of the landings that were made in WWII and the fighting in Korea.

We also had two platoon Sgts. a Phippino and a Samoan who had fought in WWII against the Japanese in guerrilla warfare and again in Korea in the USMC.
Our Company gunny was a hard corp USMC Force Recon with 15 years experience in that MOS before transferring to a line unit.
Our CO was a mustang Captain and their combined experience made the training what is was based upon their exposure to combat. They knew what it took and gave us their knowledge to survive and excell. Mindset was was one of their foremost trainng aids.

[shockwave]

Mindset is huge, and must be maintained during training and during our waking moments.

You may be conflating "mindset" and "attitude." In fact, the word mindset is so open to personal interpretation that without some qualification, people are going to wind up talking about different things.

Let's think about these discussions here lately regarding the difference between practice and training.

In many if not all cases, the difference between practice and training is mindset. Let's say you go to take a week-long Magpul Dynamics tactical carbine course. If you sleepwalk your way through, yawning, chewing gum, just doing what they tell you, then you're getting practice. Be in the moment and actually "see" the BGs in motion, "feel" the incoming fire buzzing past your head, and get yourself to a state that approximates the real panic and urgency of a firefight, then you're getting training.

In this sense, "mindset" as I'm using it here means to get yourself as close to the physical and mental state of reality as possible. When in real life that sketchy-looking fellow gets a bit too close and you see him pulling out a knife or gun, the way you feel at that moment should be similar to how you felt in training.

If you're at home practicing drawing from concealment, and doing so with no mindset, you're practicing. Change the mindset, you're training. Both activities have their place in the learning spectrum. Good students use both activities to improve their skills.