Shooting accurately while on the move - Page 2

Shooting accurately while on the move

This is a discussion on Shooting accurately while on the move within the Defensive Carry & Tactical Training forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by ToddG You know how to walk. You know how to shoot. Walk & shoot. It's really not any harder than that. True ...

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 167

Thread: Shooting accurately while on the move

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array 10thmtn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,143
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    You know how to walk. You know how to shoot. Walk & shoot. It's really not any harder than that.
    True - except that the idea is to avoid being shot, which means moving faster than at a walking pace. I can shoot fairly accurately at a walk - especially if you "glide along" or "groucho walk." It's trying to get hits while moving at speed that I was primarily inquiring about.

    This brings up another question for those who have done these FoF drills - if the "victims" are getting good hits on the "bad guys" while "exploding off the X," aren't the "bad guys" also getting hits on the "victims?" Especially since they know ahead of time what is going to happen in the staged training scenario? Do you still end up with mutual hits? Or are the "bad guys" told to stand still, which is probably a bit unrealistic on the street?

    Just curious.


  2. #17
    Senior Member Array dgg9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    philadelphia
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by 10thmtn View Post
    This brings up another question for those who have done these FoF drills - if the "victims" are getting good hits on the "bad guys" while "exploding off the X," aren't the "bad guys" also getting hits on the "victims?" Especially since they know ahead of time what is going to happen in the staged training scenario? Do you still end up with mutual hits?
    The BG sometimes sometimes gets hits as well, just fewer of them. There is no perfect solution for this scenario. And yes, one problem with FoF drills is that the role players tend to adapt if they know what's coming.

    In this case, the GotX drill was just that -- a drill, which the instructor wanted us to see in action. For real FoF scenarios, it's more important for participants to go in "blind," not knowing ahead of time what's going to happen.

  3. #18
    Member Array ToddG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by dgg9 View Post
    Going to 10:30 for a RH shooter involves shooting one handed.
    Why?
    Train Hard, Stay Safe!
    Todd Louis Green
    pistol-training.com

  4. #19
    Member Array ToddG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by 10thmtn View Post
    True - except that the idea is to avoid being shot, which means moving faster than at a walking pace.
    No, the idea is to win the fight, which means making the other guy stop, which means getting effective hits as quickly as possible.

    Saying "my goal is not to get shot in a gunfight" is like saying "my goal is not to get cut in a knife fight." You may get cut. The longer the fight lasts -- the longer it takes you to finish the fight -- the more likely you are to get cut. Getting cut doesn't mean the fight is over, and it doesn't mean you've lost.

    Putting five shots into a 6" circle at 7yd in about two seconds while moving at a fast "walk" speed laterally (the video I referenced) is substantially more effective than taking twice as long to fire twice as many rounds getting fewer good (effective, stopping) hits just so I can disco dance while I'm doing it.
    Train Hard, Stay Safe!
    Todd Louis Green
    pistol-training.com

  5. #20
    Senior Member Array dgg9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    philadelphia
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    Why?
    If you are trying to shoot at a target which is to your right side (and you're RH), it's not natural to have a two handed grip and torque your body to the right -- while moving. Your support hand won't comfortably reach across.

    Also, a fairly well observed phenomenon is that your body wants to unwind when it is in a twisted position. Your feet will tend to move in such a way as to relieve the upper body tension, and then you either fall, or end up try to shuffle step sideways.

    Finally, for this distance, one handed shooting works fine for getting adequate hits while allowing you to move full speed.

  6. #21
    Senior Member Array dgg9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    philadelphia
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    No, the idea is to win the fight, which means making the other guy stop, which means getting effective hits as quickly as possible.
    The problem with this is that while you are doing that, the other guy is doing the same thing. No one is that much faster at drawing and firing (nor are handgun rounds that instantaneous a stopper) that they can hope to draw into the drop and immobilize the other guy before he shoots back.

    There's a "chicken and egg" here. Yes, you want effective hits ASAP, but you also ned to avoid the other guy's effective hits, which he's trying to land ASAP. Try exchanging "stand and deliver" rounds in FoF -- I guarantee you both get shot, as the norm. Walking helps, but more rapid movement helps get inside the BG's OODA loop, plus moving at the 45 degree angles rapidly maximize how much he has to adjust his aim.

    Putting five shots into a 6" circle at 7yd in about two seconds while moving at a fast "walk" speed laterally (the video I referenced) is substantially more effective than taking twice as long to fire twice as many rounds getting fewer good (effective, stopping) hits just so I can disco dance while I'm doing it.
    That's an empirical claim -- what's your factual basis for it?

  7. #22
    Member Array ToddG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by dgg9 View Post
    If you are trying to shoot at a target which is to your right side (and you're RH), it's not natural to have a two handed grip and torque your body to the right -- while moving. Your support hand won't comfortably reach across.
    This will come as a huge surprise to an awful lot of people who do exactly that on a regular basis.

    Also, a fairly well observed phenomenon is that your body wants to unwind when it is in a twisted position. Your feet will tend to move in such a way as to relieve the upper body tension, and then you either fall, or end up try to shuffle step sideways.
    If you're talking about twisting the body radically while trying to track a target at a hard oblique while moving in an opposing direction, I agree. For me to hit something at my 10:30 or 1:30 requires no gymnastics.

    Being oriented toward the target is what makes effective, fast hits possible. There's no benefit to being twisted around in some weird contortion.

    Finally, for this distance, one handed shooting works fine for getting adequate hits while allowing you to move full speed.
    Something tells me you and I have different ideas about what constitutes "adequate hits" and "full speed."
    Train Hard, Stay Safe!
    Todd Louis Green
    pistol-training.com

  8. #23
    Member Array ToddG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by dgg9 View Post
    The problem with this is that while you are doing that, the other guy is doing the same thing. No one is that much faster at drawing and firing (nor are handgun rounds that instantaneous a stopper) that they can hope to draw into the drop and immobilize the other guy before he shoots back.
    So skill has nothing to do with it? Sorry, we'll have to agree to disagree again.

    Try exchanging "stand and deliver" rounds in FoF -- I guarantee you both get shot, as the norm.
    That's a strawman, because I never said "stand and deliver." But fwiw, quite a few high-speed teams have embraced the realization that getting hits, even if it means moving slower, is what ends fights.

    Walking helps, but more rapid movement helps get inside the BG's OODA loop, plus moving at the 45 degree angles rapidly maximize how much he has to adjust his aim.
    That may be true if you think you need to switch stances or go from 2- to 1-handed shooting if someone moves 45 degrees off your starting centerline (per your last message).

    That's an empirical claim -- what's your factual basis for it?
    It's just logic. You said so yourself, while I'm trying to hit, so is the other guy. If I'm moving at such a speed that my hits are less likely to connect or less likely to hit a vital target zone, then I'm taking longer to end the fight ... which means the other guy has more time to end it for me.
    Train Hard, Stay Safe!
    Todd Louis Green
    pistol-training.com

  9. #24
    Senior Member Array dgg9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    philadelphia
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    If you're talking about twisting the body radically while trying to track a target at a hard oblique while moving in an opposing direction, I agree. For me to hit something at my 10:30 or 1:30 requires no gymnastics.
    I'm not talking about hitting something at 10:30 or 1:30. I'm talking about a BG you're facing who is, by definition, at your 12. Then you run hard towards your own 10:30 or 1:30. If you run to your 10:30 (and then tack right), the target is rapidly at your own 3:00.

    Being oriented toward the target is what makes effective, fast hits possible. There's no benefit to being twisted around in some weird contortion.
    The benefit is rapid movement. ETA: though of course shooting one handed removes the contortion.

    Something tells me you and I have different ideas about what constitutes "adequate hits" and "full speed."
    Full speed is full speed -- as fast as you can run, given that your arms are incorporated doing something else.

    Adequate hits will end up being a 9" - 12" sized group. Is a 6" group better? Sure. But that's not the choice. The trade-off is between a tighter group vs a lower chance of being hit yourself. To me, the fundamental bottom line priority is to reduce the chance of getting shot.

  10. #25
    Senior Member Array dgg9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    philadelphia
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    So skill has nothing to do with it? Sorry, we'll have to agree to disagree again.
    No -- skill has "something" to do with it, but no one can count on being THAT much faster and accurate. A strategy which relies on you being Rob Leatham is not useful for a general audience. The reality is testable via FoF.

    That's a strawman, because I never said "stand and deliver."
    But see the continuum: stand and deliver = you both get shot. Slight movement is an improvement. Rapid movement is more of an improvement.

    But fwiw, quite a few high-speed teams have embraced the realization that getting hits, even if it means moving slower, is what ends fights.
    Apples and oranges, entirely. We're not talking about fire teams on offense. We're talking about a CCW holder, caught way behind the curve, in a reactive close range gunfight.

    That may be true if you think you need to switch stances or go from 2- to 1-handed shooting if someone moves 45 degrees off your starting centerline (per your last message).
    Getting iside the BG's OODA loop is about much more than making him switch stances.

    It's just logic.
    No, ultimately it's not about logic, it's about empirically tested reality. "Logic" can not distinguish where in the continuum of slow aiming and better hits vs rapid movement and lesser hits you get your best chances to survive. We can go round and round with words all day -- that does not advance the solution. At some point you need data. I submit that FoF provides the only data that exists. People have tried this out in FoF and come to the conclusion that rapid movement gets you hit less.

    You said so yourself, while I'm trying to hit, so is the other guy. If I'm moving at such a speed that my hits are less likely to connect or less likely to hit a vital target zone, then I'm taking longer to end the fight ... which means the other guy has more time to end it for me.
    By your stated logic, you should stand and deliver, since that's where the fastest and best hits are. Why walk at all? Walking widens your group to a degree, thus takes longer to end the fight. Running widens it to a larger degree. There is no a priori solution here. It's all about what actually happens: how much do groups widen at speed; how much does movement make the BG miss? These are not answerable via logic. But I will say that even a larger group of hits, such as you get with running, changes the dynamic of the encounter. As soon as you land ANY hit, the BG now has something to think about other than shooting you.

  11. #26
    Member Array ToddG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by dgg9 View Post
    I'm not talking about hitting something at 10:30 or 1:30. I'm talking about a BG you're facing who is, by definition, at your 12. Then you run hard towrds your own 10:30 or 1:30. If you run to your 10:30 (and then tack right), the target is rapidly at your own 3:00.
    I stay oriented to the threat as I move, because (again) that is what gives me the greatest probability of delivering multiple rapid fight stopping hits.

    The benefit is rapid movement.
    That's jumping to a conclusion. Rapid movement, in and of itself, is not a benefit. You're suggesting that rapid movement will make you immune from getting hit, but if that's true and we again follow your presumption that the other guy is doing the same thing, won't you just circle around each other missing forever?

    Adequate hits will end up being a 9" - 12" sized group. Is a 6" group better? Sure. But that's not the choice.
    Of course it's a choice. Based on a lot of work with a lot of people who've actually shot people, I've come to the conclusion that bad hits are little better than misses. YMMV.

    The trade-off is between a tighter group vs a lower chance of being hit yourself. To me, the fundamental bottom line priority is to reduce the chance of getting shot.
    And that's where we have a fundamental difference of opinion. If, in my attempts to "reduce the chance of getting shot" I actually increase the duration of the fight, I'm just giving the other guy more chances to hit me.

    You're of the opinion that moving "rapidly" will somehow make me so much harder to hit (at close range) that I can afford to shoot groups that are larger than many people's profiles. We'll just have to agree to disagree.
    Train Hard, Stay Safe!
    Todd Louis Green
    pistol-training.com

  12. #27
    Member Array ToddG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by dgg9 View Post
    No -- skill has "something" to do with it, but no one can count on being THAT much faster and accurate.
    Another fundamental difference of opinion between us.

    Apples and oranges, entirely. We're not talking about fire teams on offense. We're talking about a CCW holder, caught way behind the curve, in a reactive close range gunfight.
    It's not apples & oranges at all. I didn't saw the CCW holder needed to learn ninja sign language or team room clearing techniques. We're talking about how one guy shoots someone(s) to end the fight as quickly as possible.

    Getting iside the BG's OODA loop is about much more than making him switch stances.
    Thanks.

    No, ultimately it's not about logic, it's about empirically tested reality.
    I look forward to your study when it's published, then.

    I submit that FoF provides the only data that exists. People have tried this out in FoF and come to the conclusion that rapid movement gets you hit less.
    Then why do so many people who have nearly infinite access to FOF not seem to adopt that approach? I've never worked with an LE agency, SWAT team, or military SOF unit that taught shooting at a full run.

    Just last week I took a 1-day package from a "SWAT pistol operator" program with 20+ full time SWAT officers. A chunk of the package was about shooting on the move, and we did some MP5 Operator School-like hallway drills running full out. These guys, who have far more training that the average CCW holder, were lucky to get all of their hits on a huge FLETC-style silhouette at a range of less than three yards.

    FOF is like anything else. You can set it up to prove anything you want. In some circumstances, zigging works ... in others, you need to zag.

    My final comment, then I'll let you have the last word: What it all boils down to is who is controlling the tempo and the fight (that's what OODA is all about). If my goal is "don't get hit" I've put that control in the other guy's hands. As soon as I get hit, I've failed. That's a bad mindset. My goal is to end the fight by making him stop. Doing that in the fastest, most efficient, most effective way is my path to success. (and, fwiw, something I've done pretty successfully in FOF, too)
    Train Hard, Stay Safe!
    Todd Louis Green
    pistol-training.com

  13. #28
    Senior Member Array dgg9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    philadelphia
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    I stay oriented to the threat as I move, because (again) that is what gives me the greatest probability of delivering multiple rapid fight stopping hits.
    If you walk to your 3:00, the target vary rapidly goes behind you. How do you stay oriented? Note that this is much worse you when walk to your 9:00.

    That's jumping to a conclusion. Rapid movement, in and of itself, is not a benefit. You're suggesting that rapid movement will make you immune from getting hit,
    No one is saying "immune," certainly not me. There is no immunity at this distance. The odds are not good in any event.

    but if that's true and we again follow your presumption that the other guy is doing the same thing, won't you just circle around each other missing forever?
    If the BG has taken the same training courses as me, then my odds plummet. However that's extremely unlikely to be the case. The whole idea of training is to give myself the best chances, since I can't control what the other guy does or knows.

    Of course it's a choice.
    You snipped words from my post and changed its meaning. The trade-off is not just group size; it's group size plus movement.

    Based on a lot of work with a lot of people who've actually shot people, I've come to the conclusion that bad hits are little better than misses. YMMV.
    And not getting shot is better than getting shot.

    And that's where we have a fundamental difference of opinion.
    That's why a priori opinions won't solve anything. A lot of people have preconceptions about what works best. testING it is how we advance the problem.

  14. #29
    VIP Member Array Blackeagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    2,147
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    No, the idea is to win the fight, which means making the other guy stop, which means getting effective hits as quickly as possible.
    The problem with that is, except for the central nervous system, hits with handgun bullets are not immediately effective. Consider the best possible non-CNS hit, a double tap to the center of the chest with .45 hollowpoints, completely destroying the heart. This will instantaneously stop circulation and drop blood pressure to zero. How quickly will this physically incapacitate someone? Well, even with no blood circulating, the body's tissues still contain enough oxygen to continue conscious, deliberate action for another 10-15 seconds. How many rounds can an assailant put into you in 10-15 seconds if you're just standing there?

    And that's with the best possible non-CNS hit. More realistically, your hits may penetrate other organs or open up major blood vessels and you'll have to wait for them to bleed out. Now we're talking 30 seconds to a minute.

    Real life is not like television. Pistol bullets will not instantaneously physically incapacitate someone. Mortally wounded assailants have killed or injured a lot of people. No matter how fast or accurate, outgoing gunfire alone is not sufficient to keep you from getting killed.

  15. #30
    Senior Member Array dgg9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    philadelphia
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    Another fundamental difference of opinion between us.
    Except I prefer not to rely on opinion. Again, test it with FoF. The difference between an average draw and a well practiced one is simply not that great -- certainly not fast enough to make the other guy drop his gun, unfired.

    It's not apples & oranges at all. I didn't saw the CCW holder needed to learn ninja sign language or team room clearing techniques. We're talking about how one guy shoots someone(s) to end the fight as quickly as possible.
    OF COURSE it's apples & oranges. The dynamics of a CCW holder being surprised on the street and starting from a dead stop, 100% reactive, caught unawares; and a SWAT team on offense, in a raid that they planned, and are geared up for -- is night and day different.

    The dynamics are EVERYTHING: being on offense, having armor and a long gun and team mates = a game plan totally different than caught on your heels, with a holstered handgun. Starting behind the curve is the difference and that's the entire reason for this technique. If you were that much ahead of the curve, you'd definitely do something different.

    I look forward to your study when it's published, then.
    The Suarez group has been doing this via FoF.

    Then why do so many people who have nearly infinite access to FOF not seem to adopt that approach? I've never worked with an LE agency, SWAT team, or military SOF unit that taught shooting at a full run.
    Um, gee, because the mission and the circumstances dictate the techniques? If I'm wearing armor, have a long gun and a team, and am on a planned offensive raid, that presents a different set of training than if I'm caught behind the curve in a point blank reactive gunfight with only a pistol. The fact that you keep bringing up "SWAT" when the scenario at hand is about as un-SWAT as exists tells me we're at cross purposes here.

    FOF is like anything else. You can set it up to prove anything you want. In some circumstances, zigging works ... in others, you need to zag.
    FoF does require thought and fairness as a testing method, but just because FoF "can" be set up dishonestly doesn't mean it always is. But it is what exists, and it certainly trumps a priori guesswork.

    If my goal is "don't get hit" I've put that control in the other guy's hands. As soon as I get hit, I've failed. That's a bad mindset.
    Ok, so you're on the record as saying "don't get hit" is a bad mindset. I'll let the thread lurkers decide for themselves the wisdom of that.

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. May move from FL to NC - what is NC like for CC?
    By Dean407 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: September 10th, 2009, 09:31 PM
  2. How to shoot a handgun accurately...
    By Siafu in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: July 12th, 2009, 11:45 AM
  3. Move or die, Marine. Move or die.
    By grady in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: April 20th, 2009, 11:25 AM
  4. PFC "Shooting on the Move" Clinic
    By Sweatnbullets in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 22nd, 2007, 05:56 PM
  5. An outstanding article in "Handguns" magazine about shooting on the move - or not!
    By Tangle in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 89
    Last Post: March 8th, 2007, 07:52 AM

Search tags for this page

airsoft moving while shooting
,
duck walk shooting
,
firearms movement groucho training duck walk drag step
,

groucho walk shooting

,

how to shoot while running

,
is it possible to shoot while running
,
moving.while.shooting
,
running while shooting
,
shooting while on the move
,
shooting while running
,
tactical groucho walk
,
wearing armor to suarez class
Click on a term to search for related topics.