Grip angle.....smrip angle!

This is a discussion on Grip angle.....smrip angle! within the Defensive Carry & Tactical Training forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by HardCorps79 No problem. At least you didn't ask if I was in the Navy ("We saw the navy blue and the anchors ...

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 54 of 54

Thread: Grip angle.....smrip angle!

  1. #46
    Senior Member Array Sweatnbullets's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    717
    Quote Originally Posted by HardCorps79 View Post
    No problem. At least you didn't ask if I was in the Navy ("We saw the navy blue and the anchors and just thought..." Nice. )

    I'm currently in KC but will probably PCS to the Seattle-Tacoma area in the summer. I'll keep an eye out to see if you get out that way. Otherwise, I've got a ton of leave stored up. May have to take a vacation to NV. Thanks!

    Semper Fi
    We are looking to add Tacoma to the schedule this summer. The course would be hosted by Steve Collins, who was a Lead Advanced Rifle Instructor out of Fort Benning. I am not sure of the exact title, but the man has always impressed me.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    Senior Member Array Sweatnbullets's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    717
    It is very good to see so many "fight focused" shooters stepping up to the plate in this thread. We all know how important it is to point out the lack of "fight focus" that occured between 1950 to 2000. Then it was all about target shooting for score on balloons, steel, and paper." "The fight" was forgotten about........but now we are back at war and what was old, is new again.

    The Mental Aspect of the Fight and The "Perfect Balance" of Speed and Accuracy!

    What is the mental aspect of the fight?

    Situations dictate strategy, strategy dictates tactics, and tactics dictate techniques......techniques should not dictate anything.

    It is the thorough exploration of the situation, combined with the thorough exploration of the intertwined concepts that allow the individule to be the most efficient and effective as they can possibly be inside of the situation.

    At the very forefront of this exploration is the "perfect balance" of speed and accuracy. It is the "perfect balance" that takes care of the "to hit and to not be hit" puzzle.

    When we talk about speed we are talking about speed of your movement, speed of your draw stoke, speed of your aiming, speed of your first hit, speed on the trigger, speed of your subsequent hits.

    Inside of all of this speed, it has to be "perfectly balanced" with the accuracy that is required inside of the situation. The situation is the dictating factor and you need to have the fluid skill sets that allows for the "perfect balance" no matter what the situation is.

    Anyone that has taken my PSP family of courses knows that we work the "perfect balance" non-stop throughout the courses. The number of times that I repeat "what you are capable of at five yards is totally different from what you are capable of at fifteen yards, which is totally different from what you are capable of at twenty five yards" is so often that it has to become annoying to those that have already grasped the concept. I pound on it and pound on it until every last student has caught on to what is being taught.

    The "perfect balance" of speed and accuracy!

    I know a lot of students are shocked when the "point shooting guy" is right in their rear pocket at twenty or thirty yards screaming in their ears "slow down, get on those sights, guarantee that hit!"

    Point Shooting Progressions is a course that teaches a seamless integration of sighted fire and unsighted fire. The "perfect balance" is pounded on non stop throughout the whole course.

    I put my students in some of the toughest positions that I can think of and make them give me the "perfect balance." If they are too slow and accurate....I am all over them. If they are too fast and inaccurate.....I am all over them.

    We push and explore.

    We test and adjust.

    We work the "perfect balance" unlike any course I have ever seen or heard about.

    A lot of times people want to look at the speed of the movement we often work with and judge it as if it was just about the speed of movement. It is not just about the speed of movement. It is about putting the student in such a tough situation that they have no choice but to discover the ability to find the "perfect balance" at the subconscious level. IMHO, the ability to own the "perfect balance" at the subconscious level is one of the most valuable things that I can give my students. We are talking about discovering something extremely advanced and valuable inside of a short two day course.

    The "perfect balance" of speed and accuracy has been a staple inside of combat shooting for a very long time. All you have to do is analyse the systems and ask yourself "why?"

    The answer is plain to see, the knowledge and the teaching of the "perfect balance" has been around for a very long time.

    Effecient and effective shooting is not a pattern. Efficient and effective shooting is dictated by the situation.

    Distance = Time

    Time = Urgency

    Urgency = Situational Accuracy

    The idea that we have the exact same accuracy standards inside of a multitude of situations does not facilitate being the most efficient and effective that we can possibly be.

    When we have the distance and time (including cover of course) the accuracy should be precision accuracy to the heart or to the head.

    When we have very little distance and absolutely no time we need to get the hits on the adversary as quickly as humanly possibly, while simultaneous trying to make ourselves harder to hit.

    And everything in between these two extremes.


    When we begin to make up the intiative deficient with our hits and/or with our movement the "perfect balance" changes. When we get to the point where we are dominanting the action the "perfect balance" changes again.

    This is what is a called a Fluid Situational Response. This concept can be found inside of any fight. Doesn't the entire flow of a fight change when someone is hurt badly?

    The Fight Continuum covers every possible fight that can show up at your door. The most effecient and effective response inside of the situation has to be a sliding scale approach inside of the intertwined skillsets/concepts (including the need to go hands on first)

    Reactionary Continuum

    Movement Continum

    Draw Stroke Continuum

    Retention Continuum

    Sight Continuum

    Grip and Trigger Continuum

    Inside of the situation these continuums are all intertwined. They all work in conjunction with each other. They all have an effect on each other. They are all on a sliding scale approach.

    The most effecient and effective solution to problem (A) is incrementally different from the most efficent and effective solution to problem (B) which is incrementally different to the most efficient and effective solution to problem (C) and so on, and so on.........

    The idea that we have the same accuracy standard from A-Z is not reality. If this is so for you, you will not be the most efficient and effective as you can possibly be inside of the fluid dynamics of a fight.

    Situations dictate strategy, strategy dictates tactics, and tactics dictate techniques......techniques should not dictate anything.

    I am sure that a number of people do not realize, that when there is enough time, the Point Shooting Progressions (PSP) course is run all the way back to thirty yards. Precison sighted fire is part of the course. It is used from cover, from stand and deliver, inside of the riflemans "rule of three," and with controlled movement. The use of the sights are worked fluidly from the thirty yard mark up to the ten yard mark, numerous times.

    At the very beginning of the course that students are told that my preferred aiming method is the use of the sights. I actually phrase it as "There is nothing more than I would rather see, than to have the time to get a perfect sight picture, when my life is on the line."

    The concept that when you are in a dominant position "get as much visual input on the gun as the time will allow" is covered over and over again. This is covered at the beginning of the course and is reinforced often when we transition to the sights to guarantee the failure to stop.

    It is odd the "all or nothing" thinking that is prevelent inside of the gun world. It is not uncommon to just mention point shooting and be stereotyped as someone that never uses the sights. I really have no idea where this type of thinking comes from. I have actually had to stop students from trying to point shoot at thirty yards when the context of the drill (hard focus on the front sight) has been repeated numerous times.

    This is why I mention that efficient and effective shooting is not a pattern. I have seen this poor use of a "pattern" slice both ways. Some people using slow methodical "stand and deliver" sighted fire at two yards, and other people try to sprint and point shoot at thirty yards.

    This is why when I am running the "Zig-Zag" drill, I run it step for step with each student. I do this to prompt them on what is a logical response inside of the ever changing distances that they are dealing with. The speed of the movement, the amount of visual input on the gun, and the way that they work their grip and trigger is drilled and ingrained....yard by yard.....student after student.

    Most people take to this like a duck to water. I think that is due to the whole "genetic instincts" thing. Some need a little more guidance, and some need a lot more guidance.

    Usually the concept is clear to everyone by the end of the drills.

    Sometimes I feel like the most annoying person alive trying to instill it in someone that is just not getting it......somebody who is still caught up into a pattern of shooting.

    One skill set for every situation simply does not work.

  4. #48
    VIP Member
    Array gunthorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    home office
    Posts
    2,355
    Thanks for the pearls, Roger. In the spirit of helpfulness, you put into many words some very basic concepts that instinct would have us do, if we but let it. Hickock said that it's as simple as pointing your finger, and he probably would have laughed at our grip angle fetishes. We each will have a slightly different grip on the same gun. It just takes a second to get the "feel" of a new gun when the bore points to our focus. Your description of muscle tension is something I try to advance by using visualization, imagining a powerful stabilizing gyroscope attached to the forearm/wrist/hand/gun keeping the bore lined up with the target upon which the eyes have fixed their focus, and following it in a fluid motion. Even the shoulder and chest muscles muscles get involved. In my experience, just about every upper body muscle gets involved when you find yourself behind the curve. OTH the two hand grip is relaxed, the sight alignment hard, and trigger press is everything for the brain stem shot of a hostage holder at 20 yards.

    For retention, I find that stepping the strong foot back during the draw, bringing the weak arm up to the face as if holding a shield for protection, and keeping the muzzle just forward of the threat facing hip, allows shooting from a less cramped elbow and wrist.

    I, too, have been trying to structure drills that don't degrade but help unfold the student's natural abilities. In this regard, I have tried to find sources for pointing instinct by comparing the forearm/wrist/hand motions and terminal positions of athletes who project force. It has opened my eyes. Throw any imaginary object with all your might and note the positions of your extended limbs, especially the digits. As you focus on the target, move your head over in line with the forearm, the force projector. Both the first finger and thumb will probably line up with the target. They are the force directors. But when you curl the first finger around the trigger, it's your thumb you're putting on target. When grasping a strange gun with its unique grip angle, if you insure the thumb is in register, the rest is instinct.

    Sure, Hickock used a quick two hand hold and the sights when he shot Tutts throught the heart at 75 yards. But just using that technique is like learning only three chords on the guitar. You can accompany just about every song with three chords, if you know in advance where the melody is going. After much, much more practice you begin to feel the structure of music and become unconsiously fluid with the instrument as you start creating to fit the situation, even when others with whom you jam improvise.
    Liberty, Property, or Death - Jonathan Gardner's powder horn inscription 1776

    Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.
    ("Do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it.")
    -Virgil, Aeneid, vi, 95

  5. #49
    Senior Member Array Sweatnbullets's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    717
    Quote Originally Posted by gunthorp View Post
    Thanks for the pearls, Roger. In the spirit of helpfulness, you put into many words some very basic concepts that instinct would have us do, if we but let it. Hickock said that it's as simple as pointing your finger, and he probably would have laughed at our grip angle fetishes. We each will have a slightly different grip on the same gun. It just takes a second to get the "feel" of a new gun when the bore points to our focus. Your description of muscle tension is something I try to advance by using visualization, imagining a powerful stabilizing gyroscope attached to the forearm/wrist/hand/gun keeping the bore lined up with the target upon which the eyes have fixed their focus, and following it in a fluid motion. Even the shoulder and chest muscles muscles get involved. In my experience, just about every upper body muscle gets involved when you find yourself behind the curve. OTH the two hand grip is relaxed, the sight alignment hard, and trigger press is everything for the brain stem shot of a hostage holder at 20 yards.

    For retention, I find that stepping the strong foot back during the draw, bringing the weak arm up to the face as if holding a shield for protection, and keeping the muzzle just forward of the threat facing hip, allows shooting from a less cramped elbow and wrist.

    I, too, have been trying to structure drills that don't degrade but help unfold the student's natural abilities. In this regard, I have tried to find sources for pointing instinct by comparing the forearm/wrist/hand motions and terminal positions of athletes who project force. It has opened my eyes. Throw any imaginary object with all your might and note the positions of your extended limbs, especially the digits. As you focus on the target, move your head over in line with the forearm, the force projector. Both the first finger and thumb will probably line up with the target. They are the force directors. But when you curl the first finger around the trigger, it's your thumb you're putting on target. When grasping a strange gun with its unique grip angle, if you insure the thumb is in register, the rest is instinct.

    Sure, Hickock used a quick two hand hold and the sights when he shot Tutts throught the heart at 75 yards. But just using that technique is like learning only three chords on the guitar. You can accompany just about every song with three chords, if you know in advance where the melody is going. After much, much more practice you begin to feel the structure of music and become unconsiously fluid with the instrument as you start creating to fit the situation, even when others with whom you jam improvise.

    I remember the first time we talked. You have that conversation up on your site. As you see, I am right in line with those same concepts and principles. In the past, I have disguarded many things that I was taught. When you are finally at a point where you are hardly disguarding anything, you know that you are on the right path.

    Good to speak with you again, Roger

  6. #50
    Senior Member Array usmc3169's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    866
    Quote Originally Posted by Sweatnbullets View Post
    It is very good to see so many "fight focused" shooters stepping up to the plate in this thread. We all know how important it is to point out the lack of "fight focus" that occured between 1950 to 2000. Then it was all about target shooting for score on balloons, steel, and paper." "The fight" was forgotten about........but now we are back at war and what was old, is new again.

    The Mental Aspect of the Fight and The "Perfect Balance" of Speed and Accuracy!

    What is the mental aspect of the fight?

    Situations dictate strategy, strategy dictates tactics, and tactics dictate techniques......techniques should not dictate anything.

    It is the thorough exploration of the situation, combined with the thorough exploration of the intertwined concepts that allow the individule to be the most efficient and effective as they can possibly be inside of the situation.

    At the very forefront of this exploration is the "perfect balance" of speed and accuracy. It is the "perfect balance" that takes care of the "to hit and to not be hit" puzzle.

    When we talk about speed we are talking about speed of your movement, speed of your draw stoke, speed of your aiming, speed of your first hit, speed on the trigger, speed of your subsequent hits.

    Inside of all of this speed, it has to be "perfectly balanced" with the accuracy that is required inside of the situation. The situation is the dictating factor and you need to have the fluid skill sets that allows for the "perfect balance" no matter what the situation is.

    Anyone that has taken my PSP family of courses knows that we work the "perfect balance" non-stop throughout the courses. The number of times that I repeat "what you are capable of at five yards is totally different from what you are capable of at fifteen yards, which is totally different from what you are capable of at twenty five yards" is so often that it has to become annoying to those that have already grasped the concept. I pound on it and pound on it until every last student has caught on to what is being taught.

    The "perfect balance" of speed and accuracy!

    I know a lot of students are shocked when the "point shooting guy" is right in their rear pocket at twenty or thirty yards screaming in their ears "slow down, get on those sights, guarantee that hit!"

    Point Shooting Progressions is a course that teaches a seamless integration of sighted fire and unsighted fire. The "perfect balance" is pounded on non stop throughout the whole course.

    I put my students in some of the toughest positions that I can think of and make them give me the "perfect balance." If they are too slow and accurate....I am all over them. If they are too fast and inaccurate.....I am all over them.

    We push and explore.

    We test and adjust.

    We work the "perfect balance" unlike any course I have ever seen or heard about.

    A lot of times people want to look at the speed of the movement we often work with and judge it as if it was just about the speed of movement. It is not just about the speed of movement. It is about putting the student in such a tough situation that they have no choice but to discover the ability to find the "perfect balance" at the subconscious level. IMHO, the ability to own the "perfect balance" at the subconscious level is one of the most valuable things that I can give my students. We are talking about discovering something extremely advanced and valuable inside of a short two day course.

    The "perfect balance" of speed and accuracy has been a staple inside of combat shooting for a very long time. All you have to do is analyse the systems and ask yourself "why?"

    The answer is plain to see, the knowledge and the teaching of the "perfect balance" has been around for a very long time.

    Effecient and effective shooting is not a pattern. Efficient and effective shooting is dictated by the situation.

    Distance = Time

    Time = Urgency

    Urgency = Situational Accuracy

    The idea that we have the exact same accuracy standards inside of a multitude of situations does not facilitate being the most efficient and effective that we can possibly be.

    When we have the distance and time (including cover of course) the accuracy should be precision accuracy to the heart or to the head.

    When we have very little distance and absolutely no time we need to get the hits on the adversary as quickly as humanly possibly, while simultaneous trying to make ourselves harder to hit.

    And everything in between these two extremes.


    When we begin to make up the intiative deficient with our hits and/or with our movement the "perfect balance" changes. When we get to the point where we are dominanting the action the "perfect balance" changes again.

    This is what is a called a Fluid Situational Response. This concept can be found inside of any fight. Doesn't the entire flow of a fight change when someone is hurt badly?

    The Fight Continuum covers every possible fight that can show up at your door. The most effecient and effective response inside of the situation has to be a sliding scale approach inside of the intertwined skillsets/concepts (including the need to go hands on first)

    Reactionary Continuum

    Movement Continum

    Draw Stroke Continuum

    Retention Continuum

    Sight Continuum

    Grip and Trigger Continuum

    Inside of the situation these continuums are all intertwined. They all work in conjunction with each other. They all have an effect on each other. They are all on a sliding scale approach.

    The most effecient and effective solution to problem (A) is incrementally different from the most efficent and effective solution to problem (B) which is incrementally different to the most efficient and effective solution to problem (C) and so on, and so on.........

    The idea that we have the same accuracy standard from A-Z is not reality. If this is so for you, you will not be the most efficient and effective as you can possibly be inside of the fluid dynamics of a fight.

    Situations dictate strategy, strategy dictates tactics, and tactics dictate techniques......techniques should not dictate anything.

    I am sure that a number of people do not realize, that when there is enough time, the Point Shooting Progressions (PSP) course is run all the way back to thirty yards. Precison sighted fire is part of the course. It is used from cover, from stand and deliver, inside of the riflemans "rule of three," and with controlled movement. The use of the sights are worked fluidly from the thirty yard mark up to the ten yard mark, numerous times.

    At the very beginning of the course that students are told that my preferred aiming method is the use of the sights. I actually phrase it as "There is nothing more than I would rather see, than to have the time to get a perfect sight picture, when my life is on the line."

    The concept that when you are in a dominant position "get as much visual input on the gun as the time will allow" is covered over and over again. This is covered at the beginning of the course and is reinforced often when we transition to the sights to guarantee the failure to stop.

    It is odd the "all or nothing" thinking that is prevelent inside of the gun world. It is not uncommon to just mention point shooting and be stereotyped as someone that never uses the sights. I really have no idea where this type of thinking comes from. I have actually had to stop students from trying to point shoot at thirty yards when the context of the drill (hard focus on the front sight) has been repeated numerous times.

    This is why I mention that efficient and effective shooting is not a pattern. I have seen this poor use of a "pattern" slice both ways. Some people using slow methodical "stand and deliver" sighted fire at two yards, and other people try to sprint and point shoot at thirty yards.

    This is why when I am running the "Zig-Zag" drill, I run it step for step with each student. I do this to prompt them on what is a logical response inside of the ever changing distances that they are dealing with. The speed of the movement, the amount of visual input on the gun, and the way that they work their grip and trigger is drilled and ingrained....yard by yard.....student after student.

    Most people take to this like a duck to water. I think that is due to the whole "genetic instincts" thing. Some need a little more guidance, and some need a lot more guidance.

    Usually the concept is clear to everyone by the end of the drills.

    Sometimes I feel like the most annoying person alive trying to instill it in someone that is just not getting it......somebody who is still caught up into a pattern of shooting.

    One skill set for every situation simply does not work.
    Okay Okay Okay.... maybe the diconnect we have had here was the way I was reading your earlier posts - this one makes perfect sense, and maybe I am a bit niave ..... BUT I HONESTLY THOUGHT THAT ANY SHOOTING SCHOOL THAT YOU WOULD GO TO WOULD TEACH THESE SIMPLE IDEAS THAT YOU OUTLINE ABOVE

    I am a little suprised that professional gunfighters would not be taught this in a professional environment and would have to pay out of pocket for it.

    I apologize for getting off on the wrong foot with you.

    Semper Fi.
    "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

  7. #51
    Member Array 7677's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by gunthorp View Post
    Thanks for the pearls, Roger. In the spirit of helpfulness, you put into many words some very basic concepts that instinct would have us do, if we but let it. Hickock said that it's as simple as pointing your finger, and he probably would have laughed at our grip angle fetishes. We each will have a slightly different grip on the same gun. It just takes a second to get the "feel" of a new gun when the bore points to our focus. Your description of muscle tension is something I try to advance by using visualization, imagining a powerful stabilizing gyroscope attached to the forearm/wrist/hand/gun keeping the bore lined up with the target upon which the eyes have fixed their focus, and following it in a fluid motion. Even the shoulder and chest muscles get involved. In my experience, just about every upper body muscle gets involved when you find yourself behind the curve. OTH the two hand grip is relaxed, the sight alignment hard, and trigger press is everything for the brain stem shot of a hostage holder at 20 yards.
    You are correct and this is the disconnect for so many shooters...what works for a shot at distance does not necessarily work for close quarters. The greater the distance the more visual input is necessary to make the shot. And, the shooter has to have the fundamentals such as a proper grip (neutral pressure) with the focus on sight alignment and trigger control to make the shot. In other words, the greater the distance the more the shooter has to do right in order to make the shot. You are correct about using the whole upper body during shooting at close quarters and there should be almost a zen type of focus while you are shooting. Moreover, at close quarters distances the faster you shoot the more you should squeeze and the tighter your convulsive grip should be which should correspondently tighten your whole upper body.

    For retention, I find that stepping the strong foot back during the draw, bringing the weak arm up to the face as if holding a shield for protection, and keeping the muzzle just forward of the threat facing hip, allows shooting from a less cramped elbow and wrist.
    Okay...here is my take on this...should you be drawing your weapon at this point? Or, should you be dealing with the threat with H2H techniques? If the initiative is equal, i.e. the fight starts with weapons holstered, all I need is for you to shift your weight to the rear (stepping back) for me to gain the initiative (Note: the distance between the combatives will ultimately dictate the appropriate response). My take on retention shooting is you move forward and attack and you do not draw your weapon until you either have a position of advantage over your opponent or the element of surprise.

    I, too, have been trying to structure drills that don't degrade but help unfold the student's natural abilities. In this regard, I have tried to find sources for pointing instinct by comparing the forearm/wrist/hand motions and terminal positions of athletes who project force. It has opened my eyes. Throw any imaginary object with all your might and note the positions of your extended limbs, especially the digits. As you focus on the target, move your head over in line with the forearm, the force projector. Both the first finger and thumb will probably line up with the target. They are the force directors. But when you curl the first finger around the trigger, it's your thumb you're putting on target. When grasping a strange gun with its unique grip angle, if you insure the thumb is in register, the rest is instinct.
    You’re over thinking it… Most of fighting is done subconsciously and close quarters gun fighting no different and it is just like fighting with your hands but point shooting only extends your range. Think of it like this to punch or strike your opponent in the intended spot you have to see it (focus) and your brain uses this input from your eyes to guide your fist to that spot. It is no different with point shooting except the ranges maybe extended so just like with distance shooting the more visual input (focus) is required to go from indexing, to pointing, to adding greater visual input such as metal on meat, Quick Kill, front sight press, to using your sights! The best part about it is integrates seamlessly with sighted shooting but it gives you the ability to shooting from any point within your draw stroke not matter which draw stroke you use.

    Sure, Hickock used a quick two hand hold and the sights when he shot Tutts throught the heart at 75 yards. But just using that technique is like learning only three chords on the guitar. You can accompany just about every song with three chords, if you know in advance where the melody is going. After much, much more practice you begin to feel the structure of music and become unconsiously fluid with the instrument as you start creating to fit the situation, even when others with whom you jam improvise.
    Quite simple…Hickcock used the appropriate techniques to get the job done…this is what has changed and it is exactly what I teach my student to do today! As a matter of fact Roger is correct this is what any of the instructors participating in this thread teaches. The difference we all have our areas of specialty in which we excel at and some of us have been around the block more then others. This is not to take away from any other instructors teaching ability but experience tends to focus a person what is important versus not essential and students should take advantage of these different perspectives.
    "TOUJOURS PRET"

  8. #52
    Senior Member Array Sweatnbullets's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    717
    Quote Originally Posted by usmc3169 View Post
    Okay Okay Okay.... maybe the diconnect we have had here was the way I was reading your earlier posts - this one makes perfect sense, and maybe I am a bit niave ..... BUT I HONESTLY THOUGHT THAT ANY SHOOTING SCHOOL THAT YOU WOULD GO TO WOULD TEACH THESE SIMPLE IDEAS THAT YOU OUTLINE ABOVE

    I am a little suprised that professional gunfighters would not be taught this in a professional environment and would have to pay out of pocket for it.

    I apologize for getting off on the wrong foot with you.

    Semper Fi.
    No problem man!

    I've been discussing mindset, strategies, tactics, and techniques on the gun forums since 9/11/2001. It is almost impossible to piss me off or hurt my feelings.

    Some of my very best students and strongest advocates are guys that at one time or another came after me on a gun forum.

  9. #53
    Senior Member Array Sweatnbullets's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    717
    Some of my very best students and strongest advocates are guys that at one time or another came after me on a gun forum.
    Here is a good example of that. Here is a person that thought I was over complicating things.....then he finally trained with me. To judge something without any actual experience with it is presumptuous at the very least......

    Roger, I explained to you before that when I read your book the first time that I was left with the thoughts that you were making something unnecessarily complicated. I never finished it and I took a break from it deciding that I needed to reexamine what all of it means. After a few months, I determined that the book was not the problem, but, in fact, I was the problem--more apporiately, my way of thinking along with some laziness. I wanted what I was studying to be so simple that it was idiot proof. After all, if it was so then there would be less chance of failure. I forget when it happened, but it finally clicked one day when I thought of the phrase, "Keep it simple, but no simpler than necessary." It was not that you were adding complexity to your book, but I finally realized that you were dissecting all of the parts that make up a fight just as if it was a science or any other subject that can be studied. "The Fight" as a subject matter is what it is and there is nothing that we can do change it. We can only break it down into more digestable pieces and learn from it to develope our place in it.

    If one wants a chance to win a fight any and every time it is presented to them then one must understand a fight by studying it in is constituent parts. If one wants to make a learned skill instinctive then one must try develop the different recognized aspects that make a whole package. The most important and difficult part to overcome is changing the way we think from earlier misconceptions or dogma. It is such a shame that there a schools of thought out there that don't understand this and, out of ignorance, laziness and/or stupidity, have nothing but ridicule for others to try and justify their existance.
    Here was my response to this student.

    Good post Juju!

    It's not over complicated.....it's thorough. There is a very big difference between the two. A thorough look at "the fight" allows for a thorough examination of the most effective and efficient skill sets to solve the situation that may arise in a fight.

    When laid out in an organized manner this concept is not difficult to grasp.

    There are people out there that have told me "people need to figure this stuff out on there own. Just give them the basics and send them on their way."

    If we can teach students more about the fight and the best way to handle the situations that may arise......why would we not do that? It is not like we teach "hard rules" that can lock you in and blow up in your face.....we teach fluid concepts dictated by the ever changing situation. A general knowledge and skill level in these fluid concepts is a much better idea than the "people need to figure this stuff out on their own" philosophy.

    At the end of every one of my PSP course I ask all of the students "is this over complicated?" Not one student has said that it was. Sure, we all know that the Point Shooting Progressions (PSP) is "like drinking from a fire hose." But delivering a good amount of information is not over complicating things. When you back up the course with the book, the DVD, and me always being here at WT to answer your questions, there is simply no chance of not getting it.

    The PSP course has taken on a life of it's own. I would love to sit here and tell you that I planned on the course being as sucessful as it has become. But that would be a lie. I new that it would be a good course, but to keep hearing "the information inside of this course is important" like I've been hearing lately, makes me realize that the course has exceeded all of my expectations. It has taken on a life of it's own and I am just a collector of information. All I have to do is pass on the information that I keep collecting.
    This "over complicating" BS used to be the one thing that I would get pounded on the most. It still goes on in some circles. My friend Bobby (Geezer to most of you) was an educational wizard. He would constantly needle me about my explanations of things. He felt there was no need for "how, where, when, and why." He felt that what I taught was a "just do it" type of material. We debated that back and forth for years. Finally right before he passed on he admitted to the obvious need of what it was that I was doing.

    I always felt that you could get more people to "just do it" (as in the controversial things that we were talking about) if you could convince them of the "how, where, when, and why" common sense of it all. There are still plenty of "just do it" guys out there. But now that this PSP stuff is becoming more and more mainstream it is easier to get people to "just do it" because the worm has already turned on the subject for those with half of a clue. What was once heresy and blastphemy is now generally accepted. IMHO, teaching the "how, where, when, and why" is what facilitated the change.

    What many people do not know about me is that I am a "just do it" guy. I questioned the lack of common sense of what I was being taught instinctively and intuitively from the very first day. I knew that there had to be a better way. This is something that you will see in a lot of "just do it" guys. They do not need to know or need to learn "how, where, when, and why." Instinctively they are already right there. But these people are in the minority. They also do not understand why people need to know the "how, where, when, and why." What they fail to see is instinctively they are more the exception than the rule.

    A long time ago while watching the the whole "going nowhere" competition based training -vs- combat based training debates, I asked myself if this would not go a whole lot smoother if the insults were replaced with common sense explanations. I know, I know......ground breaking thinking on a gun forum. But it was plain to see that it was the one thing that was missing from many of the gun forums. Only a very few people were doing this, one of them is right here in this thread.

    Now days what I hear from certain circles is "Roger's over complicating things" "He should let people figure this stuff out for themselves."

    What kind of thinking is that!?

    "All the student needs is the basics of "just do it" and they can figure the rest out for themsleves."

    Why would an instructor just stop at the basics when there is so much more out there than that?

    It is my opinion that when you give the "how, where, when, and why" of things there is a much deeper understanding. This much deeper understanding allows for a much further skill set progression. When it comes to combat shooting skill sets, everything is connected. To only learn a block of instruction and not know what comes before it or what comes after it, severly limits your learning progression potential.

    A couple of weeks ago I had the honor of teaching a bunch of Suarez International instructors how to teach basic point shooting. Teaching is one thing but this required me to "teach how to teach" because combat shooting has next to nothing to do with the fundamentals of marksmanship. There is a whole different methodology to it. I started out by focusing on teaching the required block of instruction. It became very apparent, very early that this was not going to be near good enough. To guarantee that the guys were ready to teach the basics of point shooting they had to have a more thorough understanding of what came before and more importantly what comes after the block of instruction we were focusing on.

    I have no doubt the guys are going to do great!

  10. #54
    VIP Member
    Array gunthorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    home office
    Posts
    2,355
    Great to share with you, too, Roger. Keep up the good work.

    Any endeavor pursued with competent coaching and dedicated practice is not subconscious, but rather what I call auto-conscious. Flight may be subconscious, but fight is technique learned and drilled. Watch kittens or puppies grow up learning what works on each other as they spar. We, unfortunately, sometimes need an epiphany that evil surrounds us and that we must be able to confront it. Since our society frowns on skill at arms and is even outlawing toy weapons, some of us miss a very important window of opportunity in our early youth, when it comes easily, to develop hand eye coordination for combat. As we age, our predispositions and mental preemptions make it necessary to understand in detail the fundamentals of a technique, before we can accept it and go with the flow. Therefore your analysis of minutia is of great help to get past the awkwardness of not knowing why something works.

    I feel frustrated and discouraged when a teacher says I have to do it subconsciously. That's so easy to say. But what does it mean? I feel empowered to succeed when told clearly how to do the little things, why they work, and how to practice to put them together as necessary without needing to think about it. That's auto-consciousness, seamless, and fluid. The fight, as well as all athletic, artistic, and creative struggles, requires the very maximum of conscious thought and decisions, strategy and tactics, using skills and techniques that only seem to be unconscious. An adept makes the difficult look almost too easy.

    Sorry to get a bit off topic. When you mentioned changing angles of the forearm and wrist for retention, I suggested a method that didn't require it. Some may disagree, but the idea of retention is to maintain distance, not close it. H2H is another matter. The concept is to twist the strong hip away during the draw to protect the gun, and shoot when the muzzle reaches forward to the plane of the weak hip facing the threat. The arm is not cramped back, the elbow has a more natural angle, and the forearm/wrist/hand are lined up when the elbow is thrust down. Done properly, no time is lost, and the technique can be also used to counter sudden threats from the weak side and quarter.

    A recent study of the Force Science Institute, here in Mankato, documented how fast the body can twist. The information can help defend OIS that strike the back of perp. One of my students in CA saw it first hand. As he drew from a pocket against a gun wielding mugger, the instant surprise and shock to the BG turned what would have been a certain heart shot into a shoulder hit, as the BG twisted so fast.

    Safe regards, Gardy
    Liberty, Property, or Death - Jonathan Gardner's powder horn inscription 1776

    Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.
    ("Do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it.")
    -Virgil, Aeneid, vi, 95

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

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. A gun similar to a Glock but without the sharp grip angle?
    By Wiggity in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: June 18th, 2010, 07:21 AM
  2. Angle of Shot
    By BikerRN in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: September 11th, 2009, 06:53 PM
  3. Grip Angle?
    By dauff in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: October 1st, 2007, 11:57 PM
  4. Adjusting to the Glock grip angle?
    By Blackeagle in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: May 9th, 2007, 03:01 PM
  5. The gun POV angle
    By P95Carry in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: July 31st, 2006, 07:40 AM

Search tags for this page

right cross bent wrist

,
smrip
Click on a term to search for related topics.