[mercop]

Many of us have done thousands and thousands of presentations from the holster during dry fire and live fire. Often when we do we are flat footed and don't have to move until we have the gun presented at the target. Here are some stills of what it looks like when you need to move as you draw. So much for economy of motion. Both of these guys are experienced shooters, the bottom like is that under during dynamic movement all body angles change and so will your draw. Both shooters are drawing in response to a visual stimuli. The second shooter first had to panic push the target that is laying down before engaging the second target.

 

[orangevol]

The guy in the 2nd photo looks like he's going to fall down before he gets his gun drawn. :embarassed:

 

[Pistology]

Pictures lie. If the force of gravity and movement of the subject in the 2nd photo is in line with his center line that is connected to his base, then he has what Gabe Suarez calls the necessary elements of stance: balance, movement and stability.

 

[Ram Rod]

I'm betting the second shooter pushed the static target with his left hand instead of using his right hand........anticipating his right hand draw on the live target. That's why I think he's out of balance and position and not recovering quick enough.

 

[BikerRN]

Pictures don't tell the whole story, and only capture a split second moment in time of the situation.

Biker

 

[Pistology]

I'm betting the second shooter pushed the static target with his left hand instead of using his right hand........anticipating his right hand draw on the live target. That's why I think he's out of balance and position and not recovering quick enough.

I agree that he probably pushed with his left only because it's his natural lead and the direction of movement, and his gun is on his right side where it's better to have the right hand available for retention.
However, he next employs a two-handed draw that occupies both hands simultaneously: the left hand is raising the cover garmet and the right is on the grip. There's no panic push with one and favoring the other by holding it in reserve.
He's moving from a fist fight to a gun fight. He must've slapped that target down pretty fast for it to be flat on the ground. And he is moving aggressively to the 11 o'clock of the next target and probably scored some good hits on it.
I guess he's about right but maybe there is a faster way to get from A to B with practice of smooth motion.

 

[unloved]

I'm betting the second shooter pushed the static target with his left hand instead of using his right hand........

I agree that he probably pushed with his left only because it's his natural lead and the direction of movement, and his gun is on his right side where it's better to have the right hand available for retention.

I can't say for sure, as I wasn't there, but I expect he used both hands.
That's what George teaches. A good solid shove to at least rock 'em back on their heels and give you a little time to work.

 

[mercop]

He used both hands, that is how I teach the Panic Push. The idea is that hopefully the guy is not far from a vertical surface and this if done correctly may end the confrontation. You use the heel of both hands up under the numbers as you would in football. With force this causes the head to snap back and the eyes to close, when the eyes close they take a snap shot of the last image they saw, when you open them again they focus to the front so the idea is not to be there anymore. The arms go out to the side in an attempt to regain balance and you get put back on your heels. During classes we usually have someone stand behind the guy being pushed or he will fall or smash into something. Most people don't need to have this done to them more than once at combat speed to have faith in it.

When I came on the job they still taught that BS about striking with your weak hand as you drew and fired. So during a life and death situation you are going to not only use one hand, but you your weak hand to strike at your attacker likely only striking his hand. This was obviously instituted by gun guys who had no understanding of combatives. Go get some buddies and try the panic push, tell me what you think?- George

 

[mercop]

[URL=http://s76.photobucket.com/albums/j22/mercop/website pics/?action=view&current=ToughguyDefense.flv][/URL]

Here is a little video of the tough guy defense, you can kinda get the jist.

 

[jdsumner]

"When I came on the job they still taught that BS about striking with your weak hand as you drew and fired. So during a life and death situation you are going to not only use one hand, but you your weak hand to strike at your attacker likely only striking his hand. This was obviously instituted by gun guys who had no understanding of combatives."-mercop

If the actions you are describing match the criteria for the Taylor Speedrock, I'd venture to say this guy has more understanding of combatives than a lot of people. ChuckTaylorOptions.gif
For it to have been taught for so long, it would have had to have some success.

That being said, everything that becomes successful evolves.
Other instructors teach driving the elbow into the face, ducking and driving into the opponent, drawing to retention and firing.
There is a number of different close quarters options available in the chest to chest situation.
One thing I've learned from a number of instructors well trained in combatives is that: If you give someone a lever (ie, extending your hands/arms foreward out to your opponent) they may use it. As an example, in one of Randy Cain's classes, I stood chest to chest and attempted to Speedrock him. Once face down in the soggy Lakeland mud, I realized this MAY not be the answere. Keeping my draw the same, (non dom hand stays tight against abs) and stepping off the x while firing from retention without extending any levers to my opponent gave my attacker less 'handles and lever's' to take advantage of.
Many different responses to many a changing situation.

Mercop,
please don't read my post as anything but respectful to you and the services you provide. I've learned in the past few days how easily the written word can be misunderstood or misleading in its prose. I do appreciate what you are teaching: an evolution of success responses.
Just thought I'd add a little of what I've learned in an effort to add to the knowledge base of the forum.

dan

 

[jdsumner]

..........and now to add to my ramblings.

I think one thing a lot of us overlook, myself especially, is the evolution of the enemy.
We see more and more instructors striving to teach situational awareness- in an effort to see the attack early on.
We see more emphasis put on 'scanning' after a shoot. Why? More and more the enemy is utilizing numbers.
We are constantly required to evolve our techniques in an attempt to stay one step ahead of the enemy.
The Speedrock may have been the answer awhile ago, and may still serve under certain criteria. But the enemy on the street is likely a repeat felon. Someone who trains w other felons in the system. Some thugs are taking the lessons taught in the mil and using them against their fellow man. Some are accomplished in mma, or hand to hands of other varieties. I believe the enemy has evolved as fast as the good guys. The enemy is not just a street thug anymore. Give him a lever, he'll use it. Jamb him up, he may be caught by surprise and flinch giving you time to evade draw, or ...not. Step off the x, draw and fire from retention, maybe it works maybe not. But maybe you havent offered him an arm or hand to use against you. One thing is a constant, being that close is a bad thing.

Thanks again to all the instructors out there who press onward and continue to teach survival via the only proven method....evolution.

dan

 

[mercop]

No worries. I am not a fan and do not advocate the Speed Rock. I have seen some shooters who are fast with it and get accurate fire. This is with lots of practice. What I see more often was is the other 80% of shooters including in service and entrance level police who more often put rounds high into the left shoulder. Personally I find that what I teach takes less time to teach, in more natural, highly retainable and and provides overall continuity for the use/defense of open hand, stick, knife, and gun, within 7 yards and that is what I do.

Here are one more issue I have with the Speed Rock, the first is that it more than any other technique at this range causes the student to bow his hips forward and his head back, this inhibits forward motion and off balances you.

Again, it is about the application. Most people who are referred to by others as excellent shooters are thought of that way because of great skill when it comes to hitting inanimate objects fast and accurately. This takes a lot of training, time and dedication. But just like doing martial arts with a mirror instead of another live person, it does little to inoculate the shooter against the chaos of a real force on force situation. This level of shooting can take a long time to achieve, mostly because we cannot use the fundamental teaching concept of using the known to teach the unknown when it comes to shooting. Nothing else we do mimics it. I will give you and example. Sage wisdom is focusing on the front sight during a fight right? That is a great idea, but a problem, especially for beginners is that at extension the front sight is usually twice the natural focal distance of 11-13 inches (depending on how old you are ).

I take a mixed bad of shooters over a weekend, ranging from competitive shooters to people who are just gun safe CCW folks and buy the end of a weekend have them putting accurate rounds on target from the groin to high chest at 0-10 yards. This while being provoked by a visual stimuli, while moving and taking control of another shooter simulating a loved one. On our targets I only count misses. I also ask that at the end of everyone doing a particular drill for shooters come forward and point out whose rounds are whose in the riddled mass of the middle of the targets. They are unable to do so. Where you see the difference in the shooters is as they get back past 7-10 yards and get to go two hands on the gun. This is where experienced shooter steal the show. Then we move onto force on force where they need to defend against open hand, impact weapons, edged weapons and guns.

I put an incredible amount of information on the net, it is meant to provoke discussion. I have no problem evidencing or explaining what I do. Thanks for your comments and questions- George

 

[jdsumner]

Thank you for your response. I hope I haven't derailed your thread from its original purpose. I look foreward to your next posting.

As to your original post, I have seen handguns drawn in some rather 'unorthodox' manners when stress is applied. That's one of the reasons I'm such a fan of instructors who take the time to cover personal/situational awareness, so that we (students) on the street don't have to make a quickdraw.

dan

 

[JohnN]

Thank you for your response. I hope I haven't derailed your thread from its original purpose. I look foreward to your next posting.

As to your original post, I have seen handguns drawn in some rather 'unorthodox' manners when stress is applied. That's one of the reasons I'm such a fan of instructors who take the time to cover personal/situational awareness, so that we (students) on the street don't have to make a quickdraw.

dan

But don't you think if we had the situational awareness to see the problem developing we would have the good sense to remove ourselves from the scene?

I have been a competition shooter for years and after taking George's Combative Pistol class in October which contains a force on force component my eyes were opened. In most instances the situation will happen very quickly and you must react and try to catch up. Back in my Cooper days I practiced the speed rock and thought that was the true answer to most extreme close range encounters, not.

IMHO, adopting George's drop step and threat focused shooting at 7 yds and in has helped me prepare for that day. In many instances drawing the gun too quickly is exactly the wrong thing to do depending on the situation.

Most of the square range practice that we do at most ranges doesn't really prepare us for the real thing. Force on Force is about the truest test that we can come up with to measure likely success in an assault situation.

 

[black knife]

Striking to the throat with the weak hand while you draw is more proficient. Nobody can take a strike to the throat.

 

[mercop]

Except for that pesky problem about the human stress response where you opponents chin naturally goes down to his chest to protect his throat. I also obligates you to move backward instead to your flanks as your strong hand goes back to draw and your left hand goes forward to strike. You would also have to be well within arms distance to use the side of the hand.- George

 

[psychophipps]

My preferred throat strike to gain distance or as a loosener is the one often demonstrated by Bruce Lee in his books. It's called a "Spear Hand" in the Kempo system I study and involves slightly cupping your palm with your fingers and thumb fully extended forward for extra structure in your fingers and you strike with the middle finger into the trachea.

I've had the displeasure to use this twice in a violent encounter and it worked like a charm both times.

Great things about trachea shots are they cause a quite violent reaction to the respiratory response and I have yet to see or hear of someone bulldogging through one so they tend to make people stop advancing or thrusting forward momentarily.

 

[dukalmighty]

I see you also use the "blind them with your white legs tactics"very natural,but tactical,LOL Those tactics work great for people that can physically do them,my spinal cord injury prevents me from maintaining a good balance or being able to move fast.
BTW I enjoy reading your posts on defensive tactics

 

[Janq]

Question

As related to image two my very first thought was a wonder of what ie the relationship as between the human and the target.
I do not mean spatial relationship.
I am talking who is the target as to the human?

Is the human a GG or a BG?
Is the human a civilian or a LEO?
Is the target assumed to be right handed as are the majority of humans and thus BG/GG persons?

Reason why I ask these things...Lets look at the image again, with detail.

The first target is ignored as that was nothing more than an action initiator.

Meanwhile the human chooses to engage and run toward the target. He places his shoulders and thus centerline nearly square to that of the targets shoulders and centerline.
Why would a person do this as toward a threat that is able enough as a threat to warrant reaction toward lethal force?

Also the human is moving as in spatial relation to the target toward it's left and crossing to its center.
As most human are right handed if the target is armed and has a handgun in specific then the human has aligned himself directly in front of the target and made it functionally easier for the target to snap/point shoot him as unsighted. If the target were instead drawn and at some degree of extension mid or high still the human has placed himself well within the natural and bio-mechanical sweet spot for the target to make a coarse kill shot.

Why did he choose to move as n that direction and why is he aggressing/engaging?

A LEO would not be closing distance, or shouldn't. He would be regressing and dropping away under these conditions to gain distance/space and seek cover and buy time to draw and fire all as at one.
Equally one should be doing this at extreme angles as related to the target and not moving as within the targets direct plane or rather cone of inherent accuracy. For a left handed person it is more difficult to move the arm as in fine motor control toward shooting the direction of left. Opposite applies to a right handed person.
Optimally in this case the the target would be left handed and the human placed himself to his left and remain as to his left....while moving, away.
But is the target is a right handed person and the human as shown is standing on the left then he the human is at a strong disadvantage. By bio-mechanics alone. What to do? Get away ASAP which means buying distance and retreating away while drawing and firing if at all possible.

The relative spatial distance between the human and the target are too far away for the human to seriously entertain closing distance and making contact with a pre-emptive/defenseless strike as prior to firing.
This is shown by the shadow of the target as related to the humans feet. His feet do not yet touch the top of the shadows head. That target is likely near 6' tall per training target norms. The shadow as based on it's positioning relative to the target is close to if not just over/taller than that of the target.
Good luck drawing, moving and preliminarily striking all at once as across that large of a gap...Without being shot as the target has sensed your presence and is aware of the humans movement.

Last item, if the human is a GG and he is a civilian rather than LEO...Then he may find himself in hot water logistically, as after the fact.
Reason being as a civilian he is not allowed to in many states to use lethal force as for anything but being i fear of ones own life and by that as means to reduce if not escape danger.
One does not reduce nor escape danger by attacking it and closing distance to it.
This is a side item thought but not everyone lives in TX where such items may not even be thought of by a jury nor discussed in a combat course such as this.

Just my own take and $0.02 street.

Same as others not intended to be a criticism to the negative as more a commentary related to observation and sharing of view & knowledge.
I am not a Super human nor do I play one on TV.

- Janq

 

[Cruel Hand Luke]

Last item, if the human is a GG and he is a civilian rather than LEO...Then he may find himself in hot water logistically, as after the fact.
Reason being as a civilian he is not allowed to in many states to use lethal force as for anything but being i fear of ones own life and by that as means to reduce if not escape danger.
One does not reduce nor escape danger by attacking it and closing distance to it.- Janq

I have never read a statute regarding deadly force that said you can only legally defend yourself while backing up......


If you cannot back up fast enough to avoid a punch why do you think you'd be able to back up fast enough to avoid a bullet?

If the fight STARTS at contact distance out to 3 yards then moving QUICKLY at a forward oblique angle as you get your gun in the fight OR simply crashing into the assailant to foul his draw or disarm him is actually SAFER than backing up. Action vs reaction does not take the day off.

Now if it starts at 5 yards or farther and if cover is available then moving to cover would be better. But if you are within 3 steps you need to ATTACK and stop that threat IMMEDIATELY. It gets harder to fight effectivelty while retreating.......

And one ABSOLUTELY does reduce and escape danger by attacking it. That is what STOPS attacks. If we can verbally deescalate...fine. If we have to physically deescalte then so be it. If we are forced to ballisticly deescalate the situation then I want to be ahead of his OODA loop and turning him from predator to prey, not playing my role of victim and doing exactly what he was expecting...backing away.