Our shooting schools are classified and so far I've seen no mention of our abilities or tactics on this board.

I teach individuals to shoot all the time, what I don't teach everyone is how to kill. Sort of like shooting for fun and shooting because you life might depend on it. Two different schools of thought and two different methods of teaching.

Shooting competitions should be fun and your life doesn't depend on winning or losing, in our world it does.

On this thread all sorts of equipment (tools) are mentioned and if you read between the lines some good advice is being given by those that have faced the elephant. All other advice is game shooting, the two methods are IMO mutually exclusive. And while you just might gain some benefits from fun shooting, using fun shooting's TTP's will get you killed in real life. We've gone over this before. While a soldier can compete in a competition or IPSC, IPSC/competition shooters don't go to war.

my .02
TS

You have to take that quote in context. Yes, Paul teaches that you cannot miss fast enough to win a gunfight. At ranges over 50 yards, he teaches the kneeling and prone unsupported positions with very tight time requirements (i.e. at 100 yds., 5 rounds prone from a standing start in approx. 12 seconds, no misses). At ranges between 50 and 25 yards, he teaches the standing position and the reality is that the target appears big enough that you should be able to pause for a half second and break your shot if trained properly. Remember, most students are finishing his courses with single shot splits from the low ready of one second or less (lots of guys are shooting .7 or .8 seconds).

Shooting inside the 25 is a different beast, and I don't think you'd hear him telling you to stop what you're doing just to take the shot. Most Mil/LE shooters whom I have seen receiving shooting on the move training are able to maintain 100% hits while maintaining a "brisk walk" with only a day's training.

None of this has much to do with DM training, though, so hijack over. :)

This is a topic I'm also following closely.

AFAIK, Holschen at InSights has echoed much of what Howe said in his newsletter. Words to the effect of "when it's time to move, it's time to MOVE!". Much more along the lines of Howe's "sprint to cover, then shoot from there." From how I read those comments, it says to me the whole heel-toe "groucho walk" is more of a range technique than a fighting technique.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2zYvMpTeqI

They appear to be of the opinion that moving slowly enough to make half-way decent shots isn't moving fast enough to not get shot, yourself.

Then again, I keep reading about how other gentlemen who served in a similar capacity want to get MORE training on shooting on the move.

I'm not going to get into a hypothetical discussion of tactics here. It's out of scope and not my area of expertise. What I can tell you from personal experience is that good instruction can greatly improve your ability to get good hits while moving (i.e., a brisk walk). However, it is a skill that deteriorates even faster than other shooting skills, so unless you're going to be doing it a lot in training or on your own time, you're probably better off running to cover.

I have a hard enough time maintaining Paul's standards throughout the year, so on the rare occasions when I do shoot a box drill or something, it's usually just as a reward to myself for doing everything else well that day.

Don't know if the link will work, comments....:munchin

http://demigodllc.com/video_serve.php?id=iM6CvLHYxtk

Just a game for sure, but looking forward to the comments anyway...

Update
 

Gene,
I did ask a Senior NCO Sniper Instructor why they will not let teams compete in the ISSTE ("ICE T") unless they are B4 ASI holders.

He told me that the reason is that they want everyone to have the same basic skill level. A few years ago they had some USAF guys that were not B4 holders, and when it came time to shoot the .50 they had to have some remedial training, and then the shots they made accounted for almost no points. It is a training distraction as far as they are concerned.

I did get the winners wrong for the ISSTE, this year the winning team came from 3/75, second place was Wisconsin National Guard, and third place was the team from 5th Group.

Having spent three years in the airborne infantry and seventeen in SF I've only ever seen one (SF) guy attend an Army, or AMTU shooting competition. Not a big priority I guess.;)

TS:

Very true.

The command would like to get away from the "competition" mindset with our annual functions. They want these things to feature some competitive atmosphere but the focus is on what you get out of the experience. Hence, "Inter Service Sniper 'Training Exercise.'"

I also found out for sure that the "Wilson Match" is only for Reserve Component Soldiers; and that the Armed Forces Skill at Arms or AFSAM is open to all military on orders. Any unit can field a team. AFSAM runs concurrently with Wilson Match in October.

JG:

First to TS -- many more guys are competing now than our era. Nguyen was an exceptional Three Gun shooter who got killed in Iraq a few years ago with 3rd SFG. The owner of Viking Tactical is a national level shooter who has significant combat experience and was in 3 / 1 SFG. Chapman who was probably the first American to get killed in Afghanistan was a budding IPSC and or 3 Gun shooter. So there are more now than our era.

For JG -- take my word for it -- an Infantry Battalion or Brigade in the Regular Army has absolutely no clue what the Wilson Match is -- doesn't correlate it to anything of importance if it even knew -- and doesn't have the time to find out.

A match is either competitive or it isn't. Only a bureaucrat or Communist (Liberal) can come up with a match where eveyone wins. The fact is that the All Guard shooters dominated all the tactical matches run by the Guard - while wearing all the crap that guys wear these days.

So, wearing all the body armor, 'hemmets', magazines, and inert grenades -- with all the running and jumping etc., does not correlate with sound and accurate decisions and shots while under "stress".

Fascinating but not unexpected from my perspective at all. The best marksmen aren't distracted by gear, physical exertion, or the Army's definition of stress.

Gene

Gene,

I've looked into IDPA, IPSC and three gun, but haven't really been bitten by the bug. Of all the various Army matches discussed both in this thread and previously, which would you recommend as worthwhile for a guy to go out of pocket to travel to on his own?

I do my dry fire drills and take a couple of classes each year, but wouldn't describe myself as very accomplished, just enthusiastic.

Thank you.

JATX:

If you are in the service -- Regular, Guard, Reserve -- talk with Garcia about the Wilson Matches. They have a wide variety of venues and the Guard can run a match very efficiently and without bias.

If you are a civilian -- contact me via private e-mail and maybe we can find something you may enjoy.

One thing for sure is this -- there is only so much blasting a guy can do at a garbage dump, local range, or rock quarry before he wants something more formal to assess his personal performance. Guys who want to know how good they are are at a level higher than guys who go out and blast away at things with no purpose or goals.

Gene

Gene,

I'm not too far away from you. What do you do for competition shooting? I'm planning to come out to one of my local IDPA matches here, but the whole "race gun" thing never really appealed to me.

I think for many people, such as myself, that explains they way it should be.

For those who are on the sharp end of the spear, I would think and hope, they have the adequate training they need to do their job.


There fore, it is for S & G that the rest of us compete.

We at home are enabled to enjoy life and should do so, because we have very fine people keep harm away from us.

Best to all.

H.


(who is not a very good shooter)

Rich:

I bet your IDPA match is at TRR. Have been a member there for 15 years.

I shoot High Power. I may get into the action shooting stuff sometime but for now High Power is what I like doing.

I hear TS about the tactics side of competitive shooting. There isn't any. That said, anyone who is engrossed with a shooting sport will be getting better training than anything at the unit level. Why? Self motivation, consistency in terms of practice, and the stress of competitive events.

Gene

Understood, TS

You sum it up better than I could.

The horse is probably already beaten to death. FWIW and at the risk of coming across as captain obvious, I'd like to share a perspective I told myself and those I had the privilege coaching: The inventor of the cartridge and the rifle had a different thing in mind than one who invented the bat and the ball . Fundamentally different purpose. By keeping this in mind, we're able to draw the line and never stray too far towards the "sports" mindset, while still remaining competitive and giving our best. This is why I pursued high power (service rifle) and not international rifle. A 5k+ rifle meant to be used at 10m range, indoor, all quiet, with 1k+ jackets, pants, shoes etc. are way too far from the original intention. Not demeaning the shooters. The worldclass level of perfection is insane, and I don't think I can do what they do. I'm merely making a humble observation of the nature of the game.

Responding to the original poster, draw that line for yourself considering the purpose, wallet size, time, and level of commitment. Then choose whichever discipline that suits those criteria the most. It's always neat to know/imitate what the QP does, but it's a standard for a different world. I dream of/vizualize/prepare for life serving as a QP, so that makes me a wannabe and at the end of the day, I must admit time & money are better spent on PT than shooting :D