Do you consider matches to be training?
It's all a learning experience right?
Just seems that more people will join matches for the cheaper prices and lower round counts.
Not the same as a training class...but is it training?
Your thoughts?
Some excellent gunfighters are also excellent competitors but its easy to lose focus in competition and shot a stage in a less than tactically correct fashion. So I would say the answer to the question is usually not.
IMHO.. if you look at the Cooper Combat Triad of mindset/tactics, gunhandling and marksmanship, competition only addresses the last 2 areas - gunhandling and marksmanship. And it does it extremely well.
For mindset/tactics, I seek professional training.
Hell yes it's training. Is practice training? Is training training? It's all the same, only different.
If your question is based on comparing matches to "real life" training, no.
If you mean it as "trigger time is trigger time" then yes.
Clear as mud.
No, I do not consider matches to be training. A knowledgeable (professional) instructor is not watching your performance and making suggestions/corrections on how you can improve. You are not learning anything new (training).
I do consider matches to be excellent opportunities for practice. Practice does not make perfect (as the old saying erroneously states), it only increases the likelihood of your doing what you have been practicing. If you repeatedly practice crap, it will still be crap no matter how many times you do it.
YMMV
Originally Posted By TMA:
No, I do not consider matches to be training. A knowledgeable (professional) instructor is not watching your performance and making suggestions/corrections on how you can improve. You are not learning anything new (training).
I do consider matches to be excellent opportunities for practice. Practice does not make perfect (as the old saying erroneously states), it only increases the likelihood of your doing what you have been practicing. If you repeatedly practice crap, it will still be crap no matter how many times you do it.
YMMV
Which only assumes that the shooter is doing it "wrong." Not to minimize the importance of good instruction, you don't need Larry Vickers looking over your shoulder to become a better shooter. Any resonable person should be able to separate the "game" and "reality." They should also be able to learn from mistakes, and sort out techniques while competing. Is competition the only, best training? No, but I say it is what you take away from it.
Originally Posted By rock71:
Hell yes it's training. Is practice training? Is training training? It's all the same, only different.
Range quals are NOT training, IMO.
Originally Posted By rock71:
Any resonable person should be able to separate the "game" and "reality."
Yet we repeatedly find police officers and soldiers defaulting to the routine of the qualification course during actual shootings.
You cheat cover during IPSC and IDPA often enough and you will do it in a gunfight. Shoot each target twice and only twice then move on during an IPSC or IDPA match and you will do the same in a gunfight.
Even when I tell students to shoot each target as many times as they want, most of them will default to two to the chest or two to the chest and one to the head. Even though our last handgun shooting took 4 rounds of .40SW before he stopped, yet still survived and our last long gun shooting took 4 rounds of 00Buck before he stopped. Yet everyone wants to double-tap each target and drive on because they have been conditioned to by qualification courses and games to do so.
Originally Posted By rock71:
Originally Posted By TMA:
No, I do not consider matches to be training. A knowledgeable (professional) instructor is not watching your performance and making suggestions/corrections on how you can improve. You are not learning anything new (training).
I do consider matches to be excellent opportunities for practice. Practice does not make perfect (as the old saying erroneously states), it only increases the likelihood of your doing what you have been practicing. If you repeatedly practice crap, it will still be crap no matter how many times you do it.
YMMV
Which only assumes that the shooter is doing it "wrong." Not to minimize the importance of good instruction, you don't need Larry Vickers looking over your shoulder to become a better shooter. Any resonable person should be able to separate the "game" and "reality." They should also be able to learn from mistakes, and sort out techniques while competing. Is competition the only, best training? No, but I say it is what you take away from it.
Our differing experiences/backgrounds have obviously lead us to different conclusions concerning the value of competition as a training tool.
My definition of training is to “learn the proper way to do something”, almost always requiring the watchful eye of someone more experienced (in the technique) who will point out mistakes/errors as they occur.
My definition of practice is to “repeat a known technique numerous times until it is ingrained into muscle memory” and can be performed automatically.
I think competition is a good way to work on ingraining a know technique into muscle memory, but I have never considered it training. It has been my experience that in the heat of the moment very few people realize just how badly they do things (unless a third (trusted) party points it out to them). And I am talking about small things like trigger finger discipline, pointing the handgun at the weak hand during the draw, improper grip on the handgun during the draw (and afterwards), improper draw stroke (bowling or fly casting), etc. Not the major body movements that all of the spectators can see from behind the firing line.
I have shot numerous IDPA matches and I saw precious little training occurring. The shooters had to be pretty dialed in to even be able to tell the difference between the rare good constructive comment and the normal competition harassment that goes on. My guess (experience) is that 9 out of 10 comments made to a shooter during the IDPA matches I participated in were at best straight up harassment and at worst counter productive to improved performance.
If the knowledgeable competitors where you shoot actually try to help the less experienced shooters and those shooters can set their egos aside long enough to incorporate the changes into their repertoire, that is great. I have never seen it happen.
YMMV
Originally Posted By AR15fan:
Originally Posted By rock71:
Any resonable person should be able to separate the "game" and "reality."ng
Yet we repeatedly find police officers and soldiers defaulting to the routine of the qualification course during actual shootings.
You cheat cover during IPSC and IDPA often enough and you will do it in a gunfight. Shoot each target twice and only twice then move on during an IPSC or IDPA match and you will do the same in a gunfight.
Even when I tell students to shoot each target as many times as they want, most of them will default to two to the chest or two to the chest and one to the head. Even though our last handgun shooting took 4 rounds of .40SW before he stopped, yet still survived and our last long gun shooting took 4 rounds of 00Buck before he stopped. Yet everyone wants to double-tap each target and drive on because athey have been conditioned to by qualification courses and games to do so.
There is nothing to prevent you from practicing and executing the same tactics you would use in the "real-world". Instead of blasting through that door to engage those 6 brown targets, pie your way in and creep through it like you would in real life.
You won't score well but that's why I said that competition is not intended to help you address the mindset or tactics of gunfighting. It is solely for gunhandling and marksmanship. Make the mental separation early and you'll do fine.
Originally Posted By TMA:
Originally Posted By rock71:
Originally Posted By TMA:
No, I do not consider matches to be training. A knowledgeable (professional) instructor is not watching your performance and making suggestions/corrections on how you can improve. You are not learning anything new (training).
I do consider matches to be excellent opportunities for practice. Practice does not make perfect (as the old saying erroneously states), it only increases the likelihood of your doing what you have been practicing. If you repeatedly practice crap, it will still be crap no matter how many times you do it.
YMMV
Which only assumes that the shooter is doing it "wrong." Not to minimize the importance of good instruction, you don't need Larry Vickers looking over your shoulder to become a better shooter. Any resonable person should be able to separate the "game" and "reality." They should also be able to learn from mistakes, and sort out techniques while competing. Is competition the only, best training? No, but I say it is what you take away from it.
Our differing experiences/backgrounds have obviously lead us to different conclusions concerning the value of competition as a training tool.
My definition of training is to “learn the proper way to do something”, almost always requiring the watchful eye of someone more experienced (in the technique) who will point out mistakes/errors as they occur.
My definition of practice is to “repeat a known technique numerous times until it is ingrained into muscle memory” and can be performed automatically.
I think competition is a good way to work on ingraining a know technique into muscle memory, but I have never considered it training. It has been my experience that in the heat of the moment very few people realize just how badly they do things (unless a third (trusted) party points it out to them). And I am talking about small things like trigger finger discipline, pointing the handgun at the weak hand during the draw, improper grip on the handgun during the draw (and afterwards), improper draw stroke (bowling or fly casting), etc. Not the major body movements that all of the spectators can see from behind the firing line.
I have shot numerous IDPA matches and I saw precious little training occurring. The shooters had to be pretty dialed in to even be able to tell the difference between the rare good constructive comment and the normal competition harassment that goes on. My guess (experience) is that 9 out of 10 comments made to a shooter during the IDPA matches I participated in were at best straight up harassment and at worst counter productive to improved performance.
If the knowledgeable competitors where you shoot actually try to help the less experienced shooters and those shooters can set their egos aside long enough to incorporate the changes into their repertoire, that is great. I have never seen it happen.
YMMV
Maybe we just disagree on the semantics? My definition of training is "practicing to build or maintain a skill set." I wouldn't turn a new shooter loose at a 3-gun match and say "go forth and train." On the other hand, I would suggest that a proficient shooter can keep skills fresh in competition. In any case, I agree that competition should not be a substitue for "training" but it can, and should, be a continuation of it. Is that fair enough?
Bold quoted from the NRA website.
The NRA Law Enforcement Activities Division created the Tactical Police Competition (TPC) program to encourage patrol officers to gain more experience, training and time on the range using their duty firearms. While traditional standard qualification courses of fire are very important, we believe officers need additional practice time, live fire exercises, and challenges to hone their skills and gain additional experience in handling and deploying duty firearms
It looks like they use training, competition, and practice interchangeably.
Originally Posted By rock71:
Maybe we just disagree on the semantics? My definition of training is "practicing to build or maintain a skill set." I wouldn't turn a new shooter loose at a 3-gun match and say "go forth and train." On the other hand, I would suggest that a proficient shooter can keep skills fresh in competition. In any case, I agree that competition should not be a substitue for "training" but it can, and should, be a continuation of it. Is that fair enough?
If you ignore semantics, it sounds to me like we are in 100% agreement.
Originally Posted By SuperSet72:
IMHO.. if you look at the Cooper Combat Triad of mindset/tactics, gunhandling and marksmanship, competition only addresses the last 2 areas - gunhandling and marksmanship. And it does it extremely well.
For mindset/tactics, I seek professional training.
I would have to agree with this assessment.
The marksmanship problems in a gunfight are typically not that difficult. An entry level class teaches you fundamental safety and weapon handling skills (e.g. IAD's, loading / unloading, status check, etc., etc.).
Proper mindset and tactics are learned on the training range in simulators, room clearing exercises, FoF and not to mention, most importantly, communication skills with a partner / team member (or in the case of civilians, one's spouse or S.O.).
Carlos Hathcock got started in shooting highpower matches
Originally Posted By Renn:
Carlos Hathcock got started in shooting highpower matches
Is that where he learned fieldcraft and stalking?
Originally Posted By LaRue556:
It's all a learning experience right?
Just seems that more people will join matches for the cheaper prices and lower round counts.
Not the same as a training class...but is it training?
Your thoughts?
it's training, for other matches....
Originally Posted By TonyF:
Originally Posted By Renn:
Carlos Hathcock got started in shooting highpower matches
Is that where he learned fieldcraft and stalking?
obviously not
that's where he sharpened his shooting skills - he made quite a few references in his kills to making a winning shot. In case, you haven't shot a HP match, you stand, sit, and lay in the open - be it sunny or rain - wearing a thick shooting jacket over a sweater...lying with a spotting scope on one side, a sling, and all the while lying steady to take the next shot. At the same time reading conditions to make your adjustments. And by the way, there is a time limit on each stage. Sound familiar?
but of course all that HP stuff is not as popular as it was - few know about the Wimbledon Cup without Google
Originally Posted By TonyF:
Originally Posted By Renn:
Carlos Hathcock got started in shooting highpower matches
Is that where he learned fieldcraft and stalking?
Does all training have to encompass all facets, or can it emphasize specific areas? Do snipers make a plan, deploy, stalk/hide, range, observe, report, shoot, exfiltrate, and whatever else snipers do, on every training day?
Any situation you find yourself, shooting, job, marriage, life in general, in which you gleen knowledge about your abilities and equipment would be considered training. Combat is training. That's why you have AAR's to assess what went well and what didn't. You constantly evolve to stay ahead of your enemy, to make yourself faster and more efficient. Learning never stops. It's like the shark metaphor, "if you stop swimming, you die". It works in all aspects of life...
So yes! Matches are training, if you learn from them.
101
Originally Posted By 101ABN327:
Any situation you find yourself, shooting, job, marriage, life in general, in which you gleen knowledge about your abilities and equipment would be considered training. Combat is training. That's why you have AAR's to assess what went well and what didn't. You constantly evolve to stay ahead of your enemy, to make yourself faster and more efficient. Learning never stops. It's like the shark metaphor, "if you stop swimming, you die". It works in all aspects of life...
So yes! Matches are training, if you learn from them.
101
This is my thinking as well.
Glad to hear it from you.
Originally Posted By rock71:
Hell yes it's training. Is practice training? Is training training? It's all the same, only different.
There is a big difference between training, practice, competition and qualifications. Each are very unique and while some aspects of one can be found in the other, they can't substitute for each other. The KEY difference to training, that practice and competition do not give you, is the Subject Matter Expert watching you go through pre-proscribed drills and immediately correcting your shortfallings and forcing you to redo the drill. This is to show you what you are doing wrong and get you to do it correctly to build muscle memory. You are not however going to be able to build muscle memory from training unless you are military or LEO and train every day with instructors. That is where practice and competition come in. You use what you learned in training, and repeat it over and over in practice to build muscle memory, then you put your training and muscle memory to use in competition and reinforce your training.
Again, without your instructor/subject matter expert being there and imediately correcting your mistakes and advising you the correct way to perform an action you cannot consider it training. Without training it is VERY LIKELY that you will practice and perfect your mistakes and build improper muscle memory. That improper muscle memory is harder to break than teaching you correctly in the first place.
So many of my soldiers had this missunderstanding as well...
Originally Posted By dyezak:
Originally Posted By rock71:
Hell yes it's training. Is practice training? Is training training? It's all the same, only different.
There is a big difference between training, practice, competition and qualifications. Each are very unique and while some aspects of one can be found in the other, they can't substitute for each other. The KEY difference to training, that practice and competition do not give you, is the Subject Matter Expert watching you go through pre-proscribed drills and immediately correcting your shortfallings and forcing you to redo the drill. This is to show you what you are doing wrong and get you to do it correctly to build muscle memory. You are not however going to be able to build muscle memory from training unless you are military or LEO and train every day with instructors. That is where practice and competition come in. You use what you learned in training, and repeat it over and over in practice to build muscle memory, then you put your training and muscle memory to use in competition and reinforce your training.
Again, without your instructor/subject matter expert being there and imediately correcting your mistakes and advising you the correct way to perform an action you cannot consider it training. Without training it is VERY LIKELY that you will practice and perfect your mistakes and build improper muscle memory. That improper muscle memory is harder to break than teaching you correctly in the first place.
So many of my soldiers had this missunderstanding as well...
Read my follwing post.
Amen dyezak.
Maybe I'm just a dull knife, but in ten years of action competition, I've never participated in a match where I did not learn something. I even said to my wife a while back, "I think I've seen it all by now." She replied –– accurately, I think –– "No, you haven't."
