Claiming "combat accuracy" is an excuse.

[jrbfishn]

Do things only as fast as you can do them right.
Shoot only as fast as you can do it accurately.
One accurate shot is better than ten misses.

From an idjit coffeeholic

 

[Jon Payne]

The sad truth is shooting is easy. Understanding and applying the rules of marksmanship fundamentals is not a secret nor is it magic. Anyone can be a competent marksman. Of course that's only a part of the equation isn't it?

Punching holes in paper is more gratifying than practicing pro-active and re-active gun handling skills. It's less physically taxing than displacement footwork while accessing your weapon or setting up transitions to your secondary weapon. It's more fun than sprints and lifting heavy stuff.

My truth is I need a balance of all these things from fundamentals to lifting heavy stuff to make the most of my training. I do train because I find it fun and entertaining, but I also train because I have a life worth protecting.

 

[Charlie]

The sad truth is shooting is easy. Understanding and applying the rules of marksmanship fundamentals is not a secret nor is it magic. Anyone can be a competent marksman. Of course that's only a part of the equation isn't it?

Punching holes in paper is more gratifying than practicing pro-active and re-active gun handling skills. It's less physically taxing than displacement footwork while accessing your weapon or setting up transitions to your secondary weapon. It's more fun than sprints and lifting heavy stuff.

My truth is I need a balance of all these things from fundamentals to lifting heavy stuff to make the most of my training. I do train because I find it fun and entertaining, but I also train because I have a life worth protecting.

Sounds reasonable to me!

 

[StevenC.]

I've been shooting 1" dots for decades because building accuracy is the basis for building speed.

Preaching to the choir here perhaps, but shooting a little dot forces you to concentrate on accuracy and it becomes easier over time - as you progress, you get faster at obtaining the same result and muscle memory starts to take over to the point where you're fast enough that you barely even need to consciously see your sights.

This.

FUCKING THIS!

Oops, sorry.

 

[SIG_Fiend]

The easiest way I can think of to visualize all of this, is basically using a radar chart. Take any number of variables, such as speed, accuracy, target discrimination, etc. and use them as points on the radar chart. Basically all of the aspects that make for a great, well-rounded shooter. Some people will focus heavily in certain areas, sometimes to the detriment of other areas. They might also simply be well-rounded in most areas, and excel in one or two areas in particular. The general idea is to try to push your limits in EACH of those areas, and you will ultimately end up becoming a much more well-rounded shooter, with a greater degree of performance and decision making skills across the board. I want to reiterate, it's important to push one's self as far as you can go in EACH of those directions. Work accuracy, and work it to the extreme, whether that constitutes really small shot groups at close range, accuracy at extreme distance, or whatever else it takes to get there. Work speed to the extreme, pushing past your comfort zone, until you've achieved higher speeds, and your "comfort zone" is much faster than it was before. Work target discrimination drills, really pushing your ability to see fast and make decisions on the fly. Where people usually fail is in doing alright in certain areas, such as having decent fundamentals, and maybe decent accuracy...but being god awful slow, and making excuses for it, as opposed to pushing themselves out of their comfort zone.

If you're not used to seeing a radar chart, here's an example:

 

[Andy]

^^^ I like that a lot.

I guess human nature is to do what we're good at. We don't like failing, so we like to stay away from the things we suck at (and try to justify such behavior to ourselves) - which makes our own personal "radar chart" skewed instead of well-rounded.

I like the saying I read somewhere that "An amateur does it till he gets it right - a pro does it till he can't get it wrong". Quite a difference in commitment there...

 

[breakingcontact]

^^^ I like that a lot.

I guess human nature is to do what we're good at. We don't like failing, so we like to stay away from the things we suck at (and try to justify such behavior to ourselves) - which makes our own personal "radar chart" skewed instead of well-rounded.

I like the saying I read somewhere that "An amateur does it till he gets it right - a pro does it till he can't get it wrong". Quite a difference in commitment there...

Exactly and that is why we need to be honest with ourselves about our abilities, limitations and need for growth.

I shoot in too close, too much. Ive recently backed out to 7-10 yards more instead of shooting within my comfort zone of 5 yards where my less than perfect fundamentals show less.

Thats where IDPA has helped me a lot. Its forced me to do things I otherwise wouldn't have thought to do or chosen not to do such as:

-shoot at 15 yards and more
-shoot weak hand only
-shoot for accuracy sometimes and speed others (target obscured by a hostage at 15 yards vs 2 targets in the open at 3 yards)
-shooting while seated
-shooting from my knees
-reloading with one hand
-and many more

 

[breakingcontact]

Saved that chart Travis I like that!

 

[StevenC.]

At practice last night I was shooting at 6 different 3" circles at 7 yards.

I know from teaching hundreds of persons new to handguns that proper execution of fundamentals will allow anyone to hold a 3"-4" group at that distance.

I was able to hit those 3" circles with splits (transitions actually) in the .50 - .60 second range. While I practice a lot, it is certain than any fat-body with poor eyes can learn to shoot 3" targets at 7 yards in .60 seconds. When I shot a single target the splits were generally faster but I never consistently dropped below .45 seconds without dropping too many shots outside the circle.

When I hung up a USPSA metric target at 7 yards. I was able to hammer out 8 round strings, all A zone hits in 2.4 - 2.7 seconds from the holster. Draws in the 1.0X-1.1x sec range and splits in the .18-.20. I believe it is the ability to hold 1"-2" groups at 7 yards slow fire that enables me to hold 3" targets at 7 yards at almost .5 second splits and enables me to hold the A zone at .20 splits and faster.

Those critical of my points in the video seem to miss my points, which I must accept responsibility for if they are not being intentionally obtuse.

If you don't have accuracy, you don't have accuracy.
It doesn't magically appear when you need it. In fact it tends to hide and be harder to manifest under stress.
It requires skill to deliver an effective shot under stress.
So, learn to shoot well. Really well.
Be able to produce tight groups on demand.
Learn to keep that accuracy at quicker cadences.
Do this and accuracy at speed becomes easy.

I think Andy gave us a brilliant and simple observation:

"I've been shooting 1" dots for decades because building accuracy is the basis for building speed.

Preaching to the choir here perhaps, but shooting a little dot forces you to concentrate on accuracy and it becomes easier over time - as you progress, you get faster at obtaining the same result and muscle memory starts to take over to the point where you're fast enough that you barely even need to consciously see your sights."

I suspect people don't want to shoot small groups... cuz it's hard. It requires discipline. It requires practice.
It's easier to stand close to the target and slam the trigger about an call the no-skill grouping that produces something positive (combat accuracy).



Great shooting skill, is no survival ill

 

[breakingcontact]

Well said, but you weren't grappling with someone fighting for your life bro!

Combat acuuuuuuurrrrrrracy!!!!!!!!!

3" at 7 yards eh at 1/2 second splits...ill try to shoot to that standard and see how I do. I "think" ill be OK.

 

[Younggun]

At practice last night I was shooting at 6 different 3" circles at 7 yards.
er to manifest under stress.
It requires skill to deliver an effective shot under stress.
So, learn to shoot well. Really well.
Be able to produce tight groups on demand.
Learn to keep that accuracy at quicker cadences.
Do this and accuracy at speed becomes easy.

SNIP

It's easier to stand close to the target and slam the trigger about an call the no-skill grouping that produces something positive (combat accuracy).



Great shooting skill, is no survival ill

I was (somewhat) critical of your video. And not to rehash the discussion, but I can give some insight as to why which wasn't as clear at the time.

In your video you concentrated on accuracy, which is good. But you made no mention of speed as a goal (that I remember).

I think this can lead to the same "ok, I'm good" mentality for someone that can slow fire a few shots, take a break, slow fire a few more, then say "sweet, 2" group. I'm good to go" while never learning to control recoil.

I get a clearer view of you idea in the above post than what I saw in the video and agree. From there it's just the semantics of "combat accuracy" which isn't worth debating at this point.

 

[coachrick]

If you're not used to seeing a radar chart, here's an example:

I've had a headache all day since seeing your post this morning!

 

[SIG_Fiend]

I suspect people don't want to shoot small groups... cuz it's hard. It requires discipline. It requires practice.

That EXACTLY. What they fail to understand is, to truly become a better shooter, it is exactly THAT, that they need to do. You need to do all of the things you don't want to do, do them with discipline, and do them repeatedly while pushing one's self until you eventually reach the desired goal of subconscious competence. The funny thing is, when people make that excuse, it demonstrates that even in the other areas they do enjoy, they still likely do not have the discipline to achieve a high degree of subconscious competence in those areas they do like, and more likely just become subconsciously incompetent or subconsciously competent at a much lower degree of performance.

The best way I've found to address this issue, is to really focus on becoming predatory against self-deficiencies, and really adopting an attitude of wanting to attack and destroy any perceived deficiencies in one's ability. Basically, to the point where you actually enjoy making yourself fail. To the point where you actively seek to do so, and when it happens, you relish that failure for the learning opportunities it contains. I think coming to enjoy failure from that standpoint can play a major part in reorienting a person's mindset to achieve significantly greater things. Pretty much, you should want to eat your ego for breakfast.

As far as the radar chart goes, that was simply an example. The points I included were just an example. There may be and probably are other factors worth listing on there, so don't take what I listed as an absolute, it was simply an example.

 

[StevenC.]

I was (somewhat) critical of your video. And not to rehash the discussion, but I can give some insight as to why which wasn't as clear at the time.

In your video you concentrated on accuracy, which is good. But you made no mention of speed as a goal (that I remember).

I think this can lead to the same "ok, I'm good" mentality for someone that can slow fire a few shots, take a break, slow fire a few more, then say "sweet, 2" group. I'm good to go" while never learning to control recoil.

I get a clearer view of you idea in the above post than what I saw in the video and agree. From there it's just the semantics of "combat accuracy" which isn't worth debating at this point.

Thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to point out the deficiency in the video. While I knew there would be trolls who just post stupid stuff to troll, and acolytes who would refuse to question their faith. It was clear that there was some misunderstanding as to my point. That misunderstanding (my failure to be clear) needed clarification.

I did not mention speed initially because I didn't consider it a part of the equation. Learn to be accurate first. Be able to shoot a very tight group at further distances than "typical" self-defense distance. Have that mastery of fundamentals so they can be drawn upon and stave off the gross inaccuracy stress can effect.

I agree that combat accuracy is a term open for semantic debate. So, I choose the definitions most often found on the internet or demonstrated in videos.

Were one to say, "But, your argument doesn't hold when the definition of Combat Accuracy is... instead." I suspect all I could say is, "Under than definition you are right."

However, I invite you to share your thoughts on what combat accuracy is and how it differs from what I found on the net.

 

[StevenC.]

I love the radar chart, is there a web-page/free program with which to create them?

 

[Younggun]

Thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to point out the deficiency in the video. While I knew there would be trolls who just post stupid stuff to troll, and acolytes who would refuse to question their faith. It was clear that there was some misunderstanding as to my point. That misunderstanding (my failure to be clear) needed clarification.

I did not mention speed initially because I didn't consider it a part of the equation. Learn to be accurate first. Be able to shoot a very tight group at further distances than "typical" self-defense distance. Have that mastery of fundamentals so they can be drawn upon and stave off the gross inaccuracy stress can effect.

I agree that combat accuracy is a term open for semantic debate. So, I choose the definitions most often found on the internet or demonstrated in videos.

Were one to say, "But, your argument doesn't hold when the definition of Combat Accuracy is... instead." I suspect all I could say is, "Under than definition you are right."

However, I invite you to share your thoughts on what combat accuracy is and how it differs from what I found on the net.

OK then


IMHO, "combat accuracy" is simply having an acceptable "margin of error" when balancing speed and precision. It is a set level of precision that must be maintained regardless of distance which sets the "speed limit" of the shots. As you improve, the maximum speed can be increases while still maintaining "combat accuracy".

I don't think it matters too much if that level is set at 6" or 8". Both would put rounds in a chest cavity. The important thing is knowing your speed limit while keeping those rounds from missing the target. So, at 5 yards this could mean shooting as fast as the trigger can be pulled for many people. At 25 yards, the limit would be just below the speed at which rounds can no longer be kept in that 6" or 8" circle.

It's simply the amount of precision that can sacrificed in order to increase speed while still remaining effective.


That's my overly complicated definition anyways.

 

[breakingcontact]

Its a bag of tools. We need all the tools.

Improved combat accuracy is a good thing.

A lot of folks aren't interested in improving.

Got to decide what is good enough for you. It is odd that those who advocate "combat accuracy as 8" at combat distances" also talk about the "real world" and force on force training a lot. They do this why decrying the fudd target shooter on the square range.

They aren't being honest with themselves because if they were they'd realize the need for much greater accuracy due to the shooter and shootee both moving and probably shooting from and presenting weird angles.

I dont think the argument is about if combat accuracy exists but that in the colloquial definition, it isnt a very good standard to which to hold.

I received some comments about how I was a good shooter for ringing that steel silhouette quickly at a decent range. I wasnt shooting that fast and that was a big target, neither of us were moving. It was fun and the video looked cool but those who shoot a lot know that wasnt hard because neither me nor the target were moving, the target was relatively large and I wasnt shooting that fast.

Im planning on shooting again this weekend. Ill try to shoot that steel real fast or while moving...the wheels will come off, if I had better fundamentals and better accuracy I could still do it at speed or with movement.

I dont think im a whole lot better than many in the "combat accuracy over everything crowd" but I know where im at, what my limitations are and want to and am improving.

 

[Younggun]

Well, I guess we could try to use the military to get out answer.

From what I've found, by deviding the number of rounds fired by the number of insurgents killed we get about 250,000 rounds per kill. But some of that ammo was for training. Lets be nice and say 90%, sounds reasonable to me anyways.

So, military combat accuracy is somewhere in the neighborhood of 25,000 rounds per kill.



(I have no idea how accurate that is. Just pulled some numbers from the web and made some shit up)

 

[peeps]

Well, I guess we could try to use the military to get out answer.

From what I've found, by deviding the number of rounds fired by the number of insurgents killed we get about 250,000 rounds per kill. But some of that ammo was for training. Lets be nice and say 90%, sounds reasonable to me anyways.

So, military combat accuracy is somewhere in the neighborhood of 25,000 rounds per kill.



(I have no idea how accurate that is. Just pulled some numbers from the web and made some shit up)

That's an interesting way to describe combat accuracy. Rounds/kill or in the law enforcement (& self-defense) world, rounds/stopping the threat.

I was reading an article the other day talking about the accuracy of NYPD in shootings. Somewhere along the lines of hitting only 19% overall or smpn. 0-2 yards was about 65%. I had no idea, same article, that they require a 12lb trigger pull on NYPD glock duty weapons. 12lbs!!

I'd say NYPD combat accuracy could use some work!

 

[Jon Payne]

"Got to decide what is good enough for you. It is odd that those who advocate "combat accuracy as 8" at combat distances" also talk about the "real world" and force on force training a lot. They do this why decrying the fudd target shooter on the square range."

Can you cite a source for this? I talk about force on force allot from the citizen's perspective and leo's perspective (I instruct both in FOF). I've never called 8" acceptable and don't recall reading about anyone else who has either. I haven't called anyone a fudd target shooter nor have I read anyone else that advocates FOF calling target shooters fudds. I realize you probably weren't directing this at me. Have you attended FOF? If so, can you discount its relevance? If not same question?


The two most dangerous places in today's world:
1.) a gun free zone
2.) your comfort zone