Similarities and Differences of Civilian Competition and Combat Shooting

[Joelk 61]

I thought some of you might find this article by Craig Sawyer on "The Similarities and Differences of Civilian Competition and Combat Shooting" interesting.

 

LINK to article

[axeman_g 128]

=@

 

Good article.... I like his take and insight. Some thoughts...it was a little opinionated, but who in that field is not opinionated. Not much science, but sometimes common sense can trump science. Seem to like DA 9mm autos with ambi or no controls.... Glock... SIG... HK...???

[Tactical Monkey 51]

Can't we all just get along?

[Shane45 807]

Ive Chatted with the "Sawman" before. He is a good guy. I found him to have an interesting view on things. For those that dont recognise the name, he has been on Discovery Channel a number of times. Thanks for the link! I cant help but come away from the article feeling like he got his butt handed to him at a competition somewhere LOL. As for his 1911 comments, he might want to talk to Larry Vickers whos torture testing yeilded a different result than Sawman's suppositions. Larry found that the tight tolerances actually helped keep the 1911 running where the Glock and Berretta, IIRC failed.

[Sixtytwo327 14]

Thanks, fun article... And BTW, I'd ONLY trust advice from a gun Web site that uses human skulls as a background image.

[Krdshrk 3,877]

Oh man - This article would be perfect for that last thread.... heh

 

 

I like this guy's perspective on it. Good article.

[Maksim 1,504]

Alright, stop instigating. Grow up people. This is a gun community, not an AOL private chat room for 16 year olds.

 

Does anyone really think that gun games get you trained for combat? Anyone who thinks there is anything "practical" in shooting sports is mistaken. It is not practical to combat.

 

His quote somes it up...

 

"Someone who trains extensively for perfect conditions will absolutely become very good in those conditions. We all adapt to the stimulus we’re challenged with most often."

 

Where I disagree is with the whole notion that every USPSA/IDPA competitor is using a race gun. That just shows ignorance. Going on, where does the notion of not being able to shoot a race gun weak hand only come from? Does the race gun have a sensor in it or something that knows I am shooting weak hand only and thus shuts down?

 

If anyone really thinks that gun games get you ready to shoot in combat needs to get their head examined. Will they help you in a one on one defensive situation? Perhaps. Will they help you if you are thrown into a warzone? doubt it.

 

<flamesuit>

Where I do think USPSA/IPSC is totally the best training..... zombie invasions. They dont shoot back!.

</flamesuit>

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Where I do think USPSA/IPSC is totally the best training..... zombie invasions. They dont shoot back!.

 

 

Now who's instigating?

[Maksim 1,504]

Now who's instigating?

 

You were.

 

calling out vlad/slav/vlad.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

You were.

 

calling out vlad/slav/vlad.

 

 

Guilty

[YWHIC 18]

simple.. competitive equals no one shooting at you... combat, almost everyone is.. >>>>>>>

 

granted basic principles will allow muscle memory to develop.. (aka repetition)..

 

got a simple thing..

 

point and unloaded pistol at a room door knob..

 

turn off the lights and point your unloaded pistol at the door knob...

 

turn on the lights and see how close you are to it..

 

practice the same drawing from a holster..

 

practice in your immediate enviromental settings as they will be where you will more than likely need to use them 1st..

 

also, learn the sounds of your house at night and navigate with lights off.. learn by sound and distance (aka steps) where your doors (and knobs) are and such other objects... practice, practice, practice, = proficency..

 

 

Al

[Joelk 61]

Alright, stop instigating.

 

Maksim, If you feel this thread is instigating please feel free to lock/delete it. I just thought that in light of some of the previous discussions some people might find the article interesting, and generate some good discussion.

 

I thought that the line "many combat engagements throughout history have been at close-in distance to face-to-face proximity, resulting in hand-to-hand fighting to some degree." was possibly the most pertinent to most civilian conflict as most robberies and/or assaults occur at those distances. How many people practice weapons access from a clinch, and the like?

 

I must admit I am a but surprised at how it seems to have angered some people.

[Maksim 1,504]

Joel, it is A ok =)

 

Just because I disagree with something does not mean it is bad. I am often wrong. =)

 

The instigating was from people trying to tempt an arguement from different sides.

 

It is a good article... I just dont think it even needed to be written, as I figured it was common sense.

[raz-0 1,259]

I really can't respond to the article in detail until part two exists. Most of it is bitching about the 1911 platform arguing that you need something like a sig. Then he says his sig failed when he needed it too. The guy understands he wants a gun to be reliable and not fail, but most of his ranting seems to indicate he doesn't know what makes a gun reliable or not and where one is making compromises.

 

ETA: And yes, in the competition world, some very foolish compromises in reliability are made to get a gamey advantage. So if that is the entirety of his point there, then I guess I agree.

[tbtrout 141]

Not again another my penis is bigger than yours discussion.