Some will choose to ignore these articles. That is their right. What they can't do is refute them with evidence.
http://firearmusernetwork.com/2013/07/20/shooting-skill-snipers-vs-competition-shooters/
http://firearmusernetwork.com/2013/08/01/shooting-is-shooting/#more-2755
In my life I have known at least three individuals who applied the lessons learned in competitive shooting to become feared on the Battlefield. Two are Marines and one Army. Two are distinguished and one is on his way to being so. One is known throughout the Shooting community, another is known to some of you, and the third is a very private man who continues to enjoy competitive shooting 40 years after crawling through the jungles of vietnam.
All three have impressed upon me the value of competition to developing effective Marksmanship.
Thanks, Mike. Very interesting articles. The naysayer quoted in the second article seems to be saying, "Since training goes out the window in reality, don't bother to train." The way I learned it is, "Under the stress of reality, your skills will decay to the most solid level of your training." This highlights the need for the highest possible level of solid training. It's in line with another truism: "Most people practice until they do it right. The greats practice until they can't do it wrong."
Great articles. We used to have a couple young guys that came to the clay matches at the BC. They spent a lot of time shooting clays, the others there were primarily Appleseeders, and the competition is pretty heated. They didn't do so well. After the qualifying heats the championship round was always made up of Riflemen. When one of the guys asked me why that was I suggested it was because they had received good training in fundamental concepts that ran the board across all marksmanship skillsets, be they pistol or shotgun or rifle or archery. The kid informed me that he thought he was already good enough with his shotgun and his bow. I suggested that the reason he had asked me why the winners routinely won was because he understood he wasn't good enough yet.
These articles reminded me of this weekend. Had two guys who were prior service on the line (and a third serving as an IIT) who kinda had their minds blown a little bit by the Appleseed experience. Both had been Army, 11 Bravo, and one had worn a Ranger tab. They were both irked to some extent that they had spent so much time in the service in the role of infantrymen but had never been exposed to this style of shooting. One made this comment, "It p----- me off because I can feel myself getting better with the trigger now than I have ever been. Where was this before?" The IIT was a Marine and talked about how, after a month at Pendleton, there was a critical element that he never understood that he grasped because of the way one of the instructors said something at an Appleseed. he recognized that, in the Corps, he was told to do something and he did it. It is not necessarily the pedagogical method in the services to encourage the question, "Why?" as a element to further understanding.
I think one of the reasons people separate the concept of marksmanship performance and combat is because they are trained stylistically to perform a task. They operate under the assumption that their teachers are trained professionals, provided by the government often times, and therefor their class carries dogmatic weight and is beyond contestation. It is my hope that programs like Appleseed can help alleviate that mindset, encourage people to ask why and try to engage the fundamentals on a greater philosophical level.
Wild Deuce, the IIT/Marine in question, is no longer allowed to be the "winner" at his range's rifle matches because, after Appleseed, he won them every time. the other members of his range, instead of trying to get better to beat him, just decided that they wouldn't let him be the "winner". Participation trophies all around!
I was taught in Okinawan Karate as a young fellow that muscle memory is EVERYTHING in a time of crisis. Same goes for what I learnt in overhead diving classes. Three is two, two is one, one is none - back ups are required. We were taught to streamline our gear and use only the bare minimum, in order to avoid confusion. When your eyes are big as saucers, you will revert only to what u know instinctively.
So many of the competitive shooters I know are unaware that the NRA HP course of fire was taken from the AQT and was, once upon a time, intended to prepare u for service in times of crisis. I cringed when they removed the transitions. There was, and always will be, a reason for it.
This is not about violence. It is about tradition - skill at arms. A nation of Rifleman will always be free. Handed down from long ago by people who knew exactly what is required to remain free.
IMHO and according to history, perfect practice results in superior performance, most especially in a crisis. To think that practice is a waste is a fools error.
How many times have we asked people to attend an AS event, only to assured that they were so good, they had no need of added education or practice. Ego gets in the way. Any human who brings a empty cup to the table gets to drink new wine. If u go round with a full cup at all times - u learn nothing new. :wb:
A few years ago my dojo was starting a training cycle for an upcoming tournament. The sensei pulled us all together and said that, on gameday, we were going to perform exactly to the level we trained. If we trained harder, worked harder, our performance on the shiai mat would exactly replicate that. We would not mysteriously get much better at the tournament, we would not bow in and defeat someone far above our level of ability, we would only meet the level of success we trained for. He was exactly right. Every person in our gym beat the people we worked harder/trained harder/knew more than and got whipped by the people who worked harder/trained harder/knew more than us. If practice didn't matter we would all be in the Show hitting home runs and breakin hearts.
Don't forget that the colonial militia's made time to train. They also had to walk or ride a horse to the location. They didn't hop in a car drive 15 minutes, practice for an hour, and return home. I strongly suspect they made at least an afternoon of it. They also weren't sitting on their duffs in an air conditioned office and home the rest of the week.
The militia members trained maybe one afternoon per week for several hours. All in the name of community self-defense.
SPQR, Heard many stories like that myself. Had a young man (active duty) attended a seed, didn't get his patch, came back from the sand box attended another and shot one rifleman score after another. When being presented with his patch he asked if he could speak, not knowing what he was going to say, sure.... He proceeded to give his resume, prior service Marine, qualed expert..Got out and the Army made him an offer, qualed expert..On a NATO trip qualed expert with the German Army... "And Appleseed is the BEST marksmanship training he had ever received!" Having spent 15 years or so teaching in one form or another, designated "Master Training Specialist", I've always said about Appleseed, it's not so much what we teach, it's how we teach it that makes the difference....O.L.
Speaking of training philosophy and methods. Has anyone from AS ever set down and come up with a structured, set training course that we could use ourselves and give to shooters attending their first AS in order to prepare them for another AS? Most of the instructors I've had have encouraged us to train in positions, transitions(for those who can, I can't with my back), dry fire, and range time. But these are just general suggestions and nothing that is organized.
I would just like to have a structured and specific program that covers SHFs, six steps, NPOA, etc. I think a program that would last about 2-3 months would be good. If someone has already done this I haven't found it.
I don't want to waste my range time or my ammo with trigger time that doesn't improve my marksmanship in ways that will help me make rifleman. I want my shooting to accomplish something, not just leave brass on the ground.
There are two separate skillsets that are being discussed: marksmanship, and the combative application of it. They are not the same, and it is a mistake to think that they are.
For those of you who spent some time in the dojo, think of the difference between kata and kumite. There are many kareteka who perform lovey, balance kata, but fall apart when the time comes to apply it. They might understand the basics very well, but have never learned the proper mental and physical skillsets to apply it spontaneously.
OTOH, there are a great number of karetka who spar with speed and power, but really apply very little technique at all. It's hard to tell from watching them whether they are applying karate, kung fu, or street fighting. This is because they cannot effectively employ the techniques taught in kata. Why? Because they have not practiced them properly. The only way to really gain skill in application is to master the techniques.
So while I know that there is more to combative effectiveness than mere marksmanship, without the marksmanship, there can be no combative effectiveness.
Quote from: olefido on August 08, 2013, 08:34:17 PM
Speaking of training philosophy and methods. Has anyone from AS ever set down and come up with a structured, set training course that we could use ourselves and give to shooters attending their first AS in order to prepare them for another AS?
Yes. PM inbound.
We try to hand out a packet with Fred's stuff (Guide to becoming a rifleman; Common firing line errors) that comes in a shoot box, with AR girl on the front.
Sometimes we forget. And then mail it after the event.
There's some really good stuff in there.
Quote from: olefido on August 08, 2013, 08:34:17 PM
Speaking of training philosophy and methods. Has anyone from AS ever set down and come up with a structured, set training course that we could use ourselves and give to shooters attending their first AS in order to prepare them for another AS? Most of the instructors I've had have encouraged us to train in positions, transitions(for those who can, I can't with my back), dry fire, and range time. But these are just general suggestions and nothing that is organized.
Quote from: olefido on August 08, 2013, 08:34:17 PM
Speaking of training philosophy and methods. Has anyone from AS ever set down and come up with a structured, set training course that we could use ourselves and give to shooters attending their first AS in order to prepare them for another AS? Most of the instructors I've had have encouraged us to train in positions, transitions(for those who can, I can't with my back), dry fire, and range time. But these are just general suggestions and nothing that is organized.
It can be found somewhere on the site but here is a copy....O.L.
Quote from: malabar on August 08, 2013, 10:04:12 PM
There are two separate skillsets that are being discussed: marksmanship, and the combative application of it. They are not the same, and it is a mistake to think that they are.
...
So while I know that there is more to combative effectiveness than mere marksmanship, without the marksmanship, there can be no combative effectiveness.
It is true that they are not the same, but many people believe that the thing that made the difference at the North Bridge and along the road back to Boston was marksmanship. It was certainly not marksmanship in a vacuum, but few would argue that in militarily the British under Smith and Percy were better conventional soldiers. But they were faced by an unconventional enemy that valued marksmanship.
The same was true for the rifle companies that came north from Virginia and Pennsylvania to answer the call of Boston. They valued marksmanship. Sadly the war contains examples of both their effective use (Saratoga, Cowpens, Guildford, Kings Mountain) and their ineffective use.
I am looking at a poster right now that says...
THE NAKED TRUTH!
THERE HAS NEVER BEEN AN ENEMY
SOLDIER KILLED WITH:A Basketball
A Volleyball
A Bowling Ball
A Tennis Ball
A Boxing Glove
A Baseball
A Football
A Golfball
THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE TASK
OF AN ACCOMPLISHED
MARKSMAN!!!Marksmanship is an American skill. We have seen it's value repeated from the Revolution, to WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Quote from: oladcock on August 08, 2013, 10:26:25 PM
Quote from: olefido on August 08, 2013, 08:34:17 PM
Speaking of training philosophy and methods. Has anyone from AS ever set down and come up with a structured, set training course that we could use ourselves and give to shooters attending their first AS in order to prepare them for another AS? Most of the instructors I've had have encouraged us to train in positions, transitions(for those who can, I can't with my back), dry fire, and range time. But these are just general suggestions and nothing that is organized.
It can be found somewhere on the site but here is a copy....O.L.
Thanks very much for posting this, I hadn't seen it before. Very handy. However, there is one huge error in the guide. The effect of humidity. I know that the humidity correction information in the guide came from the Army manual but it is 100% incorrect. Humid air is actually slightly less dense than dry air (rain is another matter!). The real effect of humidity on the trajectory of a bullet is miniscule and should not be corrected for at rifleman distances. Correcting 1MOA up for every 20% increase in relative humidity as suggested in the guide would be a big mistake, as not only would the correction be in the wrong direction but the amount of correction for humidity would be off by at least an order of magnitude!
Being relatively new here, I guess I should explain further. I'm an engineer that has looked into this issue before as this misconception came up a couple of years ago on a golfing forum that I'm active in. I did the calculations. The molecular mass of water vapor is actually lower than of dry air (roughly 30% lower if memory serves me correctly).
Here's an online air density calculator I found if anyone is interested in verifying what I've stated:
http://www.baranidesign.com/air-density/air-density.htm
Quote from: Areg on August 09, 2013, 12:56:19 AM
Thanks very much for posting this, I hadn't seen it before. Very handy. However, there is one huge error in the guide. The effect of humidity. I know that the humidity correction information in the guide came from the Army manual but it is 100% incorrect. Humid air is actually slightly less dense than dry air (rain is another matter!). The real effect of humidity on the trajectory of a bullet is miniscule and should not be corrected for at rifleman distances. Correcting 1MOA up for every 20% increase in relative humidity as suggested in the guide would be a big mistake, as not only would the correction be in the wrong direction but the amount of correction for humidity would be off by at least an order of magnitude!
Being relatively new here, I guess I should explain further. I'm an engineer that has looked into this issue before as this misconception came up a couple of years ago on a golfing forum that I'm active in. I did the calculations. The molecular mass of water vapor is actually lower than of dry air (roughly 30% lower if memory serves me correctly).
Here's an online air density calculator I found if anyone is interested in verifying what I've stated:
http://www.baranidesign.com/air-density/air-density.htm
I don't know that I've ever read the thing completely through but you are correct, humid air is less dense, has the same effect as more altitude. If that's in there it needs to be fixed...O.L.
Olad,
It's in there. We were teaching this back in 2007 or 2008 (I think). But I remember it as we were teaching that 20% humidity meant less dense and this meant using a lower poa. We changed the training doctrine in 2010 to eliminate the humidity factor (as had the Army, Marines and AMU).
I had never seen this presentation. There used to be a series of blog posts on becoming a rifleman that I read that had the same info minus the photos/drawings.
Mike
edited to make sense, since I posted while busy this morning.
Quote from: Areg on August 09, 2013, 12:56:19 AM
Quote from: oladcock on August 08, 2013, 10:26:25 PM
Quote from: olefido on August 08, 2013, 08:34:17 PM
Speaking of training philosophy and methods. Has anyone from AS ever set down and come up with a structured, set training course that we could use ourselves and give to shooters attending their first AS in order to prepare them for another AS? Most of the instructors I've had have encouraged us to train in positions, transitions(for those who can, I can't with my back), dry fire, and range time. But these are just general suggestions and nothing that is organized.
It can be found somewhere on the site but here is a copy....O.L.
Thanks very much for posting this, I hadn't seen it before. Very handy. However, there is one huge error in the guide. The effect of humidity. I know that the humidity correction information in the guide came from the Army manual but it is 100% incorrect. Humid air is actually slightly less dense than dry air (rain is another matter!). The real effect of humidity on the trajectory of a bullet is miniscule and should not be corrected for at rifleman distances. Correcting 1MOA up for every 20% increase in relative humidity as suggested in the guide would be a big mistake, as not only would the correction be in the wrong direction but the amount of correction for humidity would be off by at least an order of magnitude!
Being relatively new here, I guess I should explain further. I'm an engineer that has looked into this issue before as this misconception came up a couple of years ago on a golfing forum that I'm active in. I did the calculations. The molecular mass of water vapor is actually lower than of dry air (roughly 30% lower if memory serves me correctly).
Here's an online air density calculator I found if anyone is interested in verifying what I've stated:
http://www.baranidesign.com/air-density/air-density.htm
Thank you for correcting the misconception I had regarding air density.
I have noticed the similarities between golf and marksmanship. What I've concluded is that with marksmanship, unlike golf its possible to consistently get better !
As a marine who never scored above marksman. I must credit Appleseed with teaching me the skills to obtain the coveted status of Rifleman, with the same self loading 308 .
The idea of war never being won with the balls and others of such nature is a valid concept. Wonder if there is a promotional opportunity there?
Or as Jefferson said " a strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind.
Games played with the BALL and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind .
Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion of your walks. "
Good advice then and now .
Gentlemen-- thanks for posting this discussion. Very interesting. R, Navy Irish