Pistol Quick Kill - up on you tube

I have seen many people running--track or just for a bus.
Funny--but I never saw anyone running with their hands clasped together.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but were they shooting at the time? Seriously, no one will argue that it isn't faster to run hard with a pistol (while not shooting) if you swing one arm. Even the IPSC guys preach on that account. The question is about hit quality at speed. The guys in the IPSC videos are all about points per second. They need their hits in the A-box as fast as possible. Even if they could shoot with one hand while running faster, they wouldn't gather up the required points per second. I have seen a lot of shooters forget a target and shoot at it one handed while riding by on a fast horse, the hit quality is usually pretty poor.

They need their hits in the A-box as fast as possible. Even if they could shoot with one hand while running faster, they wouldn't gather up the required points per second.

Click to expand...

This is the crux of the issue.

The IPSC shooters are moving as fast as possible while ensuring A zone hits. It wouldn't make sense for them to move faster because the time difference between their speed walk pace and a run wouldn't equal the penalty of a C zone hit. This doesn't by default mean that nobody can shoot/ move faster via a different method. It just means that this is the proven winning speed/hit combination method in this sport.

What if they changed the rules? What if the A and C zone were combined into a "hit" zone? Might that change everything? Then a new video would get posted about how the best in the world shoot and move (differently than now).

This doesn't mean running while shooting one-handed is superior either, but it is apples/oranges to what IPSC shooters do.

I have shot and hit while actually running offline one handed and made quality hits at 4 yds and under. I can do it way faster than anything 2 handed. I also would never do it in a shooting competition, distances too far, too much penalty for a miss.



I don't have a video, but in this photo when an unknown target faced, I ran offline while drawing and firing and got 2 sternum hits at about 4 yds. My pace was faster than anyone in the IPSC video.

Please don't mis-construe this as me saying I'm better or have a better method than the world-class shooters, not even close. When I say my "pace" was faster, I mean I am running a lot faster than them. My time to draw and hit this target 2x is way slower than they would be...because they are world-class shooters. I am faster offline with acceptable hits running and shooting 1-handed than I would be fast-walking, shooting 2-handed, at this close range.

At 4 yds and under, fighting for my life, for me, I'd rather run offline and get a "C" zone type hit for the first shot. Shots #2-the end of the gunfight, get better as I close distance and/or get to cover and/or get more of an extension and a full sight picture.

For shot#1, I prioritize getting off the X, and any decent hit.

What if they changed the rules? What if the A and C zone were combined into a "hit" zone?

Click to expand...

Try this one on for size, what if the 180 degree rule was eliminated? That's what I was thinking about when I said I could come up with some one handed scenarios.

For shot#1, I prioritize getting off the X, and any decent hit.

Click to expand...

Me too.

I, one of many, am anxiously awaiting to see the videos that clearly show brownie's stated techniques done well......
.

I love the internet...... you can always find people who will argue, debate, fight over who has the best technique, best gun, best carry ammo, best chili recipe and at the end of the day 98% have never been on a 2 way range. I have a very good friend of mine that is an operator in the Air Force, combat controller. He has been “down range” as he calls it 12 times and has worked with some of the best operators in the world. When I told him that I was thinking about teaching tactical firearms training to civilians his response was pretty much spot on “everyone is always prepared until the lead flies.”

I am federal firearms instructor, tactical instructor, active shooter and so on and so on. The truth never hit me until my buddy said those words to me and they sank in, I mean really sank in. brownie if you truly think that your techniques you are teaching are the best approach to surviving a situation then so be it, in the end it is you who has to deploy the techniques you are training on. Do I agree with them……… Ya know I have this amazing chili recipe.

brownie0486 said:

For shot#1, I prioritize getting off the X, and any decent hit.

That IS how you increase your odds of staying alive...

Click to expand...

One of the big problems in brownie's videos is the poor hits. He later defines ANY hit "decent," even the lucky peripheral ones.

Strambo, I understand what you're saying about points vs time, but I'd like to see someone of "average" skill run a short stage as fast as they can where any hit on target is full value. I think you'll have misses and times slower than the Masters/Grandmasters who are going for the A zone.

I developed a shooting match where C zone or better added no time to your run. But a D zone hit added 3 seconds each. Shooters of all levels thought the scoring zone was quite large, so they went fast...too fast for many, as they hit the D zone or even missed completely. My working theory was that a hit in the C zone or better would work pretty well in a fight, while a D zone probably would not.

The fof training that many lack here is a main reason for their continued insistence that their "way" in a game is the "way" to stay alive.

Click to expand...

NO one has said that.

I've run a lot of fof training. Many are/were competitors as many here are. NOT ONE OF THEM has charged the threat two handed line of sight and survived and I didn't expect anything less.

Click to expand...

This isn't something I have mentioned, although inexplicably brownie persists in saying I did. Sometimes, it might be prudent to charge, other times more prudent to retreat and other times, laterally getting off the "X." It's not a one size fits all kind of thing as some proclaim.

I think you'll have misses and times slower than the Masters/Grandmasters who are going for the A zone.

Click to expand...

Whoa!!!! Of course, it is never appropriate to compare what an average shooter can do vs. what a GM can do no matter the technique. I can hit faster at 4yds and under at a run with one hand than I can at a run with 2 hands. They may be As, may be Cs, but they'll be hits, or I'll slow down.

A GM could hit faster running one handed also than they can with 2 hands. They don't because they need all As.

If people were getting Ds and misses at the match you ran, they were exceeding their skill level which is a problem no matter the technique and distance. Whatever "acceptable" accuracy means for a given situation, we all need to go slow enough to ensure we meet that standard, but no slower.

So long as a person a) actually trains and b) does so realistically, that is way more important the the best technique or tactic.

strambo said:

A GM could hit faster running one handed also than they can with 2 hands. They don't because they need all As.

If people were getting Ds and misses at the match you ran, they were exceeding their skill level which is a problem no matter the technique and distance. Whatever "acceptable" accuracy means for a given situation, we all need to go slow enough to ensure we meet that standard, but no slower.

Click to expand...

That's not always true. I've been beaten countless times by people who had fewer points, but shot faster than I did.

Speed matters, but so do Accuracy and Power.

The matches I ran revealed that people think they can hit a large target easily going fast, but they got sloppy in the process.

You are right: take all the time necessary to make the shot...but not one micro-second longer. Easy to say, hard to do.

Or like Enos said, "See what you need to see" to make the shot (and nothing else!)

It is also easy to say, hard to do.

Deaf

I finally made it through all the medical text up there.

And while it is very interesting, it doesn't support the premise of the thread.

Similar to the various headlines we see about medical research ("Scientists today released a preliminary metastudy that indicates that, for some men of a certain age, a glass of red wine taken each day with dinner may reduce the chances of some forms of illness..."") this is interesting in a fairly abstract way, but it is completely inappropriate to claim that it supports an explanation of why a certain shooting technique should work, or insistence that they do work, in the face of contradictory experience.

It absolutely MAY be part of the explanation of why a few folks are blessed with amazing point-shooting abilities, and in explaining why most folks can develop some ability in that area with a lot of practice.

It doesn't show that you, I, or anyone anywhere ever will be more accurate shooting a pistol with one hand while running at top speed.

any reason the link does not work ?

I also would never do it in a shooting competition, distances too far, too much penalty for a miss.

Click to expand...

The irony there is measured in gallons. Or pecks? Or furlongs?

Sam, you reached the same conclusion on all that "medical research" as I did.

Throw up enough official sounding verbiage, most people will simply back off. Those that don't are accused of ignoring "authentic research," etc, etc.

And the "once you get moving" caveat is ludicrous, as was the "one hand is mo' betta" nonsense. Real world simply doesn't back up those claims.
.

I also would never do it in a shooting competition, distances too far, too much penalty for a miss.

Click to expand...

Sam1911 said:

The irony there is measured in gallons. Or pecks? Or furlongs?

Click to expand...

I knew that would get mis-interpreted.

The distances in competitions are too long, as in targets generally outside where I would PS at a full run...4yds and under. Next part of statement, penalty for a "miss," miss being missing the A zone.

So, I'm saying, I can get solid torso hits at a flat out run, under 4yds one handed. Not guaranteed As, not farther than 4 yds.

Ok. 4 yards does seem to be a reasonable limit. I'm not sure how I feel about the "dead run" idea, but it's worth exploring.

Maybe the question is, why are we at a dead run? Is a dead run a positive thing to be training for, or to do?

Is a dead run in some way inevitable? Is that why it is important to make shots at a dead run? Or is it a sub-optimal response that sufficient quality training can counter?

Sam1911 said:

Ok. 4 yards does seem to be a reasonable limit. I'm not sure how I feel about the "dead run" idea, but it's worth exploring.

Maybe the question is, why are we at a dead run? Is a dead run a positive thing to be training for, or to do?

Is a dead run in some way inevitable? Is that why it is important to make shots at a dead run? Or is it a sub-optimal response that sufficient quality training can counter?

Click to expand...

Yes, I feel a dead run is a positive thing to train for. Remember, we aren't choosing to violently attack someone. They are doing it to us and it will be when we are caught off-guard. If they observe us at our best in Condition Yellow, they won't be choosing us as victims to begin with (in all likely-hood, it's possible someone we are clearly already oriented to as a threat will attack us anyway w/o them having the advantage of suprise...but not likely).

The instant I realize I am in a violent confrontation (could be a bullet whizzes by, I get shot, stabbed, puched), I want to injure them as quickly as possible. If being shot at, I want to get off the x as fast as possible. If I can get off the x and hit at a run, I'll do it. At 4 yds and under, I know I can do it. At 2 yds and under, I won't even draw a gun, my H2H skills are way faster.

The "once you get moving" and "shooting at a full run" statements confuse me.

Where, exactly, would these come into play in a defensive situation? If attacked in a parking lot, you're not at a dead run. You may go into one, but there will be a key second or three before you can reach your "full out" speed, so the discussion about making hits while running full out doesn't quite make sense to me in a plausible defensive situation.

However, being able to make fast hits while moving off the X/centerline/dead zone makes much more sense. If done right, I suppose, there won't be a need to run full out since you took care of the reason you needed to run.

If you're two yds away, going hand to hand likely won't be the best choice if there is more than one assailant. I've practiced getting one shot each on three targets at 2-3 yds and get the third shot on the third target in under a second. Yes, I was point shooting with centered hits on all. So FOR ME, H2H won't be necessarily my choice.

"Dead Run" may be a misnomer, "quickness" may be a better term. I'm moving as fast as I possibly can while shooting.

The problem with putting bullets into people at H2H range is unless you hit the spine/CNS, bullets are not instant stoppers. a human can have 7-30s of conscious voluntary control after being shot through the heart. So, you can shoot BG#1 at 2yds, then #2 and 3 in under a second, but #1 tackles you and beats you into a coma before passing out from blood loss.

A H2H strike, executed with full bodyweight behind it, target at a vulnerable part of their anatomy, will injure them and take their balance the instant it lands. As far as multiples, a high-level response would be to move to the outside as you are striking BG#1 (so his body is in between you and the others) and as you are dropping him you are drawing to engage #2 & 3 at a distance.

Since we would presumably be static or nearly so at the beginning of an attack, quickness while drawing and shooting seems to be a much more plausible tactic than just running away. You may not be able to run or sidestep at all for a variety of reasons, so what then? Obviously, situational awareness a critical factor at all times.

If I shoot each of three in under a second and #1 attacks me, at least he's already injured. If I went h2h with #1, then #2 and/or #3 can hit/stab/shoot me. As I'm sure you'll agree, the best action depends on many variables.

Lets all try this. At your range focus on your sights on a target @ 10 yds. with your favorite 2 hand grip.
Now run towards the target as fast as possible while watching your sights.
Do it again strong hand only.
Report back with an honest assessment of your results.

I've practiced getting one shot each on three targets at 2-3 yds and get the third shot on the third target in under a second.

Click to expand...

From the holster? From concealment?

As far as shooting on the move with one hand, all of us IPSC folks know what happens when we encounter the carry the brief case/cupie doll/whatever object stage. It ain't pretty. Still, if we were to ditch the 180, I can think of some scenarios where shooting with one hand would be the way to go, maybe even the only way.