Gabe Suarez's Interactive Gunfighting in Manassas Virginia

[pax]

brownie ~

In fairness, let us note that all good trainers regularly incorporate material from others -- that is exactly how knowledge is advanced, after all. There is absolutely nothing wrong with learning from others, or passing that properly-credited knowledge along to your own students.

The difference between honorable use and dishonorable use is whether the instructor properly credits those from whom he has learned and benefited, or simply steals others' materials intact, without credit. And most dishonorable of all would be someone who steals others' materials, and then bad-mouths the very people from whom he stole the knowledge he sells to others.

pax

To steal from one author is plagiarism. If you steal from many, it’s research. – Wilson Mizner

 

[brownie0486]

I could not agree more with your thoughts on this Pax.

Brownie

 

[Jeff White]

My friend's Swedish Police SWAT team was trained by former SAS operator Mel Perry.
Mel routinely stood alongside students targets as they were shooting, as is quite common with SAS instructors.
I guess if men are being trained in CQB they have to learn to work around live fire somehow.
I joked to my friend that many instructors are willing to stand behind their students, but it seemed that Mel Perry is willing to stand in front of them as well.

Matt,
Wouldn't you agree that there just a little bit of difference in the training level of a SWAT team then there is in what you'd find in an open enrollment class? It's one thing to do this exercise to give people confidence in their team mates (I think there are other, safer methods to accomplish that task, but that's just me) but it's another thing altogether to put yourself next to the target in front of someone who you just met a day or two ago.

If an instructor really did that while bragging to his students he wanted to remember what combat was like, then there was no training value in it for the student and the only one to benefit would be the instructor who would be doing that to increase the buzz about is class in the shooting community.

I'm not sure I would want to be anywhere near an instructor like that. In fact I'm not even sure someone like that should be allowed to be instructing anyone. In the last several years members of military and police units have been accidentally killed doing live fire CQB exercises. Those tragedies all happened in very controlled environments where there risk management procedures in place to prevent those accidents. And they still happened. Live fire in close proximity to living people is an advanced skill. What happens if someone decides to try this at home with tragic results?

Jeff

 

[crebralfix]

In fairness, let us note that all good trainers regularly incorporate material from others -- that is exactly how knowledge is advanced, after all. There is absolutely nothing wrong with learning from others, or passing that properly-credited knowledge along to your own students.

The difference between honorable use and dishonorable use is whether the instructor properly credits those from whom he has learned and benefited, or simply steals others' materials intact, without credit. And most dishonorable of all would be someone who steals others' materials, and then bad-mouths the very people from whom he stole the knowledge he sells to others.

pax

You sound as if you think someone actually owns this stuff. The reality is that we're just rehashing 99.99999% of it. The differences are in the words used to explain it; even then, someone has probably said it that way before.

Nothing to see here, move along. These aren't the droids you're looking for.

 

[pax]

You sound as if you think someone actually owns this stuff.

crebalfix ~

That's an interesting perspective.

pax

A thief believes everybody steals. ---E.W. Howe

One of the common failings among honorable people is a failure to appreciate how thoroughly dishonorable some other people can be, and how dangerous it is to trust them. -- Thomas Sowell

 

[crebralfix]

crebalfix ~

That's an interesting perspective.

pax

A thief believes everybody steals. ---E.W. Howe

Or people have been teaching this for a long time. The techniques really aren't new. How can someone claim "property rights" over material that was taught decades before they were born?
Moving off the line of force? Nothing new. Fast draw, presentation, moving while shooting, point shooting, interrupting the goblin's draw...nothing new there either.

***

To get back on topic: Interactive gunfighting course.

What other trainers offer a 100% force on force class? I'd be interested in checking out their techniques to see what is common between courses. I suspect that deltas will be minimal.

FRI's Level 3 course (www.f-r-i.com) includes a day of shooting and a day of FoF. The first day is for brushup and advanced techniques (50 yard shooting, etc). Everything is done against a law enforcement standard. On the second day, he does force on force and scenarios. We had Charlottesville, VA PD assist (car and everything)!!! It was VERY interesting to get the LE perspective. Several guys would have gone to jail just for what they said during the fight.

 

[pax]

crebalfix ~

The information might have existed since before you were born, but you weren't born knowing it. You learned it from somewhere and someone, and you owe a debt of acknowledgement and gratitude to those people who formulated their knowledge and passed it down to you in usable form.

It shocks (but does not surprise) me when people are willing to argue otherwise. Sad.

pax

 

[Sweatnbullets]

I have over 50 firearm courses and Gabe's Interactive gunfighting course is the best that I have ever been in.

"Nobody gives birth to themself."

We all learn from other people. Gabe and I both have a list of aknowlegements up on The Warrior Talk forum (search "giving birth to yourself"). I do not see other instructor putting their list up online. Do not judge others until you have a list posted of all of your instructors. If you have done this.... link us to it.....but until then.....

Warrior Talk has ALWAYS been about networking of information for the advancement of the art. It has never been a secret. I have gone there for years and contributed. Many people have put to use the contributions that I have made.....and that is very good for them. Many other people have contributed....and I have put their contributions to use. Gabe probably contributes more that any of us. This is all good!

The advancement of the art is a "Warrior Talk" thing. Many people are benefiting from it....I am....Gabe is....every person on the forum is. What could possibly be the problem with this? Gabe has always been welcome to anything that I can contribute to the advancement of the art....and now that I am teaching, he lets me teach what he has contributed.

Yes, I took Gabe's old FOF course. Yes, I started a thread at Warrior Talk discussing the very best way to run a FOF session. Yes, there was great input from a lot of great guys on the subject that absolutely changed FOF in the eyes of many that contributed and read the thread. Yes, Gabe contributed as much as anyone and was the main catalyst for the discussion. Yes, the next time out Gabe had a new FOF course that was much better than the old FOF course and integrated some of the stuff that came out of that thread.

You know what.....that is friggen OUTSTANDING in my book! I helped advance the art by watching, questioning, thinking, contributing, and getting everyone else to do the same. The final out come is the very best course that I have ever seen....or heard of.

Now check out what this has done for me. I took the new FOF course and it led me to the path that I am on today. My Point Shooting course has a direct link to Gabe's new FOF course. That new FOF course has a direct link to the thread I started on Warrior Talk. That thread has a direct link to Gabe's old FOF course. This all has a direct link to Warrior Talk being setup as a place to "network" and to advance the art.

WIN/WIN! comes to mind.

 

[pax]

Sweat ~

Most people are happy enough to brag about the classes they've taken. That's not what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about in-context acknowledgement of where you learned specific techniques. For instance, on one of my pages (www.corneredcat.com/Legal/AOJ.aspx), you will find that -- right at the top of the page -- I acknowledge that I first encountered that material through Massad Ayoob. By no means does Mas have a corner on that particular bit of knowledge, as it is simply a statement of the common-law principles dating back several hundred years, but I first encountered that knowledge through him and he is acknowledged, every time, when I present that knowledge to others.

That's a far cry from just listing a brag sheet of classes taken. (Oh, I do that too, everyone does -- poke around on the site and you'll probably find it.) But that's not the issue here.

pax

One may be humble out of pride. -- Montaigne

 

[Sweatnbullets]

Pax, this is the type of thing that I am talking about right here. I have learned so much from so many I can not give credit all of the time. My long articles would triple in length.

Here is what I have posted and I would recommend that every trainer do the same.....but they don't.....Gabe has though.

I do the very best that I can to give credit where it is due.....even to a fault.

I also did not give birth to myself (However Jack Bauer did.) I have made this perfectly clear and have said it on many occasions.

"I am just a product of all the people that have taught me anything."

My top five instructors (in no particular order) (please excuse the spelling errors, if anyone would like to help me with names and spelling please PM me)

Gabe Suarez
7677
Richard Sharrer
"Majic" Serbiak
Matt Temkin
and the rest
Wes Lahullier
Chuck Burnett
Jim Fuller
Mike Havas
Larry Renner
Daryl Okayama
Robin Brown
Scott Hoernor
Bill Haig
Shannon Long
Steve Campbell
Pat Lobb
Fred Jones
Scott Pierson
John Woo
Kandi Blick
Andrew (Drew) Neil
Bill Carns


Now for the guys that have taught me so much on the gun forums.

Fred Darling
SouthNarc
Paul Gomez
Paul Sharp
Tom Givens
James Yeager

Special thanks

My training buddy BH, without his help, much of what I do would not be possible
Dave James
Guantes
Anthony
Geezer
The rest of the guys at WT that are contributing and trying to advance the art.

Forgive me if you have helped me and you were not mentioned. Forgive me if I use what you taught and you are dead now. AND ESPECIALLY, forgive me if someone "stole your stuff" and then taught it to me without giving you the credit.

 

[autospike]

I took my first Suarez class last month and I enjoyed it. It was not my first-ever training course.

There were no mentions of "green rooms". Nor was there anything said about coercing witnesses, telling them what to say, etc.

I never heard the words "In Quartata" in his class. Maybe my Peltors were malfunctioning.

He cited several people *TWO OF WHOM HE IDENTIFIED AS STUDENTS* during the class. I honestly don't remember the students names nor do I remember the technique / idea that he attributed to them. But he made it a point to say that he learned from students and he was happy to give them credit for it. He also cited several other people. SouthNarc, Paul Gomez, and Mark Denny are the three that I can remember, but there were others.

 

[smince]

OK, I'm back. Been out practicing what I learned and buying more ammo.

Matt,
Wouldn't you agree that there just a little bit of difference in the training level of a SWAT team then there is in what you'd find in an open enrollment class? It's one thing to do this exercise to give people confidence in their team mates (I think there are other, safer methods to accomplish that task, but that's just me) but it's another thing altogether to put yourself next to the target in front of someone who you just met a day or two ago.

There you go again. While I said he had admitted to this, I also said he didn't do it with just any student. It was with students he knew well and knew their level of training. Not very different from what you posted above about live fire with SWAT.

He might do it with 'Sweatnbullets', but not with me, who he has only trained with once. Below is a quote from someone who was in the class itself, suppossedly not second or third hand info:

Also, at one point Gabe stood next to one of his long term student's targets and had his student fire a group of head shots into the target to show what confidence was all about. Gabe never had us do this, but it was too much for the Range Q***r to see, He grabbed his chest and left.

 

[Soybomb]

He might do it with 'Sweatnbullets', but not with me, who he has only trained with once. Below is a quote from someone who was in the class itself, suppossedly not second or third hand info:

Quote:
Also, at one point Gabe stood next to one of his long term student's targets and had his student fire a group of head shots into the target to show what confidence was all about. Gabe never had us do this, but it was too much for the Range Q***r to see, He grabbed his chest and left.

This infamous story is one of my principle concerns about taking a class from Suarez. As several like Jeff White have mentioned, if I actually need to use that training one day I would like to think there is nothing about the class that I wouldn't mind a group of people of my peers hearing about. If the opposing attorney did a little research and came up with this relatively well known suarez story, I'm not sure that I'd want those people to hear about the instructor having the students intentionally fire ammo at a target very close to a person. It would be a good trick for penn & teller, but it doesn't make it sound like a serious class that made safety and responsbility a top priority. I'm afraid his actions would at the very least cancel out any benefit that training may have had for my case, and at the worst reflect negatively on me as though I had taken the Evel Knievel school of motorcycle safety. The insulting comments about the safety minded individuals leaving the class would be the icing on the cake.

I'm certain his training has many redeeming positive characteristics as well, but when I'm looking at potential instructors to learn from these are the type of issues I think about and look for. Don't mistake this as an insult or attack on him, its just a criticism of the possible pro's and con's of the class.

 

[smince]

Well, I stress again: He did not let anyone in our class shoot at him, mention coercing witnesses, tell us to shoot a BG after he had stopped being a threat, etc.

NONE of the things that have been talked about here. I didn't see anything that was questionable in our course.

Maybe all the keyboard commando's have taught him a lesson and he doesn't do that kind of thing anymore.

 

[brownie0486]

More likely, in fact much more probable, is that the article in SWAT magazine reporting that stunt hurt his bottom line considerably in students who were willing to take his courses, and he learned pulling that off in these clases wasn't such a wise choice and stopped.

Brownie

 

[smince]

More likely, in fact much more probable, is that the article in SWAT magazine reporting that stunt hurt his bottom line considerably in students who were willing to take his courses, and he learned pulling that off in these clases wasn't such a wise choice and stopped.

That is funny, because he reported how much his business actually picked up after the SWAT-attempted hatchet-job The other funny thing is in the issue that did the 'report' on him Paladin Press had a full-page ad for his books and DVD's. I'll bet that embarassed the staff and mgmt. Talk about unintended consequences.

I don't have a clue how many students the big-box square-range schools teach each year, but Mr. Suarez gave an approximate number of students he teaches. It was a plausable amount for a more or less one man operation and the classes are usually filled up, with a waiting list, and he has many repeat students. There were a few in my class who had taken his courses 3-4 times, and most said they would do another course with him, myself included.

There were 20 slots in our course, and 17 made it, IIRC. A look at his site shows his classes full until the last week of April already.

 

[brownie0486]

Bad press is never good for business.

Brownie

 

[smince]

I see how this is. You guys use statements from the one who wrote the article, and you're automatically right. We that use statements from the one the article was about, we are automatically wrong.

I've never met the man who wrote the article, and as far as I know, never read an article he has written (and I have read a lot of gun articles). I have met Gabe, trained with him, read his articles and books, looked him in the eye and shook his hand.

I know it is a case of he said/he said. The man said the article helped his business, and he does seem to be doing pretty well. Perhaps it wasn't as much bad press, but an indication of how people percieve SWAT magazine. I stopped reading it shortly after Chuck Taylor left. Like most gun rags, it lacked substance.

I'm gone again. Back to WT where I'm more appreciated.

 

[30 cal slob]

What other trainers offer a 100% force on force class?

i think a sticky thread of just training courses (ANY and ALL) that are offered would be an incredibly valuable THR resource.

 

[Matthew Temkin]

Gabe Suarez is the man who people love to hate.
Much like myself on Glock Talk and a few others that come to mind.
I trained with him in Memphis and found him to be a low key, soft spoken instructor who knew his stuff and could communicate it quite well.
One of my friends..who is a full time police academy firearms instructor--took Gabe's Close Range class and found it to be excellent.
I still find his books...especially his Tactical Advantage and his Rifle & Shotgun manuals--to be first rate.
As with many things in life, I believe half of what I see, 10% of what I hear and about 25% of what I read.