Modern Point Shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd like to see some of the targets following strings of fire without the 10 pounds of tape on them.
Click to expand...

No problem, come on out.

What I am able to do is marginally interesting. It is what I am able to pass along to my students that matters.

At the beginning of every course I inform people that if they allow me to lead them where I am looking to take them, " they will be accomplishing what most highly trained pistoleros believe to be impossible."

Out of the thousands and thousands of students that I've taught, only two students were not able to reach that level. One was a LEO trainer (LASD) who came to my class to prove me wrong. He refused to do what I asked him to do because he thought he knew everything. Halfway through the course when everyone was "smoking" his ability he begged me to try to get him caught up. By then the core fundamentals of what we were doing were behind us. Bottom line is, he did much better, but due to his closed mindedness at the beginning, he was never able to fully catch up.

The other guy thought that it could be done without using the methodology that he was being taught. He was only there for the coolness factor and thought he should be able to do it without even trying.

There are probably a good thousand reviews of my courses on the internet. If you really want to know what people are learning, doing, and saying I could PM you where to find all of the reveiws. Of course until then "you do not know what you do not know."

Combat shooting has next to nothing to do with the fundamentals of marksmanship. It is an entirely different methodology. Unless you have recieved hands on training in the methodology you will be discussing something that you have zero concept of.
 
Last edited:
I wonder what all of the people who are against point shooting would do if in an emergency, the only gun available was a Detonics MK VII? They don't have any sights at all, none front, none rear. Guess they'd have to use it as a hammer! WHAT were those guys at Detonics thinking anyway?
 
Interesting discussion. From the video of Mr. Phillips, it appears to me that the "point shooting" was what was being done at very close range, from below eye level. All the other clips showed the shooter bringing the gun up to eye level, which to me, is at least grossly aimed shooting with the muzzle in the shooters cone of sight, between him and th target. Just my observations.
 
While the gun is brought up to shoulder level neither the sights nor the gun itself is focused upon.
Only the spot that you wish to hit is in your cone of vision.
Naturally as the distance increases you can go immediately into front sight focus and then classic sight picture focus without changing your grip or hand location.
Technique is about time, distance and circumstances.
 
T. Bracker,

When I am moving dynamically the gun is usually an inch or two below my line of sight. When you are moving that qucikly getting the gun just slightly out of your face eliminates negative visual input, which can really make you unnecessarily hesitate and too slow on the trigger.

Even with the gun in my cone of vision it still meets the historical definition of point shooting, which is dependent on where my focus is. My focus is on the focal point of the threat.....therefore it is point shooting.

I've traced the historical defintiton back to the civil war. Any incorrect definition that came after that is usually set down by huge anti-point shooting advocates that would rename point shooting a million things so that they did not have to call it what it really was. When someone bashes point shooting, paints themself into a corner, and then discovers that it is an essential skill set they often take the sleasy way out and rename the skill set.

Point shooting is aimed fire. I may not be using my sights but I am aiming just as I would while throwing a baseball, shooting a basket, or shooting an arrow with a long bow. I am aiming using eye/hand coordination.
 
I suppose I could try to find some, but even if he was shooting fist-sized groups at speed, someone would still say point shooting is useless and inaccurate.

Take a class and learn to do it yourself
Click to expand...

I'm not really interested in taking a class in it at this point. I'm more interested in seeing the product of the training.

Thanks though.
 
Combat shooting has next to nothing to do with the fundamentals of marksmanship.
Click to expand...

I believe that marksmanship fundamentals has a lot to do with combat shooting. Without solid fundamentals how are shooters going to be able to score accurate, fight stopping hits repeatedly?
 
I believe that marksmanship fundamentals has a lot to do with combat shooting. Without solid fundamentals how are shooters going to be able to score accurate, fight stopping hits repeatedly?
Click to expand...

By knowing the fundamentals of combat shooting.

There are two sets of fundamentals. The competition based fundamentals of marksmanship and the fight focused base fundamentals of combat shooting.

And they have next to nothing in common.
 
Sweatnbullets said:
By knowing the fundamentals of combat shooting.

There are two sets of fundamentals. The competition based fundamentals of marksmanship and the fight focused base fundamentals of combat shooting.

And they have next to nothing in common.
Click to expand...
What is contained within the two fundamental sets?
 
By knowing the fundamentals of combat shooting.

There are two sets of fundamentals. The competition based fundamentals of marksmanship and the fight focused base fundamentals of combat shooting.

And they have next to nothing in common.
Click to expand...


Fundamentals don't change.

The application of fundamentals change.
 
What is contained within the two fundamental sets?
Click to expand...

Fundamentals of Marksmanship

Grip (usally two handed using some form of isometric tension, Weaver front and rear, Iso side to side)

Stance (Weaver, Iso, or Modern Iso)

Breathing (using the respiratory pause)

Sight Alignment (hard focus on the front sight)

Sight Picture (flash sight picture)

Trigger Control (compressed surprise break)

Follow Through (two sight pictures for every shot taken)

Trigger Reset (do not let finger fly off of the trigger, do not allow slack back into the trigger

This is all about making the hit. It does not account for not being hit.

There is a balance "to hit and to not be hit"

Fundamentals of Combat Shooting

Grip (usually one handed using some form of convulsive grip or death grip, which is perfect for the typical physiological response when somebody is trying to kill you. One hand on the handgun allows for the other hand to be used in an athletic manner)

Stance (What stance! Athletic movement based "do not get shot" lowered base "combat crouch"

Breathing (we are going to be breathing and the adversary is not going to be breathing for long)

Sight Alignment (we probably won't have the luxury of the sights when we are behind in the reactionary curve, in low light, with both adversaries dynamically moving, within the activation of the sympathetic nervous system, inside of typical handgunfighting distance.......especially when the majority are from 0-5 feet)

Sight picture (hard focus right at the spot on the adversary that we want our bullets to go. "The bullets go where the eyes go."

Trigger control (press straight to the rear as fast as you possibly can, dictated by the distance. All while using the convulsive grip to keep you on the targeted area as you make the handgun sound like a machine gun out of a one handed grip.)

Follow Through (the convulsive grip gets you back on target as you recover from recoil. It is a kinesthetic follow through.....not a visual one.

Trigger Reset (maybe.....maybe not.....depending on which is faster for you out of your convulsive grip)

This is all about the balance "to hit and to not be hit."

One is competiton based and one is combat based. One does not take the dynamics of the fight into consideration and the other is all about the dynamics of a fight.
 
Last edited:
Fundamentals of Marksmanship

ETC...

Fundamentals of Combat Shooting

ETC...
Click to expand...

Stance DOES NOT CHANGE, it is only modified as needed to meet the requirements of target engagement. You can get a shot off more accurately with a fooked up stance at 5 feet than you can at 30...

Grip DOES NOT CHANGE unless you are using a technique at contact distance with one hand. There is NO NEED to ever use one hand unless one is put out of action by a wound etc... It takes NO MORE time to assume a two handed grip.

AIMING as a fundamental is modified to meet the needs of time available and target size. Sight picture and sight alignment are sub-tasks to aiming as an overall fundamental. You "see what you need to see" as Mr. Enos likes to say, and he is ABSOLUTELY right, even though he is a "competition" shooter.

BREATHING as a fundamental is similar to aiming, ie, you control it as necessary. When in COMBAT, one may have to take shots after rapidly moving to a target, ie, after you are smoked / winded. Civilians don't often have to deal with this issue, cops do on occasion.

Trigger squeeze / control DOES NOT CHANGE. Period. There is NO difference between a "training" trigger squeeze or a "combat" trigger squeeze, and reset is a part of trigger control.

Follow through DOES NOT CHANGE.

Semantics?

Maybe.

"Combat" fundamentals?

No. SHOOTING fundamentals?

Yes.



The best combatants don't hire "tacticool" shooters to teach them how to shoot, they hire the BEST, IE, the Todd Jarret's, the Rob Leatham's, who, by the way, are COMPETITION shooters.

I have no doubt that some folks out there have alot to offer those who don't have access to professional training, however, I HATE seeing the "THIS IS THE REAL DEAL COMBAT WAY" mentality of many trainers.

It's not.
 
JoeSlomo said:
Stance DOES NOT CHANGE, it is only modified as needed to meet the requirements of target engagement. You can get a shot off more accurately with a fooked up stance at 5 feet than you can at 30...

Grip DOES NOT CHANGE unless you are using a technique at contact distance with one hand. There is NO NEED to ever use one hand unless one is put out of action by a wound etc... It takes NO MORE time to assume a two handed grip.

AIMING as a fundamental is modified to meet the needs of time available and target size. Sight picture and sight alignment are sub-tasks to aiming as an overall fundamental. You "see what you need to see" as Mr. Enos likes to say, and he is ABSOLUTELY right, even though he is a "competition" shooter.

BREATHING as a fundamental is similar to aiming, ie, you control it as necessary. When in COMBAT, one may have to take shots after rapidly moving to a target, ie, after you are smoked / winded. Civilians don't often have to deal with this issue, cops do on occasion.

Trigger squeeze / control DOES NOT CHANGE. Period. There is NO difference between a "training" trigger squeeze or a "combat" trigger squeeze, and reset is a part of trigger control.

Follow through DOES NOT CHANGE.

Semantics?

Maybe.

"Combat" fundamentals?

No. SHOOTING fundamentals?

Yes.



The best combatants don't hire "tacticool" shooters to teach them how to shoot, they hire the BEST, IE, the Todd Jarret's, the Rob Leatham's, who, by the way, are COMPETITION shooters.

I have no doubt that some folks out there have alot to offer those who don't have access to professional training, however, I HATE seeing the "THIS IS THE REAL DEAL COMBAT WAY" mentality of many trainers.

It's not.
Click to expand...
Pretty much beat me to the punch. I didn't see any difference in the two lists of "fundamentals"
 
Last edited:
I believe point shooting to be an advanced skill.
A skill that should be taught only after the fundamentals of shooting are mastered.
BUT---I have seen amazing results with people who have never fired a pistol before after a 4 hour point shooting class.
So good that it was hard to decipher ( from the targets) just who was the novice and who was the expert shooter.
I have a lot had a few of my armed guard students who were horrible with two handed aimed fire score deadly accurate multible hits with one and two handed point shooting.
I will also go on the record stating that one handed shooting is a vital skill to be mastered.
Common sense dictates that situations other than being wounded demand it's mastery.
 
Yes the things that make one a good shooter in general are also going to make one a better shooter in real combat. But IPDA and other competitive shooting is a lot like the Olympics. Yes many of the events in the Olympics have their roots in ancient military skills, but the Olympics of today are about as far from being practical militarily as something can be. Competitive shooting is great fun. But the bottom line is there is a lot of stuff done in competition that would get you killed in real combat. If I want to just make the smallest holes in paper I can, I'm going to take time to properly line up my sights, make sure my grip is perfect, control my breather, possibly alter my stance to be the most balanced I can. Now if I've just executed a felony stop on some thugs and I've got a radio or light in my off hand, and my heart is pumping and variation between the dark night and the light from my flashers and spotlight are messing with my eyes, I am probably not going to be doing the same kinds of things in that situation. Or if I'm pointman through the door in some building in Mosul, I'm trying to put rounds on target before that AK is on me. How close the groups are is not going to be at the front of my mind.

Fundamentals and actually learning how to shoot well will always be important. But when your priorities change from making neat holes in paper, or knocking down the bowling pins in a record time to "I'm gonna be dead in 2 seconds if I don't get rounds down range RIGHT NOW", the way you shoot is going to change to match the situation. So in that sense, there kind of are 2 sets of fundamentals, though I don't agree that they have next to nothing in common. It's all about the priorities of the situation. You do what you have to do to achieve your main goal. If that goal is one neat hole at 50 yards, I'm going to act accordingly. If my goal is putting out subject descriptions to responding units while keeping them covered with my weapon, I'm gonna do things a bit different. And if I'm worried about multiple targets with automatic weapons being on the other side of a door, I'm gonna do things another way still. How much I use my sights, what my stance is, etc are going to change from situation to situation. Of course I'm going to be using a two handed grip when shooting for scores at the range; it's more accurate. But in combat, sometimes you just can't use both hands. Of course I'm going to properly line up my sights when competing. But in combat, sometimes you just don't have the time. How you shoot will always change based on situation. And anyone who says they will always shoot the same way has no idea what it's like when the target can kill you.
 
Last edited:
Joeslomo, Could you please let us know where you learned the fundamentals of combat shooting. That is Fairbairn, Sykes, Applegate, Jelly Bryce, Col Askins, Bill Jordon, combat shooting.

Where did you learn it and who taught it to you.

It would seem to be presumputous at best to proclaim that you know what combat shooting is if you have not been formally trained in it.

I know both fundamentals. I teach both fundamentals. I teach a seamless integration of the two. To say that there is no differnce would need to be backed up with some proof of your actual knowledge of combat shooting.
 
There is NO NEED to ever use one hand unless one is put out of action by a wound etc...
Click to expand...
Try this: Move dynamically to your 4-5:00 position (7-8:00 for lefties) while engaging a target. How many steps are you able to maintain a two-handed grip before you turn and start backpedaling? Very few, I'll wager. You can create a lot of distance (allowing for terrain) while returning accurate fire with one hand.

As I said, I've never trained with Roger. I have read his book, watched his DVD and worked with those he has trained. His teaching is solid.
 
Thanks for the clarification. I was under the assumption that point shooting was just that, not having the weapon indexed in the visual cone at all. For me, what you are showing is a silhouette of your weapon superimposed on the target, even if subliminally? This would seem to be still visually indexing your fire, even if very coarsely?
 
Joeslomo, Could you please let us know where you learned the fundamentals of combat shooting. That is Fairbairn, Sykes, Applegate, Jelly Bryce, Col Askins, Bill Jordon, combat shooting.

Where did you learn it and who taught it to you.
Click to expand...

I learned, applied, and trained all of my fundamental shooting skills in the 75th Ranger Regiment over about a 12 year period from 89 to about 04'. I have been trained by, and trained with, varying members of the special operations community, the JFKSWC, and GM class shooters from AMU and the civilian sector in both rifle and pistol.

Our practical exercises consist of live fire room clearing, and close quarter engagements that require shooters to engage targets within 2M of their fellow shooters in pretty much any environment and condtion you can imagine, under heavy loads, and often times after having to conduct anaerobic movements to get to the target.

My comrades and I have applied these skills in places like Panama, Somalia, Afghanistan, and Iraq against enemy armed with assault rifles from point blank, to long range, and amazingly enough, they work. We've cleared buildings, villages, and ran into baddies out in the streets, and have never identified any need to change any of the basic fundamentals of our shooting program. The only change we ever make is to incorporate MORE shooting, and adapting existing fundamentals to various scenarios, positions, or new technology. The fundamentals remain the same.

Try this: Move dynamically to your 4-5:00 position (7-8:00 for lefties) while engaging a target. How many steps are you able to maintain a two-handed grip before you turn and start backpedaling? Very few, I'll wager. You can create a lot of distance (allowing for terrain) while returning accurate fire with one hand.
Click to expand...

That would fall into the "etc..." category smince ;)


I agree with Mr. Temkin, and many others, who have stated that "point shooting" is another tool to throw in your kit bag to use when and where it is applicable.

I do NOT agree with ANYONE saying that there are "combat" fundamentals vs. "competition" fundamentals as I believe that is misleading and the equivalent of "snake oil / marketing hype".
 
I will also go on the record stating that one handed shooting is a vital skill to be mastered.
Common sense dictates that situations other than being wounded demand it's mastery.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. While being wounded is one possibility, one handed shooting may be required when you are forced to do another task while firing the gun. The first thing that comes to my mind is escorting/pulling someone to safety. Another is the use of flashlight in a method such as the modified FBI or Neck Index method. Both of those require one handed shooting.
 
Competitive shooting is great fun. But the bottom line is there is a lot of stuff done in competition that would get you killed in real combat
Click to expand...

And some examples would be?


Fundamentals and actually learning how to shoot well will always be important. But when your priorities change from making neat holes in paper, or knocking down the bowling pins in a record time to "I'm gonna be dead in 2 seconds if I don't get rounds down range RIGHT NOW", the way you shoot is going to change to match the situation. So in that sense, there kind of are 2 sets of fundamentals
Click to expand...

So what are the two sets of fundamentals? I say there is only one set of fundamentals because each item: grip, trigger control, sight alignment/picture, breathing, etc are just important in one venue as the other.

It seems some people, in order to appear "out of the box", have jumped into another box.
 
I already told you. If I am at a range shooting for a score, I'm going to use the best 2 handed grip I can. If I am kneeling with a radio in my support hand, I am not. If I am at the range shooting for a score, I am going to take my time to get the best sight picture I can. If I am moving through a door overseas, I may not have time to use my sights at all. And if I'm at the range shooting for a score, I am going to take my time and time my breathing with my shots to minimize the impact the motion of my body has on each shot. If I am drawing and firing on a gunman during a traffic stop or returning fire after an ambush Afghanistan, I am NOT going to be controlling my breathing the same way. The application of fundamental once uses while taking precise shots on a safe range is just not always possible when you're being shot at, or when you have to do other things, like shooting laying down shoot with a radio or light in your hand, shoot while dragging another person backwards out of a kill zone. You simply can not place the same emphasis on those fundamentals in every situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Matthew Temkin
  • Locked
My Point Shooting Video
2
Replies
42
Views
1K
Matthew Temkin
Matthew Temkin
Matthew Temkin
  • Locked
Carbine Point Shooting AAR
2 3
Replies
50
Views
2K
7677
7
Matthew Temkin
  • Locked
Carbine Point Shooting
Replies
0
Views
383
Matthew Temkin
Matthew Temkin
Matthew Temkin
  • Locked
Point shooting...4 hour syllabus
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
Matthew Temkin
Matthew Temkin
D
  • Locked
The One Huge Advantage of Position SUL
2 3 4
Replies
77
Views
5K
BullfrogKen
B
Back
Top