Point Shooting And Reference Points.

[Matthew Temkin]

This is an offshoot on Roger's thread and I would like to try to make things a bit clearer.
Let's try this range experiment.
Place a man size target at about 7 yards and place a 5 inch black circle on the upper chest.
Face the target squarely with the gun in two hands and in a low ready position.
One cue raise the gun and rapidly fire 3- 5 shots while focusing on the front sight.
Now we will try it with a QK reference point..meaning raise the pistol until the barrel is about 2 inches below the spot that you want to hit. Once there fire 3-5 shots as fast as you can pull the trigger.
Now I want you to do the drill with total target focus.
Look intently at the exact spot you want to hit ( Which, in this case, would be the center of the black circle) raise the pistol and rapidly fire off 3-5 shots.
In my experience most of the shots--regardless of which method that you used--will be in a tight cluster. (If not you have to work on your grip and trigger control)
OK..after shooting with total target focus look at where your gun is in relation to your body. ( Notice I did not tell you how high to raise the pistol. That will be dealt with by hand eye coordination)
For some it will be at chest level. For others it will be at chin level and for some it will be at mouth/nose level.
In other words, don't worry about the mechanics.
If you focus on the exact spot that you want to hit then nature will take care of the rest.
The Fairbairn/Applegate/Sykes method of point shooting (FAS) did not use any part of the weapon or it's sights when using target focus, since it is human nature to focus on the threat when under deadly assault.
The system did, however, include methods of shooting with the sights (usually from behind cover) when time and circumstance allowed it.
So...I hope to hear from those who give all three methods a go and hear what they have to say.

 

[skidmark]

I've had training in several pointshooting techniques, and read the books or articles put out by many other proponents/trainers. They all seem to come to the same point you do -- that once you develop an *index* between the body and the muzzle, you will be on target.

Just as an indication of how well *indexing* works, I have seen D.R. Middlebrooks run a rack of 8-inch plates at 50+ yards. Not every hit was dead center, but that was not the object of the exercise. He was within the 8-inch circle -- which is "combat effective" (to use a phrase I've heard somewhere).

I'm working on developing some speed, now that I've reached a point of confidence in puting rounds close enough to where I want them. It pushes the need to know my *index point* so that I can return from recoil repeatedly to that same spot.

stay safe.

skidmark

 

[Sweatnbullets]

That is a good drill Matt, and really lays down the reality of the balance between speed and accuracy and the concepts you use to get there. I used "my" low ready, which would probably be a lot different than most peoples low ready. My low ready is compressed to the mid point of the draw stroke with the muzzle aligned at the adversaries feet. This drill really brings out the "continuum" of shooting that 7677 has spoken so much of in the past. The ability to do what ever needs to be done to just get the hits as quickly as possible.

At flash sight picture I had a noticeable delay bringing my gun up to line of sight and to get the my focus onto the sights.

With QK I also had a noticable delay (not as much as flash sight picture) to bring my gun up to the exact point to have the exact reference point before I fired.

With pure hand/eye coordination I was much faster due to the fact that I had an economy of motion. I brought the muzzle up only to the point that I had the muzzle indexed on to the targeted area without any need for any sort of unnecessary predetermined fixed position. I simply use my elbows and wrists to align the gun onto the target. The entire movement of my gun was no more than a few inches at sternum level. Sighted fire and Quick Kill required around 18 inches of unnecessary movement.

As I have stated before, I really do not like the low ready. I work out of a contact ready. The contact ready is a ready and a shooting position that is predetermined by the necessary visual input that is needed to understand the entire confrontation. This fluid positon can be from any position of your draw stroke, from count three, all the way to mid point, all the way to various points below line of sight. The height and extension of your gun is dictated by the proximity of the adversary, the amount of visual input you need for the situation, and your ability to make the hits from these completely fluid positions.

Here is my take on the contact ready in regards to "below line of sight."


The very easiest way to understand the need for below line of sight would be from the "contact ready." The contact ready is a position taught to me by Gabe, where you have a very likely threat, but the ID has not been made well enough to shoot yet. This would mostly be a LEO ready, but will easily show the need for below line of sight for everyone.

Give this a try.

Unload your gun and double check that it is unloaded. Stand one yard from a mirror and point in at your reflection, at line of sight. This gives you two yards from your reflection. Notice that your hands and gun block the view of the adversary’s waist band and possibly the hands. Obviously, this is very bad!

Now lower the gun while keeping it indexed on the targeted area until you can clearly see the waistband and hands of the adversary. For me this at my chin level, approximitely five inches below line of sight. By taking the gun out of your face you are able to take in the needed visual input for the encounter.

Now back this up to two yards (that makes four yards to your reflection). You will notice that the gun does not have to be lowered as much to see the waistband and hands. For me it is at mouth level, aproximately three inches below line of sight.

Now step back to three yards (six yards from your reflection.) My gun only needs to be below line of sight at my nose level, approximately one to two inches, to see the waistband or the hands.

While this is an extremely simple example, it is still a very good example of why the ability to make hits fluidly from below line of sight is a very important one. The necessary visual input of this little test is a perfect example of the necessary visual input of an encounter, whether it be static or dynamic.

The ability to make the hits from below line of sight are laid out in "the ten elements." Most important would be visual centerline, parallel to the ground, peripheral vision verification, and the confidence in knowing exactly what you are physically capable of. This will very quickly lead you to the hand/eye coordination that makes point shooting such an excellent tool. Hand/eye coordination is always the ultimate goal.

Anyone can do this and when you can, you need to be able to do it from the holster, from the low ready, and with movement.

 

[brownie0486]

Now we will try it with a QK reference point..meaning raise the pistol until the barrel is about 2 inches below the spot that you want to hit. Once there fire 3-5 shots as fast as you can pull the trigger.

QK is a "total target focus" skill. Seems you are not quite as familiar with QK as I had thought Matt. The barrel is not the reference point, the end of the barrel or front sight [ which is at the end of the barrel ] is the reference point in your peripheral vision with the direct [ total focus ] on the threat. The peripheral reference point is about two inches below the point you are looking at and want to hit while the gun is positioned from 2-4 inches below the line of sight.

It's a consciously applied peripheral skill using a very specific reference [ or as another is want to call it, visual index, which is the same thing ]. As such it is a more refined skill than other forms of threat focused skills such as FAS. The refinement being the utterly repeatable peripheral visual reference between the gun and where one wants to hit. So refined that in last years class in Knoxville, documented by one student in his after action review, and witnessed by 13 others, I was able to put 17 rds into a measured 1 inch group at 15 feet. It's as refined as using the sights without having to take the time to verify them. FAS, nor Quick Fire, nor any other threat focused skill I'm currently aware of can produce that grouping as QK can once trained and subsequently owned, without the use of sights.

The Fairbairn/Applegate/Sykes method of point shooting (FAS) did not use any part of the weapon or it's sights when using target focus

In the other thread you stated the QK narrative I wrote was close to FAS in Shooting to Live [ STL ]. From your above statement now, it seems contradictory to your earlier position.

As I provided the exact wording from STL, from the exact pages that were supposed to support your earlier position and confirmed by Roger, and it doesn't mention peripheral vision or peripheral references to the gun as the QK skills use and the narrative states, it appears they are not the same, not even close to the same as I wrote in the other thread to clarify for the members here.

Seperate skills being used for both, not similiar or the same. The results might be very close, but they are taught differently and the results will be different.

Proving what we have come to know over the years of discussion on this subject, which is that there are a few ways to skin the cat, but they are still different in their execution and descriptors.

With QK I also had a noticable delay (not as much as flash sight picture) to bring my gun up to the exact point to have the exact reference point before I fired.

From your own review after learning QK in Tucson Roger:

"The technique excels when speed is the key factor. Speed of the shot, speed of your movement, and speed of your opponents movement. All the while giving you excellent accuracy and possible the very best accuracy possible when there is dynamic movement."

IMHO, without a doubt, this is the very best way to get hits while you are exploring your limitations of dynamic movement. If for just this one reason, I would recommend, in the strongest way possible, that you learn QK.

Damm good technique! I got to put it to use in FOF with mutual dynamic movement. Dude, it is a no brainer, it is like just reaching out and touching someone. It is actually so simple it's scary. With this skill, I will put my ability to makes hits "on the run" as my "greatest strength." That is a very reassuring fact!

These are the things you've found to be true, and now want to train others, in your course from your own statements which led directly to this discussion. As you find there is a delay, you may now stop training others in shooting at nose, mouth and chin level with a visual peripheral reference [ what you call visual index ] which is QK. You'll also notice no mention of a "delay" in your review of the methodologies with QK, though now you seem to want the members to think there is.

Seems odd to write about something you find a "delay" and hence detrimental and then be training students in that very same skill, but then it is becoming very apparent here what your motives are Roger.

Very interesting, very interesting indeed.

Brownie

 

[7677]

That is a good drill Matt, and really lays down the reality of the balance between speed and accuracy and the concepts you use to get there. I used "my" low ready, which would probably be a lot different than most peoples low ready. My low ready is compressed to the mid point of the draw stroke with the muzzle aligned at the adversaries feet. This drill really brings out the "continuum" of shooting that 7677 has spoken so much of in the past. The ability to do what ever needs to be done to just get the hits as quickly as possible.

At flash sight picture I had a noticeable delay bringing my gun up to line of sight and to get the my focus onto the sights.

With QK I also had a noticable delay (not as much as flash sight picture) to bring my gun up to the exact point to have the exact reference point before I fired.

With pure hand/eye coordination I was much faster due to the fact that I had an economy of motion. I brought the muzzle up only to the point that I had the muzzle indexed on to the targeted area without any need for any sort of unnecessary predetermined fixed position. I simply use my elbows and wrists to align the gun onto the target. The entire movement of my gun was no more than a few inches at sternum level. Sighted fire and Quick Kill required around 18 inches of unnecessary movement.

I agree...QK comes towards the end of the sight continuum and is only one part of the over all picture in combat shooting. The more visual input one has to use the slower the time for first shot on target will be. Time and distance determines with sighting method and the amount of extention pure and simple.

 

[brownie0486]

QK comes towards the end of the sight continuum and is only one part of the over all picture in combat shooting. The more visual input one has to use the slower the time for first shot on target will be. Time and distance determines with sighting method and the amount of extention pure and simple.

I also agree here with the above. That is why it is hard to understand why Matt would offer this exercise between shooting techniques and skills sets. Each has their own strengths at distance based on the time available to make the shot.

It's one of the things covered in the Integrate Threat Focused Training Systems [ ITFTS ] and why the course starts with the closer distances with skills such as elbow up/elbow down, QK hip on multiple threats, compressed ready, shooting throughout the draw stroke once the gun is cleared, etc before moving the distances further back and continuing with other skills such as Quick Kill and Quick Fire, and then onto moving with these same skills once they are owned by the shooter.

Everything in the course is based on distance/time equations as 7677 mentions in the sight continuum. You should have all the skills covered in the course to be well rounded, including sighted fire skills when appropriate.

Brownie

 

[7677]

I'm not a mind reader, but I believe that the point of exercise is to point out that in most deadly force incidents QK will not be used because it comes so late in the continuum.

I do not want to start another train wreck like went on last night but I feel that I have to set some things right. I do not see the connection between what Roger wrote and QK or the theft of such. When I read his post I did not understand what Roger wrote and asked for clarification which I received.

What Roger is referring to is actually after the draw stroke and has to do with the position of the gun if you have not taken the shot and your opponent has given up. At the end of the draw stroke, your weapon will be in the line of sight and depending on the distance to the suspect determines how much you lower the gun and what he is referring to with nose, lip and, chin positions. Your focus is on the threat but if need be you can take the shot without having to realign the gun because it is still on target.

 

[brownie0486]

What Roger is referring to is actually after the draw stroke and has to do with the position of the gun if you have not taken the shot and your opponent has given up. At the end of the draw stroke, your weapon will be in the line of sight and depending on the distance to the suspect determines how much you lower the gun and what he is referring to with nose, lip and, chin positions. Your focus is on the threat but if need be you can take the shot without having to realign the gun because it is still on target.

As Roger wrote "The ability to do what ever needs to be done to just get the hits as quickly as possible."

and this:

Also, while these are only points in the draw stroke, they are also shooting positions….positions that are dictated by the specifics of the situation that you are dealing with.

The points that I teach in my course are as follows.

(1) Line of sight
(2) Nose level
(3) Mouth level
(4) Chin level
(5) Mid point (of the draw stroke)
(6) Compressed ready (count three)

The first four points are dictated by the necessary visual input of the situation. Whether you use one through four is dictated by how much visual input that you need on the gun and how much visual input you need in regards to the other factors of the encounter.


I find his comment on nose mouth and chin positions to be in the context of shooting, not covering someone with the gun based on his writings above myself.

Brownie

 

[Sweatnbullets]

I find his comment on nose mouth and chin positions to be in the context of shooting, not covering someone with the gun based on his writings above myself.

It is both!

My point is that you never know what height that you will have to draw the gun to. Picking a frozen point of height and thinking that you are going to use that frozen point all of the time makes no sense. The same goes for line of sight or line of reference point or any other frozen point inside of the contiuum.

This is another reason why I do not teach QK (along with the obvious one), because it is a frozen point and I do not agree with the concept of frozen point.

Line of sight is a necessary frozen point because the sights are my default....but I have progressed in my learnings to not allow for any other default frozen point.

Fluid Situational Response is the only concept that makes any sense to me.

 

[brownie0486]

Picking a frozen point of height and thinking that you are going to use that frozen point all of the time makes no sense. The same goes for line of sight or line of reference point or any other frozen point inside of the contiuum.

I agree, hence this from a previous post:

It's one of the things covered in the Integrate Threat Focused Training Systems [ ITFTS ] and why the course starts with the closer distances with skills such as elbow up/elbow down, QK hip on multiple threats, compressed ready, shooting throughout the draw stroke once the gun is cleared, etc before moving the distances further back and continuing with other skills such as Quick Kill and Quick Fire, and then onto moving with these same skills once they are owned by the shooter.

Brownie

 

[Sweatnbullets]

I absolutely agree that you teach the of continuum throughout the draw stroke.

My latest articles have me progressing further than I have in the past and past just the "continuum throughout the draw stroke" concept. As I teach, experiment, learn, discuss, observe, consider, and learn from what my students do..... I progress my teachings from what comes out of all of that.

As I progress, I see an absolute need to break away from all things that are not completely well rounded and absolutely versatile.

"Be Like Water," "Be Like Mike" it does not matter what you call it....that is my concept of the perfection of continuum shooting inside of the fight continuum. React as you need to react, see what you need to see, and move as you need to move. This concept breaks us away from all thing dogmatic...from all things that are "technique based." The mind is the weapon, the handgun is just an extension of the mind. We need to be able to get solid combat hits from any position (From the hip all the way to line of sight,) From all angles (at ever direction on the face of a clock) one handed of two, while seeing what you need to see (as set down in my "Visual Input" articles) with whatever movement that is necessary (stand and deliver, controlled movement, and dynaimc movement.)

Just like any well trained athlete this should all be worked to the point that it is programed at a subconscious level. As soon as you throw out the idea of "techniques" and accept this as a "concept," programming this all to the subconscious level is absolutely as simple as can be. It is just a fight! There is no time or room for "picking techniques" just do it.....and that is what I teach.

Shooting at full extention with the gun at the completely appropriate, absoluely fluid, and totally situationally dependent height is just a very small part of this well rounded, completely versatille, Fluid Situational Response.

I only have one priority position for my handgun and this is line of sight so that I can get to my sights. This is my default....this is what I want to be able to see. If that is not possible I have every other conceivable option covered. I do not have or teach any other "reference point" or priority position and I never will because it goes against every single thing that I teach and preach. My learnings/teachings have simply progressed way past that point with help from a lot of great people.

The learning progression is a beautiful thing.....I am blessed to have the people around me that help me progress past the learnings of my past.

 

[brownie0486]

As soon as you throw out the idea of "techniques" and accept this as a "concept,"

I rather think you are going to have to teach techniques [ as seperate parts which become the whole ] that flow into and out of each other as necessary, within the context of the concepts [ the whole ]. Pretty hard to teach concepts seperately.

The concept is the theory and thought process, a mindset, like my signature line " The mind is the limiting factor". The concept has to be broken down to individual skills and those are the techniques.

When you teach EU/ED, compressed ready, etc, they are individual techniques within a "system" of comabtive skills, not concepts.

Concepts are cerbral, a thought, an idea. Techniques live in the physical plane and are what will be used "physically" by the student when they need to "physically" defend themselves.

Brownie

 

[Matthew Temkin]

Before Roger is accused of stealing QK the question is this..Is QK worth stealing?
In July, 2004 7677 and myself got some hands on training in the subject from Brownie and I, for one, was not impressed.
Yes..at 15 yards Brownie had us hitting a very small target with his reference point, but then I was able to duplicate the exact same feat with both front sight index and then with total target focused index--meaning true point shooting.
At 15 yards, may I reemphaise
Conclusion...IMHO the reference point--for me at least--was unnecessary.
Then Brownie showed us the QK hip shooting which, to me, seemed awkward and placed the gun so far out from the body as to put it past what would be safe for very close range gunfighting.
Yes, it was accurate, but I prefer the half hip method as taught by Jelly Bryce, Fairbairn and many past gunfight masters. It was also done without movement in a very rooted to the ground fashion.
I see that Brownie has added some of the other point shooting methods to his courses ( which I assume he got from 7677 because I never formally taught him anything) but back in 2004 when he called himself a QK instructor he was just showing these handful of techniques.
Before someone calls me on the carpet for posting this ( as if telling the truth is a bad thing) I do have a short video of Brownie ( shot by 7677) teaching/explaining the system along with some pistol/knife disarms.
Anyone in the NYC area who wants to view it ( it's only about 7 minutes or so) is welcome to contact me at [email protected]
Here is a review of our 2004 shoot.
http://www.pointshooting.com/2004nyc.htm

 

[brownie0486]

Matt,

Anything with FAS is not copyrighted, not intellectual property of any one person as you are well aware.

When you show that video, people will also see that I was making head shots at 9-12 feet, multiple times on three targets with QK very quickly. Another tool in the box, as I've stated before, like other tools we use.

Stand and deliver skills have their place in the SD of oneself. No less so that FAS which you teach being a rooted to the ground skill which you had the students performing in Tucson. They certainly were not moving as the line was too tight, they stood and delivered with you all day in those skills.

You know they have their place, in fact, your FAS training is a perfect example of stand and deliver, no more or less so. It was good enough for Fairbairn and Sykes and your own training in that system, but somehow it is inferior when it involves another skill?

And lets not forget your use of QK hip when three were charging you from 21 feet simultaneously in Tenn. when FAS wasn't working so well for you on multiples, thats also on that little video you mention you have. You used that which you now claim put the gun too far out in front as to be not used, yet when three rushed you at 21 feet, it worked perfectly. Hmmm-

Interesting, very interesting.

As to this statement: back in 2004 when he called himself a QK instructor he was just showing these handful of techniques. that would also be incorrect, I wasn't training anyone back then as an instructor. I didn't start training people professionally until Oct. 2005 when the Tucson event went forward. I demonstrated some of the skills you asked me to come to NY and demo based on internet correspondence. More inaccuracy in your posts, but thats to be expected of one who goes by so many names on these forums and not just his own.

It's quite apparent what you are attempting to do here by your posts where some of the materials I cover in the classes is concerned. It doesn't wash well when put under scrutiny though, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Brownie

 

[BullfrogKen]

I have no idea what background conflicts may have, or are occurring between the parties here. And I take no sides in it. This manner of conversation is not beneficial to the members of THR, as it goes way over most folk's heads. The only activity occuring here is a fight between who owns what technique and is qualified/authorized to teach it or not.


I highly encourage all of you to take this dispute off line, and not let it spill out onto the public forum.