How do you rate your handgun self-defense skills?  There are tests that measure it and the easiest one for most people to do is the bill drill - draw and fire 5 rounds at 5 yards in a 5 inch target.  Type of holster makes a difference with appendix carry usually being about .25 or so seconds faster than strongside concealed draw.

Here's a through provoking writeup I copied from facebook.



Riley T. Bowman
  ·
After my last two days of posts which has generated a lot of discussion, here is the next natural progression. People start wondering about their own shooting skill, where they stand, how much unfounded faith in their gear they've placed, whether they've invested in themselves properly, etc. You may even have wondered or asked yourself the question:
How good is good enough?
This is a difficult question to answer because it's going to depend on your own personal priorities and goals. If you're a competitive shooter, what are you goals you hope to achieve, and have you reached them yet? If not, why not? What stands in your way? (It's almost certainly not your gear, which was the whole point of my last two posts!)
But let's come at this from the defensive context and try to answer the question that way which is also very difficult to do.  First, let's address two harsh truths:
1. 95+% of firearm owners have very low skill especially where it comes to handgun shooting skill.
2. Most defensive firearms events are won by individuals with below average skill.
That's a bit of a conundrum, isn't it? But it's the truth. If we were to ask a large sample of firearm owners about their skill level, almost certainly the large majority of them would exaggerate their response. Some of that fallacy or misbelief comes from an overconfidence provided from the gear they've purchased. Most of it is just pure Dunning-Kruger.
Obviously, we should not settle for low skill or make excuses that just because most defensive encounters are won by those with low skill, that it's acceptable to not pursue skill development.
So how good is good enough?
Nearly a decade ago, John Hearne of Two Pillars Training solicited from the hive mind at a major online pistol shooting forum opinions on automaticity as it relates to shooting skill and where various measurements of skill might land on that spectrum. His "Typical Performance & Automaticity Speculation" chart is the result of that endeavor.
Now, I've grossly misappropriated John's chart and adapted it (squished it) to fit within the chart I posted up yesterday. Neither chart is perfect. Don't read into anything too much here. My bell curve was just an illustration on some thoughts I had regarding gear and performance benefits. But it is ALL just speculation, based on experience and educated estimates. And I only included the bell curve from yesterday's post as a reference and an effort to maintain some continuity in thought process.
I've added in some percentages (again, estimates!) of where I think groups of shooters of like skill land within that spectrum. And then I've added a red line right in the middle, which happens to correspond with what I've thought for some time now that somewhere around 50% performance of a top Grand Master shooter in USPSA is dead middle of C-class, and everything to the right of that suggests skill that shows strong likelihood of automatic performance. Or, in other words, this is the line I've decided to draw where I think we should strive to attain as a "minimum performance standard." It is realistically attainable by anyone that puts in a reasonable amount of consistent, deliberate practice.
If you're in a deadly force incident, a situation requiring thinking on your feet, application of tactics, and decision making, do you want your shooting skills--should they be called upon--to come from a place of automaticity? Or do you want to roll the dice and hope that today you're just another in a long string of the lucky ones?
Put that in the context of the discussion we had about gear and equipment, and ask yourself where you are skill-wise. Where do you measure up? What do you lack yet? How are you going to get there? What plan will you implement and follow to guide you to achieving your own performance goals?
Get to work. 💪

is there a chart for old guys?

is there a chart for old guys?

Jerry Miculek (age 68) was unavailable for comment.

Get to work. 💪

Agree.  But ummm.....where?

And even if KHSC opens I doubt it would offer the training we need......

How do you rate your handgun self-defense skills?  There are tests that measure it and the easiest one for most people to do is the bill drill - draw and fire 5 rounds at 5 yards in a 5 inch target.  Type of holster makes a difference with appendix carry usually being about .25 or so seconds faster than strongside concealed draw.

Here's a through provoking writeup I copied from facebook.



Riley T. Bowman
  ·
After my last two days of posts which has generated a lot of discussion, here is the next natural progression. People start wondering about their own shooting skill, where they stand, how much unfounded faith in their gear they've placed, whether they've invested in themselves properly, etc. You may even have wondered or asked yourself the question:
How good is good enough?
This is a difficult question to answer because it's going to depend on your own personal priorities and goals. If you're a competitive shooter, what are you goals you hope to achieve, and have you reached them yet? If not, why not? What stands in your way? (It's almost certainly not your gear, which was the whole point of my last two posts!)
But let's come at this from the defensive context and try to answer the question that way which is also very difficult to do.  First, let's address two harsh truths:
1. 95+% of firearm owners have very low skill especially where it comes to handgun shooting skill.
2. Most defensive firearms events are won by individuals with below average skill.
That's a bit of a conundrum, isn't it? But it's the truth. If we were to ask a large sample of firearm owners about their skill level, almost certainly the large majority of them would exaggerate their response. Some of that fallacy or misbelief comes from an overconfidence provided from the gear they've purchased. Most of it is just pure Dunning-Kruger.
Obviously, we should not settle for low skill or make excuses that just because most defensive encounters are won by those with low skill, that it's acceptable to not pursue skill development.
So how good is good enough?
Nearly a decade ago, John Hearne of Two Pillars Training solicited from the hive mind at a major online pistol shooting forum opinions on automaticity as it relates to shooting skill and where various measurements of skill might land on that spectrum. His "Typical Performance & Automaticity Speculation" chart is the result of that endeavor.
Now, I've grossly misappropriated John's chart and adapted it (squished it) to fit within the chart I posted up yesterday. Neither chart is perfect. Don't read into anything too much here. My bell curve was just an illustration on some thoughts I had regarding gear and performance benefits. But it is ALL just speculation, based on experience and educated estimates. And I only included the bell curve from yesterday's post as a reference and an effort to maintain some continuity in thought process.
I've added in some percentages (again, estimates!) of where I think groups of shooters of like skill land within that spectrum. And then I've added a red line right in the middle, which happens to correspond with what I've thought for some time now that somewhere around 50% performance of a top Grand Master shooter in USPSA is dead middle of C-class, and everything to the right of that suggests skill that shows strong likelihood of automatic performance. Or, in other words, this is the line I've decided to draw where I think we should strive to attain as a "minimum performance standard." It is realistically attainable by anyone that puts in a reasonable amount of consistent, deliberate practice.
If you're in a deadly force incident, a situation requiring thinking on your feet, application of tactics, and decision making, do you want your shooting skills--should they be called upon--to come from a place of automaticity? Or do you want to roll the dice and hope that today you're just another in a long string of the lucky ones?
Put that in the context of the discussion we had about gear and equipment, and ask yourself where you are skill-wise. Where do you measure up? What do you lack yet? How are you going to get there? What plan will you implement and follow to guide you to achieving your own performance goals?
Get to work. 💪

I'm probably not normal,  but I won't hesitate to kill any threat.
Even if the kill is a metaphor.
 

USPSA D Class is better than 95% of the shooters?  I guess I can see that overall, but damn. . .

is there a chart for old guys?

I think the old guys would be off the chart as life in jail is no longer a deterrent.

USPSA D Class is better than 95% of the shooters?  I guess I can see that overall, but damn. . .

They're talking about all shooters.  To include those that shoot once every year or less which makes up the majority. 

Also the number of people shooting USPSA is very small, likely only a few percent itself.

The minimum standard most defensive firearms instructors recommend is the bill drill in 5 seconds. 

Draw and fire 5 shots at 5 yards in a 5 inch circle in less than 5 seconds.

Another challenge is being able to shoot it cold, no prior practice shots like what would happen in. Defensive encounter.

They're talking about all shooters.  To include those that shoot once every year or less which makes up the majority. 

Also the number of people shooting
USPSA is very small, likely only a few percent itself.

Uh, yeah.  I got that. . .

I've seen some USPSA Class D shooters "in action" and the standard isn't very high to get there.  That said, in order to get a classification, they have to shoot enough matches to get the classification, so I get that's shooting more than many gun owners who maybe shoot their gun for 50-100 rounds after purchasing and put them away.  Plus, shooting in USPSA matches does have a good amount of safety education and rules. 

I think the point of this chart and writeup is if you are in the upper end you have a very high probability of surviving a deadly encounter.  You can win with lesser skill, but with lesser odds.

In my rangemaster instructor class with Tom givens, one of the top civilian firearms instructors and one of the hardest classes to pass(<1% in the chart) .  He had 18 of his students involved in deadly defensive shootings.  About 15 of those were successful encounters.  The other 3 didn't have a gun on them.

Jerry Miculek (age 68) was unavailable for comment.

=============
I'll be 68 in a few months.
At this age stuff changes. eyesight, muscle mass, reflexes, ...everything.
Unlike Miculek, I don't have a shooting range to practice on either.
Even if KHSC were open, the opportunity for close range action shooting is rare.
I used to go practice every week, but that was 44 years ago. Everything has changed.

=============
I'll be 68 in a few months.
At this age stuff changes. eyesight, muscle mass, reflexes, ...everything.
Unlike Miculek, I don't have a shooting range to practice on either.
Even if KHSC were open, the opportunity for close range action shooting is rare.
I used to go practice every week, but that was 44 years ago. Everything has changed.

Cops routinely fail to get more than 25%-35% of their shots on target in real live gun fights.  These are paid, trained professionals who practice a lot and are mentally prepared for these situations.

Hopefully the bad guy I face is a "Call of Duty" trained idiot who's already at a disadvantage with his heart racing and adrenaline pumping.   

Jerry Miculek (age 68) was unavailable for comment.

He is too busy shooting.  I once read he shoots about 20,000 rounds a month, with demos, matches and practice.  Must be nice to have firearm and ammo companies as sponsors.  Most could not afford the cost of all that ammo.

He is too busy shooting.  I once read he shoots about 20,000 rounds a month, with demos, matches and practice.  Must be nice to have firearm and ammo companies as sponsors.  Most could not afford the cost of all that ammo.

20K rounds/month?

What does he do with the rest of his month after those 2 hours?

 

=============
I'll be 68 in a few months.
At this age stuff changes. eyesight, muscle mass, reflexes, ...everything.
Unlike Miculek, I don't have a shooting range to practice on either.
Even if KHSC were open, the opportunity for close range action shooting is rare.
I used to go practice every week, but that was 44 years ago. Everything has changed.

Looks like when KHSC opens it will be worse than it already was (practice wise).

Almost like ballroom dancing without a partner.

Here is a thought.

Before the range shut down, I used to go and shoot at the 25 yd range at least a couple times per month just to stay sharp.
To keep my rapid-fire skills somewhat ok, I would practice 5 shots at a sheet of copy paper.
You can't load more than 5 in the gun anyway.
I would practice from the low-ready position and fire the 5 rounds at about 1 shot per second.
The goal would be to keep every shot on the piece of copy paper. (8.5x11 size sheet)

If you shoot any faster than that on the BE range, you will get yelled at.

I like the idea of the Glock bb gun but apparently it doesn't charge the same way so you would be restricted to certain drills. Cheaper than paying indoor range extortion.

I found the original article by the author.  The curved line represents when good higher priced gear makes a difference.  Balancing where your resources should go:  training and practice or guns and gear.  At the low skill level, equipment doesn't do much.  At the middle level, it makes a big difference.  At the top level, it's back to small differences again.  I guess at that level it's a close race and there isn't much more to improve on.

So far I've probably put 75% of my money into training, and 25% into gear.

https://www.concealedcarry.com/tactics/pistol-skill-how-good-is-good-enough/

I found the original article by the author.  The curved line represents when good higher priced gear makes a difference.  Balancing where your resources should go:  training and practice or guns and gear.  At the low skill level, equipment doesn't do much.  At the middle level, it makes a big difference.  At the top level, it's back to small differences again.  I guess at that level it's a close race and there isn't much more to improve on.

So far I've probably put 75% of my money into training, and 25% into gear.

https://www.concealedcarry.com/tactics/pistol-skill-how-good-is-good-enough/

Okay that makes way more sense