TODAY ONLY: Interview with Bob Vogel, the paper GM

[MemphisMechanic]

If you’re not familiar, you have to be a paid member of Shooters Summit to watch all the videos any time.

 

For free, when it goes live in November? Certain videos are available on certain days. Today is Bob Vogel.

 

https://shooterssummit.com/speaker/robert-vogel/

Skip to 7:00 to get directly to the meat of the talk.

 

Listen to his original training regimen for USPSA. Guys often talk trash about people who set up classifiers and practice them endlessly. But that’s exactly how today’s most dominant shooter got started, and how he made GM without having shot more than a major match or two.

 

Edited November 27, 2018 by MemphisMechanic

[rowdyb]

And in Stoeger's book he says he got to be GM his first classification match because he practiced the hell out of classifiers for months ahead of time. Isn't that exactly the type of behavior which many deride? Selective memory is a killer...

[Sarge]

9 hours ago, rowdyb said:

And in Stoeger's book he says he got to be GM his first classification match because he practiced the hell out of classifiers for months ahead of time. Isn't that exactly the type of behavior which many deride? Selective memory is a killer...

Well, I don’t think much of Stoeger for a few reasons, but he and Vogel are not what I consider paper GM’s. They can win at the highest levels. Practicing classifiers until your hands bleed and then out performing everybody else is much different than going to the range and shooting classifier X until you ace it and having a stats guy or MD submit that score. At least that’s how I see it.

[jkrispies]

40 minutes ago, Sarge said:

Practicing classifiers until your hands bleed and then out performing everybody else is much different than going to the range and shooting classifier X until you ace it and having a stats guy or MD submit that score. At least that’s how I see it.

Please tell me that doesn’t happen...?

[MemphisMechanic]

47 minutes ago, Sarge said:

Well, I don’t think much of Stoeger for a few reasons, but he and Vogel are not what I consider paper GM’s. They can win at the highest levels. 

 

Congratulations on making my point.  

 

So far, every single GM on the summit has stated that they practiced classifers exhaustively while making GM.

 

Vogel.

 

Josh Froelich. (shotgun worldshoot champ and PCC all around badass.)

 

Casey Reed and Mason Lane. (Production winners of all kinds of Area matches, and top 10 Nats guys.)

 

It’s almost like being able to hammer targets fast with exceptional gunhandling is a huge portion of being an actual top level shooter.

 

Edited November 28, 2018 by MemphisMechanic

[rowdyb]

Being good at and practicing classifiers is never going to hurt you. Saying you're only good at stand and shoot aka classifiers or only good at stages but not at classifiers is just making excuses.

 

People who throw the term paper gm around need to take a look inside themselves.

[Sarge]

22 minutes ago, jkrispies said:

Please tell me that doesn’t happen...?

I’ve seen it once. That makes it rare but it happens

[rowdyb]

Oh, and if you look in here you find and old thread from another respected, national top 10 shooter who has a post asking "what are the easiest classifiers to make gm?" The horror, someone trying to find the easiest classifiers for gm. Total paper gm behavior right? Oh wait, that's Matt Mink.

 

The paper gm argument is weak.

[jkrispies]

40 minutes ago, rowdyb said:

The paper gm argument is weak.

I disagree with this statement only if you’re using it against somebody else in a derogatory fashion.  The reality is that many GMs started as a paper GM, which I would define as a person who classifies as a GM but competes at M in the overall.  The other way to make GM is via match bump and then they’ll be accused of being caught as a sandbager, LOL.  Making it on paper first, for many, is just part of the learning curve, as with any developing skill.  If there’s a GM out there who has self-awareness and recognizes him or herself as a paper GM and then uses that as a motivator to notch up a level, then good for them.  Agreed 100%, though, that anybody less than a GM who derides somebody else as being “only” a paper GM is best served to keep thier unqualified opinion silent till they can back it up with thier performance at that level... unless it’s a situation like Sarge descrbed.  That’s crazy but I can see it happening with certain sponsored shooters who need to justify thier pretty shirts.  

Edited November 28, 2018 by jkrispies

[rowdyb]

Let me clarify where I'm coming from on this issue.

-many of the behaviors to get to GM are shared, if not exactly the same between the people described as either "paper" or "top level" GM's

-using the term "paper gm" as a pejorative belittles the accomplishment of something that 98% of people in uspsa will never ever attain

-it is a fact that a great majority of GM shooters do not shoot 95% or greater at nationals. to use match finish to describe someone as a paper gm is misguided and contrary to the data.

[nasty618]

1 hour ago, Sarge said:

Practicing classifiers until your hands bleed and then out performing everybody else is much different than going to the range and shooting classifier X until you ace it and having a stats guy or MD submit that score. At least that’s how I see it.

 

13 minutes ago, Sarge said:

I’ve seen it once. That makes it rare but it happens

 

I assume you mean shooting a classifier "in a single, organized local match" until you ace it and then submit the "good" score, correct?  I am thinking about that scenario and the thought that comes in my head is this: unless there is an MD  somewhere out there that sets up all classifier matches on a regular basis with a specific goal in mind for four or five dedicated and driven future "paper GMs"... i just dont see this as a valid use case.  Here is why: although if it happened once - so the precedent is clearly there - it's just not very likely to happen often enough to have any meaningful impact to the global membership.  Why is it not likely to happen?  Nobody on the squad of a local match (regular or classifier) would agree with allowing someone to shoot a stage more than once.  Who would stay silent if someone was blatantly abusing the rules??  Even if they didnt know the rules - "I need to go home, i dont have time to wait for you to shoot this thing 5 times!!".   Peer accountability in action. 

 

 

 

[nasty618]

36 minutes ago, rowdyb said:

-using the term "paper gm" as a pejorative belittles the accomplishment of something that 98% of people in uspsa will never ever attain

 

YES!

[motosapiens]

Why wouldn't you practice classifiers? Only an idiot would say "these drills have a known standard of excellence, and the skills in them are tested at every match, so I'm going to avoid practicing them."

[Sarge]

22 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

Why wouldn't you practice classifiers? Only an idiot would say "these drills have a known standard of excellence, and the skills in them are tested at every match, so I'm going to avoid practicing them."

ugh..... Yes, by all means, practice classifiers. I agree that setting up a classifier when at the range to practice is better than just doing bill drills over and over and over and over and....

[MemphisMechanic]

Look at it another way; someone who trains standing still until they can average 95% on enough classifers to make GM?

 

That guy would only need to work on entry, exit, and loading/shooting on the move to be really deadly. I’d love to have that little to work on, in order to dominate.

 

And no one is going to totally avoid movement skills while dryfiring static skills like a lunatic. That’s an extreme example.

Edited November 28, 2018 by MemphisMechanic

[motosapiens]

18 minutes ago, Sarge said:

ugh..... Yes, by all means, practice classifiers. I agree that setting up a classifier when at the range to practice is better than just doing bill drills over and over and over and over and....

I would say it's better than just about *any* static practice..... although there is a crap ton to be learned about grip and shot-calling from shooting bill-drills on partials at different distances. I'm cheap, so I usually only shoot 4-5 shots per string instead of 6.

[motosapiens]

2 hours ago, nasty618 said:

 

Why is it not likely to happen?  Nobody on the squad of a local match (regular or classifier) would agree with allowing someone to shoot a stage more than once.  Who would stay silent if someone was blatantly abusing the rules??  Even if they didnt know the rules - "I need to go home, i dont have time to wait for you to shoot this thing 5 times!!".   Peer accountability in action. 

 

 

 

 

 

speaking of knowing the rules..... the rules explicitly allow you to re-shoot classifiers for classification (not match score)

[Sarge]

4 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

 

speaking of knowing the rules..... the rules explicitly allow you to re-shoot classifiers for classification (not match score)

Yep. It happens fairly often. Joe Shmidlap shoots a classifier and fumbles the reload or has a gun issue. Wants to shoot it again because he knows he can do better. No problem. Pay a few extra bucks and run it again. I have never seen anyone be upset about it.

[motosapiens]

3 minutes ago, Sarge said:

Yep. It happens fairly often. Joe Shmidlap shoots a classifier and fumbles the reload or has a gun issue. Wants to shoot it again because he knows he can do better. No problem. Pay a few extra bucks and run it again. I have never seen anyone be upset about it.

 

Correct. At our club we either do it after the match, or if there is no squad waiting, 1 person stays and runs the shooter when the rest of the squad moves on. Takes a minute or two. No harm no foul........ until people start doing it 10 times just hoping to hook up. That's lame.... but not something I care about other than to mock that person.  Peer pressure seems to keep it in check here. A few people will occasionally re-shoot if they are close to moving up but it's not that common.

[ngodwetrust21]

On 11/26/2018 at 8:32 PM, MemphisMechanic said:

Listen to his original training regimen for USPSA. Guys often talk trash about people who set up classifiers and practice them endlessly. But that’s exactly how today’s most dominant shooter got started, and how he made GM without having shot more than a major match or two.

 

 

I wasn’t aware that practicing classifiers was frowned upon. I love practicing classifiers. They are measurable and repeatable. Great way to understand the math and scoring behind USPSA. They focus the shooting skills you will need to perform at the match if you want to be successful.

 

Don’t know what to practice? Set up some classifiers until you find one you suck at. Then go practice that.

Edited November 28, 2018 by ngodwetrust21

[nasty618]

1 hour ago, Sarge said:

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

 

 

speaking of knowing the rules..... the rules explicitly allow you to re-shoot classifiers for classification (not match score)

Yep. It happens fairly often. Joe Shmidlap shoots a classifier and fumbles the reload or has a gun issue. Wants to shoot it again because he knows he can do better. No problem. Pay a few extra bucks and run it again. I have never seen anyone be upset about it.

 

Correct. We spoke about something along these lines a while back - https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/268057-classifier-vs-match-bump/?do=findComment&comment=2981403 and then a few more posts down in the same thread.

 

 

For this topic, i assumed we're speaking about that borderline unethical "shooting classifier X until you ace it and having a stats guy or MD submit that score", not a per rules reshoot for classification purposes.

[PPGMD]

We deride paper GMs because they often aren't quite GM material, but even paper GMs are good shooters. They have a good understanding of the basics, and often are just lacking on the overall competition skills which they can gain if they put the same effort into that as they did on the basics required to make GM.

 

Personally my classification is on paper only, due to my own physical limitations I can't perform to my classification in a match with field courses.

[Thomas H]

52 minutes ago, PPGMD said:

We deride paper GMs because they often aren't quite GM material, but even paper GMs are good shooters. They have a good understanding of the basics, and often are just lacking on the overall competition skills which they can gain if they put the same effort into that as they did on the basics required to make GM.

 

Personally my classification is on paper only, due to my own physical limitations I can't perform to my classification in a match with field courses.

 

I'm thinking one of the main issues in this thread is that people are describing "paper GMs" in two different ways.

 

Since they are talking about different things, then it isn't surprising that they think different things about those two different things. 

[Mcfoto]

I dunno. I started listening to the series because one of the speakers is my instructor (Go Keith Tyler!). I've gotten some very interesting insights:

 

1. Some like Vogel, make a study of the classifiers. Personally, I don't think that's a bad thing. Like he says, it's a test of basic skills.

2. Dry fire to a classifier. I had Anderson's book on my shelf but now have it out to the first exercise in my dry fire space.

3. Treat classifiers as another short course in the match. This I personally recently came to after a summer of bombed classifiers now clogging up my average.

4. Live fire to a classifier. Already kind of do. My basic live fire set up is an El Prez that I mix up the COF to keep from getting too bored.

5. Use a timer on Par time to work on speed in Dry fire.

 

As a D shooter who is usually at the bottom of the standings, I'm not knocking on a GM door any time soon (if ever). But I know my biggest weakness is speed and I've been able to glean enough from the series to figure out some practice routines to work on it. Whether a GM is a "paper" one or a match one, doesn't matter to me. They got there somehow and it seems that most of them have a perspective on how to get there. If I can learn from it, so what?

[Gooldylocks]

On 11/28/2018 at 6:04 AM, rowdyb said:

Let me clarify where I'm coming from on this issue.

-many of the behaviors to get to GM are shared, if not exactly the same between the people described as either "paper" or "top level" GM's

-using the term "paper gm" as a pejorative belittles the accomplishment of something that 98% of people in uspsa will never ever attain

-it is a fact that a great majority of GM shooters do not shoot 95% or greater at nationals. to use match finish to describe someone as a paper gm is misguided and contrary to the data.

Agreed on all counts. The "paper GM" debate comes up at least weekly it feels like, but most all of the people casting stones at the "Paper GMs" they mock won't ever make it there themselves.

 

My advice? Go shoot lots and lots of classifiers in practice. Dryfire them in the dojo. Shoot lots of strong and weak hand. If you can crush classifiers, you will crush field courses too soon enough.