TODAY ONLY: Interview with Bob Vogel, the paper GM

[obsessiveshooter]

You can't fake a great classified score; they really do test our fundamental skills. So, whatever your current classification is, whether D or GM, it is a pretty accurate grade for your gun handling skills. Your match skills might be different though. It looks like the newest classifiers include more movement, right?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[CHA-LEE]

The thing that people have a really hard time understanding is that earning a GM classification is just the beginning. Producing an overall match performance at a consistent GM level when titles are on the line is a completely different level of skill and determination to achieve.

 

I also want to point out that most shooters who achieve a GM classification in USPSA also have or have achieved "GM Level" skills in other aspects of their life, job or experience. Most of the career "B Class" shooters you see at matches are also "B Class" in everything else they do in life. They can't break out of B class performance in doing anything in their lives so why would practical shooting be any different? This may sound harsh to some, but it is what it is.

Edited December 5, 2018 by CHA-LEE

[obsessiveshooter]

Its about to get Jerry Springer up in here!



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Sarge]

1 hour ago, CHA-LEE said:

 Most of the career "B Class" shooters you see at matches are also "B Class" in everything else they do in life. They can't break out of B class performance in doing anything in their lives so why would practical shooting be any different? This may sound harsh to some, but it is what it is.

What it “is” is bulls#!t! Dumbest thing I have ever read on the internet.

[Ssanders224]

1 hour ago, CHA-LEE said:

The thing that people have a really hard time understanding is that earning a GM classification is just the beginning. Producing an overall match performance at a consistent GM level when titles are on the line is a completely different level of skill and determination to achieve.

 

I also want to point out that most shooters who achieve a GM classification in USPSA also have or have achieved "GM Level" skills in other aspects of their life, job or experience. Most of the career "B Class" shooters you see at matches are also "B Class" in everything else they do in life. They can't break out of B class performance in doing anything in their lives so why would practical shooting be any different? This may sound harsh to some, but it is what it is.

 

[CHA-LEE]

1 minute ago, Sarge said:

What it “is” is bulls#!t! Dumbest thing I have ever read on the internet.

 

Really? Show me a majority sample of B class shooters who are also performing other skills, tasks or functions at 95% or above everyone else TRYING HARD to do the same task(s). I will save you some time, it doesn't happen. That is a bitter pill to swallow but doesn't make it any less true.

[nasty618]

1 hour ago, CHA-LEE said:

The thing that people have a really hard time understanding is that earning a GM classification is just the beginning. Producing an overall match performance at a consistent GM level when titles are on the line is a completely different level of skill and determination to achieve.

 

Out of about 22000 Production competitors in USPSA only about 400 are GMs. Less than 2%

Of those 400, only about 30 participated in the biggest event of 2018 (USPSA Nationals). Less than 8%

Of those only a handful produced "real" GM level performance (if we measure that performance by the pure classification numbers)

 

So while that statement maybe correct for the top 20 or 40 people,  dont you think it would be more reasonable to say that  producing consistent GM level performance is not in focus for not just the most USPSA shooters, but even for the majority of the GM class shooters?  I think for the vast majority of USPSA membership attaining a GM classification is the main prize and if not the end of the journey, then definitely the ultimate goal.  That is if they even set that goal.

 

4 minutes ago, Sarge said:

Dumbest thing I have ever read on the internet.

 

Exaggerate much?  

[B_RAD]

USPSA B class in life is still IDPA Master class.

 

 

 

So,.....  

[sfinney]

As a previously  aspiring paper GM, and now a "paper M" way past his prime (about a point shy of making GM at my peak but would never be a real threat at most matches in either classification now), I agree with all the above.

 

Its easy to practice classifiers and its good practice for skills. But you have to work in movement, more field courses, and stage analysis as you progress or you'll be what I like to call a "stand and shoot Master" rather than a paper one. Long courses and explosive footwork, movement, etc might not every be your thing.... but dang you can shoot 95%+ or higher on a lot of classifiers without those abilities.

 

I'd love to see them adopt an 85% or better is just plain M... but to make GM you have to show up and win at a major, and earn it.

 

 

[Sarge]

55 minutes ago, nasty618 said:

 

Out of about 22000 Production competitors in USPSA only about 400 are GMs. Less than 2%

Of those 400, only about 30 participated in the biggest event of 2018 (USPSA Nationals). Less than 8%

Of those only a handful produced "real" GM level performance (if we measure that performance by the pure classification numbers)

 

So while that statement maybe correct for the top 20 or 40 people,  dont you think it would be more reasonable to say that  producing consistent GM level performance is not in focus for not just the most USPSA shooters, but even for the majority of the GM class shooters?  I think for the vast majority of USPSA membership attaining a GM classification is the main prize and if not the end of the journey, then definitely the ultimate goal.  That is if they even set that goal.

 

 

Exaggerate much?  

It was pretty damn dumb.

 

1 hour ago, CHA-LEE said:

 

Really? Show me a majority sample of B class shooters who are also performing other skills, tasks or functions at 95% or above everyone else TRYING HARD to do the same task(s). I will save you some time, it doesn't happen. That is a bitter pill to swallow but doesn't make it any less true.

Now majority sample? I know surgeons who might not even be B class. I know orchestra members who are maybe B shooters. I’m retired military and feel I’m much more than an A class member of society but that’s about all I can muster in USPSA.

 Most any competitor in any game or sport tends to be an A type person but that doesn’t always translate to GM. Heck, the percentage of guys who make A in this game is a very small number.

[Jollymon32]

3 hours ago, CHA-LEE said:

The thing that people have a really hard time understanding is that earning a GM classification is just the beginning. Producing an overall match performance at a consistent GM level when titles are on the line is a completely different level of skill and determination to achieve.

 

I also want to point out that most shooters who achieve a GM classification in USPSA also have or have achieved "GM Level" skills in other aspects of their life, job or experience. Most of the career "B Class" shooters you see at matches are also "B Class" in everything else they do in life. They can't break out of B class performance in doing anything in their lives so why would practical shooting be any different? This may sound harsh to some, but it is what it is.

 

I am a lowly B shooter.  I bet you though, that I have beaten you in the game of life...

[CHA-LEE]

Sarge> Bitter truths are still bitter. You are missing the point with your examples. If someone goes to school to become a surgeon, does it automatically make them a "GM" in that field? Absolutely NOT. The same goes for Orchestra members, post hole diggers, trash truck drivers or whatever else occupation you want to list. Show me someone who is a "GM" in other activities in their life who is also a B Class practical shooter with a vested interest in improving but is stuck in B class forever. These people will be the far exception compared to the majority "Career B Class shooters". These exceptions are usually limited by something else that is obvious.

 

The point I am trying to make is that the majority of Career B Class shooters out there don't know what it takes to achieve a GM level performance in doing anything much less shooting. These people usually have significant problems with or refuse to set goals, achieve goals, embracing the suck when needed, troubleshooting issues, and continually pushing for the next level of performance. This reality applies to everything in life, not just practical shooting. There are plenty of social statistics out there that prove time and time again that this reality is true.

 

Don't kill the messenger. The Facts are the Facts. If you or anyone else reading this thread takes offense to these facts then its 100% in your control to change your reality by dedicating yourself in the appropriate manner. GM level performance isn't some mystical unachievable thing that most non-GM's make it out to be. It simply requires a level sacrifice and dedication that most people are not willing to do.

[AKJD]

3 hours ago, CHA-LEE said:

The thing that people have a really hard time understanding is that earning a GM classification is just the beginning. Producing an overall match performance at a consistent GM level when titles are on the line is a completely different level of skill and determination to achieve.

 

I also want to point out that most shooters who achieve a GM classification in USPSA also have or have achieved "GM Level" skills in other aspects of their life, job or experience. Most of the career "B Class" shooters you see at matches are also "B Class" in everything else they do in life. They can't break out of B class performance in doing anything in their lives so why would practical shooting be any different? This may sound harsh to some, but it is what it is

Edited December 5, 2018 by AKJD

[CHA-LEE]

13 minutes ago, AKJD said:

People shoot for a myriad of different reasons. Not every one aspires to be a GM. By your logic everyone that is a GM must be the best at everything they do and be wealthy and successful. I’m sure it wouldn’t be that hard to disprove that.  Several well known GMs that are also well known train wrecks come to mind. Your statement smacks of arrogance on a GM scale.

Read my explanation to Sarge...... I am not claiming that GM practical shooters are "GM's" in everything they do in life. GM level practical shooters simply understand the process and effort it takes to become a GM. This level of sacrifice and dedication is something that most B Class shooters don't and never will understand or they wouldn't be stuck in B Class.

 

I want to make it clear that there is nothing wrong with someone who feels that "B Class" skill in anything is good enough for them. We all have different priorities and motivations for the endeavors we strive to participate in or achieve in life. I am also not claiming that being a GM practical shooter is somehow more important than anything else in a persons non-shooting life. We all have the choice of which activities we want to get involved in and to what level that participation can or will be.

 

The reoccurring theme through human performance history is that the basic recipe successful people use to maximize their performance doesn't vary much from one activity to the next.

Edited December 5, 2018 by CHA-LEE

[GrumpyOne]

29 minutes ago, CHA-LEE said:

Sarge> Bitter truths are still bitter. You are missing the point with your examples. If someone goes to school to become a surgeon, does it automatically make them a "GM" in that field? Absolutely NOT. The same goes for Orchestra members, post hole diggers, trash truck drivers or whatever else occupation you want to list. Show me someone who is a "GM" in other activities in their life who is also a B Class practical shooter with a vested interest in improving but is stuck in B class forever. These people will be the far exception compared to the majority "Career B Class shooters". These exceptions are usually limited by something else that is obvious.

 

The point I am trying to make is that the majority of Career B Class shooters out there don't know what it takes to achieve a GM level performance in doing anything much less shooting. These people usually have significant problems with or refuse to set goals, achieve goals, embracing the suck when needed, troubleshooting issues, and continually pushing for the next level of performance. This reality applies to everything in life, not just practical shooting. There are plenty of social statistics out there that prove time and time again that this reality is true.

 

Don't kill the messenger. The Facts are the Facts. If you or anyone else reading this thread takes offense to these facts then its 100% in your control to change your reality by dedicating yourself in the appropriate manner. GM level performance isn't some mystical unachievable thing that most non-GM's make it out to be. It simply requires a level sacrifice and dedication that most people are not willing to do.

I'm gonna ask tech support to get us a like button....so I can push it for this post.

[Sarge]

1 hour ago, GrumpyOne said:

I'm gonna ask tech support to get us a like button....so I can push it for this post.

Figures... ask for a BS button while you are at it. It’s attitudes like his and apparently yours that make the 90+% of shooters out there who, no matter how hard they try , won’t even make A, want to use the term paper GM even more.

 So I’m not a GM because I don’t try? Got it. I’m glad it doesn’t take at least a little god given talent, better vision, better knees and back, reflexes of a 20 year old, and enough money for countless thousands of rounds a month for practice. (Oh wait, the reason I can’t afford the ammo is because I’m only mediocre at life.)

[CHA-LEE]

Sarge> Here is the difference in the mindsets. You list limitations as to why you can't or wont achieve your goals. GM's make lists of their limitations then treat them as opportunities to overcome and are willing to put in the effort to work past them or find alternate solutions to mitigate the limitation. 

 

The best enablers for people to get better at things is high quality training mixed with highly focused practice. Ask yourself this. How much money have you invested in yourself with highly effective personal training over the years for practical shooting? How much money have you spent on Guns, Gear and Ammo over that same time frame? Hint, one of these investments is far more important than the other if you want to maximize your performance.   

[GrumpyOne]

Sarge, how many classifiers have movement? That takes the knees and back out of the equation. Glasses take the eyes out of the equation. Reflexes are what they are, but you can train to have faster reflexes. Just because someone tries, does not mean that they are trying hard enough. If you want something bad enough, you will make it happen. You will try harder, you will spend more time and money, you will put in the maximum effort to meet your goals...if you want it bad enough. Saying you want something but not putting in the maximum effort to produce those results is what holds people back. Can you honestly say that you are giving 110% to meet your goal of being a GM? Do you go out and practice in the rain, sleet, snow, heat, or dark? Do you practice when you are sick or not feeling well? Do you really want to make GM, or is it just a crutch to say that because you don't have a "natural talent" that it will never happen? Personally, I don't think shooting a gun is a "natural talent"...what is natural about it? It is training, for the long hours, doing the grind, even if you don't want to, it is putting in the work to get there.

 

In the words of Flexmoney....Do the work

 

I'm in a very specialized field of work. I am considered by the industry to be one of the best in the entire industry, even though there are many other people in the same field of work. It's not because of natural talent, it's because I wanted to be the best, I refused to let anything stand in my way of that goal. It took me 20+ years to make that goal, but it wasn't natural talent...it was doing the work, putting in the hours. I have sacrificed many things in the quest of that goal. Make a decision to be the best (or GM) and do what it takes.

[Youngeyes]

24 minutes ago, GrumpyOne said:

It's not because of natural talent, it's because I wanted to be the best, I refused to let anything stand in my way of that goal.

THIS^^^ I'm putting this on my wall. 

[jcc7x7]

Well y'all have accomplished it!

This thread is officially no longer worth reading!

[Sarge]

1 hour ago, GrumpyOne said:

Sarge, how many classifiers have movement? That takes the knees and back out of the equation. Glasses take the eyes out of the equation. Reflexes are what they are, but you can train to have faster reflexes. Just because someone tries, does not mean that they are trying hard enough. If you want something bad enough, you will make it happen. You will try harder, you will spend more time and money, you will put in the maximum effort to meet your goals...if you want it bad enough. Saying you want something but not putting in the maximum effort to produce those results is what holds people back. Can you honestly say that you are giving 110% to meet your goal of being a GM? Do you go out and practice in the rain, sleet, snow, heat, or dark? Do you practice when you are sick or not feeling well? Do you really want to make GM, or is it just a crutch to say that because you don't have a "natural talent" that it will never happen? Personally, I don't think shooting a gun is a "natural talent"...what is natural about it? It is training, for the long hours, doing the grind, even if you don't want to, it is putting in the work to get there.

 

In the words of Flexmoney....Do the work

 

I'm in a very specialized field of work. I am considered by the industry to be one of the best in the entire industry, even though there are many other people in the same field of work. It's not because of natural talent, it's because I wanted to be the best, I refused to let anything stand in my way of that goal. It took me 20+ years to make that goal, but it wasn't natural talent...it was doing the work, putting in the hours. I have sacrificed many things in the quest of that goal. Make a decision to be the best (or GM) and do what it takes.

  I'm trying to remember when or where I said I wanted to be a GM? I'll never make it because I don't qualify. After all I'm just a retired Grunt who drives a school bus. You remember, your buddy said I needed to take out a loan to buy a gun because I was just a school bus driver. Pretty much a burden to society based on what I have read hear. Shooting a gun well does take natural talent. Alvin York didn't practice much. If a GM doesn't need legs or back that works to get his card then he is by definition a Paper GM because he'll never win anything other than an all classifier match. 

  Nobody is born with the knowledge to keep cell phones working so of course it's not natural talent based. But if one is born with a good head on there shoulders they can learn almost anything. 

  

[Sarge]

1 hour ago, jcc7x7 said:

Well y'all have accomplished it!

This thread is officially no longer worth reading!

Well, it was about paper GM's.

[B_RAD]

Most people don't realize that "natrual talent" is due to a lot of work put in behind the scenes. 

 

 

[d_striker]

I'm not going to insert myself too much into this discussion but I will mention something about "natural talent."  

 

Of course "talent" helps...But it only takes you so far.  Per Lanny Basham, someone who has more "talent" may pick up a skill faster or in less reps than someone with less "talent."  Which only means that someone that has less "talent" must perform more reps and practice harder if their goal is to make GM.

 

I've also heard time and time again from the top shooters in the world that they hate it when people say they are "gifted" or "talented" because it discounts all of the hard work, practice, discipline, sacrifice, and dedication it took to get them where they are.

[Ssanders224]

2 hours ago, d_striker said:

I'm not going to insert myself too much into this discussion but I will mention something about "natural talent."  

 

Of course "talent" helps...But it only takes you so far.  Per Lanny Basham, someone who has more "talent" may pick up a skill faster or in less reps than someone with less "talent."  Which only means that someone that has less "talent" must perform more reps and practice harder if their goal is to make GM.

 

I've also heard time and time again from the top shooters in the world that they hate it when people say they are "gifted" or "talented" because it discounts all of the hard work, practice, discipline, sacrifice, and dedication it took to get them where they are.

 

I’ll expound on this, by saying that “natural talent” has even been noted to be a hindrance at times. 

 

As Basham states, natural talent allows some to pick up new skills in a very short time, or in very few reps.... Because of this, some athletes that are “gifted” never develop the true discipline and grit that it takes most people to become proficient at a new skill.  When that discipline isn’t developed, it makes it very, very hard for a “naturally gifted” athlete to continue past the road block that is the peak of their “talent”.  Their curve is steep, to a certain point, but then tapers rapidly.  Conversely, an athlete that has needed true discipline and determination from the beginning may not ever have the steep learning curve... but it is easier for them to continue their upward trend in a sense. 

 

You will never be “elite” on talent alone, but that status CAN be reached on determination, discipline, and grit.  

In the instances that an athlete exhibits both the talent AND the other traits, we get the “Jordans”, “Tigers” etc.. The “Elite of the Elite”. 

 

Edited December 6, 2018 by Ssanders224