The Tactical Excuse

[nontactical]

My friend Mark S. pointed out what shooting “tactically” means to a lot of shooters. In his words, it means “pretending that you don’t know where the targets are when you DO indeed know where the targets are.” We watched a perfect illustration of this at a recent match as a shooter would poke his head out from behind cover, locate a target and retreat behind the cover only to pop back out in the same position as before to engage ONE target, and repeat this laborious process until all threats were neutralized. If you are someone who does this, do you have any idea how silly it looks?!? This shooter took around 55 seconds to complete the stage. When Mark shot the same stage following all of the rules pertaining to cover, movement, reloads, etc, it took him under 14 seconds to shoot. Now I ask you: how was the other shooter being more “tactical” than Mark? In fact, didn’t the bad guys the other shooter was engaging have almost four times as long to kill him as those Mark dispatched? In terms of gunfight survivability (and by extension, “tactics”), isn’t that a bad thing?

I will concede that you may not know where your threat is if you get in a gunfight on the street. That’s why we have blind stages. In order to make it to the line on an open stage without knowing where the threat targets are you would have to be the first shooter and walk up to the line with your eyes closed having missed the stage explanation somehow (or have been shirking your duties as a competitor, namely taping and pickup up brass). Even in this far-fetched scenario, most targets are visually locatable since most barricades don’t extend all the way to the ground, and many of them are transparent anyway. So the fact of the matter is that we know where most of the targets are without trying. Purposely acting like you don’t know where something is when you do is well, rather infantile.

In fact it is more and more apparent that “tactical” is becoming the cry of the slow shooter as he bemoans getting spanked by those of us in the high speed, low drag mindset. I can’t tell you how many people have said to me recently “well, I shoot it tactically. I’m not an IPSC shooter like you.” Hey, I follow all of the rules, and solve the scenerios without exposing myself to a target until I’m ready to engage it just like the “tactical” guys. We can’t all keep up with B.E. (Lord knows I can’t) but there have been faster and slower shooters for a long time and “tactical” has become an unnecisary and rather silly excuse for not pushing yourself to shoot faster. As a sport, I think we need to expose this argument as the fallacy that it is so we can move forward and progress (even “ratchet” as IPSC is said to do) instead of de-evolving into bullseye shooting with barricades.

[Clay1]

On the street I am going out the back door and forgetting about the 9 guys that I know where they are.

In the game we call IDPA, I play by the rules and shoot damn fast.

If you want to play the game to be more real life, more power to you. Just remember winning a game and living are two different things. If you want to be tactical IDPA isn't the place. Get off of the square range and play simunitions / force on force and open your eyes.

I choose to play the game IDPA, but if someone wants to threat scan after a bank of targets, who am I to say that he looks silly. Funny as it may sound people react as they train.

Rick

[revchuck]

I don't make excuses for my slow shooting - I'm just slow.

Some "tactical" concepts that were considered settled - tac sequence, for example - are again up in the air among the guys who do this for real. Funny how a war with lots of CQB can do that.

As for a guy locating one target at a time from behind a corner - nah. Once his first round goes off, he's located, and any BGs with weapons will start firing up his location. NOT tactical. Especially if that wall is concealment, rather than cover.

IDPA is a great place to practice defensive shooting techniques that you've learned during training. Sometimes taking your time is the better option, and some shooters accept that and eat the high times. But slow isn't always tactical.

[Merlin Orr]

My friend Mark S. pointed out what shooting “tactically” means to a lot of shooters. In his words, it means “pretending that you don’t know where the targets are when you DO indeed know where the targets are.” We watched a perfect illustration of this at a recent match as a shooter would poke his head out from behind cover, locate a target and retreat behind the cover only to pop back out in the same position as before to engage ONE target, and repeat this laborious process until all threats were neutralized. If you are someone who does this, do you have any idea how silly it looks?!? This shooter took around 55 seconds to complete the stage. When Mark shot the same stage following all of the rules pertaining to cover, movement, reloads, etc, it took him under 14 seconds to shoot. Now I ask you: how was the other shooter being more “tactical” than Mark? In fact, didn’t the bad guys the other shooter was engaging have almost four times as long to kill him as those Mark dispatched? In terms of gunfight survivability (and by extension, “tactics”), isn’t that a bad thing?

I will concede that you may not know where your threat is if you get in a gunfight on the street. That’s why we have blind stages. In order to make it to the line on an open stage without knowing where the threat targets are you would have to be the first shooter and walk up to the line with your eyes closed having missed the stage explanation somehow (or have been shirking your duties as a competitor, namely taping and pickup up brass). Even in this far-fetched scenario, most targets are visually locatable since most barricades don’t extend all the way to the ground, and many of them are transparent anyway. So the fact of the matter is that we know where most of the targets are without trying. Purposely acting like you don’t know where something is when you do is well, rather infantile.

In fact it is more and more apparent that “tactical” is becoming the cry of the slow shooter as he bemoans getting spanked by those of us in the high speed, low drag mindset. I can’t tell you how many people have said to me recently “well, I shoot it tactically. I’m not an IPSC shooter like you.” Hey, I follow all of the rules, and solve the scenerios without exposing myself to a target until I’m ready to engage it just like the “tactical” guys. We can’t all keep up with B.E. (Lord knows I can’t) but there have been faster and slower shooters for a long time and “tactical” has become an unnecisary and rather silly excuse for not pushing yourself to shoot faster. As a sport, I think we need to expose this argument as the fallacy that it is so we can move forward and progress (even “ratchet” as IPSC is said to do) instead of de-evolving into bullseye shooting with barricades.

Here we go....

Welcome to the Forums.

[Practical Use]

Why does it matter how someone else chooses to shoot????

Are you bothered by the fact that they do not see the game your way?

[Ted Murphy]

Non Tactical,

Playing, "The Pokey Little Puppy" and slicing the pie about as quickly as my grandma could seems very tactical and "real world" to some people. Being slow as a search technique isn't a bad idea but after you shoot and the suprise is gone, I believe speed is very important.

Factor in the fact that most the walls IRL this tactician would be hiding behind and shooting slowly from wouldn't stop a bullet, and I'd say he is a bit off plumb. But, the idea of games like IDPA is that we have a seat at the table for the sunday morning gunfighter and competitor alike, so as long as he's cool and safe, what of it?

I do get annoyed though, when they get arrogant and preachy and tell me that how I shoot will "get me killed".

We have a pair like that at our local matches, that the SO's have dubbed "Starsky and Hutch". They shoot 18 second stages in 2 minutes sometimes. That in an of itself does not bother me but when they go on internet forums and thump their chest saying how the rest of the playing field is dead meat on the street, I get a little miffed.

Ted

[Crusher]

IDPA, USPSA and any other action shooting game is about max score, minimum time. Some play by a different plan. Who cares?

Most of these games are based on testing the speed of your gun handling ability (speed/accuracy) against a timer and paper/steel.

I have had my share of unwarranted and un-solicited comments from those who shoot a stage vastly different than I. I normally (well recently) now respond by saying "thank you for your input" and then proceed to avoid any further contact from the individual(s) who critique my performance and preface their critique with "Doing that in real life.........."

[SmittyFL]

Speed is a tactic.

[Middle Man]

Speed is a tactic...

...discovered by the pistoleers of the mid to late 1800's.

[Merlin Orr]

Speed is a tactic...

...discovered by the pistoleers of the mid to late 1800's.

Discovered by the first hairy biped throwing rocks at an advancing "whatever."

[jm951]

I think somebody already popped this nail right on the head-

it is a GAME

Games have rules and if somebody wants to dawdle, cool, one less guy I have to worry about beating.

Again- if this is so goldanged "tactical" why the heck am I limited in the amount of ammo I can put in the mags. I'm never going to think of engaging in a real situation with low ammo.

Even so, I have noticed that in shooting both IDPA and IPSC matches, I get much more static from the IDPA guys over shooting IPSC than the opposite. The next IDPA guy that starts whining to me about "tactical" at a match is likely to get a response from me along the likes of- "stop yer bellyaching and shoot!!" I shoot both, but they're both still games, albeit with differing rules.

[ima45dv8]

Speed is a tactic...

...discovered by the pistoleers of the mid to late 1800's.

Discovered by the first hairy biped throwing rocks at an advancing "whatever."

Please notice my long-standing signature line.

Hell yes speed is a tactic (and a pretty damn good one!).

Let him shoot how he wants. But if he starts telling you how your approach will get you a quick ticket to room temperature in "The Real World" (like the 2 Walter Mitty's that Ted is burdened with), just point out that you hope your opponent performs exactly like they do.

Edited January 20, 2006 by ima45dv8

[nontactical]

Why does it matter how someone else chooses to shoot????

Are you bothered by the fact that they do not see the game your way?

I think you misunderstood my entire post.... what I am bothered by (bothered is a little strong... lets try "confounded by") is people barking at me about the way I shoot (when I do so well within the confines of the rules) and using what I consider an invalid excuse. SOmebody said it really well in a reply: Speed is a tactic. And a darn good one if you ask me.

I know my post was a bit of a rant (especailly for a guys first post) but I wanted to see if serious shooters in other parts of the country were experiencing this same thing. In a way, I think this is kind of damaging to IDPA, which is still already not taken seriously. As I said in the orriginal post, I think this excuse has stymied a lot of people's improvemment.

[AikiDale]

A good friend of mine has a gun only for self defense. He is not interested in our games as games but as practice. So when he comes to my steel match, helps me set up and tear down, I really do not mind that he always shoots wearing a coat or vest, takes a step on the draw and scans left and right before holstering.

I learned a long time ago teaching a martial art that each trains for his own reasons and that we should respect them.

[dirtypool40]

Speed is a tactic.

F'in A Bubba, F'in A.

Seriously though, trying not to rehash, my ealier, redundant reiterations any further..... it's pretty egocentric to think you, me or anyone can define tactics for everyone. They change depending on way too many factors to list in a rule book.

Let's see......Dog handler, CCW holder, lone motor cop, sf guy clearing caves in Afghan, bounty hunter, home invasion victim, Mall security guard, house clearing in Iraq, tow truck driver, paired officers making an unknown risk stop, SEAL on recon, SWAT guy serving warrants, bartender, lone officer making a felony stop, Air Marshall, first responder to Bank robbery or domestic dispute.

OK, now write one set of tactics good for all of them, that will encompass their changing theater, evolving counters, emerging technique and weapons advancements oh, and the other 10,000+ different types of folks who may find themselves in armed conflict. AND a fair set of OBJECTIVE rules.

You have ten minutes. Write on the back for additional space.

Edited January 20, 2006 by dirtypool40

[Loves2Shoot]

If you want tactical, get grenades, they are seriously tactical.

You will find playing pistols games much more enjoyable it you play it for your own enjoyment.

[AikiDale]

My favorite tactical weapon is a MEU.

[smokshwn]

DP that is the one of the best replies yet to this whole genre of discussion.

Thanks for puttin a on my face.

Craig

PS how's my new gun?

[L9X25]

This is a game and the only things that we can accurately measure are speed, power and accuracy (DVC). The other arguments and observations are subjective. Stick to the things that we can measure.

[shred]

Seriously though, trying not to rehash, my ealier, redundant reiterations any further..... it's pretty egocentric to think you, me or anyone can define tactics for everyone. They change depending on way too many factors to list in a rule book.

...

+1 on that. Here's a Tru-Life I-Was-There Tactical-Example: Seveal years ago I came home to find my front door ajar. I slowly pied around the corner, saw the TV was gone and backed the heck out and called the cops from the cover of my truck 20 yards away. Cops show up. One roundish middle-aged guy. He unsnaps his holster, draws a big ol stainless revolver by his side, says 'Police! anybody here?' and walks in, reemerging a few minutes later. Valid tactics for the both of us in exactly the same situation.

[Bigbadaboom]

I don't know a thing about tactics but I sure love Cinnamon Tic-Tacs.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[baa]

IDPA is my primary focus as far as competition goes. As far as I am concerned, if someone is following me around with a timer and scoring my hits, it's a game, and should be shot like a game.

I have noticed you can pretty much divide IDPA shooters into 3 groups-

The competitors- People who treat it like a game, follow the rules of the game, and are out there to place as highly as possible.

The martial artists- The people that are using IDPA to practice what they believe are sound tactics. I have no problem with the martial artists, unless they get preachy (or they are ROing and looking for a reason to FTDR the competitior type.) In all fairness, IDPA is the closest thing civilians can get to real "tactical" practice, without spending a lot of money to go to the tactical instructors.

The hobbyist- People who like to shoot guns and want to do something more dynamic than standing at a static gun range. Generally, the type who is the most fun to hang out with between stages.

[Crusher]

In all fairness, IDPA is the closest thing civilians can get to real "tactical" practice,

"tactical" practice for what?

If you mean safely deploying and moving with a firearm, a test of accuracy and reloading skills I guess it would be.

[iainmcphersn]

Any game (competition, match, etc) which rewards the players (competitors, participants, tactical role players, etc.) based on the speed the problem is solved will always force the best competitors to push for a shorter response. While not a direct parallel, compare chess to speed chess.

Any shooting competition will focus on... shooting.

In real life, the best tactical response will be determined by the situation, your abilities and resources. Hitting multiple targets as fast as possible will most likely not be the correct response, but IMHO it should be one of your choices. A true tactical competition should allow a stage to be won without firing a shot.

I saw Rob Leatham on one of the shooting shows recently, showing a shooting solution to being in a vehicle when confronted by hostiles at the driver's door, passenger's door and right in front of the car. He introduced the segment sitting in the car, then moved the car and set up a chair and proceeded to explain how to change grip and presentation due to the circumstance, IE shooting out the windows from the driver's seat and around the windshield.

I had this on the DVR so I called my wife in and showed her the initial presentation with Rob in the car. I asked her how she would solve this and she said "Floor it, crush the guy in front, leave the other two behind." My thoughts exactly.

The shooting scenarios found in IDPA and USPSA are arguably best solved tactically by getting the best hits on the targets as fast as possible within the rules of the match. If that were not the case, speed wouldn't factor into the score.

That being said, I like IDPA shooting because it forces me to do things differently than I might do them otherwise. I think this gives me more options to use if I find myself in a real tactical situation.

Edited January 20, 2006 by iainmcphersn

[Ted Murphy]

I think for a lot of shooters, IDPA/USPSA type shooting is their only venue to shoot their gun other than in the stall of an indoor shooting range.

In the action shooting they can draw, move, shoot in different directions, etc. They simply do not get that opportunity at their home range.

I would not go as far as to say it's "tactical" training, but it offers some opportunities that some Martial oriented people could certainly use to their advantage traningwise.

Of the people that actually use IDPA/USPSA to practice, there is a number that actually use it to reinforce their traning and test their shooting skills. They are the quiet ones that shoot it their way. The noisy ones that tell you how good they are shooting, often are the ones that have the least knowledge and ability. One of the mysteries of life I guess.

Ted