Catfish Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Talking with new shooters, and teaching them how to shoot, it's come up several times now, and I just don't have a good answer. You see folks at the range who practice a lot and can make nice little groups with their firearm of choice. But does that make them a good shooter? You see folks that have safely and responsibly handled firearms their entire lives and know their weapons in and out and have never missed a deer in 30 years of huntin'. But does that make them a good shooter? You see folks who are in Law Enforcement or the Military who are perfectly capable of passing their department's tests. But does that make them good shooters. How would you define it? What are the bare minimums of what should make a good shooter? I'm thinking something along the lines of: - safe - comfortable and confident with the weapon of their choice - able to draw and accurately engage a target (let's say at 7 yards) in 2.5 seconds or less (I would think 2.5 would be a bare minimum here??) - able to rapidly and accurately engage said target - able to engage multiple targets accurately and rapidly - able to perform (and be familiar with) standard drills like an el prez or bill drill. I'm thinking el prez time should be under what, 10 seconds or so? Bill Drill 3.5 seconds? - able to shoot and move - able to reload both stationary and on the move - able to engage rapidly and accurately from a variety of positions What do you think? What should a "good" shooter be able to do? Perhaps instead of using the word "good" we should use "capable". So, what do you think makes a capable/good shooter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbrowndog Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Always willing to be a good teacher and a good student, you never stop learning. A good shooter is a good person, a capable shooter has good ability but may not be a good shooter. Ability does not make you good, only,..........Able. Experience, ability and humility, make for good shooters, admit when you're wrong, know when you're right, and teach others to do the same. Its a bit philosophical but its my definition. Trapr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlamoShooter Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 (edited) If you are willing to go to the range with them and share a shooting bay or stage and not even once feel the need to look over your shoulder, & If you are willing to run the timer for them and not worry about being swept, I think that makes them a good shooter (A good shooter minimizes mistakes) and has a short list of skills they lack in Level of skill is always relative, I know that very few events have the best shooters show up. Even at an event like Steel Challenge the winner makes the fewest mistakes. Some ware, some place some -one is training harder Edited February 14, 2009 by AlamoShooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RV man Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 It is all subjective and changes with the situation. Most of the people I play with are good shooters and quite a few are exceptional. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Moved this thread to the Shooting Questions area of the forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boz1911 Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I would agree with Browndog, when a shooter is able to teach what hea has learned to other shooters, he's become a "good" shooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catfish Posted February 14, 2009 Author Share Posted February 14, 2009 Granted, part of being a good shooter is sharing what you have learned with others. But we have all seen folks who share with others bad or faulty information, so I don't believe that sharing is, in and of itself, a qualifier for being a capable shooter. I'm looking for something quantifiable here I think. We know that there are folks (on this board!) who can burn an el prez down in under 4 seconds. That is simply outstanding. What would you expect a capable shooter to be able to do the same drill in? A bill drill? Reload? etc etc etc. In some ways we are insulated in our little practical pistol world. We're surrounded by outstanding shooters on a weekly basis. For the rest of the shooting world, what would you consider to be capable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Without question, if there is one thing that will, over time, make a good shooter, it is a deep and abiding passion for shooting. I know several people who teach regularly. They are much better shooters than the people they instruct. But, there is a difference in a guy who carries a gun everyday for a living and a guy who handles a gun everyday for the pure enjoyment of it. The latter doesn't teach, but he may share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSEMARTIN Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 If someone is safe, I'll consider them a good shooter until proven otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uscbigdawg Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 How I know that I'm a good shooter is when someone else tells others that I am. I take this to mean that I am safe, confident, proficient and able to not only pass along information, but still be open to receive new info, apply it and discern whether or not it's an improvement or it hinders improvement. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbrowndog Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Thats a good remark, Rich if you have others say watch this guy, instead of you saying "watch me" that would be a mark of a good shooter. others would have to acknowledge your ability, and pass it on, you cannot do it yourself, arrogantly!!! there are a lot of shooters out there that are very proficient, but cannot tell you why or instruct you as to how to be as proficient as them, its those people that do not make the grade. Being safe, does not make you a good shooter it does make you a good gun handler, a good bill drill does not make you a good shooter, it makes you good at bill drill's. trapr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlamoShooter Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 (edited) OK Catfish did you know the time frame for El President was 10 seconds as the guideline? for Good that was before TGO and Brian Enos and the rest of the Wonder Kids. Well that's what I was told Interesting Thread Cat Man . I think the better you become the harder it is to define "Good" Edited February 14, 2009 by AlamoShooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyZip Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Catfish, In your orignal post you presented three different models of a "good" shooter. I grew up hunting rabbits and coyotes with three other kids that I would say were "good" shooters. They were all capable and safe with a rifle or shotgun, and willing to impart their know-how with their younger friends. "Good" shooter is a term that applies to those of all shooting disciplines who are safe and capable. Some capable shooters though are not friendly. Not most, but some. Do we say that you are not a "good" shooter solely because you are an a$$h*&e? I don't think that is the case, but I do think that better shooters are not. I essence I would say good is relative to the type of shooting you do and your skill level. Safe and capable to shoot in your discipline? I would say you are a good shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris iliff Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 No one has mentioned "stress". I kinda like to think that the middle of the road "C" shooter in USPSA is probably a good shooter. Within USPSA he is a lowly "C", but outside of our community that guy is hands down better than most people. He has probably spent a year or more working his draw and reloads plus he has tested himself under "stress" many times. By this point he is safe, and maybe even helping newer shooters and bringing in new shooters. You need to get some average times "cold" from people who have an average classifier score of 50%. You define the skills tests and let them run them. Maybe that would give you what you are after. IMHO No gender intended .... put a "she" up their in my post instead of "he" if you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I would agree with Browndog, when a shooter is able to teach what hea has learned to other shooters, he's become a "good" shooter The ability to teach and the ability to shoot are not the same thing. There are many people who are good or great at a particular skill, and cannot explain or teach someone else how to do it. Many are good or great shots and cannot teach it effectively to others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris iliff Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Catfish, In your orignal post you presented three different models of a "good" shooter. I grew up hunting rabbits and coyotes with three other kids that I would say were "good" shooters. They were all capable and safe with a rifle or shotgun, and willing to impart their know-how with their younger friends. "Good" shooter is a term that applies to those of all shooting disciplines who are safe and capable. Some capable shooters though are not friendly. Not most, but some. Do we say that you are not a "good" shooter solely because you are an a$$h*&e? I don't think that is the case, but I do think that better shooters are not. I essence I would say good is relative to the type of shooting you do and your skill level. Safe and capable to shoot in your discipline? I would say you are a good shooter. "Safe and capable to shoot in your discipline." That is a pretty good overall description, as there are so many disciplines in the shooting community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catfish Posted February 15, 2009 Author Share Posted February 15, 2009 It's interesting to note that "safe" keeps coming up. Over a beer or two after a practice session today, I presented this same question to my friends. We all struggled to come up with an answer! But safe - as in - you don't scare the snot out of me when you shoot - kept popping up as something to shoot for. I'm going to have to keep thinkiing on this. I mean, we all KNOW when we see a good shooter that the shooter is good. There's no doubt in anyone's mind, for example, after watching TT or Max or TGO or pick your name shooter that they are good. It's just the definition of what makes a good shooter that seems to be challenging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle O Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Good Shooter = good accuracy, good time, good gun handling, good gaming, good sportsmanship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ankeny Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 FWIW, I once heard a GM and L10 National Champ remark, "B class is the black belt of IPSC". I guess that would be a good shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
konkapot Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Catfish I would totally agree with your times/distances/drills for what makes a "good" shooter. I would say that a "B" shooter certainly classifies as a "good" shooter. Most cops start as a "C" class shooter........so a "C" shooter is about equal to Law Enforcement shooters, most of whom are just horrible.........so I can't agree that (for purposes of this discussion) that a C shooter meets this definition "Good Shootter" everyone is struggling with. The ability to impart the information as nothing to do with being a good shooter. A good instructor........but that's an academic exercise I've been having with some problems with defining. Being safe-That is not unique to being a good shooter. Nor is personality. If we're defining a "good shooter" we have to do just that. If we're defining "someone we'd like to squad with" well then that's different. If I were coming up with a definition, I would include some metrics (like Catfish came up with) and I would add Demonstrates an interest in self improvement Demonstrates ability to change. FY42385 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badchad Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 It's just the definition of what makes a good shooter that seems to be challenging. I think that's because you are trying to define something that is both relative and context specific. Kind of like "what's a good car?" Well it depends, what for, and good compared to what, etc. Reading through you initial post I'm not sure if David Tubb would qualify as a good shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Stating specific requirements would be difficult, but I think a generalization might be appropriate. I think that a B shooter is definitely a good shooter. They will have a good grasp of the shooting fundamentals and have demonstrated the ability to execute these skills under match conditions. After B, I think the skills become very specific to the IPSC game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sslav Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Most cops start as a "C" class shooter........so a "C" shooter is about equal to Law Enforcement shooters, most of whom are just horrible.........so I can't agree that (for purposes of this discussion) that a C shooter meets this definition "Good Shootter" everyone is struggling with. You must have better law enforcement shooters where you shoot. Because of the ones around here only very few would make a C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayouSlide Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Most cops start as a "C" class shooter........so a "C" shooter is about equal to Law Enforcement shooters, most of whom are just horrible.........so I can't agree that (for purposes of this discussion) that a C shooter meets this definition "Good Shootter" everyone is struggling with. You must have better law enforcement shooters where you shoot. Because of the ones around here only very few would make a C. I have to say, I was thinking the same thing. When I see training at the local sheriff's range, I see a lot of D class level shooters and a few that would find it hard to break out of U. But, in fairness, many of those those officers are getting there some needed remedial training to get them up to speed for POST qualifying. But this thread has lit a fire under me. I thought that a USPSA C card put me firmly above the hoi polloi of the general population and I had become complacent in my imagined superiority. Now I see I need to make B...I guess you take motivation wherever you can find it Curtiis "Must make B...and soon" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ankeny Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 Most of the LEOs in our region would make B with a little practice and an orientation program. Come to think of it, the best shooter in Wyoming is a cop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now