There IS a Timer in a Gunfight by Chris Cypert

[cedartop]

Spend enough time on the internet, and you will encounter someone who opposes the use of shot timers in training and practice. Sooner or later you will encounter a statement to the effect of, “There ain’t no timers in a gunfight!” To the beginner, this may sound like wisdom. “It’s true,” one might think, “There aren’t any electronic shot timers in a gunfight.” For those who live by the adage, “Train like you fight,” it might follow that you shouldn’t introduce something in training and practice that won’t be present in a real-world defensive gun use. However, I use a slightly different adage, which is “Train for the fight.” Instead of always trying to replicate the precise real-world conditions one might encounter in an actual self-defense encounter (which can vary considerably from incident to incident), I recommend try to comprehensively understand all the technical and tactical aspects of civilian defensive-gun use, break those requirements down into individual components and subcomponents, and work on those tasks individually. A shot timer is an indispensable tool in training for the fight we might one day find ourselves in to protect our loved ones and ourselves.

MORE

 

[Trapper Jim]

The timer is a much needed tool to build, measure and maintain a shooting skill set. Until that is achieved, spending resources on fighting, ability driven gadjets, 1 lb triggers, etc is like trying to build a house and working on the foundation last.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

The timer is a tool like a batting cage is. As long as one understands the differences, it's a valuable tool. When people don't get that the timer often doesn't start until you start it in a real world situation, that hell for leather from a surrender position gets you shot, etc. then you have problems. Sometimes of the fatal sort.

Speed sometimes matters, sometimes it doesn't. Better to have the option...but not at the cost of smart tactics.

 

[Twangbanger]

Without a timer, you'll continue to waste time on low value added stuff. Remember the "tactical turtle" craze a few years back? "That's how you act in a fight, so that's how you train." Well, that may be how you'll act in a fight, if you never use a timer to learn that simply bringing the sights to eye-level and firing is the fastest and most accurate way - then train that until it becomes second nature.

But it's a waste of time to talk to people who don't believe in breaking down skills and working them. Let them do what they want.

 

[Twangbanger]

I'm not a tactical badass, but will add...I strongly suspect that in the situations people present where speed is optional - shooting the person probably is, too, in a lot of them.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I'm not a tactical badass, but will add...I strongly suspect that in the situations people present where speed is optional - shooting the person probably is, too, in a lot of them.

Not really. The thing about timed drills is they pretty universally start with the gun holstered or grounded. If you see trouble coming, are you still holstered?

Pocket carry sucks from the IDPA surrender position. It's fast AF when done properly to counter a street mugging.

Talking your way to the gun as you feign compliance is slow AF, but works well in reality.

If the bad guy is shaking down clerk #1 at gun point, do tenths of a second matter to clerk #2 who's unobserved?

Ambush position in your own home.

Etc. etc.

Compare to trying to out draw a drawn gun. It gets people shot. That's where the timer talk breaks down. Combine with the wild west hollywood idea of quick draw, and it rapidly becomes overinflated in terms of importance of who wins or loses real world encounters.

 

[Kdf101]

Not really. The thing about timed drills is they pretty universally start with the gun holstered or grounded. If you see trouble coming, are you still holstered?

Pocket carry sucks from the IDPA surrender position. It's fast AF when done properly to counter a street mugging.

Talking your way to the gun as you feign compliance is slow AF, but works well in reality.

If the bad guy is shaking down clerk #1 at gun point, do tenths of a second matter to clerk #2 who's unobserved?

Ambush position in your own home.

Etc. etc.

Compare to trying to out draw a drawn gun. It gets people shot. That's where the timer talk breaks down. Combine with the wild west hollywood idea of quick draw, and it rapidly becomes overinflated in terms of importance of who wins or loses real world encounters.

Never been in a gunfight, and hope I never am, but this makes sense to me.

 

[bwframe]

Are there a records of competition shooters or those that train with timers having failed or died due to their ingrained poor tactics?

 

[cedartop]

Are there a records of competition shooters or those that train with timers having failed or died due to their ingrained poor tactics?

If there were, they would be shouting it from the rooftops. I am not sure why this divide is growing again. Human nature I guess. It seems like we reached a gamer vs tac tard peak about 15 or 20 years ago and then all of the combat Special Forces guys started touting the benefits of competition and that debate really started dying off among all but the most hardcore Fudds. Recently here, the last few years the guys on the application side of the house seem determined to make it a thing again.

It is hard to apply a skill you don't have. No one that I know of is saying you only need technical proficiency. One of the big differences here seems to be technical skills can easily be measured, application not so much. What is funny to me is some of the biggest voices for application, say Lee Weems and Dave Spaulding for example are actually very good shooters and do a lot of practical/performance shooting in their classes. As to this ballyhood IDPA surrender draw, I am not sure where that red herring even comes from. I have been shooting IDPA for 3 seasons now and I think have maybe shot that once in a match. It is probably because of this big thing recently with the 1 second AIWB draw. The application guys were whining about how this had no place in self defense. In most cases they are probably right but why do they care if I have a 1 second draw?(I don't, from concealment) How does it hurt them if I want to be good? As long as people realize there are multiple components to be prepared for street crime or whatever you want to refer to it as, I don't see the problem.

And actually I don't know if the author competes or not. As far as I can tell, he was only saying what gets measured gets improved.

 

[cedartop]

Instructors | Citizens Defense Research

citizensdefenseresearch.com

Bio of the guy who wrote the article if anyone cares.

 

[bwframe]

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I am not sure why this divide is growing again.

Is it?

I don't see much of a divide in this conversation among any participant. Technical skills can be honed in competition/timed drills/etc. That provides a part of the puzzle. Simunitions, MUC, basic weapon retention and hand to hand all address different pieces of the puzzle. The more pieces you collect, the more prepared you are. Has anyone worth listening to said different in the past decade or so?

It's still important to realize that if your goal is fighting with a gun, you can hit the point of diminishing returns pretty early with technical skill. How many people lost because they were entangled or disarmed in the fight? Then your timer drills mean very little, you were missing a piece that matters. The "Are there a records of competition shooters or those that train with timers having failed or died due to their ingrained poor tactics?" is a red herring. it isn't so much about learning bad habits, they are simply missing puzzle pieces if they aren't doing all the other things to some degree as well. Taking another tenth off your draw stroke is well and good, but can you talk your way to a gun? Can you keep your gun holstered when someone else wants it out? Do you *think* about these things prior to needing them? You do, I know. But how many don't and just assume the hell for leather speed will see them through whatever gun fight they imagine?

 

[Twangbanger]

Not really. The thing about timed drills is they pretty universally start with the gun holstered or grounded. If you see trouble coming, are you still holstered?

Pocket carry sucks from the IDPA surrender position. It's fast AF when done properly to counter a street mugging.

Talking your way to the gun as you feign compliance is slow AF, but works well in reality.

If the bad guy is shaking down clerk #1 at gun point, do tenths of a second matter to clerk #2 who's unobserved?

Ambush position in your own home.

Etc. etc.

Compare to trying to out draw a drawn gun. It gets people shot. That's where the timer talk breaks down. Combine with the wild west hollywood idea of quick draw, and it rapidly becomes overinflated in terms of importance of who wins or loses real world encounters.

It's not that I don't understand what you're saying. My point is that in most of the cases where you set up your choreographed "gimme your money" scenario with the outcome pre-decided to fit the narrative you were trying to teach, and instructed people to surreptitiously inch toward their unholstered Ruger LCR in their pocket and look for their moment to shoot...there's a good chance they would have survived that scenario even if they left it there. Just because you're justified in shooting someone, doesn't mean you have to.

But in what I'm calling the "opposite" situation - one where the person absolutely, 100% positively has to be shot for you to survive - speed probably matters. And timers play a role in analyzing and developing that. Simply having a "beep" where your attention is amped-up, but you don't know exactly when it's coming, is potentially very valuable in training some of the exact situations you describe.

If you've unholstered because your SA told you trouble was maybe coming, but the AH decides to "escalate" on you anyway, is speed irrelevant? It takes everyone some time to get from low-ready to A-zone. Why not work on that quantitatively? The other person is really starting the timer in this situation.

In the moment where "feigning compliance" stops and "blinding violence" commences, if you snag that beeoch and partially undress yourself getting it loose and into play because you didn't practice that under time pressure, and you re-direct the perp's attention back to you in the process...might you wish you had done some work to gauge how fast you can actually do that, cleanly? Just for curiosity? (Keep in mind it's the bad guy's inattention that starts the timer, not you, which is something you must wait for and can't control - just like waiting for a beep).

In the case of Gitanjali and Varanasi, you cited "tenths of a second," but what if Varanasi isn't hiding in a deer stand waiting to flick his safety off every minute of his shift? If unobserved clerk #2 is a very-typical newbie who takes 1~2 seconds to bobble his feet into position and index his gun to the target and "go," and the BG catches a glimpse of that out of the corner of his eye and moves his body just a little as Varanasi shoots, turning an easy "turkey-shot" into a clean miss, resulting in an everybody-firing-at-each-other-free-for-all - would some index-speed have helped create a different outcome?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

It's not that I don't understand what you're saying. My point is that in most of the cases where you set up your choreographed "gimme your money" scenario with the outcome pre-decided to fit the narrative you were trying to teach, and instructed people to surreptitiously inch toward their unholstered Ruger LCR in their pocket and look for their moment to shoot...there's a good chance they would have survived that scenario even if they left it there. Just because you're justified in shooting someone, doesn't mean you have to.

Yup. Compliance is almost always a safe option. Not 100%, of course, people have been shot for not having enough to satisfy the robber, but most likely.

But in what I'm calling the "opposite" situation - one where the person absolutely, 100% positively has to be shot for you to survive - speed probably matters. And timers play a role in analyzing and developing that. Simply having a "beep" where your attention is amped-up, but you don't know exactly when it's coming, is potentially very valuable in training some of the exact situations you describe.

If you've unholstered because your SA told you trouble was maybe coming, but the AH decides to "escalate" on you anyway, is speed irrelevant? It takes everyone some time to get from low-ready to A-zone. Why not work on that quantitatively? The other person is really starting the timer in this situation.

Did I, or anyone in this thread, say not to work on it? Or not to overly rely on it?

In the moment where "feigning compliance" stops and "blinding violence" commences, if you snag that beeoch and partially undress yourself getting it loose and into play because you didn't practice that under time pressure, and you re-direct the perp's attention back to you in the process...might you wish you had done some work to gauge how fast you can actually do that, cleanly? Just for curiosity? (Keep in mind it's the bad guy's inattention that starts the timer, not you, which is something you must wait for and can't control - just like waiting for a beep).

Again, can you point me to anything remotely approaching not to work on it? You caught the batter cage analogy right? Does anyone become a great hitter without using one? A fouled draw or presenting a non-functional firearm is simply one of the most dangerous things you can do, much worse than simple compliance.

In the case of Gitanjali and Varanasi, you cited "tenths of a second," but what if Varanasi isn't hiding in a deer stand waiting to flick his safety off every minute of his shift? If unobserved clerk #2 is a very-typical newbie who takes 1~2 seconds to bobble his feet into position and index his gun to the target and "go," and the BG catches a glimpse of that out of the corner of his eye and moves his body just a little as Varanasi shoots, turning an easy "turkey-shot" into a clean miss, resulting in an everybody-firing-at-each-other-free-for-all - would some index-speed have helped create a different outcome?

I'm not going to argue various hypotheticals. In the real world, it mattered not a tinker's damn. There's a pretty solid difference between understanding a point of diminishing returns vs whatever you're trying to argue against that you apparently think I said.

Whatever stand you've assigned me so you can argue against it seems to have little resemblance to what I've said or taught in this thread or elsewhere.

 

[rosejm]

they are simply missing puzzle pieces if they aren't doing all the other things to some degree as well. Taking another tenth off your draw stroke is well and good, but can you talk your way to a gun? Can you keep your gun holstered when someone else wants it out? Do you *think* about these things prior to needing them?

Missing pieces of the self-defense puzzle is the point BBI is making here fellas. That there is far more to winning than draw speed or splits. Speed is a major factor in some cases, but it's knowing when speed is important and when speed will be worse than distraction or avoidance. Staging your draw and waiting for your turn isn't speedy, it's thinking ahead.

Frankly, the thinking part is the most crucial component.

Thinking about what you're doing, what the attacker(s) is/are doing, what's coming next, engaging targets in the proper order, NOT engaging targets that don't need a serving. All of this while safely executing those next steps and still maintaining accuracy and fundamentals of marksmanship.

How many times have you seen experienced, proficient shooters completely trash their stage plan or forget to engage hidden targets when the timer beeps? Or fumbling a reload after some malfunction needed cleared (slowly)? Now imagine every target is moving, LOTS of no-shoots (also moving) and a safe backstop is not guaranteed.

All of this ignores the huge advantage that simply avoiding a self-defense scenario presents. You'll win every one of those.

There are many pieces to this puzzle and it's important to realize that different applications (bullseye, steel challenge, IDPA/USPSA, gas station, home defense) place different priorities on those skills. The experts have not only honed all of those skills, they're able to use their minds to evaluate the situation and adjust those priorities based on the ever changing dynamic in front of them.

 

[cosermann]

What I gather from the folks that seem to be worth listening to, is that while speed is a piece of the pie, it's not the whole pie (and the speed that's needed is a envelope with fuzzy fringes depending on the situation, tactics used, etc.).

I'd much rather see someone get to an 80% level across the core competencies (things like smooth, unfouled, rapid presentation, verbal agility/talking one's way to the gun/feigning compliance, MUC, empty hand skills, awareness, avoidance, etc.), than spending a bunch of time trying to get from a 1.5 sec to 0.75 sec draw.

My suggestion would be once you get to a speed that's "fast enough", spend time developing other skills in which you may not yet be proficient. Well-rounded is the way.

 

[Trapper Jim]

There is Shooting Well and Fighting Well. Forgetting to master the first May lead to luck or a lack of in fighting.

 

[cedartop]

Missing pieces of the self-defense puzzle is the point BBI is making here fellas. That there is far more to winning than draw speed or splits. Speed is a major factor in some cases, but it's knowing when speed is important and when speed will be worse than distraction or avoidance. Staging your draw and waiting for your turn isn't speedy, it's thinking ahead.

Frankly, the thinking part is the most crucial component.

Thinking about what you're doing, what the attacker(s) is/are doing, what's coming next, engaging targets in the proper order, NOT engaging targets that don't need a serving. All of this while safely executing those next steps and still maintaining accuracy and fundamentals of marksmanship.

How many times have you seen experienced, proficient shooters completely trash their stage plan or forget to engage hidden targets when the timer beeps? Or fumbling a reload after some malfunction needed cleared (slowly)? Now imagine every target is moving, LOTS of no-shoots (also moving) and a safe backstop is not guaranteed.

All of this ignores the huge advantage that simply avoiding a self-defense scenario presents. You'll win every one of those.

There are many pieces to this puzzle and it's important to realize that different applications (bullseye, steel challenge, IDPA/USPSA, gas station, home defense) place different priorities on those skills. The experts have not only honed all of those skills, they're able to use their minds to evaluate the situation and adjust those priorities based on the ever changing dynamic in front of them.

Sigh. Nobody here is arguing with that. Neither is the author saying anything different than that. He is merely explaining how a shot timer can be an invaluable tool in becoming a better shooter. I am pretty sure with his background he more than realizes that is not all there is to being prepared for a deadly force encounter. BBI jumped in with a bunch of stuff that most of us are aware of and that has nothing to do with the point of the actual article. I have been to BBI's class and many like it, it is great information, I always encourage FOF training as well, that is simply not what was being talked about in the article.

 

[bwframe]

I think what this discussion often misses is that both the gamers and the tacticians could do well to make it a point to swap their rolls as part of their well rounded training.

Too often it is assumed that your gun gamers have no concern for self-defense training, when actually this is not the case. A LOT of us spent our early years in shooting competition hearing that repeatedly "Your competition skills will get you killed in the street," and the message was received. A lionshare of the folks that I encountered, doing self defense and FOF classes with, were at the range the next weekend shooting Steel/USPSA matches.

The other side of the coin is if the tacticians are so busy bad-mouthing competition and the tools involved, that they never get an understanding of a score sheet. Never know how they match up to very seasoned gun handlers. How they measure up to those that safely handle firearms in relatively crowded environments regularly. While the "square range" trash talking of the tactical crowd is understood, there is something to be said for having the ability to operate and take commands on a cold 180 range, without making others a nervous wreck.

The unspoken advantage of regular competition shooting and tools involved, is the working knowledge of pistol skills and limitations. If and when the time to shoot is NOW, it gets done with very little effort or thought process. If separated from the tactical aspect, the shooting part is a given. There is more room to wrap your mind around tactics when the actual shooting part is a like putting your belt on. When it happens so naturally, that there is no concern about speed or accuracy. No need to go fast, you are already there.

This is a valid discussion. It reminds me of the running laugh that Coach and a small handful of us used to have. Watching folks leave a USPSA match, how many took off their gear, threw it in the trunk, got in the car and left. Compared to those of us who had to gun up for the trip home. There were too many times at on the road matches where one either needed to skirt cold range rules or hunt down the match director to gun down on arrival and gun up on departure.

 

[cedartop]

I think what this discussion often misses is that both the gamers and the tacticians could do well to make it a point to swap their rolls as part of their well rounded training.

Too often it is assumed that your gun gamers have no concern for self-defense training, when actually this is not the case. A LOT of us spent our early years in shooting competition hearing that repeatedly "Your competition skills will get you killed in the street," and the message was received. A lionshare of the folks that I encountered, doing self defense and FOF classes with, were at the range the next weekend shooting Steel/USPSA matches.

The other side of the coin is if the tacticians are so busy bad-mouthing competition and the tools involved, that they never get an understanding of a score sheet. Never know how they match up to very seasoned gun handlers. How they measure up to those that safely handle firearms in relatively crowded environments regularly. While the "square range" trash talking of the tactical crowd is understood, there is something to be said for having the ability to operate and take commands on a cold 180 range, without making others a nervous wreck.

The unspoken advantage of regular competition shooting and tools involved, is the working knowledge of pistol skills and limitations. If and when the time to shoot is NOW, it gets done with very little effort or thought process. If separated from the tactical aspect, the shooting part is a given. There is more room to wrap your mind around tactics when the actual shooting part is a like putting your belt on. When it happens so naturally, that there is no concern about speed or accuracy. No need to go fast, you are already there.

This is a valid discussion. It reminds me of the running laugh that Coach and a small handful of us used to have. Watching folks leave a USPSA match, how many took off their gear, threw it in the trunk, got in the car and left. Compared to those of us who had to gun up for the trip home. There were too many times at on the road matches where one either needed to skirt cold range rules or hunt down the match director to gun down on arrival and gun up on departure.

Back in the early days during my short stints in the Army, police reserves, prison, and then full time LE I was always one of the better shooters. Fast forward to around 2008 and the beginning of my dozens of "tactical" classes and once again, I was usually one of the top shooters. It wasn't until IIRC 2013 that I took a Todd Louis Green class that I realized there were MUCH better shooters than I. While I worked hard to improve this situation I also comforted myself with the fact that surely I was more tactically aware. Later that year attending a Dave Spaulding class and the Rangemaster Instructor class I had improved and once again was doing pretty well. Then I went to the Rangemaster Tactical Conference and shot the match that is part of that. While I didn't suck, I was nowhere near the top. That stung. Still though I knew that competition would get me killed in the streets so I wasn't ready to go down that road yet.

After a lot of cajoling from my friends Randy Harris, Coach, and another local friend who had just retired from the SD and was now competing, I decided to take the plunge. Imagine my chagrin when my initial USPSA ranking was C class. Surely this system must be broken I thought. That was a number of years ago and now I shoot IDPA and continue to improve though unfortunately very slowly. I am definitely at the point of what would be diminishing returns if I was only doing this for self defense, but I am not. I am competitive and enjoy competing so what started as a way to improve strictly to serve my tactical journey turned into something different. I now, like many others, try to straddle both worlds.

Edit because I forgot my point. I was never a very good shooter, it's just that the people I was shooting with were usually even less good and none of us knew it. The skill of people that attend classes has improved dramatically in the last decade.