I Hate hearing the word "Tactics" used in Competiton
I'm a LEO and I shoot in competitions. I hate hearing how I will suck at tactics and maybe even get myself killed just because I like to test my skills in competition. The most frequent comment I hear is, "Your tactics are sound, for now, but if you keep shooting in these competitions your tactical skills will decline". That is just one area I get grief about, even though I always ace any "tactical" shoot house or building clearing training drills. Lets not even get me started about the constant, "You'll never be able to reach your full shooting potential if you keep shooting that weird looking Isosceles, its not even a true Isosceles, your elbows are bent." Than after I shoot they always qualify their remarks with "Well if you would shoot a proper Weaver think of how good you would be." Dude, whatever. I really love the "gamesman shoot isosceles, warriors shoot weaver," Mmmmkay, If I'm sucking pavement up my a$$ while trying to shoot around cover in the middle of a firefight..., I don't think any stance will be relevant, but that’s just the opinion of a lowly gamesman, based on my observations of human behavior during simunitions training. Or how about this, "Why did you not do a tac load there son? We do not do speed loads here, that is "tactically" unsound." I'm sorry, I thought tactically unsound would be not having a topped off gun, topped off as quickly as possible I might add. This isn't a battlefield or theatre of war, a tac load is useless in the middle of a gun fight. Why do I need to pocket a mag with 1,2 or 3 rounds left in it? Rip that sucker out of there and stuff another one in. Did I mention I completed the "Combat Challenge" course of fire, at this LEO tactical training center where all the above conversations occurred, in record time with one of the best scores ever? Guess that doesn't count since I didn't do tac loads or shoot "The Weaver." Alright, I'm going to go meditate and chill. Boy do I feel better.
From Paul Sharp

I work for a Federal agency where our pistol skills are highly touted. We have the highest qualification standard in Federal law enforcement (except for maybe some elite units like HRT or such). As a Firearms Instructor, I can tell you that we teach and encourage the use of the Isosceles stance.

I switched from Weaver to Isosceles years ago and my shooting only improved. My accuracy increased and, most of all, my follow through time decreased. Basically, I could shoot more accurately, faster. This was coupled with the "thumbs forward" grip. World of difference in just those 2 changes.

Can't remember the last time I saw a true Weaver stance.

I might catch some heat over stating this but screw it....cause I know from years of first hand experience that it's the freaking truth....

IMNSHO???...Your average trained LEO can't hold a candle to your average skilled IPSC shooter. (that would be a period)

There's 3 reasons for this....

1. Your average LEO dosen't typically practice 1/10th of what an IPSC shooter does.

2. Your average LEO's gear usually ain't 1/2 of what the IPSC shooters is and...

3. Your average LEO's mind has been polluted by...

a. whatever "Who Knows Who"..."Good Ole' Boys"...."The Sheriffs Brother In-Law"..level...god knows who proclaimed and ordained him....the LEO's "Tactical Instructor". LOL!!!! Who is usually some BIG MOUTH TOUGH GUY HARD CORE acting wannabe who' was trained (read: spoken too) by some other cement headed (read: all mixed up and set like stone) predecessor who passed on their 19th century like skills and tactics...or...

b. The LEO's Tactics come in the form of departmental mandated "POLICY"...whereby some pencil necked geek of an IROC (buy a vowel: Idiot Right Outta College) sat down at a desk in an air conditioned office for 3 years getting paid to author and write a policy pamphlet regarding the LEO's Field Tactics...then hold classes burning each letter of "the policy" into each individual officers mind...

Where the IPSC boys get to pick and chose their own good advice, are free to think on their feet and then put into practice...."The Best Of It"

And that's the difference.

I competed hard for 6 years in IPSC...

Watched a lot of weaver stancing LEO's get a large heaping helping of a "Dose Of Reality" as to just how "INEFFECTIVE" their skills and training are and have been..and it usually comes as a cold hard shocker to the vast majority of'em...as many are left shamed at their own initial performance levels of engaging in their first ever IPSC competition....as typically they pale in comparison to even a modestly skilled IPSC competitor.

More recently some of the more forward thinking LEA's have modified their training...the ones who have learned that "ADVANCING THE THREAT" is far more effective at commanding a firefight situation than is "HIDING"....or fiddeling around in the middle of a firefight with tac mag changes...not that there's anything wrong with taking advantage of hard cover along the way or keeping your firearm topped off but damn man...you don't call time out or toss yourself into a mexican stand-off over such folley...you TAKE COMMAND of that situation through greater firepower...you RETAIN COMMAND of the situation through a continuose volley of fire as you never stop your assault or slow down "ADVANCING THE THREAT"....as the moment you do???....your opponent will anxiousely be awaiting to sieze that moment and take advantage of that opportunity you just afforded him...and (speaking as devils advocate here) if you stop to take cover???..by the time I hear that mag eject guess who coming atcha guns a blazing???...guess who just relinquished command of that situation???...guess who's "ADVANCING THE THREAT" now???...and guess who's left $hitt'in their BVD's and ducking a heavy rain of hot lead???....hint..."not me".

1/2 measures $uck...most IPSC shooters can execute a mag swap without so much as skipping a beat...with a little practice and drop free mags so can you....so funnel out that magwell...carry an extra hi-cap mag or two...wear your vest...have no mercy on those who would fire back at you....show no fear...and always...always..ADVANCE THE THREAT...thereby showing your opponent you have a far greater level of conviction at dominating and surviving the situation than he does...then he will be the one found hiding in fear...or as some learned tacticians refer to it as..."Taking Cover" LOL!!!!



The Above is JMHO and ya'll be safe out there. L8R, Bill.

Before it starts, let's not get into the whole "advance-on-the-threat" vs. "seek cover" argument again!

I think we agreed before that both are valid tactics and both have a definite place. You need to have both in your toolbox.

If you try to advance on the threat in every situation, you will run into the one where it will get you waxed. It is easy to advance on the threat when he is an IPSC silhouette! Before that flames someone, I'll let you know right now that advance on the threat is my preferred method of engagement. It's just that I am smart enough to know that there is a time and place for it.

If the bad guy has a shotgun or select fire weapon and knows how to use it, would I draw my Glock and advance on the threat. Hell no! If you say otherwise you're an idiot and I would hope they would say nice things about you at your funeral.

How about a bad guy on his home turf, say in his own home, heavily armed and backed into a position of cover. Advance on the threat! Hope you packed a nice lunch, cuz baddy's gonna eat it.

If you try to seek cover in every situation, you will run into the one where it will get you waxed.

One is not a replacement for the other and neither is the end-all-be-all tactic.

That's why its called tacticS, folks (emphasis on the S intentional), cuz there is more than one. Those that stick to one tactic and use it exclusively are doomed by Murphy to run into the threat situation where it won't work. That's when the threat eats your lunch.

Of course IPSC shooters get to play by their own rules! There are no dire consequences for their actions! A missed target puts a round into a berm and gives them a lower score, it doesn't hit an innocent bystander.

Rarely have I ever seen "no shoot" targets in an IPSC/IDPA match. I know they are out there, but they are rare. A LEO has to make a split decision and live without the rest of his life. He can't just come back next weekend and shoot it over.

I have never seen an IPSC/IDPA stage that changed into something completely different part way through it. The stage is exactly the same as it was when you WATCHED THE LAST GUY DO IT. It doesn't morph into a completely different scenario just as you get a handle on it. You don't have to move up and down a Force Continuum and apply appropriate force to the changing situation.

Wow! If every LEO could watch someone else first go through the lethal force encounter he is fixing to go through, I do believe that the LEO's would do much better, don't you?

Just because someone is a great competitor doesn't mean that they have the wherewithal to win a lethal force encounter. You can't compare the two. I'll admit that the average competitor has good skills, and those are definitely necessary to win real encounter. But, after all, it's just a game. You can't compare your abilities at a game with how you would do on the street.

Unfortunately, a lot of LEO's don't have what it takes to win either.

Silhouettes don't shoot back. They rarely move. They don't start out aggressive and then throw their weapon down, placing their hands in the air. They don't lure you in with compliance and then break bad. When you step up to the shooter's box you know that you are going to shoot all the silhouettes in the manner in which you were TOLD TO DO SO. Pretty much a no brainer.

And the statement that the average LEO's gear isn't 1/2 of what the average competitors gear is. How ludicrous! Of course it isn't! I've yet to see an IPSC with a Level II or III retention holster. That is a must for a LEO. In 9 years of law enforcement I have been in an unknown number of physical altercations, definitely in the thousands at various levels. I have been in one lethal encounter involving my issue sidearm. It stands to reason that you have to have retention devices built into your holster.

This is all coming from my personal experience and prospective. I have been an IPSC and IDPA competitor. I still shoot Action Pistol matches when I get a chance. I enjoy them and will continue to compete. I've met a lot of great men and women there, both non-LEO's and LEO's.

I have been a LEO (local and Federal) for over 9 years. I have been a Firearms and Tactics Instructor for LE for 7 years. I have survived and won lethal force encounters while in the military and LE. I think I know both sides of the coin on this one.

Well I guess I needed to clarify my response as pistolcraft vs pistolscraft and not extreme cases such as facing off against a shotgun weilding baddy in his own home....or other rediculous hypo situations like advancing the threat on a sniper 1,000 yards out with your compact glock 9mm....as yeah...thens there's definately "other tools in the box".

cmshoot....there lotsa demeaning things you could equate and claim bewteen ipsc and the real thing like..."Cardboard Targets Don't Shoot back" but guess what???...who do you practice with???....is "Practice" Important???....do you find targets that "shoot back" for your practice???....see what I mean???

I've personally seen and witnessed some of the toughest talkers I ever knew absolutely coward down and fold while under and when exposed to a live fire gunfight situation....so I fully understand that aspect as well...but just because targets don't "Fire Back Atcha" is no call to belittle the man who DOES PRACTICE RELIGOUSLY...as he is the one who will be more confident and effective in his skills.

cmshoot: I have no idea who's been running or setting up the IPSC Matches you've attended, relayed and reported on your personal experiences thusfar with but I'm here to tell you that if such is the case as you describe???...that's one sorry run IPSC club...and not representitive of any of the local club abd state level tournaments I've attended all over the state of florida...from Miami/Lauderdale too Tampa too Gainsville/JAX....for 6 years...where there was and is EXTENSIVE use of simulated HOSTAGE SITUATION/NO-SHOOT targets incorporated into just about every single stage of fire I've ever encountered as a competitor.

Is it the real thing???....No....is it damn good practice???....yes....is a man to be belittled or downplayed for practicing????...NO!!!..even if the targets don't "Shoot Back" LOL!!!!

Peace, Out & L8R, Bill.

This happens in the USA everyday. I have been in that real life situation, and many others similar to it, beaucoups time while I was a street cop, with and without backup or SWAT.

A LEO can never use the mindset of "pistolcraft vs. pistolcraft", cuz the bad guy doesn't play by our rules. He can bring whatever weapon he wants to the game. If I walk up to the front door of his house to handle a noise complaint and he wants to greet me with a 12 gauge pump or a lever action .30-30, then I have to play the game with the weapon that I have on my side. Policing in north Georgia, how often do you think I went to a home that had at least a shotgun and/or a deer rifle in it? More often than not.

I'm not trying to belittle anyone! Anyone who owns a firearms, has the skills to use it and constantly trains to maintain and improve those skills, has my utmost respect. If more Americans were that way this country would be much better for it. Practice is practice and I get it anyway I can, with whomever I can. I will shoot with anyone who can pull a trigger, and pick their brain while I'm there. I'm not so proud as to not take skills where I find them.

Yes, in a lot of my practice the targets DO shoot back. It's called Simunitions and it's one of the most valuable training tools we use. I do Simunitions training a minimum of 1 day a week. Different scenarios every time. Great training. I don't wear any protective gear other than the minimum required (head and throat protection) so that I can get the most out of it. I have scars from Simunitions rounds that are several years old. I want to take a painful hit and keep fighting. Is it as painful as actually being shot? Probably not. Having talked to several folks that have been shot and didn't know it when it happened, it may very well be.

You can't compare a shoot/no shoot or hostage situation in training or competition with the real thing. A "no shoot" is usually clearly delineated by a different color, or a red X across it. That's a lot easier to ID than a real life person. Is that a weapon he's holding or not? It's not as easy as it sounds. I've been there and can vouch for that!

Again, I'm not sure where my post was interpreted as being against folks that compete or practice a lot. I thought I made it clear that I am current competitor myself and support those that do.

I wasn't trying to say that since all training does not involve targets that shoot back or shoot/no shoot targets, it shouldn't be done or has no value. Good basic weapons skills are good skills, regardless of the scenario you employ them in. Quality trigger time is quality trigger time, regardless of what you are shooting at.

There is not doubt that a good competitor has some very good weapons handling skills that we all could use, LEO or not. I had a chance in the past to shoot and talk with Rob Leatham and Todd Jarrett (2 separate occasions, many years apart). Because they weren't LEo/military, did I shut out what they had to say? Hell no! I took what they had that I could use and put it in my tool box.

What I was trying to get across in my post was that you can't equate a competitor shooting in a competition with a LEO involved in a real life lethal force encounter. I'm not saying that one is better than the other, they are different. A competitor has to do things certain ways, and so do LEO's.

What is most important to both, don't get married to doing things only one way, every time. You're setting yourself up for failure. The difference between IPSC and LE being that with LE, failure could mean death.

cmshoot: I guess what I've been trying to say here (except in a much more pleasant fashion) is this...

Just because an LEO regularly places themselves in potentially dangerous situations as a matter of course in executing the position they've been paid to fill in serving and protecting the public does not dictate that these same fine folks have automatically and mysteriously aqquired any jedi-like mastery of the weapons they typically employ any more than badges they wear are a symbol of possessing mystical powers as a cool, calm, and always collective tactician.

The vast majority of LEO's I've personally spoke with, shot with, competed against and interviewed readily admit and confess that they have but to qualify only once or twicea year with their duty weapon side-arm (with many bragging the point that they are so good they don't even have to practice to pass and qualify)...albiet SO's seem to be a tad more comprehensive than do the PD's but Officers/Deputys from both camps typically claim to only discharging maybe 200-500 practice rounds per year...and that's giving the benefit of the doubt and on a "High Average" as many don't practice at all and speaking quite frankly???...I've found that a surprising number of LEO's have very little interest (if any) in the most lethal tool in their box. Their firearms. Al biet these are not what one might call "The Dedicated Officers" and are most times the folks seeking to use their position as an LEO for a stepping stone with far greater career goals in mind...some actually hoping they'll never hafta use their sidearm in the course of their hopefully short lived stepping stone careers as LEO's.

Note: And no....obviousely any officer who would go out of his way to investigate and join SP to participate here with us is NOT a stereotypical cross-section of nor representitive of...your average LEO.LOL!!!

Now....pit the average of that pool of LEO's against your typical "B" or even "C" class ipsc competitor who reloads and practices too the tune of 500-1,000 rounds per week or month and you will soon find that the skill levels between the two are apples and oranges...

Now...take a look at those infamous FBI agents who attempted to arrest those bank robbers down in Miami a few decades back...in a vehicular chase scene in a residential area as they forced the two perps to the side of the road then jumped out of their units and took cover....and promptly got shot to ribbons with a ruger mini-14...and the only thing that ended it was one FBI agent with a $hitload of heart and a fully loaded .38 snubby...who just couldn't take seeing his entire crew getting dessimated before his very eyes....and finally decided on a bold and valient move of jumping up from cover, taking control and...

"Advancing The Threat"

With left arm/hand over his heart/lung chest area he CHARGED those two well armed perps with his right hand full of snubby .38 fully extended with a loud distracting death scream and tons of....."CONVICTION"...effectively ventilating the drivers head then hammering the mini-14 wielding, mag fumbling 2nd perp to the ground. "THAT'S" what I'm talking about.

"Using Cover" in a commanding assault is a good thing...but imho???..."Taking Cover" in many instances is a fatal mistake...cause it makes "Breaking Cover" a god aweful dangerous thing to do when there's someone with a barrel full of BB's trained on your postion and ready to hose down the area at the first sight of skin or hair or any sign of movement...and now your what I humbly call...

"Glued & Screwed"

literally.LOL!!!

cmshoot: Trained LEO or Well Skilled IPSC Shooter this is one of those extremely subjective topics where you could ask a 1,000 shooters and get 1,000 answers..but no matter how ya slice it???...Practice ='s Skill...and typically???...the more ya prctice???...The more skill ya have...and it's been my experience that your average LEO dosen't get anywhere's near the levels of practice that even your novice level IPSC shooters do.

BTW...I have many LEO buds down my way...and more recently their latest training war cry is..."Advance The Threat"...as a matter of fact???....I have one bud who's just like you...who's job it is to train his officers...and when he trains them in a tactical course of fire???...he won't let them "STOP" or "TAKE COVER"...and he literally physically pushs them forward if they do...as he insists that his officers burn and learn to take an immediate and highly dominant command of almost any situation by almost always...."Advancing The Threat"..wether that advance be made with their sidearm, unit shotgun or carbine..you move...always forward...always agressive....always relentless..nmo fear...no backing down...in a "Use Cover" but don't "Take Cover" fashion.

Oh well...while I fully understand the levity and possible fatal consequences of any given officers training or lack thereof????..."simunition"???....."failure means death"???....imho???...neither high tech pain inducing simulations nor bold macho statements constitute a valid substitute nor are they any match for ultra high skill levels aqquired through tons of practice...so we'll just hafta agree to disagree on this..which is fine by me.

Peace, Out & L8R, Bill.

Many, you're in another world. You take everything I say and twist it so that I don't recognize it anymore.

You asked if I have ever shot at a target that shot back. I said that I had and validated it. I do 4-6 hours of Simunitions training every week.

I don't know what the hell you mean by "bold macho statements". What I said is a fact. LEO's are killed all the time because they make mistakes. It ain't a load of macho crap I'm selling, it's a fact. Calm down and don't feel so threatened.

I said time and time again, practice is important. I never said that Simunitions is a replacement for high level training. I do both. I shoot 2-3 days a week with live ammo and do Simunitions scenarios 1 day a week. The other day or 2 is usually hand-to-hand.

Whatever man, continue to be the IPSC God. Obviously, whatever point I am trying to make is lost on you.

I teach Advance on the Threat constantly. In my current job, we rarely teach the use of cover because the environment we work in has absolutely no cover that will effectively stop a handgun round. I personally love Advance on the Threat and think it is the best tactic available to me. But I'm smart enough to know that it will not work in every situation.

Since you are apparently so good, would you advocate an "average" trained LEO to advance on you? By the way you tout your skills, that would be one dead LEO.

BTW, in the FBI Miami shoot out both Platt and Matix (the bad guys) were injured and one was having weapons problems when Special Agent Morales advanced and took them out. I totally agree that was the proper tactic to use at that time. If Platt and Matix were not injured and both had fully functioning Mini-14's, would YOU advocate ADVANCING ON THE THREAT with a .38 revolver? If so, I'm glad that you ARE an IPSC competitor and not a Firearms and Tactics Instructor with a major LE agency/department, cuz you'd get a lot of good men and women killed. And that's not a "bold macho statement" either, it's a fact.

I am generally known as hating to agree with anyone, but I find myself having to make a few statements. CM is exactly correct, if I understand what he is saying. I too am a firearms instructor, and deal in some tactical training and find a few truths in both of your statements.

First, as a competetive shooter, although I don't win a lot of prizes..... I find that anything that helps me get out of the holster and on target faster is good. As for advance the threat, not so sure. I work in an environment where there is cover everywhere, buildings are made of concrete block and steel, and space is tight. We have ample opportunity for "tactical withdrawal" and I teach this as an accepted practice. Why would anyone teach that advancing was the only solution to a situation when a retreat to cover can take half the time it takes to close even half the distance to the threat. I was at a training situation recently where I was shown that I could deliver fire effectively from behind a telephone pole, which provided great cover from the guy shooting at me. In my not so humble opinion, if I can be protected from incoming fire, while still delivering accurate, aimed fire, what could I possibly gain from advancing?

We have a shoot back FATS system, as well as a fully stocked Simunition setup, and both have great applications. With the FATS I can watch an individual or team advance to a threat, shoot back if cover is not used appropriately, and track the entire team's muzzles during the entire situation. Then I can take them and put them in Simunition gear and run it all again, with even more devastating impact to show of any tactical errors. The only way to learn is to make mistakes, learn from them, and learn to think your way around the problem.

I feel like I am starting to ramble, but in short, good training is good training. Sims and FATS are nothing without live fire training, but competitive shooting is worthless if used as training all by itself. All of them are important, for if you can't deliver accurate live fire, you can't win; but if you are accurate as is humanly possible, but are tactically challenged, you can't win either.

I like to imagine that my opponent is as good a shot as I, and the only way for me to win is to be smarter. Tactics is all about thought, and planning, and preparation, and has nothing to do with shooting. Anyone can learn to shoot, how many of them (the students) can learn to think, and act under pressure, and survive.

Sorry if this rant didn't seem to follow, but I believe CM is on the right track, and the competetive guru is a tad off.

All in all, just my probably underinformed opinion.

BTW, we also teach Isosceles and thumbs forward....of course we are feds too...imagine that.

Another world???...Twisting your words???....Calm Down???...Feeling Threatened???...IPSC GOD???....advocate that an LEO advance on me???....advocate that an LEO armed with a .38 revolver advance on two baddys armed with mini-14's???...C'mon Shep....there's no call for that...I just attempted to engage in a good healthy debate level discussion here..which in essense has taken the form of "Tactical Technics Application VS Firearms Skill & Proficiency" discussion just as incited by the originator of this thread.

It appears we've simply had somewhat of a communications break down....with both of us taking aim at each others weakest points and words...in stereotypical debate fashion and....well...I guess I started that by questioning your grossly devalued opinion of what seems to me to have been your bad experiences at what was (judging by your description and imho) evidently a very poorly run IPSC club with less than well set-up or executed stages of fire.

But no Shep....I'm not advocating or suggesting that a Pistol Packing LEO go bum rushing a house full of shotgun weilding baddys...or that a .38 revolver weilding FBI agent run head long into the muzzle of two mini-14's....as while I am a huge advocate of advancing the threat at no time have I suggested that anyone shelf their "Common Sense" to apply advancing the threat.

My apologies for any confusion I may have caused here.

Peace, Out & L8R, Bill.

Interesting topic and I think I'm going to side with CMShoot on this one.

I was a range coach in the Marines and I am also a firearms instructor with my department. We have about 25% of our department that are dedicated to weapons handling. These officers put out a strong effort at the range and always shoot well. 50% of the department puts out a decent effort but often will complain about training being to difficult. Then there is the 25% that just do enough to get by. Somehing that people must understand is how difficult it is for someone to dedicate so much time and personal funds to a job. My typical work week... 40 hours regular shift. 8 hours of overtime(average). Atleast 3 hours of court. 6-8 hours in the gym a week. 8 hours of personal range time a week. Then you throw in a few hours a week of taking care of uniforms, weapons and reading up on police related news it turns into an 80 hour work week and a good chunk you are not paid for.

Like CMShoot said earlier. The situation will dictate what tactics you employ. Personally I stress just plain old moving and shooting. Personally speaking, I feel moving diagonal or horizontally is more effective than advancing the the threat if in a gun battle. Typical IDPA match a few months ago... I moved diagonal and was told that I had to engage targets while walking straight ahead because that is how the scenario was written. Telling me I can not push card board "good guy" targets out of the way while I move through a crowd is ridiculous. Though I go to the matches for the training I get tired of hearing "but the rules or the scenario says" Our scenarios during department ranges are simple. With X number of rounds eliminate each threat starting at Point A and moving to Point B or from this location eliminate all threats. It is pass or fail just like life.

It is easy to bring up real world scenarios and say, "Well this worked here". It is important to discuss real world situations but while doing so it should be discussed that all situations require you to be fluid and the ability to improvise adapt and overcome are far more important than what tactic should I use.

I've always done what's comfortable for me, I study what others say and write and use that to augment what I already know. I've been told I'm unorthodox but I've won regional competitions just being me. I go out to the town forest to practice different things where the safety thing is just thrown out the window, then I'll go to the range and be a good boy and just shoot.

I like to find a balance of good fundamentals and raw instincts. I'm a target shooter but I also want to be able to defend myself effectively if that situation ever decided to unexpectedly interfere with my life. At a lot of ranges you're not allowed to run around and dive behind trees and pop a few rounds in a few different targets in different directions. I practice tactical skills on my own and differently every time. Bad guys don't practice that much so I think I have an edge