Speed vs. Accuracy
- Thread starter Amp Mangum
- Start date
- Replies 107
- Views 3,343
FatboyFlash
Senior Member
What distances are we arguing about?
Every situation requires a different response. Under 10 yds I promise you I don't need to see the sights to put 3 rounds on target, every single time. I will eventually have the sights but that first second, probably not. If I'm running then probably not going to hit anything without the sights, maybe not even with the sights. If there are other people in the field of fire then I would want my sight picture before I pulled the trigger.
This is quite honestly one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard but only because there are no absolutes that cover every scenario. It will also depend on the person doing the shooting and the amount of time behind the gun. I promise you that Ken Hackathorn can point shoot at 25 yds but he'd be a fool to teach that because the average retard with a pistol can't do it and should never try. That's my 2cents and it's worth exactly what you paid for it. Just for the record, I'm not that great of a shooter but I'm not a bad shooter either.
Every situation requires a different response. Under 10 yds I promise you I don't need to see the sights to put 3 rounds on target, every single time. I will eventually have the sights but that first second, probably not. If I'm running then probably not going to hit anything without the sights, maybe not even with the sights. If there are other people in the field of fire then I would want my sight picture before I pulled the trigger.
This is quite honestly one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard but only because there are no absolutes that cover every scenario. It will also depend on the person doing the shooting and the amount of time behind the gun. I promise you that Ken Hackathorn can point shoot at 25 yds but he'd be a fool to teach that because the average retard with a pistol can't do it and should never try. That's my 2cents and it's worth exactly what you paid for it. Just for the record, I'm not that great of a shooter but I'm not a bad shooter either.
Last edited:
Stick Man
Knee Dragger
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Benefactor
Vendor
Life Member
Supporting Member
Yep, the more I think about it, it's just getting crazy, and I need to stop adding to it, lol, So I deleted my post. I'm done.
Sent from my LM-Q710.FG using Tapatalk
Sent from my LM-Q710.FG using Tapatalk
Last edited:
And there is the kicker, know what works and know it's limitations. Maybe to wrap this up and jerk some chains. Close in I use point shooting to get to the sights. I'm not sure I've ever seen a point shooter argue that sights don't work, but you get some sight picture only guys that really make a big deal of point shooting not working.
On the old board a guy told me he would not bring his family to Hickory because I was too dangerous. Lmao, OK. At the time of that thread I had a very good idea of what I could and could not do. And he was arguing with me about something I was not really arguing about, distance.
I think I might start practicing point shooting. At least pointing, with a laser dry firing. If I can learn to draw and present so that the sights are aligned (or very close), no reason I can’t learn where the POA is by muscle memory also.
Anyone can point shoot at point blank range (and will under stress no matter what they say here). So the question is where is the limit to that? With an A/C zone target is it 1,2,3,5,7,10 yards? As with most questions it isn’t a hard yes or no, it’s where the line is between yes and no.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Anyone can point shoot at point blank range (and will under stress no matter what they say here). So the question is where is the limit to that? With an A/C zone target is it 1,2,3,5,7,10 yards? As with most questions it isn’t a hard yes or no, it’s where the line is between yes and no.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah.....I gave up early on page 2...….sometimes you just have to accept you ain't getting through.
fieldgrade
waiting...
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
You would be dead wrong about Amp Mangum. I don't recall if he advocated for or agin' it, but I've shot probably 75-80 matches with him.
You know what they say about ASS-umptions.
Last edited:
fieldgrade
waiting...
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Thank you for your insightful contribution to the thread.
I think I'll follow Ken Hackathorn's advice on this.
Last edited:
fieldgrade
waiting...
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Hey, if the shoe fits.
Jim's a friend of mine. What question was that?
Edit: Nevermind, I see it. So no, I don't have an expert video available to answer the question. I've shot with Jim. He's a real good shooter.
Last edited:
fieldgrade
waiting...
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
If I misread your earlier post, I apologize. Amp is a good friend, and I took umbrage.
Last edited:
fieldgrade
waiting...
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Last edited:
Funny guy. Never called them lame. Wish I had time to do it. But I wouldn't be point shooting 99% of the stages I have seen. Which is why it's a poor comparison.
georgel
Behind Every Blade of Grass
Charter Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
And you won't even need a gun.
People don't know what they don't know. In real life there are more factors than speed of draw or accuracy of shot. SC380 doesn't realize he was answering some of his own comments when he was talking about reaction times and use sights if possible.
Yes, sighted shooting is more accurate, when possible. But it's not always possible. Research has show that in many shooting incidents, due to stress and tunnel vision the shooter does not recall ever seeing the sights. This is a physical response, due to threat fixation and not a chosen one. Generally, within 21ft. hit probability is high with metal on meat aiming. Beyond this hit probability drops quickly. So, in reality you need both. For close encounters, metal on meat works and is fast. As distance increases and you have time and ability to start using sights you do. At very close encounters, like contact distances, it's another animal all together. Then it's combatives, hands on, no sights, not even point shooting. Retention position shooting. What does that look like?
I still have issues with this vid, but I'll post it since everyone seems to like it. First couple of rounds, contact, retention position. Next couple of rounds at slightly greater distance, point shooting, then aimed fire with sights. Next round, well never mind the coup de gras shot.
Last edited:
And you won't even need a gun.
People don't know what they don't know. In real life there are more factors than speed of draw or accuracy of shot. SC380 doesn't realize he was answering some of his own comments when he was talking about reaction times and use sights if possible.
Yes, sighted shooting is more accurate, when possible. But it's not always possible. Research has show that in many shooting incidents, due to stress and tunnel vision the shooter does not recall ever seeing the sights. This is a physical response, due to threat fixation and not a chosen one. Generally, within 21ft. hit probability is high with metal on meat aiming. Beyond this hit probability drops quickly. So, in reality you need both. For close encounters, metal on meat works and is fast. As distance increases and you have time and ability to start using sights you do. At very close encounters, like contact distances, it's another animal all together. Then it's combatives, hands on, no sights, not even point shooting. Retention position shooting. What does that look like?
I still have issues with this vid, but I'll post it since everyone seems to like it. First couple of rounds, contact, retention position. Next couple of rounds at slightly greater distance, point shooting, then aimed fire with sights. Next round, well never mind the coup de gras shot.
SC380 realizes exactly what he is talking about and didn't have any questions about reaction times.
According to Rob Leatham, Bill Wilson, Ken Hackathorn, Bill Rogers, Bill Allard, Larry Vickers, Jack Weaver, Wyatt Earp, Bill Hickock, and Clint Smith, accuracy is the most important factor in real life. I am wondering how many more videos have to be posted before people get it. I am sure if those guys came here and posted it themselves somebody would be here saying "your absolutes are not correct" because they managed to one hand point shoot a pie plate at 20 yards in the dark back in the day.
Since this is a topic about shooting (accuracy vs speed) then we can assume we are able to shoot the gun for purposes of this discussion. Stick Man's 5 yard sucker punch game, Joe Rogan's jujitsu, Kendo stick fighting, Filipino machete fighting, and all other non shooting related real life stuff is not my concern for this topic. But the same rules apply, accuracy still puts all of those people down quicker, and you are more accurate when you use the sights...SO...
You don't have a choice to use the sights in retention shooting so why you think that (or Tom Cruise) is particularly relevant to a topic about choosing accuracy is beyond me.
Further research has proven that just because you don't remember seeing the sights doesn't mean you don't use them AND if you train to use the sights you WILL use them.
georgel
Behind Every Blade of Grass
Charter Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
SMH
We may be confusing term "real life" here. If you're only talking about competition shooting, sure sighted fire. If we're talking about survival on the street, not necessarily so. Because, as you stated, in the video, which is only used for demonstration purposes, he didn't have a choice for sights. That's real life. Because, you're not going to engage with someone beyond contact distance. Application of sights vary with the situation.
We may be confusing term "real life" here. If you're only talking about competition shooting, sure sighted fire. If we're talking about survival on the street, not necessarily so. Because, as you stated, in the video, which is only used for demonstration purposes, he didn't have a choice for sights. That's real life. Because, you're not going to engage with someone beyond contact distance. Application of sights vary with the situation.
Last edited:
Chuckman
Senior Member
Point shooting saved the lives of Marines a handful of times in Fallujah that I know of where the Marine had to draw and fire when the booger-eater was under 10 ft and advancing.
It is one tool in the toolbox. you have to know how to use all of your tools if you want to be an expert craftsman.
It is one tool in the toolbox. you have to know how to use all of your tools if you want to be an expert craftsman.
At least you are consistent, from page one to three, your condescending BS is my problem. Even when giving a token nod, you have to throw in the hyperbolic condescending BS with it.
Point shooting is a tool, and a viable one, in its element. IMO, dismissing it out of hand or talking it down has a strong potential to turn people from a style of shooting that might one day save their lives.
As far as I can tell, all those of us advocating for it are putting it in it's appropriate box. Close quarters, contact distance, likely SD situations.
Those of you dismissing it routinely dismiss it using a game that you play, IDPA. Where it's mostly not in it's element anyway. I've been in many of these threads. And almost without question the terms, ideas, and arguments used to argue against point shooting are used by people that already don't like it and completely misrepresent what it is. Just like you are doing now. And in many cases, like this one, it seems to boil down to people using a game to train for SD and people that are using most likely scenarios to train for SD.
You might be confusing it. My first reference was to Bill Rogers who helped develop the modern FBI firearms program. None of that was for competition. I clarified in later posts that we were debating how to best quickly end an adversaries ability to fight.
In what world can you confidently say that nobody is going to engage somebody beyond contact distance?
This is funny. Anyone listen to P&S podcasts? This argument has the "It'll get you killed in the streets!" vibe.
SC380 What do you say to the guys who start pulling the trigger as soon as the booger hook gets on the bangstick. Popping rounds like a dotted line as they try to get it up on target. That shoot-fast-fairy is alive and well when you think your about to get smoked. I was taught you can fire as soon as your gun is pointed at the target, so theoretically you **could** be pulling the trigger before the gun comes up and the sites are aligned. Shooting with sites on the target and properly aligned is optimal. Sometimes shit ain't optimal.
I have talked to those who have killed people in a gun fight and was told they didn't see their sites. They were so focused on the bad guy and they were just trying their absolute utmost to kill the bastard before he did likewise to them. Your mileage may vary, my mileage may vary. The real world is not IDPA or USPSA, but those skills sure serve you well. I do think we tend to rise to the level of our training. But i can say from doing simulations that it is very hard to watch what the hell someone is doing AND look at your front site. That whole blurry target thing right?
V
SC380 What do you say to the guys who start pulling the trigger as soon as the booger hook gets on the bangstick. Popping rounds like a dotted line as they try to get it up on target. That shoot-fast-fairy is alive and well when you think your about to get smoked. I was taught you can fire as soon as your gun is pointed at the target, so theoretically you **could** be pulling the trigger before the gun comes up and the sites are aligned. Shooting with sites on the target and properly aligned is optimal. Sometimes shit ain't optimal.
I have talked to those who have killed people in a gun fight and was told they didn't see their sites. They were so focused on the bad guy and they were just trying their absolute utmost to kill the bastard before he did likewise to them. Your mileage may vary, my mileage may vary. The real world is not IDPA or USPSA, but those skills sure serve you well. I do think we tend to rise to the level of our training. But i can say from doing simulations that it is very hard to watch what the hell someone is doing AND look at your front site. That whole blurry target thing right?
V
I don't need a token nod. I am simply stating that I accept the opinion of these people, that we all recognize as experts, on point shooting. You are welcome to throw your theories, rhetorical questions, and questionable facts at me as you have been and I am glad to elaborate on why I still accept what the experts have to say...you don't have to like it. You are welcome to have a differing opinion than all of the top current experts (and many of the historical ones) in self defense and law enforcement even though they unquestionably have the experience and knowledge to back it up and they are turning people from a style of shooting that has proven to be less effective...I am not going to worry about that.
Most people don't have access to simulators, simunitions, or the facilities for live fire exercises but most people can purposely try aimed vs point shooting under time and very quickly see the difference. An IDPA match is one way. The 5x5 classifier done at 3 yards is another excellent way to quickly find out for yourself. Even better at the 5-10 yard distances some are claiming point shooting is viable/preferred. Go to Billy's and do the wizard with sights and then right after do it without sights. Even though you get a practice run, you will almost certainly not do as well without sights. The wizard is a self defense drill according to Hackathorn...is he wrong? Most of these Hackathorn, Wilson, Vicker's drills are greater than 3 yards...are they wrong?
If you are trying to change my opinion, you'll have to post/link something a bit more convincing. In your mind you might be the fastest point shooter ever but I don't know. I am open to being impressed.
Last edited:
OK, ya'll Pulled me back in. I was taught the kind of shooting I am professing should NEVER be shot further than you can SPIT. I agree.
SC380 is absolutely correct about the Wizard. Hackathorn's professed Gold Standard for carry proficiency. Every person that fails this drill tries to get away at 7 and 10 yards with what they did at 3 and 5. You can easily point shoot the Wizard at 3 and 5 BUT at 7 and 10 he will kick ass. I proved this recently by starting a Wizard Assassin at 10 yards and letting him work his way in to the 3 yard mark. He did great. When he started at 10, using sights he continued all the way in, ending in success. When starting from 3, folks get caught up in their success of drawing, pointing, and firing superfast. It won't float at 7 and 10. You better find some sights.
This all to say what several had already said, a place and time for both. Without belittling either.
Really all that needs to be said on the matter. At least to anybody who knows anything about shooting.
It isn’t speed (point shoooting) OR (XOR for the geeks) accuracy (sights).
It is shooting accurately _enough_ as fast as you can. It really is that simple.
“Accurately enough” depends on range, skill with that firearm, and aim. You have to know what your ability and limits are. If you can hit A zones from retention at 5 yards, then that is accurate enough. If not, use some sights. (And I really meant “some”.)
For those saying sights are absolutely necessary, that argument falls apart when the obvious question is asked - how much? How perfect of a sight picture is “necessary”? Do I need exactly lined up across the top and a perfectly even gap on each side of the front blade at 50 yards? Yep. But that would be suicidal and pointless both at 5 yards. The closer in the “sloppier” that sight picture can be. And very close it can be so sloppy you’d call it point shooting.
Post 19
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It is shooting accurately _enough_ as fast as you can. It really is that simple.
“Accurately enough” depends on range, skill with that firearm, and aim. You have to know what your ability and limits are. If you can hit A zones from retention at 5 yards, then that is accurate enough. If not, use some sights. (And I really meant “some”.)
For those saying sights are absolutely necessary, that argument falls apart when the obvious question is asked - how much? How perfect of a sight picture is “necessary”? Do I need exactly lined up across the top and a perfectly even gap on each side of the front blade at 50 yards? Yep. But that would be suicidal and pointless both at 5 yards. The closer in the “sloppier” that sight picture can be. And very close it can be so sloppy you’d call it point shooting.
Post 19
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All the experts are selling something. Themselves and their shooting style. So I take a lot of it with that in mind.
I'm on record already saying I'm not impressed with the wizard as realistic shooting practice. Don't confuse that with being impressed if you can pull it off. A lot of talk about head shots, but all those targets are static. IMO, it's a lot like being told you should shoot at a leg or arm. High risk, high chance of failure. Unless it's your only target, there are better shots to take. And why would I take head shots point shooting? Again, not really what it's for. That angle is far too drastic an angle which is harder to repeat, and much smaller than the torso. Back to my point about putting point shooting in a box that those of us advocating for it are not even doing. For the most part, point shooting is about getting metal on meat in a hurry.
Never claimed anything for myself. I shoot way too little to do that anymore. But when I was shooting regularly and working on it, quick and accurate was not too difficult 7 yards and under. All this talk, I do need to work on it. We got steel plates at the pistol range and it's just too fun to knock them down. Need to get away from them next time.
Man, this has turned into the Timmy vs Gammer...