Rob Pincus-Combat Focus Shooting/Advanced Pistol Handling

[rhino]

I get startled frequently by coworkers because of the location of my cube and my orientation to the entrance when I am working. That's not a great thing, but my hands do not fly up in front of my face when it happens.

We've discussed this particular issue in other topics. It's good to be aware of potential effects of being startled, but it doesn't make any sense at all to me to condition yourself to mimic the specified startle response so that you'll do it by rote.

 

[VERT]

I get startled frequently by coworkers because of the location of my cube and my orientation to the entrance when I am working. That's not a great thing, but my hands do not fly up in front of my face when it happens.

We've discussed this particular issue in other topics. It's good to be aware of potential effects of being startled, but it doesn't make any sense at all to me to condition yourself to mimic the specified startle response so that you'll do it by rote.

I usually jump up a little in my chair and cuss. But in my case they more then likely woke me from a power nap.

 

[Yojimbo229]

Thanks for the AAR!
As others said - it was very honest of you to share that and your sincerity in not being an Internet basher was apparent.

I recently took a CFS class with one of Rob's instructors.

I agree with most sentiments here; take the good, leave the bad.
As for the "bad," I try to give every method I initially don't gel with the ol' college try for fear that I'm being arrogant or not open to new concepts.
I'm still wrasslin' with some of the CFS theories and re-reading the Counter Ambush book (much better now that I've been in the class) and will build on the personal deficiencies which were revealed in the class.

The jury's still out but I'm open to anything...Bruce Lee's "empty cup" as it were. I am not fond of my knee-jerk "that YYY nonsense he talked about sucked," "that isn't what XXX taught me" when I mentally (or officially) AAR a class...but I need to be honest w/myself that I think it. When I do, I try to see why I react negatively and open my mind (at least for the time being).
Often I'll see the kernel of wisdom in what turned me off ...and at times I agree with my initial assessment.

My biggest pet peeve with classes of late is the school/person trying to be contrarian for the sake of it. ...needing to be the controversial instructor so as to have his niche.
That's dangerous.

I think someone touched on this: Rob has overall good training concepts geared for a specific market.

Thanks again for a real sincere report.

 

[Never A Victim]

Thanks for the AAR!
As others said - it was very honest of you to share that and your sincerity in not being an Internet basher was apparent.

I recently took a CFS class with one of Rob's instructors.

I agree with most sentiments here; take the good, leave the bad.
As for the "bad," I try to give every method I initially don't gel with the ol' college try for fear that I'm being arrogant or not open to new concepts.
I'm still wrasslin' with some of the CFS theories and re-reading the Counter Ambush book (much better now that I've been in the class) and will build on the personal deficiencies which were revealed in the class.

The jury's still out but I'm open to anything...Bruce Lee's "empty cup" as it were. I am not fond of my knee-jerk "that YYY nonsense he talked about sucked," "that isn't what XXX taught me" when I mentally (or officially) AAR a class...but I need to be honest w/myself that I think it. When I do, I try to see why I react negatively and open my mind (at least for the time being).
Often I'll see the kernel of wisdom in what turned me off ...and at times I agree with my initial assessment.

My biggest pet peeve with classes of late is the school/person trying to be contrarian for the sake of it. ...needing to be the controversial instructor so as to have his niche.
That's dangerous.

I think someone touched on this: Rob has overall good training concepts geared for a specific market.

Thanks again for a real sincere report.

Have you trained with any other commercial firearms companies? I think for me, that was the reason I didn't connect with Rob's material as much. Had CFS been my first commercial class, I would have probably bought into it more-but it was easy to see the weaknesses with his system because I have trained with other people. Not saying this is your experience, but most of the people who I have talked to who like Rob's CFS class have not trained with any other established instructors.

 

[Yojimbo229]

Have you trained with any other commercial firearms companies? I think for me, that was the reason I didn't connect with Rob's material as much. Had CFS been my first commercial class, I would have probably bought into it more-but it was easy to see the weaknesses with his system because I have trained with other people. Not saying this is your experience, but most of the people who I have talked to who like Rob's CFS class have not trained with any other established instructors.

I have.
I wouldn't say I've been around the block but I've seen the first mailbox on the way.

If I were discussing this in person I may be less diplomatic. Rob's In The Arena and certainly on the 2A side. It has its place and its intended market. As long as waving a gun around isn't overlooked or not carrying one in the chamber-type things are not part of the curriculum, I won't bash.

I like the emphasis on movement, the body-alarm response (vision, hearing, blood flow, hormone-dump) is always good for a review, stressing quality equipment etc are things I liked about the class and book. I haven't had a class yet where I haven't gleaned something from it. A day of meaningful reps and a little added stress always brings out personal flaws I can work on.
I don't think I'll warm up to a few CFS dogmas (somewhat sublty couched at times, some not so subtle) but I won't pooh pooh what may work for others....and I'm open to trying the techniques until I'm convinced they're not for me.

Personally, CFS wouldn't be the first 'recommend' for folks with a few miles under their belts. Other classes/facilities I've attended have given me more than I could have expected and that's why I return and recommend them without reservation to shooters at any level.

All the best~

 

[Bfish]

Thanks for posting this review! I really like reading them for reasons you stated... 1k on a weekend of training by the time you pay for it, have your ammo, food, travel etc. It's nice to have an idea of what you are "buying" before making a purchase. Seeing the issues you raised would align with my own I'm sure, and there likely better options of course!

 

[szorn]

I am no expert on Rob Pincus or CFS but I have trained a little with one of his instructors as well as watched many of his videos and read all of his books. In all honesty I am not a firearms expert either. I consider myself a self-defense specialist that trains with and without weapons, to include firearms.

After reading through the thread I think there are some misunderstandings or misconceptions about some of the stuff that Rob teaches in his courses. While I am sure that Rob or one of his instuctors could explain it better than I here are some of my thoughts. The first thing that comes to mind is the context. If we go into a course like CFS and try to compare it to a standard firearm course, obviously things are going to be different. The question that needs to be asked is- "what's the context?". Without the proper context, comparing different training methods, grips, stances, ect is comparing apples to oranges. That said, the context of CFS is dealing with sudden explosive violence without the luxury of pre-attck indicators or heightened levels of awareness. As an example- say you are sitting and relaxing in your home in front of the TV. unless you are overly paranoid your level of awareness will likely be in condition yellow and possibly even close to white. Without warning or any pre-attack indicators an armed assailant crashes through your front door, just feet away from you. this is what is considered sudden explosive violence or what Rob would call the "ambush". You weren't expecting it or prepared for it and there was no prior warning. If a situation like this doesn't make you flinch then you must have nerves of steels and cat-like reflexes but obviously that's not a bad thing. Unfortunately the rest of us are normal and there is a quite a bit of data and research out there that supports what happens to normal people under similar conditions.

Now if we place the training methods in this specific context, that of the "ambush" and not of the gunslingers duel it becomes easier to understand the 'why's' behind what is being taught. Sure if you know you are about to be in a firefight or even an unarmed assault chances are good you will not startle. If you are 200 yards from an active shooter and can safely assess the situation before you choose to engage, obviously you are not going to startle immediately prior to that engagement. Again, context is important. Many worry that training the startle response (a response we will have anyway during sudden explosive violence) will somehow be detrimental to out safety. If we are going to do it anyway how can the inclusion of these innate skills be detrimental? Some worry that it takes up time. Really? How much time? Time in what context? Sure if you are a competitive shooter that has to beat a certain time then the inclusion of the startle response prior to your draw would obviously take up important time, however that's not the context in which the startle response is being trained. again, it's being trained for the "ambush", sudden explosive violence. In that context, it takes up little time because it's likely to happen anyway. In fact by training the startle response in the proper context it's likely to increase reaction time because the shooter will have trained through it and will immediately be able to transition to effective follow-up. Whereas a person that has not trained the startle response could easily be caught off guard, and an unfamiliarity with this physiological phenomenon can create 'log jam', a slowing of the mental processing that goes hand in hand with the freeze response. That said, training the startle response in it's proper context is not slower unless you talking about other contexts as mentioned. everything needs to be placed in proper context. Once we understand how to place things in their proper context it becomes relatively easy to figure out what works and what doesn't when a life is on the line.

All of that also applies to unsighted fire (point shooting), sighted fire, grips, stance, movement, etc. What is the context? People often attack point shooting not because it hasn't been proven to work in it's proper context, but because they just don't like it. Often they don't like it because their only comparison is traditional sighted fire. Remember the gunslingers of the old west had sights but rarely did they use them. Point shooting has been shown to work and in fact many people that have trained to use their sights have ended up point shooting when faced with sudden explosive violence. this isn't something that's just made up, is a fact. While my knowledge of CFS is limited I can tell you that Rob doesn't claim that point shooting is the be-all-end-all to defensive shooting. In fact one of his primary training drills "balance of speed and precision" is designed to help shooters understand when sighted fire and unsighted fire are both applicable and necessary. They both have there place and it's vitally important to understand that, otherwise there are inherent risks involved. Again, it must be placed in proper context.

I could go on about many of the nuances regarding CFS (within in my knowledge base of course) or defensive shooting in general but I think you get the picture. Ask yourself what your objective is and then train accordingly. Understand the context of the training that suits your specific objective. If it doesn't suit your objective or fit your needs than look for something that does. However, when comparing skills or courses etc they must be placed in the proper context and looked at from that perspective, otherwise.

Steve

 

[turnandshoot4]

I was at a class this past weekend and we had wrapped up for the day. I was sitting outside the barracks reading a book and there was another class going on down on one of the ranges about 200 yards away. The class finished up and a few trucks pulled up within 100 yards and they were talking. Everything was calm for about 30 minutes or so and I settled into my book.

They then lit off a gas bomb. First I saw the flash out of the corner of my eye, felt the concussion hit me in the chest, then I heard the loud boom. The cloud was at lead 10' wide.

At no point in time did I bring my hands up to my face.



I went to PEP2 a couple of years back. Whilst there I attended a class that had a presentation of the "sacred cow slaughterhouse" by John Hearn of Rangemaster. In this class he described the 1930's era study that can be cited showing, on video, people thrusting their hands in front of their faces when startled. They were told to sit in a chair while someone came up behind them and shot a revolver with a blank in it. The people threw their hands up in front of their face. The rest of the lecture was report after report of police that were point shooting, missing, focused on the front sight, and started hitting. I enjoyed the lecture and adjusted my training to fall in line with the theme of the class.

 

[szorn]

I was at a class this past weekend and we had wrapped up for the day. I was sitting outside the barracks reading a book and there was another class going on down on one of the ranges about 200 yards away. The class finished up and a few trucks pulled up within 100 yards and they were talking. Everything was calm for about 30 minutes or so and I settled into my book.

They then lit off a gas bomb. First I saw the flash out of the corner of my eye, felt the concussion hit me in the chest, then I heard the loud boom. The cloud was at lead 10' wide.

At no point in time did I bring my hands up to my face.

Again, put this in context.. you were at a training class in a training environment. Even if it had been quiet for 30 minutes you were still fully aware that you were in a an environment where these things and sounds are expected. Put yourself in a situation where you are sitting with loved ones in a dark movie theater, a restaurant having dinner, a night club having a good time- places you would not otherwise expect gunfire or explosions and see if things might be a little different. That said, we know that not everyone is going to react exactly the same way and there are some people that may not startle like the rest of us. There are those that can learn to bypass the startle through proper training. That said i can tell you from experience that many soldiers come back home with a more intense startle response than the rest of us and many of them were in environment where gunfire and explosion were common place. In other words the exception to the norm should not dictate the training methodology.

Steve

 

[turnandshoot4]

Again, put this in context.. you were at a training class in a training environment. Even if it had been quiet for 30 minutes you were still fully aware that you were in a an environment where these things and sounds are expected. Put yourself in a situation where you are sitting with loved ones in a dark movie theater, a restaurant having dinner, a night club having a good time- places you would not otherwise expect gunfire or explosions and see if things might be a little different. That said, we know that not everyone is going to react exactly the same way and there are some people that may not startle like the rest of us. There are those that can learn to bypass the startle through proper training. That said i can tell you from experience that many soldiers come back home with a more intense startle response than the rest of us and many of them were in environment where gunfire and explosion were common place. In other words the exception to the norm should not dictate the training methodology.

Steve

The bolded section is my point.

If we can train them to NOT have a hands in front of face response, why train FOR it? Worse even, why create it?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Point shooting works right up until it doesn't, and that's generally when one or both people involved begin moving.

Go watch a hand full of surveillance videos of robberies. There are plenty on Youtube, liveleak, etc. Count how many people put their hands in front of their face when they are startled by the sight of an armed robber vs how many shrug their shoulders and lean away. If that look into reality doesn't kill the theory for you, I don't know what to tell you.

The bolded section is my point.

If we can train them to NOT have a hands in front of face response, why train FOR it? Worse even, why create it?

This. My startle response it to reach for a strong side holster...even if I'm not wearing a gun. As I've stated, I've gone straight for my gun when startled. Simunitions and realistic training has ingrained it for me. There is a time for the hands in front of the face. It's managing a potential hostile contact, particularly one who hasn't yet displayed a weapon. Protecting your face from a punch, creating distance, while not being openly aggressive. Certainly not during the proverbial door kicking.

 

[cedartop]

Point shooting works right up until it doesn't, and that's generally when one or both people involved begin moving.

Go watch a hand full of surveillance videos of robberies. There are plenty on Youtube, liveleak, etc. Count how many people put their hands in front of their face when they are startled by the sight of an armed robber vs how many shrug their shoulders and lean away. If that look into reality doesn't kill the theory for you, I don't know what to tell you.



This. My startle response it to reach for a strong side holster...even if I'm not wearing a gun. As I've stated, I've gone straight for my gun when startled. Simunitions and realistic training has ingrained it for me. There is a time for the hands in front of the face. It's managing a potential hostile contact, particularly one who hasn't yet displayed a weapon. Protecting your face from a punch, creating distance, while not being openly aggressive. Certainly not during the proverbial door kicking.

Nailed it there!

 

[rhino]

Each time we've had this discussion I am at a loss as to why someone would want to inculcate themselves into wasting time and movement with putting their hands in front of their face each and every time, regardless of the situation. There are too many examples of people not reacting that way or training themselves to react a different way to startle to believe the rhetoric that it's an inevitable reaction.

 

[szorn]

The bolded section is my point.

If we can train them to NOT have a hands in front of face response, why train FOR it? Worse even, why create it?

Because it requires years of contradictory training. Generally speaking the average student of self-defense (with or without defensive tools) won't have the time, energy or desire to invest in the amount of training it takes to change innate responses. Even average military and LEO training doesn't address this.

The question becomes why would anyone want to train in such a way that contradicts natural ingrained patterns of survival, even if it didn't require excessive amounts of time and energy?

Steve

 

[szorn]

Point shooting works right up until it doesn't, and that's generally when one or both people involved begin moving.

Point shooting is just one component on the continuum. Obviously it's not applicable to every scenario, distance, etc. That said, it's not any less or more valuable when applied to specific circumstances than what sighted fire is.

I have yet to find anyone during my courses that have problems using point shooting while moving during scenario replications. In fact the circumstances do not generally allow time or opportunity for sighted fire and yet participants with absolutely no previous training continue to be successful.

My startle response it to reach for a strong side holster...even if I'm not wearing a gun. As I've stated, I've gone straight for my gun when startled. Simunitions and realistic training has ingrained it for me. There is a time for the hands in front of the face. It's managing a potential hostile contact, particularly one who hasn't yet displayed a weapon. Protecting your face from a punch, creating distance, while not being openly aggressive. Certainly not during the proverbial door kicking.

That very well may be true for you but as I mentioned before that doesn't necessarily apply to the general population with minimal training. Also, force-on-force is still a training environment where participants know they will go to guns. It's not the same thing as a violent ambush that occurs without warning and when least expected. However, there are numerous stories of people being able to do things that others can't, even when following the same training methodologies. The point is not what one person can do but what an instructor can teach others to do given the numerous limitations that exist in this world including time, learning abilities, teaching abilities, and most importantly statistical probability-what's likely to work for the majority of the people, the majority of the time, under the majority of the given circumstances. The world is full of people claiming "I can do this", "I would that", etc. etc. However, it's what the majority of been proven to do under the stress of the real thing that should matter most.

Once again, it all comes back to proper context, regardless of what the opinions may be.

Steve

 

[cosermann]

Because it requires years of contradictory training.

Did you miss this part?

. . .Go watch a hand full of surveillance videos of robberies. There are plenty on Youtube, liveleak, etc. Count how many people put their hands in front of their face when they are startled by the sight of an armed robber vs how many shrug their shoulders and lean away. If that look into reality doesn't kill the theory for you, I don't know what to tell you. . .

We're likely not viewing highly trained folks in the videos BBI mentions.

Each time we've had this discussion I am at a loss as to why someone would want to inculcate themselves into wasting time and movement with putting their hands in front of their face each and every time, regardless of the situation. . .

Maybe because some people get all wrapped up in a theory/method and take it to the extreme.