I generally try to take some sort of force-on-force class at least once a year. So, I am always looking for local opportunities for that type of training. A friend of mine used to study Hapkido at Gentry Martial Arts and told me about this class. He asked me to attend with him. So I decided to jump in and see what they had to offer.
The Basics
Course: FAST Stress Shooting
Date: 5/31/2014
Duration: 4 Hours
Location: Gentry Martial Arts
Instructor: Brandon Sieg
Assistant Instructors: David Yoshida and Todd Miller
Students: 13 (5 women / 8 men)
Cost: $75.00
Stated Objective
From the course handout: “To provide participants with the experience of choosing and applying appropriate use of lethal force in the adrenal stress state. To provide a full spectrum of appropriate use of force skills with a handgun. To provide the experience for students to make an educated decision on whether or not they want to own/carry a handgun. Skill sets include “getting off the line of charging attacker, verbal de-escalation with the weapon as a visual deterrent, and firing both a laser weapon and airsoft projectile gun point shooting style at a live aggressor exhibiting a hostile intent.”
Instructor quote: “Theme of the class is enlightenment.” (As I understood him: help the student better understand the speed and dynamics of a live situation vs square range training.)
Related Threads
N/A
Summary
This course is one in a series of FAST self-defense courses. The series has other courses that focus on unarmed combatives utilizing scenarios against heavily-padded aggressors. This class was basically an introductory force-on-force type course. The first hour was lecture and discussion. From there it moved to a skill building portion and on to drills. I would categorize all of the drills as “skill-based” rather than “Scenario-based” exercises. A few of the final scenarios did involve minor interactions with the role players, but generally did not affect the outcome. I believe the course generally met its objectives, though I disagree with some of the details.
Details
The Lecture and Discussion:
We gathered around 0905 in a circle of chairs and kicked off with a quick bit of background on the class from the instructors. The head instructor was quick to disclose that he was “not an expert shot, but expert at creating stress.” All of the instructors had a significant background in Korean martial arts such as Hapkido and Tae Kwon Do, among other things. After hearing a quick bit from the instructors, we went around the room and introduced ourselves. Most of the students were relatively new to firearms and none mentioned any prior firearms training or significant firearms experience.
After introductions we moved to the course discussion which closely followed a three-page handout provided to the class. The instructor went through the course objectives and told us the class was not a firearms safety class or a CCW class. It was both expressed and implied that primary objectives of the class were to build in a bit of stress and learn to move off the line of attack. Verbalization and de-escalation were also central themes of the lecture and exercises.
The lecture continued on to discuss the Tueller drill and the importance of distance. It also discussed the concept of an asymmetrical vs a symmetrical attack. The idea that the defender would be reacting and behind the curve was central to this portion of the lecture. This moved the discussion along to point shooting. The idea was presented that, because a person was shooting defensively, behind the curve, and under the effects of adrenaline, using the sights would not be likely. It was presented as if one should not worry about the sights.
One of the most memorable portions of the discussion was basically a mindset lecture (but the instructor never used the term “mindset” like we see in “gun classes”). The instructor relayed several incidents of people who had been shot, grievously wounded, and continued to fight through the situation. Some examples were to demonstrate the ineffectiveness of handgun bullets. Some were given to illustrate that a person most often gives up by choice, and not because their injuries force them out of the fight.
The lecture also discussed the physiological effects of adrenaline, some basic use-of-force rules and legal considerations. The lecture portion concluded with a general recommendation about what to say to police after being involved in an incident. We took a quick five-minute break and headed to the main training area.
Skill Exercises:
The skills exercises started off with a quick discussion on grip. The instructor demonstrated a couple grip options that included a crossed-thumb type grip, and a cup-and-saucer type grip. He also demonstrated three shooting positions. Someone familiar with a four-count draw stroke would loosely equate them to positions 2, 3, and 4. (Or positions 3, 4, and 5 of a five-count draw stroke). Position one being a loose and somewhat forward retention, two a compressed ready, and three full extension. We worked through these positions in and back out. There was significant emphasis on scanning the area at position two while coming back in to the holster.
After working through the shooting positions we moved to lateral movement. Two basic types of movement were presented. I’ll call one a shuffle to the side and the other a cross stepping type of movement. Moving off the line of attack was a significant, over-arching theme. Based on the class drills to follow it was probably the biggest focus.
Drills:
After the basic skills portion we moved to some basic drills with a partner using blue guns. One partner was given a training knife. The knife wielder would come at you slowly and you would implement the draw while moving off to the side. This is where verbalization was added. We would yell “stop, stop”, etc. Drills were done in steps, building skills on as we went. Everything was pretty slow-paced at this point. We’d add movement, then verbalization, then simulated shooting one step at a time.
After these drills we moved to similar drills with SIRT pistols. This time an instructor would come at you and you would move off the line and shoot with the SIRT. The SIRT was used so students could get an idea where they were shooting and what type hits they were getting. These drills worked up to full speed and basically turned in to a demonstration of the Tueller drill, but with lateral movement. I believe the purpose of these drills were to showcase the effectiveness of moving off the line as priority one.
The final exercise was similar to the above drills but using airsoft guns. The instructors added a bit more play-acting and didn’t present a threat right off the bat. There was some decision making, but almost all of the scenarios went the same basic way. I still considered these skill-based vs a full-out scenario because they didn’t appear to have an open ending. They did, however, drive at the themes of the course which were distance and lateral movement off the line of attack.
My Thoughts:
Overall, I think the course met its primary objective. I believe the overall goal of these FAST courses is to get students worked up, let them get a taste for the pace and difficulty of a real situation and work under some actual stress and resistance. This class did generally get people somewhat stressed. Some people reacted to the stress a bit more than others. Resistance was fairly low and the drills/scenarios were fairly simple. The attacks weren't all that realistic, but it seemed they were primarily used to demonstrate the distance and lateral movement concepts. I think they generally fit the level and approach of the class.
I like several of the lecture topics. The mindset portion was really pretty good. I liked the direction the instructor took there. The discussion on adrenal stress was also good, and not something always well-covered in other classes. I did not like the conclusions they drew about the necessity for point shooting. I don’t have a problem with the concept of point shooting, and think it happens under stress. However, I don’t think it’s an excuse to ignore the sights altogether.
Based on my previous training experience, the skills portion covering grip, draw-stroke, and shooting positions was not on par with current standards in firearms training. It appeared the instructors didn’t have any significant firearms training themselves. I am basing this on a few hours of class and the specific things they taught. So, I could be way off here. These were just my personal observations.
The drills, while pretty basic and not representative of an actual attack, followed pretty well with the overall themes of the class. Movement was emphasized, as was verbal de-escalation. Students came away with an appreciation for distance and the speed at which an attacker can approach. I think that was the primary objective of the class. If after-class feedback from other students is any indicator, I believe that objective was met. The primary take-away for most students was “wow, I felt far away until he started moving” or “wow, it happened fast” or “wow, I need to work on this”, etc.
At the end of the class the instructor said the theme of the class was “enlightenment”. He wanted students to come away with a little better picture of the problems they could face, and the speed at which they happen. I think most of the students got that out of it.
The Basics
Course: FAST Stress Shooting
Date: 5/31/2014
Duration: 4 Hours
Location: Gentry Martial Arts
Instructor: Brandon Sieg
Assistant Instructors: David Yoshida and Todd Miller
Students: 13 (5 women / 8 men)
Cost: $75.00
Stated Objective
From the course handout: “To provide participants with the experience of choosing and applying appropriate use of lethal force in the adrenal stress state. To provide a full spectrum of appropriate use of force skills with a handgun. To provide the experience for students to make an educated decision on whether or not they want to own/carry a handgun. Skill sets include “getting off the line of charging attacker, verbal de-escalation with the weapon as a visual deterrent, and firing both a laser weapon and airsoft projectile gun point shooting style at a live aggressor exhibiting a hostile intent.”
Instructor quote: “Theme of the class is enlightenment.” (As I understood him: help the student better understand the speed and dynamics of a live situation vs square range training.)
Related Threads
N/A
Summary
This course is one in a series of FAST self-defense courses. The series has other courses that focus on unarmed combatives utilizing scenarios against heavily-padded aggressors. This class was basically an introductory force-on-force type course. The first hour was lecture and discussion. From there it moved to a skill building portion and on to drills. I would categorize all of the drills as “skill-based” rather than “Scenario-based” exercises. A few of the final scenarios did involve minor interactions with the role players, but generally did not affect the outcome. I believe the course generally met its objectives, though I disagree with some of the details.
Details
The Lecture and Discussion:
We gathered around 0905 in a circle of chairs and kicked off with a quick bit of background on the class from the instructors. The head instructor was quick to disclose that he was “not an expert shot, but expert at creating stress.” All of the instructors had a significant background in Korean martial arts such as Hapkido and Tae Kwon Do, among other things. After hearing a quick bit from the instructors, we went around the room and introduced ourselves. Most of the students were relatively new to firearms and none mentioned any prior firearms training or significant firearms experience.
After introductions we moved to the course discussion which closely followed a three-page handout provided to the class. The instructor went through the course objectives and told us the class was not a firearms safety class or a CCW class. It was both expressed and implied that primary objectives of the class were to build in a bit of stress and learn to move off the line of attack. Verbalization and de-escalation were also central themes of the lecture and exercises.
The lecture continued on to discuss the Tueller drill and the importance of distance. It also discussed the concept of an asymmetrical vs a symmetrical attack. The idea that the defender would be reacting and behind the curve was central to this portion of the lecture. This moved the discussion along to point shooting. The idea was presented that, because a person was shooting defensively, behind the curve, and under the effects of adrenaline, using the sights would not be likely. It was presented as if one should not worry about the sights.
One of the most memorable portions of the discussion was basically a mindset lecture (but the instructor never used the term “mindset” like we see in “gun classes”). The instructor relayed several incidents of people who had been shot, grievously wounded, and continued to fight through the situation. Some examples were to demonstrate the ineffectiveness of handgun bullets. Some were given to illustrate that a person most often gives up by choice, and not because their injuries force them out of the fight.
The lecture also discussed the physiological effects of adrenaline, some basic use-of-force rules and legal considerations. The lecture portion concluded with a general recommendation about what to say to police after being involved in an incident. We took a quick five-minute break and headed to the main training area.
Skill Exercises:
The skills exercises started off with a quick discussion on grip. The instructor demonstrated a couple grip options that included a crossed-thumb type grip, and a cup-and-saucer type grip. He also demonstrated three shooting positions. Someone familiar with a four-count draw stroke would loosely equate them to positions 2, 3, and 4. (Or positions 3, 4, and 5 of a five-count draw stroke). Position one being a loose and somewhat forward retention, two a compressed ready, and three full extension. We worked through these positions in and back out. There was significant emphasis on scanning the area at position two while coming back in to the holster.
After working through the shooting positions we moved to lateral movement. Two basic types of movement were presented. I’ll call one a shuffle to the side and the other a cross stepping type of movement. Moving off the line of attack was a significant, over-arching theme. Based on the class drills to follow it was probably the biggest focus.
Drills:
After the basic skills portion we moved to some basic drills with a partner using blue guns. One partner was given a training knife. The knife wielder would come at you slowly and you would implement the draw while moving off to the side. This is where verbalization was added. We would yell “stop, stop”, etc. Drills were done in steps, building skills on as we went. Everything was pretty slow-paced at this point. We’d add movement, then verbalization, then simulated shooting one step at a time.
After these drills we moved to similar drills with SIRT pistols. This time an instructor would come at you and you would move off the line and shoot with the SIRT. The SIRT was used so students could get an idea where they were shooting and what type hits they were getting. These drills worked up to full speed and basically turned in to a demonstration of the Tueller drill, but with lateral movement. I believe the purpose of these drills were to showcase the effectiveness of moving off the line as priority one.
The final exercise was similar to the above drills but using airsoft guns. The instructors added a bit more play-acting and didn’t present a threat right off the bat. There was some decision making, but almost all of the scenarios went the same basic way. I still considered these skill-based vs a full-out scenario because they didn’t appear to have an open ending. They did, however, drive at the themes of the course which were distance and lateral movement off the line of attack.
My Thoughts:
Overall, I think the course met its primary objective. I believe the overall goal of these FAST courses is to get students worked up, let them get a taste for the pace and difficulty of a real situation and work under some actual stress and resistance. This class did generally get people somewhat stressed. Some people reacted to the stress a bit more than others. Resistance was fairly low and the drills/scenarios were fairly simple. The attacks weren't all that realistic, but it seemed they were primarily used to demonstrate the distance and lateral movement concepts. I think they generally fit the level and approach of the class.
I like several of the lecture topics. The mindset portion was really pretty good. I liked the direction the instructor took there. The discussion on adrenal stress was also good, and not something always well-covered in other classes. I did not like the conclusions they drew about the necessity for point shooting. I don’t have a problem with the concept of point shooting, and think it happens under stress. However, I don’t think it’s an excuse to ignore the sights altogether.
Based on my previous training experience, the skills portion covering grip, draw-stroke, and shooting positions was not on par with current standards in firearms training. It appeared the instructors didn’t have any significant firearms training themselves. I am basing this on a few hours of class and the specific things they taught. So, I could be way off here. These were just my personal observations.
The drills, while pretty basic and not representative of an actual attack, followed pretty well with the overall themes of the class. Movement was emphasized, as was verbal de-escalation. Students came away with an appreciation for distance and the speed at which an attacker can approach. I think that was the primary objective of the class. If after-class feedback from other students is any indicator, I believe that objective was met. The primary take-away for most students was “wow, I felt far away until he started moving” or “wow, it happened fast” or “wow, I need to work on this”, etc.
At the end of the class the instructor said the theme of the class was “enlightenment”. He wanted students to come away with a little better picture of the problems they could face, and the speed at which they happen. I think most of the students got that out of it.
Last edited:
