Got the short ones to load on photobucket.  youtube is still "processing" the long "GoAm" vids...

Like I said, I don't have all the neat stuff some of you hombres do, so for kit, I'm going with the survival gear in my pack I use in winter on my mountain nordic ski treks.

So, here it is:

WITH RUCKSACK {and a shovel lashed on for a little extra weight};

Video:

http://vid38.photobucket.com/albums/e115/Skaapskieter/AugeeIMChallenge/AugeeChallengeRucksackRun%20011_zpsy42kjhfj.mp4

Rifle;



Target:



GoAm:



Clean Target setup;



Some observations;

Not sure what I think of the barrier.  It was the only place I kneeled, but then it was at bayonet range of the target, too.  Mmm... gotta think about that one.

Augee;

Rip it apart.  I will be very interested in what you think.

Compared the the "LaClerc" we run {very similar to this} from 450 meters to 75 meters, it is a breeze.  As you say, the shooting is not the thing because prone at anything under 100 is shooting fish in a barrel.  Maybe for scoring sake and to DEMAND a hard zero, add an "invisible circle" like we shoot on the Norwegian government hunting test?  You could add say a 5 inch light pencil circle in the center of the white paper so it cannot be seen and must be "judged" or better yet, close to a side so the guy risks losing shots if he leans on it.  But maybe that is too much "riflery" for this sort of exercise. Just an idea worth what you paid for it.  

I am as usual, VERY happy with my optics.  I set the scope at 5x and left it.  I have killed many tons of game with that scope setup and it just works.  close range or far.

I am also very happy with that rifle.  It is LIGHT and very handy.  I was  apuss and used it instead of my 12 pound AR10.  Gotta get that one limbered up for the next go-round.

I need to work at my mag changes.  I suck.  I also need to remember to charge the weapon. THAT mistake screamed loud and clear!

I am a slow shooter.  I need to work on that.  I am a slow runner and the ground didn't help.  My foot is healing and tho I had to pick my way thru the rough ground I didn't reinjure it.  I want to do this in a few weeks after I get back to my full workout.

I have about worn out my list of excuses so I'll sign off.  

I'm super jealous of your scenery. Beautiful land.


Great shooting as well!

Thanks!  

Agreed... thats an great  piece of land.  Great shooting as well.  That kit was basically the antithesis of tactical.  I really dug it haha.  Well done man.  Debating if i should run it with irons or wait till my EOTech gets back from repair.  Also, all of yall's ranges look really comfy.  Mine is all overgrown: 80% briars and 20% fire ants.

Thanks!

Yeah, I am pretty limited in what I have for "tactical" gear, as in devoid of it! Old cobbled-on and modified surplus load bearing crap is the best I can do.   I really should get at least a vest for this sort of thing but I just haven't got round to it.  If Augee requires armor I'm really screwed.  It's gonna be railroad fishplates lashed fore and aft!!  

RE: your optics, why not give it a whirl now w/ irons and then with the EOTECH when it arrives?  It will give you a good baseline for what advantages the EOTECH gives you.  That would be kind of neat to compare.

EVR -

I concur - beautiful land!

Long day today, will score yours and nickforney's runs and post times and combined scores, hopefully tomorrow, but I've got a busy day lined up -

Based on what I'm seeing though, I think this is getting close to finalized.  

Again - I will be re-posting all of the previously shot videos as examples - and scores will still be posted - but the "live" challenge will be a new thread.

Thanks again for everyone that's participated in the discussion so far, and helping me to refine it!

~Augee

Thanks Augee, and thanks very much for all the work you are doing here.  It's been fun and I'm sure your final version will be great, too.

Thanks again.

Here are the "GoA" vids. They finally loaded. Yeah, the thing actually works pretty well.



Augee Challenge Stripped;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RZiuWMN4Mc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RZiuWMN4Mc



Augee Challenge Rucksack;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX1y7w14Gwg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX1y7w14Gwg

Updated my post on top of page 6 with video.

Good job!!

You've got a really neat range, too.

Okay - so, I decided "what the hell," -

Have had some beers tonight, and drinking a beer now, so I will double check the times at a later time - but I decided to score the four runs we have so far -

Scores were calculated based on the most current rules - no DT penalties - Elapsed Time + Exposure Time

Points are counted as seconds and added total time score.

Scoring was done on an iPhone 5S using the "Stopwatch" function - I watched the video and started the time when the shooter indicated time start - I hit "Lap" for every bound and recorded the bound time.  

I then added the time penalties for Exposure Time.  

SCORES:

nickforney -

Unlimited/Full Kit:

Elapsed Time - 3:07.21

Exposure Time -

1st Bound - 5.18 = 5.1

2. 4.88 = 4.8

3. 6.03 = 15

4. 5.46 = 9

5. 4.26 = 4.2

6. 5.78 = 12

7. 11.54 = 1:10

Total ET = 2:00.1

Total Time = 5:07.3

Points - +21 (scored as seconds)

Combined Score = 5:28.3

nickforney -

Unlimited/Slick

Elapsed Time - 3:07.40

Exposure Time -

1. 4.14 = 4.1

2. 4.13 = 4.1

3. 4.71 = 4.7

4. 4.15 = 4.1

5. 4.40 = 4.4

6. 4.06 = 4.0

7. 3.54 = 3.5

8. 11.23 = 1:02

Total ET = 1:30.9

Total Time = 4:38.3

+ 24 (points)

Combined Score = 5:02.3

EVR -

Unlimited/Slick

Elapsed Time - 3:32.33

Exposure Time -

1. 10.53 = 1:00

2. 8.86 = 43

3. 10.93 = 1:04

4. 9.71 = 52

5. 4.05 = 4

Total ET = 3:03

Total Time = 6:35.3

+ 0

Combined Score = 6:35.3

EVR -

Unlimited/Full Kit

Elapsed Time - 3:43.33

Exposure Time -

1. 11.58 = 1:10

2. 11.21 = 1:07

3. 11.98 = 1:14

4. 10.75 = 1:02

5. 4.64 = 4.6

Total ET = 4:27.6

Total Time = 8:10.9

+ 0

Combined Score - 8:10.9

Nice shooting there, man.  Very well done.

At first I was wondering why you were not just running in a straight line to the target, but then after watching your "GoAm" video, there are all those ruts and creek beds.  That certainly makes it more a challenge.  I was wondering what it would be like to use those for natural cover when going prone.  If it were a real 2-way range, I'd definitely be wanting to get down in one of those periodically.  Nicely done, and a good time, I thought as well.

Hey, that's great!!

Thanks again.  Very interesting.

Couple notes -

Once again - I've had some beers, so I will need to re-check these numbers for "final" competitive scoring.  I would also warn that I hold advanced degrees in the humanities, and scored in the 18th Percentile for mathematics on the GRE.  Scoring them tonight may have been a mistake, but I couldn't resist.  

Scoring tonight has also pointed out what I kind of figured would be the case in the first place - the need for several judges to independently score the time, and to average those scores to come up with a final "Time" score.  

There is a certain amount of subjectivity in what constitutes "down" and "up," which could make the difference of a second or more, which, based on the time penalties, could be a pretty big deal.  Because of this - it is imperative to have multiple, impartial judges score independently to come up with a mean score for the final scoring to count.  

During nickforney's "Slick" run - it was pretty difficult to judge when he turned around, thus ending his final exposure time.  

I think the solution for this (military guys, get ready to roll your eyes now) - is to institute the rule that the shooter must shout "LOA" (Limit of Advance) before turning around to react to the counter-attack (100 yard engagement).  

Based on these two runs, run very differently - I think that my scoring method is working the way I wanted it -

Great hits on target only help you so much if you expose yourself for too long, which is a killer.

EVR - your exposure time killed your score (as was intended) and getting all your rounds on the target didn't make up for that too much.  Unsurprisingly, your exposure times in full kit were slightly longer than when you were "slick."  

On the other hand, nickforney got fewer hits on target and more penalties - but his exposure times were closer to par, with fewer of the 1::0.1 penalties.  Surprisingly, he actually bounded more while slick than in kit - but his overall score was better slick than in full kit, which is to be expected.  

The barrier made little difference at all that I could see, which is A-OK, since it's optional at this point, and simply based on the shooter's preference.  

Thanks again for being willing to be "guinea pigs," guys!  Two very different ways to run the COF for a very interesting comparison, I think.  

~Augee

FAB-10_Guy - it's getting late, I will score yours tomorrow -

But thank you again for participating!  

~Augee

It is interesting.

I'm still a little fuzzy on how to improve the score.

Was I docked more for the time I spent in the prone or the time I spent bounding?

The time you spent bounding - i.e. exposed to enemy fire.  

The way to improve the score, honestly, is to make shorter bounds - both time-wise, and probably distance wise, unless you were "holding back" on how fast you moved from position to position to position.

That's part of the difficulty in the pre-planning of your round counts.  

You not only need to fire a minimum of one engagement per range bracket - but you also need to shoot every time you come down.  

Miscalculate the distance you can bound, and you risk either a 1::0.1 penalty - or screw up your round count, and/or be left with extra rounds to fire at the "hardest" portion of the course - 100 yards, after all that running and bounding - or decide that the risk of the 3 point penalty for missing is less appealing than the 2 point penalty for left-over rounds + the extended elapsed time while you shoot those last rounds.

I honestly don't know (again, it's late) - if I've specified a penalty for not firing on a bound - but there will be one as well.  

~Augee

I don't believe there are any extra time penalties for being prone, other than the longer base run time.  Your penalties came, I believe from being up bounding too long with each bound.  Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Correct.  Under the original scoring method (DT) there was, but no longer.  

~Augee

Oh I can't wait to do this. I'm totally jealous of all your nice ranges. I have to drive way the hell out to the desert and pop mags with my bullet button. FTW! Video soon to come.......

Augee, one quick question:  In the instructions you mention the barrier can be anywhere from the start line to the 15yd line, but in the diagram it says 5yd line.  Is this a typo, and if not, which one is it?  Thanks.  This was such a fun challenge, I think I'm going to do it again as soon as I can.  May try a different camera setup of possible.

I think I get it. Sounds cool.



Now to get permission to run up and down my club's 100 yard range...

Best time is middle of the day, mid-week, when there is no one around.

OK.  I think I got it.

What I did by placing the deadlines was prevent myself from being penalized by not going prone between the brackets of range as indicated in the rules.  So it was laid out so I hit one per bracket on purpose.  I misunderstood the rules.

Mental picture here is of more or less creeping toward the objective {looking at it from an aerial view...short bits of ground taken at each bound}, not making rushes as per we do with the LeClerc {where you are covering more ground per rush}.  Now I see what is going on.



Correct and very good eye!

I wanted to post the body cam because of that.  This ground is very uneven and even the body cam doesn't even show it clearly as it turns out. Good eye on your part.  Holes and whatnot. You can kind of see me looking at the ground and picking each footfall, as the ground is rough and easy to twist/sprain/break an ankle on.  It doesn't show it in the vids as the grass makes it look all smooth.  Then in addition there is the creekbed.

Yes, there is lots of cover that could have been used.  I didn't for a few reasons.  One reason is I wanted to test my theory about gaming the thing.  I thought wrongly that going to ground multiple times over the minimum required was going to result in penalties.  

Also, there are quite a number of spots in the creekbed that if used, put the shooter in defilade entirely and the target actually cannot be seen.  Again, it is hard to see that in the video, but I didn't want to hit a dead spot where I couldn't shoot as I knew I'd "waste time" if I did and get penalized for that.  In a real situation, covering unknown ground, that would simply happen from time to time under these circumstances.  It would be bad, as it would prevent the shooter from providing support fire, but that's the breaks.  It takes a surprisingly little bit of terrain "personality" to blind the objective/target and on the run, judging it is very hard.

None of that can be seen from the stationary camera and you are right, the stationary camera leaves one wondering why this goofy guy is dancing and wandering all over the neighborhood on his way to the objective.  Good observation on your part.

This issue you bring up is one of THE specific issues going on in my head when I was discussing the difficulty in comparing scores between shooters purely from terrain standpoint.  I am guessing it might not impact most guys, because most {?} guys will be shooting on a regular rifle range where the ground is flat and the approach is straight to the target.  In my case I knew it wouldn't be. If everyone ran the same terrain, that variable would be eliminated and each shooter would be faced with the same challenges of terrain.  As it is, many will have very smooth and clear ground to work and others like myself much more difficult ground.  In my case even if the creek wasn't there, the ground is so bad it prevents blind running anyhow.  Others will face that, too.  There really isn't anything that can be done about it as it is what it is.  It is a little extra "reality" on my range that adds flavor to the soup.  Some others on home ranges will probably be in the same boat.  

And our LeClerc is even worse!

Better yet, get them all to run it!  

We could use this for a target.

I actually agree that I'd like to see more demand in scoring be placed on accuracy of fire than what the challenge has now, but I think the answer from Augee will be...No.

And I think I know the answer why, and I guess it is sound for his purposes.

1}  Because this is not specifically a shooting exercise.  Augee has stated at length what he thinks should be demonstrated here.

And another reason is;

2}  The use of a target w/ no specific aiming point replicates reality.  Those who were critical of my disagreement with Augee over certain issues should note I never questioned him on this one.  I DO think an "invisible" scoring ring or rings could and should be used, but NOT a visible ring or rings. No bullseye or other visible aiming point.

We have an annual hunting qualification we shoot here.  It is the Norwegian government hunting test.  It is a large black silhouette of a reindeer and to pass one must from 100 meters place 5 shots inside a 30 cm circle on the animal.  Now the key is the circle is not easy to see, impossible with irons and low magnification scopes.  It is an easy test to pass and my wife does it every year from sitting position on the ground and makes a small group, centered in the ring.  But many people don't pass it.  The lack of an aiming point screws them up.  The point is one must place one's shots just like they would on an animal.  Critters don't walk around with "bullseyes" on them.  Neither do enemy soldiers manning a machine gun if they are smart enough to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.

Our training targets are set up similarly, with no clear reference point and mostly asymmetrical to-boot.

I'd vote here for an invisible scoring ring, but NO visible ring.  Force the shooter to place his shots accurately.  The contrasting white sheet is a big, easy target to hit.  Quite outside reality in point of fact, one that could be improved upon to make it more realistic and more difficult.

As it was/is currently when I shot the challenge, I didn't care where my shots went on this target as it is a very easy target to fill up with bullet holes.  But it could be made a bit tougher with some form of scoring ring, made with one line of pencil for example.  If someone needs a tactical reason, the reason could be that a prepared position holds a machine gun, well camouflaged and well dug in.  If the enemy knows anything, he knows to make himself and his weapon as small as possible and as difficult to see.  The target then if replicating reality should be hard to see and small.  

Again, tho, Augee wants the shooting part to be more representative of generalized suppressive fire.  

All depends on what he wants to achieve.

Possibly a more realistic target overall would be an off-white sheet on a white background or a dark brown sheet on a black background.  Or any such non-contrasting combination.  I'm all for that, too, since again, it more replicates reality in that the enemy is not trying to make himself contrast with his surroundings, he is trying to do the exact opposite.  So the target itself could be improved if Augee wanted.  

But the single sheet is easy and available and everybody has it.  So I suspect it will stay.  When I finalize on our version here it will incorporate some of that doctrine.

I really appreciate Augee's work here and I plan to adopt a version of this thing myself.  However, I will incorporate a scorable target.  Invisible ring/rings, but one demanding acute riflery skills.  Again, I am not being critical, I just have different goals than what he has for his.  Both for hunting and for just about any conceivable type of civilian defensive situation, precise fire is an absolute must, and I don't want to adopt a cof that encourages diminishment of precision of fire.  Military has its goals.  We have ours.

But I agree 100% w/ Augee in the use of a simple, non-specific target like the 8 1/2 x 11 sheet.

I'm sure he'll be along soon and can expound on his views.

For a pictorial explanation, here are our qualification targets.  The Norwegian target is the big one.  Mine are the others, adopting the concept, with smaller kill zones.  Most asymmetrical, all w/ invisible kill zones:

Honestly, EVR and Nick. I can't shoot this. I really, really want to. But disability prevents me from IMT'ing. You both did an awesome job, though.

I'd be willing to be an impartial judge, score calculator, or official for Augee. But beyond that, I sadly have nothing physical to add. My vote in the poll reflects this.

So, Augee if you need help with this, I'm here. Use me ..

ETA: Augee, I think the LOA idea is a great idea. When Nick ran it, if there wasn't 2 views I wouldn't have known he even turned around. It's just too easy to yell "LOA, LOA" as a cue to let the judges know what's going on.

Just to mess with EVR   ----  I was joking about it being an advantage if you're actually an Infantryman. But seriously, if you look at the scores between yourself, and Nick. Regardless of terrain. It does reflect the difference.

No doubt Nick did great!

xtreme762;  I'm not sure what your disability is but I have spent a life with all sorts of injuries and disease and struggles and during every episode, I use it as a learning experience.  One of the reasons I give a fail to certain trainers out there is they emphasize certain methods that are only achievable by a 25 year old guy in good shape.  What about the rest of society?

I say go do it.  Whatever you are capable of. Walk and stand if you have to.  Walk and sit down on a chair if you have to.  Try it.  You'll learn something new and maybe a trick or two that ight come in handy some day.  Even if you don't want to post the results.  And if you do, I'll be your biggest supporter.  I'm learning a lot of interesting stuff with this thread.  When I first had my nerve damage my shooting was wrecked.  So I learned to shoot from the off side.  I was a mess, but stuck with personal fitness training and physical therapy and the long process of healing {years} and eventually by God's grace healed to the point I could shoot regularly.  It is still a problem.  And over a half century of wear and tear over the rest of me doesn't help much, either.  

Oh, I get it, brother. Believe me! I have two fractured vertebrae in my lumbar from a mortar attack on my first tour to Iraq. Along with several annular tears from T5 to S1. They've not really healed to the point that I'm not going to injure myself further by doing things like this. It's just a bad idea..

But, I can contribute in other areas. With knowledge, experience, and mathematics.

Once I was doing a buddy rush range with my junior Marines. I noticed that they would often get into dead space and sit there, unable to shoot because they were tired and couldn't see the target. After screaming at them to shoot I finally had to demonstrate for them myself. It's simple, can't see a target? Take a knee. Or two knees. Or haji squat crouch. Anything so that you can see the enemy. Don't be afraid to take dead space. If anything, not being able to see the enemy gives you options because you can't see him, he can't see you.

As for the scoring, I like the paper target. the size corresponds with center mass of a man. His heart or lungs or spinal column don't really care which you shoot first. The CNS is going to take notice of SCHV trauma.

I think you're missing the point.

First, thank you for your service.  You are paying a price the rest of us have not paid.  THANK YOU.

A thought about targets came to mind.

This just for discussion.   I understand the value of suppressive fire.  However, in real life, an enemy that is being approached is unlikely to sit out waving his torso around.  In fact, suppressive fire actually causes the target to become SMALLER because when receiving fire it is natural to go to ground {as WE do when we approach the objective} and thus present a smaller target.  . So...I am just brainstorming here but I got to thinking, a method could be used to score for both.  Simply using TWO 8 1/2 x 11 sheets as targets.  One would receive suppressive fire and the other would bear a small circle of say 4 or 6 inches in diameter, the latter replicating a gun part, helmet, slot in a pillbox or other hasty prepared position. {Parenthetically, I have always chuckled at the torso targets like the old "E" target used for various US Army exercises and COF's or the humongous M9 pistol qual target.  We use that one for a couple cofs and it is as hard to hit as the side of a box truck.}  So the one should represent random shot {it could be cut up into 4's by making a simple cross on it and the other would demand very precise fire.  Thus the one should show "accurate random" fire and the other one demand accurate fire and penalize for missing.  Adding toughness would be maximum number of shots placed on the small circle, like, say, 5.

I'm not expecting Augee to complicate things by adding this option but just tossing out there as a point of observation as I find these discussion quite interesting.

Finally, for those who are geewhiz math gurus, the Textbook of Small Arms, 1929 {British Army} has an extensive discussion and proofs of how random fire is more effective than aimed fire in infantry engagements.  It is quite fascinating tho the math is beyond me.

EVR, I think you're over thinking a lot of this stuff. Nothing wrong with that. It just makes things a lot more complicated. Gotta keep in mind that this is an individual 3 to 5 second movement.

I do agree, though, there may need to be a penalty for spending too much time in the prone. But the challenge is all about time so there may not be a need for a prone penalty.

Thanks for your response.  Somehow I had actually missed one of the scoring spoilers and I just found it and when I read it, it cleared it up so I deleted that part of the post, but you were already answering it.    Your explanation here helps a lot.  Thanks very much. Also, I believe Augee struck the time in prone penalty as it is actually already calculated in elapsed time.

Interesting stuff.

you guys are being  a bit too long winded for me to care to read.

I will put this out and there is no need to leave a long response because this thread is becoming taxing on my time.  

Taking away time restraints for down time is a very bad thing.  IMT is hard because it is a constant press.  With only an over all time to worry about you can spend more time getting into a good shooting position and controlling your shots.  IMT means you are set and need to be shooting to cover the buddies move.  If you can take 7 10 or 13 seconds in the down position you have a huge advantage and takes away some of the stress and need to fire from a sloppier position that you face in having to flop down and get to shooting asap.  I know mine weren't as short thanks to reloads and other things but comparing my time to unlimited downtime is apples to oranges.

Now that is very interesting.  You guys who are or were infantrymen have been very helpful in explaining the doctrine.  I think I speak for many readers who never were who find this a fascinating read and encourage the civilians out there to give it a go as trying it hangs flesh on the words the experienced guys are telling us.   Thanks Augee, Nick, extreme762, and others for taking the time to answer questions.

Once Infantry, ALWAYS Infantry.

If I can come up with a good site to do this (notably, one that won't give me hep C when I go prone, due to all the broken glass and shit), I'll do my run next week, and I'll see if I can figure out a camera solution.

I dealt with this out at the range mostly busted shot gun clays but my elbows told me the next morning that I was a dick.  

I'm retarded and can't figure out how to post from iPhone to YouTube

Get the YouTube Application. From it, sign in to YouTube, and then open the drop down menu and go to "My Channel". When this screen loads, look for the Upload button.

Awesome view!  What a nice place to shoot!

Better off if you don't post those horrid attempts at "runs"

Augee, here's another one.

I tried to apply your timing suggestions and hope it had some positive effect.  ???  

We had other shooting to do and...I...forgot to take the scope cover off...   LOL.

Rifle;

ArmaHeavy...uh, I mean, ArmaLite AR10A4 "B" model w/ Redfield 3-9 scope and PA mount.  FSB added by ADCO.  12 pounds.  Yeah, size matters.........

Load is Hornady 150 gr FMJ + 43 gr H4895 + CCI200 + Lapua brass.

The gun is heavy.  Mags are shorter except for the 25-rdr so I can't use a 3-point hold unless I try to assume an old Hawkins position which in the high grass and uneven ground is too low.  I still need to run and shoot faster.



Target;



http://vid38.photobucket.com/albums/e115/Skaapskieter/AugeeIMChallenge/AugeeChallengeAR1005162015%20020_zpsv1vo9yxt.mp4

https://youtu.be/eAQ-z8CCaSc

Augee;

Shooting is 30-29=1, 1x3= 3

3 Points

I think I did that right.

Haha

On no. Once youtube let's me, I'm posting both

Had a much busier weekend than expected, wasn't able to get on ARF much.



Need to change the diagram, must have missed it.  Barrier may not be closer than 15 yards.  



I agree "philosophically" - however, consensus seemed to be that defilade time was too difficult to understand.  Scoring it would be easy if you use the iPhone timer the way I did, you simply score bounds and "down time."

While I didn't score either of yours or EVR's downtime - I did take note of defilade times - EVR's were actually fairly close to par for shooting... just excruciatingly long bounds.  

The "plus" side of this is that since we're working with video - runs can be "rescored" as necessary, plus, participants have an unlimited number of opportunities to re-shoot.  

I think for the final challenge - I may go back to the DT initially - and see if a "video tutorial" helps to clarify the DT requirement.  If it becomes too confusing after it's been demonstrated and explained, it can be cut out, and scores based only on ET.  

I know that this is a little bit of "flip flopping," but it is what it is, that's why this is a discussion, not the final challenge.  

There are no changes to the scoring or targets planned at this time, and I think EVR and nickforney's separate runs showed me that the target and scoring work the way I want it to.  

I understand the concerns about marksmanship, but this is not a marksmanship challenge.  There are plenty of drills and challenges out there to test your mettle with marksmanship.  Ideally, you would run through a training regimen that includes doing all of those drills (as well as some exercise) before attempting this drill - marksmanship in this drill is intended to punish you for shooting poorly, but not to reward you for shooting better than adequately.  

Still working on a script for the "tutorial" video, but may be able to go out and shoot this this afternoon on my Contour, though it depends heavily on how long "real life stuff" takes today.  I will warn that my weekend has involved a lot of beer and friends, good, rich food, and, of course... cigarette smoking.    My run(s) will probably not "set the bar," but at least provide an example.    FWIW, I've also been trying to find a way to incorporate more "full kit" PT personally without it being solely an exercise in intentional misery, as like nickforney, a couple years of academia and partying has left me softer than I once was and am fully happy with.  

I feel that it's coming together, though - so hopefully it can go "live" soon.  As long as the members don't mind - I will re-embed all the trial runs to the "live" challenge along with my own run(s) and tutorial video so that the "live" challenge has ready made benchmarks and examples of other people doing it.  Please PM me if you don't want that to happen.    

~Augee

EVR, I gotta say, buddy. For an old fart you did pretty damn good! You just gotta get that "I'm UP, he sees me, I'm DOWN" going, and you'd be good to go I think. That's killin' your time.

Yeah.  

My problem is I am a slow talker.  I'm saying to myself...


"I'.....m-------U......p-----------H...e-------S..e...e...s--------M.......e----------------------I'......m---------d......o...........w.........n"



I was going to use that safety switch as my new avatar, but found out you can't use a 10 minute video for an arfcom avatar!  

Seriously, thanks for the tip and I will run this again with that in mind.  I THOUGHT I was getting it better but when I watched the video I realized that tho a little better {I think?} I am still spending too much time on the ground and too much time on my feet.

Note to self.

Forget the "I'm down".  Just go "I'm Up. He see's Me" and drop like Obama's approval rating.  That AR10 and gravity should work to my benefit...  

Exactly.

There's a HUGE improvement between the first video, and the last.

I'll be curious as to how it scores.