Part 1:

Of course, what is also being missed here is that MVT offers a progression: we have two square ranges on site, one just completed. You must start with the basics on a square range and then progress your training. We don't just offer tactical classes. We offer skills and manipulation classes which progress to SUT and even to Combat patrol and CQB classes.

So with MVT it is not choosing one or the other, it is conducting a correct training progression. For trainers who 'only' do square range manipulation training, they have nowhere to progress their training to, as it should be progressed when training for combat (which is what we are really doing, unless you are in it to look cool). Many are not willing to teach 'mere civilians' SUT, which is why, to make a buck, they end up dong all these circus tricks and converting rounds to sound. Stuck on the square range. THAT is 'ballistic masturbation!'

You need a balance and progression.

Part 2:

I do not see the need for team tactics as that unlikely given the current state  of the country/world. However, if you are not just a 'sporting shooter' or a tacticool poser, you have to agree that the reason for doing any training is to be ready for what you consider is a possible chance of someday being in some form of combat. If that is the case, why would you stop your progression, and learn a  lot of bad habits that are detrimental to your survival chances (like never taking cover!), by sticking at the firing line phase of training? You should be learning how to fight and work as a team.

Don't come at me with your normalcy bias ASSumptions about what will or will not happen to you and the likelihood, because how can you know? And going down that route, why train with carbine at all, because you are not carrying a carbine concealed.....but even if you only expect a home invasion where you will be able to get to your rifle, why wouldn't you want an understanding  of team movement., tactics and CQB, rather than being able to just duck walk or stand static on a firing a line and manipulate/shoot your weapon?

Living in a rural setting, I can tell you their is more than a few times this has been applicable for me/us in more than just a "funsies" type role.

And the very basics of what Max covers (RTR drill) is infinitely more tactically valuable than duckwalking towards a potential threat.

Like I said, I've done boatloads of "tactical rifle" classes at numerous places, 90% of it is all the same, sometimes if it's an "AK fighting class" they have made a few adapations to the AK, but truly, most of it is the same.

You talk about "master-tion"- well let me tell you something-  I took a little while off going to training classes, etc. a few years back cause I was working hard on getting out of debt. I got completely out of debt in April 2008. Well just like a pent up firehose, I went crazy in 09 and took 17 classes that year. My normal year is about 6-8 classes.

By about November of that year after taking yet another places rifle class (won't name it cause I'm not looking to dis anyone, but it's a well known place), I reflected on what I "learned" over the course of being away from home almost 2 full months training that year. Not a frickin lot.... THAT is "ballistic mas-bation"   converting MONEY INTO SOUND while not learning a helluva lot.

 I went to my notes from the 17 classes- a lot of pages wherein their was a heading like "Tacticool Rifle 202 at Cooldaddy Operator Skewl", then no notes below it or very few short notations.

I'm a note taker so this was odd. I looked at the notes I did take, one class that really stuck out, a controversial trainer, unorthodox and very challenging. The following year, instead of going to 17 more "pew pew" classes I evidently didn't really need, I sought out that trainer and trained with him 6 or 7 times while also keeping my eyes open for others that could help challenge me and grow my skill set. . Outside of that trainer, Max is about the only one that has truly challenged me in a while. Which is why I'll be back next year for the Rifleman's Challenge again to help out, and I'll probably do another couple classes there again also.

So I'm not your average "I took a CCW class at my local gunshop" shooter, I actually have trained, a lot, and I HAVE AN OPEN MIND.

So their is a plug for Max from someone that has put his time, money and effort where his mouth is on training for a couple decades now, not a "tactical tourist" or a one class wonder.

Lowdown3

Indeed you should be constantly progressing. That applies to mastering fundamentals and being able to apply those fundamentals in a variety of circumstances/situations. With that being said, progress has to be structured so that the more likely situations we may encounter are trained for first and then we move down into lower probability circumstances



Who teaches not to use cover?



No one knows anything for sure other than that they'll die some day. However, as I mentioned above more likely situations should be addressed first and then we move on to the unlikely.





There's not a lot of logic in that argument actually due to an ever increasing number of people that carry long guns in their vehicles (outside of professional users) and people that have solved personal protection toon situations via long gun use (such as an associate of mine that saved a woman's life in his front yard several months ago by engaging the suspect with an AR).

It's good that you have found some opportunities to apply what you learned. Do you have some examples of what you've used and when?







Aside from it sounding like you have a tendency to use classes as practice and you like to non-stream members of the training community; what does any of that have to do with comparing 6 days of X with 6 days of Y?





Any particular reason you felt the need for such a proclamation?

There is a lot ignorance in this thread.  And by that I mean you guys are making a lot of suppositions, based on your own experiences, and applying that to what you are "hearing" about MVT.  I'm not sure I understand why someone would post online, and say "I don't think this place is worth going to", because based on my personal experiences, this is : a) just not needed, according to my estimate of the situation, b) not possible to do in such a short period of time, and/or c) it's just not safe.

Well, starting at a), this is all going to be based on your personal METT-TC as it were.  Auggie has made logical, and polite arguments, but where I think he veered off course was the assumption that this is all just "tactical band camp" where we're dressing up and playing CAG/DevGru  assaulter for the weekend, as a hobby.  Well, speaking for myself, and also the majority of guys I've talked to there this year (6 classes so far), this is simply not the case.  This is not entertainment.  Far from it.  I am totally fried about right now, from 3 days of hard training.  There was nothing entertaining about it.  Especially in the drizzling rain the last day.  I am not doing this for an ego stroke, or shits and giggles; I am doing this because I think this country is in deep trouble.  The skills I am learning and honing here could be used to save my family's life.  This is a huge point of contention within the "tactical community".  Some think this is totally ridiculous, tin-hat tom-foolery.  Others think it's absolutely essential to learn.  So I'm not sure why those with a different estimate of the sit, would scoff at those at those that think this training is prudent for uncertain times.  Why not each to his own?  Why must we jam our opinions down each other's throats?

Then there's b).  Unless you've been there, and seen it, how could you possibly know?  I mean you could guess at it, like you're doing here.  And that's all it is.  "I'm guessing that this isn't possible because I've never seen it done", or "Big Army" don't do it that way, or whatever.  But is there a possibility that just because you haven't seen something yourself, that it might be possible?  Yes, all the training models you guys have suggested all work, to one degree or another.  Why is it so hard to think, just maybe, this guy might be onto something different, something truly cutting edge, something that actually works?  Have any of you actually cross-trained with British Light Infantry?  I have.  They are some of the best soldiers on the planet.  To say Uncle Sugar knows better is truly arrogant.  Until you have seen this guys in action, you really don't know what you're talking about.    

And finally  c).  Well, there is inherent risk.  Yes, we sign waivers, just like any other class I've ever taken from any other shooting instructor.  That being said, there is a huge amount of safety built into the program.  I wasn't sure myself until I got there and saw how he conducted the training.  But, bottom line, I think it's as safe as any live fire training can be.  This is kind of a catch-22, because then someone will say, aha! that means it's just canned instruction, and not real "free play".   So OK, you got me there pal.  Yes, it's a bit canned, in that for total newbies you HAVE to provide the leadership and safety needed for their first exposure to this stuff.  But as they come back and progress, the "training wheels" come off as they prove their skill level.  But the bottom line is Max cares deeply about his student's safety, and it shows in the way everything is set up.

At the end of the day, there are some of you whose minds will not change.  Some of you think this training is either: a) un-needed, b ) impossible to pull off, or c) unsafe, and I don' think any amount of discussion will change your mind.  But for those of you that may be more open to the possibility that: a) this just might be needed, b) it might just be possible to pull off, c) is actually as safe as live can be, then I invite you to check out MVT.

@ NCPatrolAR:

Uh-Huh. I'm pretty new on this site. But I believe that the reason that you and I have those little pistol icons is because we are both instructors in the professional exchange program here at AR15.com, and it allows us to post classes. Am I right??

So, I think we have established that at MVT, we run a progression of classes from basic carbine to combat team tactics/patrol/CQB etc. This is because we believe there is a realistic chance that this place could go up in flames, and the mission is to try and keep good folks alive, by providing the skills. Now, before you start, any of the skills taught at MVT will still be of huge value in a 'lower end more likely' current day scenario, such as home self defense with a  carbine, as well as in some more extreme scenarios. So it's not like we skip that part!

So getting to my point; what classes are you teaching, and why do you think there is little value in having a full progression? I may be wrong, but it appears you are saying only train for what you think is most likely to happen? You'll be feeling a bit silly when that cyber attack happens (or whatever) and the grid fails,  right? That may be 'unlikely' but if/when it does happen, it's not survivable without either the skills, or the luck.

So as Diz said, what's the deal here? I assume you teach some carbine classes, maybe? We teach our carbine classes and also a cutting edge mix of old school and modern light infantry tactics. Why do you care?

Here's a book with a scenario you might enjoy: Patriot Dawn: The Resistance Rises by Max Velocity

Well said Diz!!

If I want "entertainment" I'll go somewhere and watch UFC.  Busting my arse up "Death Mountain" on the 2 miler was definitely not "entertainment."

I read this after the revised "contact "..wish I read it first it tied so much together. But in the end I just picked contact back.up and read it over again.

Sorry. To hijack just wanted to say they were both great reads!



Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

I've been out a few days but here are my parting thoughts:

-It seems that Max himself has to come on here to defend his "system" of teaching in an RFI thread.  That says a lot about the "system," none of which is good.  Good, safe, realistic training programs don't need defense, especially from the owner/creator.  Coming in stating that you only had a few minutes between classes and being able to a) read the entire thread and b) post a 2 part articulated response is BS.  More sales gimmicks.

-Any "system" that advertises the same results (live fire SUT) with much less time than the industry consensus is usually considered along the lines of Tai-Bo or some other BS.  All the instructors in the world and suddenly Max has created this "system" that is faster than everyone else?!?  Why is NO ONE else using the same "system?"  

- Why are there no testimonials (name/unit/agency/etc..) about this "system" from people who actually do this for a living?  Its always "There was this one guy who I think was a SEAL/Ranger/18 series..." but noting to verify the claim?  The ONLY people standing up for MVT are those who have not done SUT before (more than in a 1 week class), and definately not done it 2 way.  According to one post, shooting out in the rain is the definition of "taking this seriously."  



While I may come off as cocky or elitist or whatever, I've got the credentials and experience to back it up.  After almost 20 years of SOF and attending & teaching at some of the best gunfighting schools in the world, I've NEVER heard of this "system" or anyone being able to conduct such drills safely in the short-cut time frame described.  Coming from an industry where everyone is looking to be more efficient and save time where possible, NONE save time by sacrificing safety.  



So...flame away.  I'm not a competitor with MVT (rather MVT cant compete with us) and have no reason to attend an MVT course, for any purpose.  I stand by my original statement that, based upon the content in this thread (statements, videos, etc..) I call BS and that the "system" is unsafe ballistic masturbation.

Edit: I spent some time actually watching the videos and looking at the techniques displayed by the students. While the DoD and DoS aren't the end all on tactics, what they teach are tested, proven, and vetted techniques. What was shown by the students in the videos was not any of those.  Rather than help, the videos confirmed that the material is not being adequately taught in order that the students can demonstrate them during live fire and that the material is not current vetted TTPs. At least AirSoft kids try to get their shit right.  MVT is below that...

My responses here were not intended to discredit MVT or the owner, however based upon his personal attacks and the safety of students in jeopardy I may rethink that position.

Ok fine.  That's you're opinion, and I have also stated mine.  I invite everyone else to weigh the arguments and decide for themselves.

I'd really love to know where this idea that no one can teach this sort of thing without five hundred years of dedicated study frickin comes from. It makes you look really silly. As if people go to Partisan University for 8 years of undergraduate studies before hitting the field?

Hell I've attended more than a few similar classes, MANY teach it, although not the same.  Most will have some pre-reqs like a general rifle class (or multiple).

SAFEST ones I've been to of this genre were at Max's.

Course you stated clearly that you never have been there.

@ coloccw.

Hey Fella: I didn't come on here to 'defend a system' - yes I'm still here and I'm not going away just because you are twisting it as a bad thing that I am here. I'm here as part of the AR15.com professional exchange and I'm here to discuss and be part of the forum. So I'm here to stay.

Now, sorry, but whatever you claim to be doesn't ring true
to me. It just doesn't make sense. I think you are just one of those drones without the real ability to know what you are doing, parroting the line that 'civvies shouldnt be/can't be doing this.' Frankly, this BS is tiring. You have no dea what training we do, yet you feel free to criticise anyway. That's called arguing from a position of ignorance!

In response to a couple of your latest statements:

1) there are several student reviews by legitimate combat veterans of various units including SF. As cadre we have a USMC combat veteran NCO, a infantry First Sergeant combat veteran, and a Captain Ranger Instructor combat veteran. These guys know what they are doing, and what right looks like. That's not even mentioning me.

2) it's not a system that I made up.. It's not Tai Bo! It's legitimate British Army /US Army live fire and SUT tactical training. That's your system, right there. I simply refined my training site and curriculum, because i am a skilled trainer. What part of that don't you understand? Tell me: have you ever heard of the 590 mil / 33 degree safety angle? Ever used it? Thought not.

Now, go away and tidy your room.

;-)

Perhaps you should go back and read. No, based upon your videos you are NOT teaching US Army TTPs correctly. As a DoD tactics SME, I'm flat out saying you are full of shit and charging people money for this should be fraud.  You can try to insult me all you want but at the end of the day, I have my credentials and you have...a few hundred bucks?

Colost-ccw guy- maybe since your throwing so much fuel on the fire here, you'd care to expand on your creds, experience, etc.

As a paying student that goes to many different schools, I'd be interested in learning that.

How do YOU teach this sort of thing? If not what do you teach?

I already listed my credentials and experience in this thread.

I've stated several times that I dont have an issue with a progression in training and agree that one needs to be in place. I also stated multiple times that the training should be structured so that the most likely situations are addressed first and then you move on to the more remote circumstances that you may face. Doing otherwise is like a person preparing for an EMP attack on the US and putting all of his electronics in Faraday cages but doesnt have a bottle of Drain-O at home to fix a clogged sink.  In boils down to priorities




I'm just like you in this thread.....merely offering my opinion on training. I only responded when a rather dismissive attitude towards square range work continued to pop up.





Indeed I do. I teach more handgun and handgun-related topics though. The courses have all been well received over the past 10 years that my company has been in operation.




I don’t care. You are free to teach whatever you want, to who you want and you appear to have your niche carved out. Was there a certain point where I said that you shouldn’t be teaching?





Thanks for the offer  do I have to wear BDUs when I read it?  

Part 1:

( @ NCPatrolAR: When reading Patriot Dawn, I suggest not only BDU's. but also a tin foil hat and a pro mask...;-) )

It's very interesting how in some circles, training such as that provided by MVT is just a magnet for trolling. Often, it comes from an LEO perspective - because of course, mere civilians shouldn't know this stuff, right? So really, we get trolled probably for the following main reasons:

1) The Troll doesn't see a need for this sort of training, so it's got to be BS.
2) The Troll is LEO (a couple int this thread, right?)and doesn't think civilians should receive this sort of training.
3) The Troll is a tacticool/ LEO trainer or fanboy and realizes it is very important to try and keep a lid on the market, lest the BS of AR dancing on the 7 yard line is is exposed.
4) Any or all of the above combinations.

It is a misconception that MVT does not provide a training progression. The current open enrollment training progression looks like this:

1) Combat Rifle Skills: a 2 day square range carbine class.

2) Combat Team Tactics: 1 day on the square range, 2 days on the tactical ranges.

3) Combat Patrol: 3 days learning patrolling, recce, raid, ambush, patrol base etc.

4) Citizen Close Combat: 2 days on urban operations / tactical clearance (i.e high threat room entry and clearance).

The purpose of MVT is to teach combat proven tactics primarily to the armed citizen in order to increase survivability in uncertain times. If your normalcy bias tells you that you will never need any of this, then I cannot help you. This is real meat eating AMERICAN training in the tradition that every citizen should have his weapons and gear and be trained and ready to fight for the survival of his family and community.

Part 2:

It is also a misconception to call the credibility of MVT into question because, to paraphrase: "techniques in videos aren't exactly the same as US Army TTP's." This again displays a towering ignorance. But while trolling, throw enough poop and some will stick, right? No, the point of MVT is not to teach out of an FM. Among the cadre we are bringing years of training and operational experience and tailoring training to the needs of an armed citizen. That was my intent when I originally wrote the manual 'Contact! A Tactical Manual for Post-Collapse Survival.' It is most definitely not an FM re write, and those who cling to FMs simply show their lack of experience/imagination, because it misses the TTPs gained by experience, and the nuances, and the need to adapt to civilians.

Part 3:

For example, when I wrote "Contact!' I adapted it to an expected WROL environment, but I brought years of experience  in British SOF, as well as many years in Iraq/Afghanistan as a paramilitary contractor. But for example, when Chris came on a cadre, we found that on the Combat Patrol class (which is pretty much straight up light infantry tactics), what I was teaching was almost identical to Ranger School / the SF Q Course.  In fact, Chris came to MVT as a student first, to check the place out, on leave from Afghanistan. He was / is working there as a DoS/DoD security contractor. The funny thing is, before new contracts he has to go to those DoS/DoD schools and do the work up training before deployment. We have had many a laugh about what they get up to there. The point here is that just because training for a group is DoS/DoD mandated and contracted, does not mean that it is the shit. At MVT we are a group of talented and experienced veterans who have adapted training to the needs of the armed citizen facing uncertain times.

If anyone wants to read student reviews, the link is here: Student Reviews

Thanks for taking the time to read.

Went back and re-read cause everything is scattered. Got a sound bite about Ranger battalion and a sound bite about working at Blackwater currently. Is that correct?

What do you teach at Blackwater/insert current name? How long have you been teaching there? What is your feelings on civilians learning tactics? Please take the "it takes a village and 100 years" out of it, and simply state yes or no if you think it's appropriate for civilians to learn this. If you say it takes a week and will offer a week long class, hell I'll take it. But would you teach it to civilians and if not why?

Thanks

Just because someone has an affiliation with Academi, doesn't mean much.  There are plenty of 70K a year Academi gate guards out there that never stepped off the FOB.   I have met more than a few that run their sucks like they were Travis Haley back in Najaf.  

Long story short gentlemen, y'all give way too much cred to some guy off the internet who claims this and claims that.  Even if it were true (which it may), he will speak out on MVT training, and at the same time acknowledges that has never experienced it.  He literally says that himself!  What else is this a guy an "expert" on, and has no first hand knowledge?

Don the ruck and carry on.  Don't bother swatting flies, they really cannot affect the mission once you learn to disregard them.

Is your training available to me?

If not, and if you have never taken any classes at MVT, I'm not sure how your opinion really matters here.


You don't believe MVT offers "real" or "safe" training. We get that. Any further comments are chest pounding.

Oy Vay.  I REALLY didn't mean for this thread to turn into to this kind of thing.  But perhaps it's just unavoidable.  Every time you mention reality-based training, for armed citizens, in a WROL type sit, you get these guys with .gov paychecks, usually fedco, poo-poo-ing the fact that mere citizens (without creds) have the temerity to seek out this type of training, AND, that there are actually trainers out there, in this case a fucking LIMEY, who have the nerve to believe they can actually teach a better COI than .gov.   Oh the horror!

I mean dig it, some dude, that has never been there, or seen what goes on, blithely pronounces judgement on the program, simply because it doesn't fit into his definition of how it should be done.  By .gov.  Uh, I'm sorry but I no longer trust my government, or what it's minions may have to say about the matter.  Do you seriously believe that the federal government has the ultimate answer to tactical training (not to mention a myriad of other subjects) simply because WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT!!??

Uh, that doesn't work for me anymore.  This is a classic case of institutional bias writ large.  I mean this dude has been in government service so long, that arrogance has replaced common sense.  Or maybe competence.  Sure as shit critical thinking.  

I tried to come on here and play nice, but you get guys calling a really good instructor a lying sack of shit.  And I take exception to that.

Here's the drill.  I don't give a flying fuck about your creds.   Or all your buddies creds.  And all their friend's creds.  I don't care about your .gov COI.  Or what Big Army is up to.  Or even what you are teaching your government contractors.

You don't own SUT.  For the hard of thinking, let me repeat that.  You, or any one country or government don't own SUT.  The arrogance of the assumption that NO ONE else can teach and learn this stuff is astounding.  

BUT, let's look at this from the other side, shall we?  What kind of training did insurgents get, throughout history?  You have 5th century goat herders fighting modern armies to a standstill, and you want to talk about effective live fire training?  Seriously?  How did your vaunted live fire training program work out in "4th Gen" asymmetrical warfare?  

But hey, let's ignore reality, and continue to  state that the US MILITARY has the best COI for "live fire" on the planet.  You sound like one of those Samuri who claim you must have thousands of repetitions to master the COI on your weapon's system, only to be felled by a peasant with a quick 5 minute class on how to shoot a musket.  That's the reality of the situation here.  Your modern, high-tech army is being made irrelevant by peasants willing to fight for their cause.  

And that doesn't sit well with you.

So go ahead and  live in your little dream world, where you and your buddies know best, and throw rocks at anyone who dares to challenge your supremacy.

The rest of us will be quietly (well usually) training for come what may.

You don't read very well do you?  I've never stated that civilians shouldn't know SUT, only that what MVT is selling isn't correct or safe tactics (based upon the discussions from all here and the videos MVT has posted on their website).  It also seems to piss you off that I'm stating that the money you've spent with him is a waste.  Do more research before spending your hard earned money with someone.  The OP asked for opinions and you don't like mine; fine, yet you want to argue with an instructor when you have no experience to base anything on?  No wonder you're not understanding what is being said here.  He's selling a fantasy weekend for those who want to play dress up in multicam and jerk each other off on instagram.  You would be better served going to https://adventurecombatops.com/   At least they are utilizing current, vetted tactics and there is no risk of someone getting killed.  I'll say it again, NO ONE with any experience is vouching for MVT.  His "system" is BS and a scam.  The OP asked for a professional opinion and there it is.

I was looking for feedback from folks who have taken his class.

Your opinion, while possibly valid due to your own - unproven - experience, has been noted.  It carries the same weight as every internet 'expert' who offers an opinion on something that have neither seen with their own eyes nor participated in.

Would you like you opinion to be seriously considered?  Offer a specific resume with proof.  Or, take/observe an MVT class and then critique.  

I hope you can look at this from an observer's perspective and realize that you've done nothing to prove your point except argue on the internet.  We don't know you from Adam's housecat, so it is impossible for anyone to take you or your feedback seriously.  

The other guys who have responded and attended?  Are they as qualified as you (claim to be)?  Possibly not, but at least they can offer first hand feedback - which is what I was seeking.



I do appreciate the link for Adventure Combat Ops and will check them out.

If you don't trust the knowledge and experience of someone on the internet then why are you asking for opinions on the Internet?

This may be mom's basement commando.

Any reasonable human being with a modicum of understanding when it comes to firearms realizes that "zero" chance of someone getting killed is disingenuous at best.  And by disingenuous I mean full of shit.

Forget the resume measuring.  These claims can't even measure up to basic logic.

Mike; how about coming back on the reservation a bit. Dude you're starting to come across as a pure counter-culture douchebag.


Anyways: on your point about AWG; there's some guys in Southern Pines that would disagree a bit with your summation of their results.

Agreed. His words sound like everyone else that got their knowledge of tactics from watching CNN.

And you guys, Chris, are starting to really coming across as .gov douche bags.

As the man said, if you haven't been there and trained, you have nothing to add to this conversation.

The link to a place where there is no chance of someone getting killed is for an AirSoft "combat experience" in Vegas. Learn to read before speaking.

Actually the side bar conversation of priority in training is extremely applicable here.

Everyone wants to play dress up and do team tactics although there hasn't been a situation where civilians (non LE or gov sanctioned) had to use team tactics in a  rural environment to defend themselves in over 200 hrs. People should spend more time practicing in the underwear and trying to focus in the dark or with their hands full of groceries at their car, wearing their everyday clothing and EDC rig, as those situations are exponentially more likely than "red dawn" types. No one wants to learn medical even though that more likely to save a life than a firearm is. Current trend with most civilians is to practice what makes for good pictures to put online and not what will actually benefit them, based on the lessons learned from history. Civilians want popular, not relevant because they don't realize that gunfights are won from putting in hours dry firing and working fundamentals on the square range.  But what do those of us who have been in gunfights know?  They already know everything...

I find it amusing that the implication is that at MVT we are not using "current vetted tactics." What a towering pile of horseshit vented by a couple of trolls who have no idea what they are talking about.

But of course: back to the script: if it's not LEO or endorsed as such, it must be trashed. Come on, just admit it....

Coloccw: you have lost any credibility that you may have started with. You claim to be an instructor, yet you trash and lie about another school with no knowledge and nothing but malice. No one is critiquing whatever the hell you get up to.

This may be the internet, but to profess to be an instructor yet behave like this is the height of unprofesionalism.

To say that training at MVT is unsafe, or not in line with correct tactical TTPs, is disgraceful, and you should be ashamed.

Clearly, legitimate posters here, and those seeking information, are not happy with your approach. Yet now it has become such a personal matter for your ego, that you won't let up on the slander. Slander and defamation based on no knowledge of the training school.

What a towering unassailable egotistical blowhard. What is the name of your training school or where you work? I plan to be in touch.

Well, there we have it. If it's not  .Gov sanctioned it is nothing. It's just dress up.

If you had any idea of my writings and training you would know that all of this and much more is covered. But let's not let the truth get in the way, hey?

Yet you insist on demanding what we don't need this training, calling it some sort of scam system.

The bottom line is that any awake citizen will look around and see that we are in uncertain times, and wish to be prepared with legitimate tactical training. That is training for citizens, not LEO, and it's actually more effective as tactical training because it is real combat proven training, not SWAT tacticool BS. You may be glad of some trained citizens one day, saving your ass, perhaps?

The bottom line is that you don't think anyone should be doing this training if they are not .Gov / LEO and you will lie and say anything on this forum to try and discredit legitimate training.

Many see the need for it, and are training. They don't care what you think, or that you think they somehow need your permission or approval. This is still America, just, and we are free citizens. We don't need your approval to train. Your opinion is un-American and unworthy.

Oh, been in a gunfight have we? Whoopdy do!

I actually have a question a it something I saw on one of your videos. In the video that shows your cqb entries, you have two people post in the doorway then try to enter at the same time. What's the origin of that and who is currently making use of it? In the video, it appears the pairs never clear the far corners upon entry but I'll chalk that up to inexperience

I'm pretty sure Colo isn't a LEO and isn't thinking that the training should be limited to police

Reading doesn't appear to one of Max's strong suits either...

I've said it explicitly at least twice.  Perhaps you're the one with a reading problem?

Really? Said 2x that you only wanted info from former students?  Please show me...

Never mind. This thread has already wasted enough time. You have my opinions, although very few posting here actually read them. Max has made himself look like a fool trying to defend himself and insult & threaten others (but still can't read the thread to see where I work).  And still, NO ONE with experience will come to his aid.
If anything, whether you believe who I am or not, this thread has shown what a fraud MVT is. Everyone who reads this will wonder why people are saying he is full of shit. The black mark is on his reputation, not mine.

Yet more lies and slander. It's interesting that by being here to offer rational explanations, I am critiqued for that, rather than being applauded for being accessible and helpful. But of course the idea is to try and bait me, which hasn't happened, and the thread will sit here on record to speak for itself. FYI: I'm not the type  to be intimated and made to shut up.

As to the question about the tactical clearance, there are articles and explanations about it on my site. The technique does involve clearance of the near corners. Whether or not that was done in the video by students at the rifleman challenge, doing it as an intro session for a couple of hours, is moot. Or you may not be seeing it.

The tactical clearance taught is an alternative technique to the traditional flood the room entry. It is based on what you will actually do in combat. There is little point responding unless you go read the article. I'll post a link when I get to my computer. Not that the facts will stop the inevitable response!

NcPatrolAR: where do you teach, are you military, and what is your background?

I am co owner of Defensive Concepts North Carolina. My background:

6 years infantry (4 w/ 82nd, 2 w/ 1ID)
2 years as a Commo guy in the National Guard
13 years LE
DT trainer since 2006
Teaching building searches at my agency since 2005

Train with guys such as:

Larry Vickers
Ken Hackathorn
Paul Howe
Pat Rogers
Scott Reitz
Bill Jeans
Jason Falla
Kyle Defoor
Etc
Etc

Agreed. There is far too much of the tacticool fanboy wannabe CAG doorkicking thing going on.

Folks need to train for the full gamut from everyday concealed, to grabbing a carbine for home defense while in bed, to correctly taught and combat proven SUT.

Some on here don't see the need for civilians to train in SUT, and see it as a .gov area only. There is a multitude who see uncertain times ahead and wish to be prepared to defend their families. For this, there is a training progression starting at basic weapon manipulation and moving on to SUT.

For red blooded Americans, being well trained and equipped is a standard thing. We do not repose all our trust and faith in others coming to protect us or our families. We protect our own. For those who wish to gain these skillls, schools like MVT and others are available.

Don't like it? We don't care. :-)

I see the LEO connection. Explains a lot.


There are a number of names in the list who refuse to train citizens in SUT. That is a huge problem.

Back to the OP, the man asked for comments from people who had been through the training at MVT.  And he received some answers from guys who had gone there.  All well and good.

But then a few individuals take it upon themselves to say that this training isn't necessary, it's not valid, and it's not done safely.  Again, all opinion, and supposition.  

The facts are no one knows what the future may hold.  Based on each person's estimate of the situation, you train as you see fit.

Some think the training is invalid because it's different from their approach.  How exactly would you know that when you haven't trained there.

Some think it's unsafe because it's different from their approach.  Again how exactly would you know that when you haven't trained there.

Your opinions are: not necessary, invalid, unsafe.

My opinion is: there's a good chance it will be needed, my experience is: it's is a very valid approach, and very safe training.

People aren't stupid.  They can read this thread and make up their own minds about what's going on.  Why would some guys come onto a thread and talk shit about a guy and his training program?  Even after the guy who posted the OP said repeatedly he didn't want their gratuitous comments?

I think Max hit the nail on the head.  These guys don't think this kind of training is necessary for civilians.  They also think only the government owns SUT.  Therefor anyone who does get this (unnecessary) training had better stick with the government pros.  If you can't see this for yourself, they are going to guide you to the correct answer.  

Again, I think people are smarter than this.  They can make up their own minds about whether this training is necessary or not.  I would imagine the guy who posted the OP has done this and it now seeking out training.  He didn't ask for someone else to tell him whether it was necessary or not.  He then specifically asked if anyone had trained with MVT.  He didn't ask for a dissertation about how MVT's training methods were invalid and unsafe.  He asked who had trained there and what did they think.  But again, some must butt in and express their opinions about something they have absolutely no first-hand knowledge of.

BTW I posted an AAR of training at CTT and NOD-F, as an actual answer to the question.

If this is the technique I am thinking of I first saw this from the old Surefire training division.  James Williams, the guy that came up with the hissatsu knife is in some old videos (as in copied off VHS) on youtube demonstrating it.  It is also taught in FL police academies.  I personally don't care for the techniques since it seems like something that needs to be rehearsed extensively beforehand with the exact partner you are going through the door with, while the more standard entry seems better for adhoc teams or a more "flowing" style of building clearing where ones spot on the team is constantly changing.  It is however a valid technique taught in both civilian and LE/gov circles.

At about 4:00 in this video.  Is this it?

@ Aikibiker:

I watched the video. It is not exactly the same, but what is happening is the same principle i.e. not rushing into the room when you may not have surprise / bangers etc to get away with it. I just posted another thread with the in to my blog article. The video is good stuff for searching a structure etc.

The specific technique I reference / teach came from combat clearance when facing barricaded enemy and finding it better to fight from the door. I have simplified / standardized some of the myriad techniques of how to do this.

Bottom line: flooding the room when you have no surprise puts you right into the guns of a waiting barricade enemy. It has proved invalid in combat and what we teach is standardization of what ends up happening anyway. I make not claim to have invented this, or that it is s super secret system, or whatever the trolls will say. I have simply standardized A WAY in order to be able to train this. After all, its about training people to 'keep the good folks alive' that is all.

Here is a recent AAR from our Citizen Close Combat Class: http://www.maxvelocitytactical.com/2015/09/student-review-citizen-close-combat-m1-guy/