Posted: 8/27/2007 5:56:53 AM EDT
| I am looking into attending the fighting pistol and fighting rifle classes put on by tactical response. I was wondering if anyone has attended either of these classes and there opinions of these classes or the facility. Thanks. |
|
I have taken both the Fighting Pistol (twice) and the Fighting Rifle. I highly recommend both courses Both courses are excellent. All instructors were knowledgeable . TR is a 'Fighting School" not a 'Shooting School' You are treated like an adult and expected to act accordingly. Lots of shooting on the move, multiple target, shooting while on the ground etc. at the rifle course I was the only non leo/military person there.. at 56 I was able to keep up (getting down in the mud was easy, getting up was a different story) LOTS of team movement, covering drills etc. I felt that the type of training here was so important that I took my daughter and my son ( USMC) there. My son qualified expert at Quantico a few weeks ago. There is no doubt the training at TR certainly helped. I am taking the fighting rifle again (just for fun) and the advanced fighting rifle.. You do not come away a marksman, but you do come away with the knowledge to practice at home to become one. Prepare for hard work and lots of shooting ... you can go to the 'get of the x' forum and read all the after action reports there on any of the courses. none are edited out. At the end of the course they ask if anyone wants their money back, so you have nothing to loose except ammo and time. You won't be disappointed. |
|
I’ve taken both classes you’re referring to; both are well worth the money. Cheap by my standards for the level of training you get. All the Instructors I’ve had the privilege of training with are Top notch. I'll be taking both over again at least once with wife. Go train with them in confidence that you will learn a Ton. Fighting, Mindset and Tactics. |
| I traveled from Germany to New York to attend exactly those two classes. It was a real eye opener, like finding the missing link. It changed my training since then. As this wasn't in Camden the facility was pretty simple. It doesn't matter that much as knowledge, charisma and teaching style of the instructors is way more important. I definitely don't regret it and would do it again. If you decide to do it, talk to someone who already attended classes like these and ask him what to bring and what to look out for before you attend because you will get out more of those classes if you arrive prepared. |
|
I have taken multiple courses from them and they are top notch. Go over to www.getoffthex.com and check out their training after action reports on all the classes they had. You get more info reading those posts than some other schools. It is not all about shooting, but also about mindset. Go to their website www.tacticalresponse.com and check out their schedule. They offer classes all over the country and are probably close to your area. Their facility is very nice and they have a gear company that you can purchase equipment, ammo and guns if you need it during the class. Go take some of their classes and you will never regret it. |
|
I have taken multiple courses from them and they are top notch. Go over to www.getoffthex.com and check out their training after action reports on all the classes they had. You get more info reading those posts than some other schools. It is not all about shooting, but also about mindset. Go to their website www.tacticalresponse.com and check out their schedule. They offer classes all over the country and are probably close to your area. Their facility is very nice and they have a gear company that you can purchase equipment, ammo and guns if you need it during the class. www.tacticalresponsegear.com Go take some of their classes and you will never regret it. |
|
murph687, I have taken several classes from Yeager and his crew. Until you go, you will not understand how important this training is and what you have missed all these years. Foolish me spent way to much money on guns and gear in the past and should have been spending it on training from these folks. Not sure what part of IL you reside in, but we have fighting pistol and fighting rifle coming up at the end of this month in the Fort Wayne, Indiana area. That is about a three hour drive from Chicago. Britton. |
|
Everyone here has summed-up my experiences pretty well. It may sound cheezy, but Tactical Response changed my life. LOL I've trained with them A LOT over the past 2 years and they really transformed the way I look at the world in general and defense in particular. You can't go wrong with any of their classes - I'd recommend taking Fighting Pistol first though. I feel it's the foundation upon which all their other classes are based. I'm in the Chicago area and might be going to the Ft. Wayne classes. IM if you want a ride or to talk over anything. Mike |
Here is a student's review of last week's High Risk Civilian Contractor - Shooting Package
|
| ...if you want to become a contractor. But the average self/home defense scenario as well as the police officer patrolling alone may require a different set of tactics and skills. Nowadays TR focuses heavily on the team environment (and the tactics and skills that go with it) which is hardly a standard situation for most civilians. And as the "fighting" comes the basics of trigger control, techniques, etc. seem to have become a prerequisite - so you are well advised to be already proficient with your gear before signing up for TR. Doesn't make it bad training- just not that suitable to complete novices. |
|
I don't know. I'd never fired my Glock 17 until I went to Fighting Pistol in San Jose. I knew how to manipulate the weapon but shooting it is another story. After 3 minutes with Yeager coaching my trigger control and sight picture I improved a great deal. The way he taught was simple and effective. I plan on taking my 63yo mother to the next FP that comes this direction and she is absolutly a complete novice. Now the HRCC courses are a whole different story...rofl I might go there in a couple years and a few dozen cases of ammo. |
|
My brother in law took a TR class last year. I think it was the their pistol I / Basic Handgun?). Based on my training experiences (9 years Army, 2-Pat Rogers, 1- Paul Howe, numerous other not so well known), it seemed very different. He came back all fired up like he was going straight to Iraq or something. Mind you he has never served a day in the Mil, LE, or took a class like this before. I tried to ask specific questions about trigger control, sight alignment, stance, accuracy standards, etc. All he wanted to talk about was “Mindset”. Our next range trip was revelation. He shot no damn better and did not seem to have clue on what drills would make him better. It seems they breezed over the fundamentals and flew right into “Mindset drills”, team work, close contact, and hammered a lot of rounds down range with little care how accurately they were hitting the target. Does not make much sense to me. In my opinion training should be tiered, only moving past the basics when you have them down pat. That does not seem to be the case with TR. They prefer the “I’ve been to Iraq” fantasy camp approach. Funny thing was his instructors had never done anything even remotely high-speed or even medium speed. One was corrections officer I think and the other had only taken classes from other instructors (mostly TR itself). Khaki pants & SF shemaghs and a lot of chest beating. If I wanted a class on combat minset it would not be from TR. |
That was just.... laughable. Take a class and form an opinion or keep your mouth closed. That's my opinion. I've been to marksmanship/skills based training and I've been to Tactical Response's Fighting Pistol training. There is a formula and I took thier instructor development course to try and figure it out, that is how important I think mindset training is. All the small holes in the world will only stroke you off at the range if you don't have the mental skills to bring on and keep on the fight. CY361 Stan |
|
Ah, spoken like a true “Warrior” who has never done crap more than the rest of us. “Mental skills to bring on and keep on the fight” – from instructors who have NEVER done crap more than wear Khaki pants and Shemaghs means less than nothing if students cannot hit the target while moving, under stress, low light, rain, etc. Like I said, tier based training is the key to building a better shooter. Not a “fantasy camp” from those who have never done it themselves. |
You might want to watch what you say about TR. They are well regarded by many in the tactical training industry inspite of your negative opinion. If you friend was unhappy....have him request a refund. Yeager loudly offers a full refund to anyone who is unhappy. |
In two days we can only cover so much material and we do cover a lot. It is up to the student to practice what they learn in class when they return home. Your brother in law might need a little more training and practice to get where you think he needs to be but from what you've written he was pleased with the training he received from Tactical Response and that matters more to me than pleasing you. |
This is all very true. The skill level a student brings home depends allot on the philosophy and approach of the instructor / school. Everyone develops a course syllabus and it would be nice if every student absorbed the material according to the lesson plan. However, not all students make progress at the same rate. The question then becomes, does the instructor forge ahead with the syllabus or does he adjust it to suit the average skill level of the class. Another way of looking at it is what does the instructor / school think is more worthwhile to the student? Exposing him/her to as much material as possible or perhaps scaling back the syllabus, slowing things down and making sure that by the end of the course they can at least can perform some basic skill sets correctly so that when they go home and practice they are practicing with good form and technique. OTOH, there is the occasional student that just can't seem to absorb much of anything. In those cases, to slow things to a crawl would be unfair to the other students. We all like to cover as much material as possible so the student gets the most bang for his buck. Whether or not that should be the primary goal is subject to debate.
Yet another way of looking at this subject is do we offer the student what they "want" or what they "need". |
This is not a comment about Tactical Response, and should not be taken as such. But it is a comment about how commercially offered courses of tactical instruction are evaluated - or, more accurately, why they are never evaluated. The notion that one should not criticize a program because it is "well regarded by many" is misguided. A training program may be "well regarded by many" for a lot of reasons. It may, of course, be well regarded because the program has a lot of merit. Other potential reasons may include: - They are part of the "tactical training good buddies club," and therefore benefit from the virtual mutual support pact that exists in different circles. - They have a cadre of proselytes (with or without a financial interest) who make it thier life's work to sing the praises of the master (and savage any who would deny his truth). - (Related to the first two points, above) Anyone with the temerity to express a crticial view is vilified and, effectively, shouted down. - Cognitive dissonance (which causes people who spend and suffer for something to regard it as having a higher value than it has). Stated differently, the people who have trained there are much invested in believing they are now trained by the best. - The people who went there don't know good training from bad (and there is no reason they should, after all), and are just psyched up. A couple of things Wickingfan said that caught my attention were that his bro was all jacked up with excitement when he got back, but a week later he could not shoot any better than before he went, and had no idea how to drill to improve. I regard the ability to students of a training course two and three weeks after the course to be a significant indication of how good the instructors were. Unfortunately, one cannot judge the abilty of students of a course two weeks later based upon one evaluation of one out of dozens of students. Any given student may not pick up anything useful because he went to the course and wasn't listening, and I know I would hate to be judged by the "retention rate" of some I have trained. But if we could look at "before" and "after" skill sets of a significant percentage of the students two weeks after the course, we would have a useful measure - perhaps the only measure that counts. As for the personal experience of the instructors, that only matters if THEY make an issue out of it. Those who know me know I set very little stock in the reported personal histories of instructors. "Two tours in Vietnam" doesn't mean much if they were spent greasing trucks. It is just too hard to tease out the relevant detials of military or police service to put any stock in prior employment as a predictor of a good instructor (and that assumes the prior employment history is true and not fabricated or exaggerated). Further, I have been privileged to know some truly tough, dedicated, skilled fighters who simply cannot teach. I do regard it as significant if the instructors themselves (or thier marketeers) suggest one should learn from them because of thier prior job experience. To the best of my present recollection, every one of those men I have come to know who were there, did that, and were very good at it, would never volunteer to say so, at least not to strangers. In any case, being attacked and insulted for saying something critical is exactly why so many who are in a position to make an informed point just never say anything. There's no percentage in it ... no percentage at all. So we are left, for the most part, with the subjective or partisan singing the praises of the course, and no way to know if they are right. I, for one, welcome intelligent criticism of any program - including my own. Despite an edge to Wikingfan's post, he made pertinent observations. People should take them for what they are worth. |
Ain't it the truth? |
Nothing our wicking fan has any merit, just plain out trolling. What he did post tells alot about his b.i.l. but nothing about his experience at tactical response. Start a thread about btdt or not, every training forums got one. Start a thread about fantasy training and instructor shopping if you want to talk about your b.i.l. Trolling in a training forum is bullshit. My advice is train with as many different people as you can. There's lot's of ways to teach but how we LEARN and RETAIN skills is pretty straightforward. That has to be done by ourselves, teachers don't do that part of the process. CY361 'stan |
If you talk to an est graduate, and question what the hell they are talking about, you will invariably be told "You have to take the training or you just don't get It." ("IT being what Werner Erhard, a.k.a. Jack Rosenberg, sold all those years.) If you question some blacks about thier politics or philosopy, you will be told "It's a black thing; you wouldn't understand." Rubbish. We can know the merit of a program or an idea by its results. The notion that one cannot address the obvious unless they first "experience what I have experienced" is an excuse to avoid addressing a questions from someone who is not already sold on the program. Stated differently: I don't have to be able to lay a good egg to smell a rotten one. |
| One can look at something and get a general idea of the merits and perils of a program. That person might not have the most informed opinion, but he can still have a valid one. One of the easiest ways is to cross check the opinion with others and see if some of the same problem areas keep getting cited. One of the worst places to get honest evaluations of a course is on the forum that training company hosts. |
Did ya figure out the formula. Can you share it? Are the course task, conditions, and standards published? Is there a test? Do some folks fail the course? Just curious. You may not be able to answer if you're not a principal of the company. -- Chuck |
I'll be glad to share, anyone wanting to donate to my training fund can IM for my paypal addy. ;-) I can answer some of that as a student, my consensus about training in general. A student can be corrected and coached, praised and rewarded, or a student can figure it out. If a student can figure it out under stress, it's your opinion whether that is good or bad, effective or not. There is a time and place for both methods. The training process is one where a student can be taught to accumulate skills, but also has to be a development, "Absorb what is useful". The process involves identifying one's attributes and weaknesses and moving from there. A student can put that expectation on the teacher, or take that responsibility for him/her self by "being a good student". If you want to be a marksman, DON't take Tactical Response. If you carry a loaded gun and think there's even a remote chance you'll be in a fight, Tactical Response. Fighting pistol, Force on Force, Advanced FP in that order (just to make more fun for the role players, and no matter how many times you can tell a person skills are important to practice getting owned is a good way to drive it home). If you want a fantasy camp, Tactical Response is not the place where that shit will swing, believe me. If you want a BTDT guy to pat you on the back, Tactical Response is not the place to seek that. The formula, in part is consistency in training, that's one thing I learned. I'm not applying for a job with Tactical Response nor do I plan to. I have been teaching people for years just by being the guy 'that can shoot' and having a place to shoot. Just by understanding that I've been able to tighten up how I act in front of people. When asked questions I have a better way to respond, and can actually teach them how to go about developing more than trying to teach them skills. The mindset behind winning a fight is very much like the mindset of a good student and/or teacher, don't make assumptions and don't perpetuate myths. CY361 stan |
So how do you guys do it? You're the guy who hosts/promotes alot of Larry Vickers' training classes aren't you? You're also the guy who has had 4 different troll accounts over on the Tactical Response message board if I'm not mistaken (well at least you have the same IP/e-mails as 4 or 5 of the troll accounts). You used to go by VA-Dinger also didn't you? I was looking forward to taking some of Mr. Vickers training (and we have some of his slings here at the shop), but if you are a representative of his company and if this cyber-hooliganism is ok with Larry, I'm afraid I'll have to pass. |
|
I recently purchased a DVD video set of Tactical Reponse Fighting Pistol, just to sample to see what this training center has to offer. I was really pleasantly surprised by the material. I also don't normally learn much simply by watching videos. But I actually picked up some very helpful tidbits 30 minutes into the DVD that automatically made me a better shooter. Tactical Response just seems to stress different things than many other instructors/schools. It seems that everyone teaches you how to shoot accurately. But Tactical Response seems to go BEYOND that to crucial areas that many instructors fail to adequateky cover. I mean anyone can be trained to shoot spots with great precision when under no stress. But that isn't realitsic combat training. I'd rather be able to shoot just well enough to place my rounds all in a man's chest when I am experiencing an adrenaline overload and shaking like a leaf during a fight for my survival, rather than shooting at pretty little round 1" circles. It's obvious the techniques Tactical Response presents are geared toward actual combat shooting. I already know how to shoot. I want to learn how to fight. This is what seperates Tactical Response from a lot of the others out there. And I picked up on this rather quickly by only watching a 4.5 hour DVD of one of these courses. After seeing the methods they teach, I've gone from not knowing much about TR to placing them at the top of my list for classes that I consider a MUST to attend. I'd like to start with Fighting Pistol then work my way up to the rifle course. And though I am not a contractor, I would even consider taking that course after completing the others if allowed, as it sounds like it really tests you to the limit in realistic situations. I don't understand the attitude of those who simply blow off the critical "mindset" portion of training. Take boxing. You could have all the quickness and talent in the world. You could have your foot work, jabs, right crosses and hook all down pat. But if you don't have a winning attitude and the will to prevail, you're gonna fold the first time you take a solid hit from an opponent. Therefore it is foolish to skip over something that's every bit as important as skills, if not more, when it comes to prevailing in a fight. James, thanks for producing such an excellent video. I can't wait to park my butt in one of your classes for the first time. If you can create a 4.5 hour video of the quality of Fighting Pistol, I can't wait to experience a whole two day class covering this material in person. |