The Defensive Paradigm

     I recently attended the Rangemaster class Establishing a Dominance Paradigm. This title seems less than clear cut compared to the normal offerings in the training world.  Normally we see things that are much more straight forward and descriptive such as Handgun Level whatever.  I have taken a great deal of classes of those types and benefited from all of them.  This class however is by design not so straight forward.  To my way of thinking, most shooting is more software than hardware.  After we have learned the basics, shooting well is predominately a mental exercise.  EDP is for sure a software class but not in the traditional sense.

     This class could be considered as a personal audit, not only of your technical skill level and tactical acumen, but to some extent an evaluation of who you are as a person.  All three instructors emphasized from the beginning of class that this was not a class for beginners, which I feel was an understatement.  This is a class for those that have chosen to be armed as they go about their daily lives, accept the responsibility that entails, and seek to prepare themselves mentally and physically.  The class also covers things I feel many people, even those who choose to carry daily may not have truly thought through.

     The format of this class, to my knowledge, is unique.  I have been to events such as TacCon that have multiple instructors, each giving a different block of instruction.  Events such as that are great for maximizing exposure to multiple aspects of the defensive training world.  This class takes a different approach.  It is run by three giants from the training world, all three of whom lend their expertise to a part of the class.  The class is divided into three sections, but the sections are very symbiotic in their relationship.  Part of the time is spent shooting, attempting to hone the student’s ability to deliver quick, accurate hits on target. The next portion is classroom and is focused on the mental aspects of the problem. The last portion of the class is the immersive, experiential learning portion.  All three sections are designed in some way to push you outside your comfort zone because that is where we grow and learn.

     First is Tom Givens with Rangemaster.  Tom covers the shooting portion of class.  The shooting is only a part, and frankly not even the largest part.  As Tom said on Day 1, you were expected to be able to shoot when you show up.  What shooting was done in class was to push you so that you could get accurate rounds on target, on demand, in a short time frame.  That sounds much like what is required to win a defensive encounter.  I have trained with Rangemaster quite a bit over the last few years, so I was familiar with many of the drills we ran.  I shot well for the class but not as well as I am capable, dropping a few to many shots for me to be happy.  While I tend to be my harshest critic, “good enough” is the enemy of improvement, so more work is needed.

     The next presenter was Dr. William Aprill.  I had previously taken Dr. Aprill’s Unthinkable as well as heard him at TacCon last year.  I cannot recommend Dr. Aprill enough.  Everyone, regardless of whether they choose to carry a gun or not, should hear the Unthinkable class.  Dr. Aprill gives real insight into what the Violent Criminal Actor (VCA) is capable of and how they think.  A common human failing is assuming everyone is like us and that is most assuredly not the truth.  

For this class Dr. Aprill delves into the thinking part of the problem.  This does not just mean the bad guy’s thinking but your own as well.  Dr. Aprill does not just give his expertise in the classroom.  He also helped to dissect the after action of each scenario, both immediately after the student was done, as well as the group review at the end of the day.  He offered observations on both the students and the “bad guy’s” reactions during the scenarios.  These observations can lead the student to reexamine their actions and lead to some serious introspection.

     The last piece of the puzzle was Craig Douglas, of Shivworks renown.  Craig was the only instructor that I had not previously trained with, but he has an outstanding reputation in the industry, which I might add is richly deserved.  Craig is known for specializing in a few small niche areas of instruction, most notably ECQC. But his work focusing on verbal and mental agility as well as being able to read people and situations were what was emphasized here. Craig ran the scenario-based portion of the class.

Without going into detail, the students are dropped into scenarios that are realistic, open ended, and intentionally ambiguous. There were multiple ways to handle the scenario with no clear choice. The scenarios outcome also varies based on the choices the student makes, much like a real situation would. Craig set up and ran tightly controlled scenarios that were still fluid and adaptable. It is impossible to overstate how large a challenge and an accomplishment that is. But Craig also was able to dissect the student’s actions and reactions during the scenario to make sure the student got the most from the experience.

     The students were asked immediately after their run what they saw and to explain their decisions. This I felt was a great example for the student about how faulty our memories and perceptions can be under stress. Most people do not routinely place themselves in high stress situations and may not have experienced the cognitive degradations that can occur at such times. We often do not see everything, and we may not remember what we do see, or we can remember things incorrectly. A person can be told about such occurrences, but experience is a much better teacher.

     One of the greatest tools used in the class for the scenario portion was videoing the students runs. After all students had completed the scenario, we had a group debrief.  The entire class watched everyone’s performance.  Each student was asked to explain their thoughts and actions, as well what they saw during the scenario. Then instructors would critique the student’s actions. Seeing the same basic situation resolved in multiple ways, can be very informative. I saw things that I would not have thought of on my own, both good and bad. It was also informative to see the different interpretations that people applied.

One of the first lessons that this brought home to me is that we are all a product to some degree of our training and experiences. I realized in hindsight that I made certain judgements and assumptions based on being in law enforcement that most might not would have.  I observed several reactions from the students that had a law enforcement background that differed from some of the other students.  This was not good or bad per se just a matter of perspective.

     The biggest lesson learned is that the shooting portion of the problem is not the hard part as a rule of thumb.  The marksmanship challenges were not difficult when looked at from a technical perspective.  The problem comes in when stress causes the degradation of our skills that is all but guaranteed.  

The scenarios, much like a real shooting, we had no control over.  What was brought so clearly to light throughout the class is we can not control when or where we will need a gun.  What we can control is our level of preparedness to deal with the problem when it presents itself.  The more we preplan our responses and the more we train our skills, the less decrease we see in what we can deliver in the moment.  I do not mean that we practice occasionally, but we do what Rangemaster instructor John Hearne refers to as overlearning.  We practice a skill till it is second nature and does not require conscious thought.  As the class went on, we could witness the students were better able to perform skills under pressure, clearly demonstrating this very concept.

     Of course, the true strong suit of this class is the pressure testing of the student.  With some introspection the student can learn who they are deep down inside.  Are you what Dr. Aprill referred to as a high responder or low responder?  It is informative to learn that sometimes we will react under stress in ways that we did not anticipate.  Much better to learn those things in a controlled environment than when it is for all the marbles.  Neither of those are right or wrong, but it is nice to know. Knowledge of your own inclinations can help you align personal preparations with your natural disposition. 

     Throughout my law enforcement career and my personal training, I have had lots of opportunities to participate in different types of force on force training.  I have been the student, the role player, as well the one responsible for running the training.  I have learned valuable lessons from doing all three of those.  This also gives me a good idea of the work required to run this type of training well.  This was the best run force on force, interactive training that I have ever seen.  The scenarios were well managed, and the role players were spot on in their performances.  This class is truly an audit for where your skills are, as well where your mind is regarding mindset and performance. 

     Everyone has no doubt heard the old saying, experience is the best teacher.  While in many aspects of life that might be true, experience in dealing with violence seems a dangerous way to learn.  The likelihood of someone surviving enough violent encounters to gain competence seems at best foolhardy and at worst near suicidal.  A class such as this is designed to give the student more than mere theoretical knowledge but without all the messy parts.  We learn best through failure and with EDP the student is afforded the ability to fail in part or in whole and still walk away.  It would be impossible to recommend this class to highly for someone that wants to consider themselves well prepared.

Chris Norville