Re: Episode 4: Lateral Movement

[m25operator]

Episode 4, very good.

Rob, you and Mike were going off the X, and I noticed that as you both progressed, you went in opposite directions, makes sense with 2  persons, but it brought to mind, as an individual, practice off the X, in both directions, don't get caught in always going to one side, in my case to the left, because I'm right handed and moving to the left means 2 hand and strong hand suits the situation well from a right handed persons stance. I will now practice off the X, in both directions. Moving off to the right will bring a new dynamic.

As a team effort, both participants, moving away from each other, at the instant of engagement, makes perfect sense.

[Rob Pincus]

Thanks, M25.

The movement during the drill was not choreographed... it was simply what we did. Environment and situation will dictate which direction is best. On the square range, as you noted, it makes sense to practice both directions.

I always remind students that in a real situation the location of obstacles, cover, bystanders, the bad guy and about a dozen other things will probably dictate that one direction is "better" than the other, but you aren't likely to process those little details in the moment. I honestly believe in training to "get off the X" during presentation, but I think the minute discussions about which way to move are IDPA style over-thinking the problem.

I have a DVD coming out later this year on "two person tactics" and one of the things we stress ( and that I also stress for EP teams, Military teams, LE partners, etc.) is that everyone responds to an ambush as an individual first. Your Lateral movement should be an individual act, which occurs before you really start to get coordinated with the others in the area. Taking the CQB approach to counter ambush training is a recipe for false confidence. When caught off guard, you need to be as efficient as possible to weather the storm, get back on balance and get into the fight! Lateral movement is an important part of taking back the initiative.

-RJP

[tombogan03884]

Thanks, M25.

The movement during the drill was not choreographed... it was simply what we did. Environment and situation will dictate which direction is best. On the square range, as you noted, it makes sense to practice both directions.

I always remind students that in a real situation the location of obstacles, cover, bystanders, the bad guy and about a dozen other things will probably dictate that one direction is "better" than the other, but you aren't likely to process those little details in the moment. I honestly believe in training to "get off the X" during presentation, but I think the minute discussions about which way to move are IDPA style over-thinking the problem.

I have a DVD coming out later this year on "two person tactics" and one of the things we stress ( and that I also stress for EP teams, Military teams, LE partners, etc.) is that everyone responds to an ambush as an individual first. Your Lateral movement should be an individual act, which occurs before you really start to get coordinated with the others in the area. Taking the CQB approach to counter ambush training is a recipe for false confidence. When caught off guard, you need to be as efficient as possible to weather the storm, get back on balance and get into the fight! Lateral movement is an important part of taking back the initiative.

-RJP

This is something I'd like to see discussed in more depth, here in the forum. Since I don't get the show I don't have enough info to comment, but I'm intrigued.

[Rob Pincus]

Tom,

Have you listened to the podcasts that are linked in the TBD Blog or on my website?

A couple of them deal with this issue and might provide a starting point for specific questions in a another thread or ones related to Lateral movement here.

-RJP

[tnroadrunner]

The movement part was good and that's how I practice now.  The ATM portion was good and looks like all the areas were addressed.  Keep up the good work, love this show.

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

Tom,

Have you listened to the podcasts that are linked in the TBD Blog or on my website?

A couple of them deal with this issue and might provide a starting point for specific questions in a another thread or ones related to Lateral movement here.

-RJP

No chance yet, but I will this weekend. Thank's.

[Michael Janich]

I agree with Rob that much of the "analysis" of lateral movement gets into unnecessary and worthless detail. For example, I have heard some shooters talk about the benefits of moving to your left because "most shooters are right handed and flinching causes right-handed shooters to dump their rounds low and left." The effects of flinching are true, but I wouldn't use that to dictate my direction of movement in a fight.

On the other hand, one very good reason to move to the RIGHT has to do with contact-distance weapons. If someone is swinging a weapon at you and he is right handed (yes, the majority of folks), moving to your right dissipates the force of the blow and makes you harder to hit. He's "hitting around the corner" at you. My students and I have found this works really well in force-on-force training and is worth practicing.

In the case of what Rob and I demonstrated, I moved left primarily because of camera angles and Rob's position.

Thanks for the great feedback!

Stay safe,

Mike

[sash]

On the other hand, one very good reason to move to the RIGHT has to do with contact-distance weapons.

That is an excellent point, and one that is not addressed nearly enough, in my opinion.  Too often, combat pistol classes are taught without addressing the possibility of an engagement beginning at or near contact distance.  Such a scenario is an equally important reason to get off the x, but seldom contemplated in class or in range practice.  Just another reason to "mix it up" during training, even if it is just practice on presentation during dry fire.

Thanks for adding that aspect to the mix, and for demonstrating it on the show.