Joined
·
17,282 Posts
I'm trying to sort out the intent of your post. It seems to be more of a lamentation that TFP skills are being taught by an ever diminishing number of people... a number which was exceedingly small on a national scale to begin with.
There is a bit of a "tone" that seems to be saying, "Nobody is teaching what I taught, anymore, and I'm retired... So, it sucks that all you heathens are stuck with these incompetent and ubiquitous FSP instructors. Too bad, so sad. I'm a dying breed, and I'm going to reminisce while mocking everyone else."
Now, that may not be the case at all. So, what IS your point, really? You used to teach it. Very few are qualified to teach it.... and they're dying off / retiring, too. FSP sucks. (Does it really?) What are those who haven't taken a TFP course supposed to do about that, if it's not available? What can WE do about it... Other than be equally smug that we are among the few who were able to take your courses?
I've taken some FSP instruction (even fairly recently). I've also taken TFP... twice, including a recent refresher.
The differences between them are stark and obvious. However.....
I'm going to turn around and ask you a question.
Do you think some basic marksmanship skills are a prerequisite for TFP training? As I recall in the 1st class I took, you verified that we had some basic skills by having us shoot with sights at a target.
FSP might fall under the basic marksmanship set of skills, IMO. In other words, I think a gun owner should be able to perform FSP skills BEFORE moving up to TFP. No? Yes?
So, rather than "competing" techniques, I would suggest they are complimentary. They each have their place in the spectrum of defensive pistol skills. Parts of a spectrum. Yes? No?
I will say I'm very glad to have both. I'm really REALLY glad I had the opportunity to train in TFP. I would like to do more, including TFP "on the move" and from unconventional positions. I think a FoF course would be a great way to realistically assess those TFP skills, and I've never had that opportunity.
There is a bit of a "tone" that seems to be saying, "Nobody is teaching what I taught, anymore, and I'm retired... So, it sucks that all you heathens are stuck with these incompetent and ubiquitous FSP instructors. Too bad, so sad. I'm a dying breed, and I'm going to reminisce while mocking everyone else."
Now, that may not be the case at all. So, what IS your point, really? You used to teach it. Very few are qualified to teach it.... and they're dying off / retiring, too. FSP sucks. (Does it really?) What are those who haven't taken a TFP course supposed to do about that, if it's not available? What can WE do about it... Other than be equally smug that we are among the few who were able to take your courses?
I've taken some FSP instruction (even fairly recently). I've also taken TFP... twice, including a recent refresher.
The differences between them are stark and obvious. However.....
I'm going to turn around and ask you a question.
Do you think some basic marksmanship skills are a prerequisite for TFP training? As I recall in the 1st class I took, you verified that we had some basic skills by having us shoot with sights at a target.FSP might fall under the basic marksmanship set of skills, IMO. In other words, I think a gun owner should be able to perform FSP skills BEFORE moving up to TFP. No? Yes?
So, rather than "competing" techniques, I would suggest they are complimentary. They each have their place in the spectrum of defensive pistol skills. Parts of a spectrum. Yes? No?
I will say I'm very glad to have both. I'm really REALLY glad I had the opportunity to train in TFP. I would like to do more, including TFP "on the move" and from unconventional positions. I think a FoF course would be a great way to realistically assess those TFP skills, and I've never had that opportunity.
