[Matt VDW]

Let's assume, for purposes of this discussion, that the technology will soon be available to allow people to safely "shoot" each other with some sort of realistic, affordable handgun simulators. (I realize that all of the current technologies -- e.g., paintball, Simunitions, airsoft -- fall short of this standard.)

If we now have the ability to stage mock gunfights, can we turn them into a sport? Ideally, the rules of the sport would make it:

1) Possible to keep score to introduce the element of competition

2) Fun enough to get people to participate

3) A way to learn about the dynamics of real gunfights that are absent from all the other shooting games where the targets don't shoot back.

One major problem that comes to mind is that if competitors get within a few yards of each other (as they would "for real") someone is going to resort to hand-to-hand techniques and injuries will result.

 

[John Forsyth]

How would you simulate fear? It is one thing to be good at a game, which is what IDPA and others like it are. It is real easy to push the envelope when there is no chance of you getting hurt. Having never been in a gun fight (and I pray to God I never am), I just do not see how any game can simulate the mind set that a true life or death struggle would produce. There are people out there who are not that fast but they have the will to fight and take what comes their way. Just do not see how a game could produce what it takes to make all this happen.

 

[Matt VDW]

You can't really simulate fear. You can create stress, but without the prospect of bad, bad things happening you can't create "real" fear.

Having granted that point, though, does that mean that we should just close our eyes and quit trying to learn because a real fight will be too scary for us to handle? I like to think that we can manage the problem of fear indirectly:

1) When we build skills, we gain confidence and the experience to resist being overwhelmed by a situation.

2) The subconscious mind can execute well-rehearsed skills even when the conscious mind is too scared to function normally.

What I have in mind isn't the ultimate "Realistic Gunfight Training Experience". It would just be a game that would provide a laboratory (a la the original IPSC concept) to see what works in a dynamic situation where the target is another thinking, moving person with a gun.

 

[Marty Hayes]

If one is correctly prepared, there is no fear.

 

[Shane1911]

On 2001-05-31 10:06, Marty Hayes wrote:
If one is correctly prepared, there is no fear.

Sorry Marty, I respectfully disagree.....

Have you ever been shot at?

I have trained with the best in the world, and I'm still pretty damn afraid when I'm being shot at. I have worked with some of the best spec-ops/tactical/HRT teams in the world, and those guys are as "prepared" as anyone. I've seen some of those same guys piss their pants when things got hairy.

Your point is relevant (if not slightly incorrect IMHO), that being prepared at least helps, but it doesn't prevent - at least not in my experiences.

 

[John Forsyth]

Thanks Shane, you said it much better than I. Something is wrong with you, if you are being shot at and you are not scared.

 

[Matt VDW]

If being "correctly prepared" means showing up in a tank when the bad guys are armed with handguns, then I suppose fear isn't an issue. :wink:

You guys are getting off the original topic, though. Let me put it another way:

Suppose you heard about a force-on-force shooting match that was no more distant or expensive than the matches you normally shoot. Suppose you also knew that the technology used was very safe and "realistic" in that the guns handled like real guns. Would you consider participating?

 

[Shane1911]

Back to the topic......

Give it another 50 years and you probably won't need to ask this question. I'm sure that technology and holographic virtual reality programs will allow pretty much any type of scenario you can imagine.

Bottom line - A GAME is a GAME is a GAME is a.......play them if you want to have fun, and develop whatever practical skills can be taken from the GAME, but don't ever assume a GAME will equal a true life-or-death experience. Your mind will ALWAYS know the difference.

 

[Matt VDW]

Given that it would be a game:

Would you want to play?

Assuming that your response to that question is, "It would depend on how it was set up", what sort of rules would you like?

If such a sport does come into being many years from, I expect that there will be plenty of grouching of the sort currently heard about IPSC and IDPA, e.g., "The stages have too many targets", "The mandatory reloads don't make sense", "There's too much sandbagging", et cetera. I'd like to do a little brainstorming to avoid those problems.

 

[Shane1911]

On 2001-05-31 16:26, Matt VDW wrote:
Given that it would be a game:

Would you want to play?

Assuming that your response to that question is, "It would depend on how it was set up", what sort of rules would you like?

Yes, I would play. If you want this as realistic as possible then there would be no rules!

 

[John Forsyth]

On 2001-05-31 16:26, Matt VDW wrote:
Would you want to play?

Assuming that your response to that question is, "It would depend on how it was set up", what sort of rules would you like?

Yes, I will play. Since this is supposed to be real, there won't be any rules.

 

[Matt VDW]

Actually, in looking at the pistol sports currently available, it seems that the more "realistic" they try to be, the more rules they have. Compare, say, Free Pistol with IDPA. :wink:

 

[Ted Murphy]

You would never make something like that into a science.
It is too subjective.

To simulate a "street encounter" you would need a BG and a GG (multiple or single). Now is this good guy going to have to follow the law and follow a guideline such as AOJP in this sport, or is this more or less a duel? If you decide to simulate a real street type encounter the BG , if permitted to run full speed, will most always cream the GG. He will be on the offensive and the GG will be reacting to what the BG does. So how would you make sure you give the GG a chance?

If you put them in a ring and allow them to do as they may, you have a paintball match.....

What do you consider the limitations of simunitions?
I have never met someone who told me he learned all he could from simunitions and wanted something more "real".
The only limitations I can think of is that most role players continue to act after getting popped some and there is that spot of paint will not tell you what exactly a bullet would have done had it hit the role player there. Small details really.

I can see what Marty Hayes meant. I always considered "fear" do be defined as being so scared you cannot do a damn thing. Training usually will make you do something- anything at all except freezing. YMMV Ted

 

[Matt VDW]

What do you consider the limitations of simunitions?

The biggest one that I see is their limited availability. Aren't the vendors very restrictive in their sales policies? I don't think that I, as a private individual, can just order a set of simunitions gear the way I can order paintball equipment.

There's also the cost factor. For most people, a simunitions pistol plus ammo plus protective gear costs more money than they're willing to spend on a game.

If you decide to simulate a real street type encounter the BG , if permitted to run full speed, will most always cream the GG. He will be on the offensive and the GG will be reacting to what the BG does. So how would you make sure you give the GG a chance?

There are several ways to balance things out. The simplest would be to have the "bad guy" and the defender switch roles. Perhaps you could structure it like a tennis match, where the advantage of having the serve passes from one player to the other.

Or you could make it a team sport and use numbers to balance things. Or you could adjust the weaponry -- give one side a .38 snubby and the other a SIG P226.

If you put them in a ring and allow them to do as they may, you have a paintball match.....

Probably a very brief paintball match. :grin: But that might have some value, too.

 

[slidelock1]

I am not a paintballer but if you have ever been shot at close range bya top of the line model paint gun the next time one is pointed at you will experience some amount of fear. A paint ball at 400 fps hurts.