I had an interesting conversation with a group of friends recently on the best methodology for training, specifically for pistolcraft. A USPSA GM buddy of mine was of the opinion that you should solely train the myriad of skill elements required to shoot at a high level as a gestalt, and by “feel.” Despite his advanced skill level, I couldn’t agree with him. I have heard the same viewpoint espoused before, in various disciplines, always by the talented who come by improvements easily.

This is a common approach in the tactical training world. Stress shoots, full mission profiles, shooting in full kit, live fire shoothouse runs, all these events have value as tests and confidence builders. I would argue though that these are not good ways to develop skill. Skill is best developed without distractions and in isolation. Then you test it by adding those physical and psychological distractors back in. Train for the fight, instead of training like you fight.

The great trainers in every endeavor I’m familiar with, from Bruce Lee to Louis Simmons of Westside Barbell, to world champion shooter Ben Stoeger, all take a test/retest approach to training. The event, whether it’s an MMA match, a football game, a powerlifting meet, or a USPSA match, is the test of your training. It isn’t training itself. You test your skills with the event, simulated or actual, identify whatever component skills or attributes are lacking, and then focus on each in isolation until you bring them up. Then you retest at the event or a simulation of it again. This can be done with simple or more complex training evolutions, but one element at a time is being addressed.

I’ve made the mistake many times in my own training of working on multiple things at once. It’s easy to do as an athlete, especially a motivated one. It’s often counterproductive though. Especially beyond a certain skill level. As your mastery of your craft grows, the effort required for smaller and smaller improvements increases exponentially. Smaller and smaller pieces of the whole need to be evaluated and improved. One variable at a time gets tested, trained and experimented on, then evaluated with a retest. One by one, weaknesses strengthened, test and retest.