If you’re anything like me then you’ve worked on your shooting and moving CQB skills. As a result we all know just how hard it can be to shoot and move. In this article we will review an excellent video that examines the utility of shooting and moving in great detail. Keep reading for more.
If you’ve read any of my other articles on concealed carry, or self defense statistics, you know that shooting and moving is a very common aspect of any defensive engagement. It doesn’t matter if you’re a special forces operator doing shoot house runs, or joe civilian working on basic tactical training. Shooting and moving is a technique you certainly need to be proficient in.
The difficulty lies in just how much effort we allocate towards developing this skill? After all, it can be very difficult to hit a target when moving. In this article we are going look at an awesome video by Shepdev, which examined the realities of shooting and moving against an armed bad guy. Here are some of the key takeaways.
Shooting and Moving CQB Key Points
- Proficient shooters hit their target 90% of the time when moving
- Novice shooters can hit a man sized target 60% of the time at close range when moving
- Moving at normal speeds does not improve survivability
- Moving and shooting at fast speeds is more doable than you think
- 54% of trained shooters missed when shooting at fast pace
Before we get to the details of this video, I want to cover a few caveats. As Shepdev mentions this isn’t an actual experiment. There are several variables that he couldn’t control, such as objective movement speed. However, he did an excellent job of controlling for most variables that would have an impact on accuracy, and survivability, in today’s real world situations.
Before we get to the data, check out Shepdev’s video. He does a lot of good work. Make sure to give him a follow.
Shooting and Moving Close Quarters Battle Data
Most tactical professionals would probably tell you that moving and shooting makes you a harder target, and is a good option when being shot at. As it turns out, that may not be entirely true. From Shepdev’s experiments it seems that we may not be able to move fast enough to make us a hard target.
In the first half of his video he shows himself and another shooter facing off at roughly 3 meters. He makes the point that hit’s on target are not meaningfully degraded by any movement speed, short of an all out sprint. Of course, at that speed, shooting becomes nearly impossible. Even drawing a gun from a battle belt becomes hard!
If you watch closely you’ll see the shooter who initiates the gunfight is reliably ahead of the responding good guy, by about two tenths of a second. Even moving to 7 meters didn’t change this fact.
I found it particularly interesting when they repeated this close range shootout, while moving to cover. Even that movement speed did not prevent significant hits. It’s important to note that these runs were all airsoft pistols with iron sights, which should give a solid base to start from. Let’s see how live fire turned out.
If you like this kind of article, and want to get the latest posts sent directly to your inbox, join the email list below.
Shooting and Moving: Live Fire CQB
This section tested live fire shooting performance on a standard IPSC target that you would see at any USPSA match. Each subject did 6 runs at three movement speeds, slow, medium, and fast. They did three runs at 3m and three runs at 7m. Scoring was standard USPSA points, with -10 for a complete miss. The shooters did not have to factor in target identification.
Shepdev also included each shooters skill level on his spreadsheet, in terms of USPSA classification. This is important because we are able to see data trends based on skill level.
Across all 6 runs, and for all skill levels, he found that 77% of shots taken were hits on target. However, 54% of shooters missed at least one of their shots taken.
Interestingly enough, Shepdev included data from an untrained shooter. He found that they were able to hit the target 60% of the time. This aligns with other research that shows that even untrained shooters are within 10% as accurate as experts within 15 feet. First time shooters are still dangerous!
I know some of you are asking the question, how did the higher skill shooters do compared to the lower skilled shooters? I had that same question. Because Shepdev showed his data, I’m able to give you an answer.
Moving and Shooting CQB Skill Level
For this bit of napkin math, I will restrict the data to the most difficult shooting condition, 7m at the fastest pace. We can see that of the 7 USPSA Master class shooters, none completely missed all 3 shots. Moreover, they shot 66% of available points using the following USPSA points system: A =5, C=3, D =1. I removed the -10 points for misses. In a tactical situation a miss doesn’t impact the bad guy.
If we look at A class shooters, the next category under Master, we see none missed all shots at 7m fast. They scored 46% of available points. Of note there were only 2 A class shooters in the data set. Now let’s look at B class.
Of the 10 B class shooters, none missed the target completely. They averaged 47% of available points. Again, I’m removing points down for misses, as I think it’s more applicable to self defense shooting.
For the 4 C class shooters, none completely missed the 7 yard fast target. They shot an average of 31% of available points. Of the two D class shooters, one completely missed all shots, which left them with an average of 34% of available points. The newbie completely missed all 7 yard fast shots. Check out the chart below for a quick summary.
Now that we’ve covered the data, let’s cover just what we can and can’t learn from this experiment, as it applies to a CQB environment.
Discussion
First, and foremost I think this data set is skewed towards very high skill shooters. I am also a Master class USPSA shooter, and I can tell you at a local match level I will reliably place in the top 5-10%, in a very competitive region.
For a SWAT operator, or tactical professional, I would asses their average skill level with a pistol around high B class, low A class. Remember, these jobs require them to be a subject matter expert in multiple technical skills. I mention this to point out that if a very skilled group of shooters has difficulty hitting at speed, then an average population will have much more trouble.
One thing this study can’t replicate is the accuracy degradation in a real shooting. If you read my previous article on this topic, you’ll remember that most police officers are around 85% accurate during qualifications. Their accuracy drops to around 77% in force on force training. During actual law enforcement gunfights cops are about 30% accurate. Thank God for body armor!
Common sense, and the data tells us that increasing stress degrades tactical shooting performance. To make a wild ass guess, I would expect the accuracy by points to be chopped nearly in half in a real engagement.
Obviously, I think the Master Class and A class shooters would degrade less in real world scenarios, but we don’t know for sure. This leads me to my final thoughts on shooting and moving CQB marksmanship.
Final Thoughts
I agree with Shepdev. You would be better off sprinting to a place to shoot stationary, than you would be to shoot and move. The speeds even highly skilled shooters are moving degrade their shooting ability, and do not improve their survivability.
Of note these experiments were generally conducted in the open, with no cover or element of surprise. I think this data doesn’t necessarily apply to clearing rooms, where you can often achieve relative surprise on the adversary, with appropriate CQB tactics. Similarly, these experiments were not repeated with something like a submachine gun or rifle.
You should still practice the fundamentals of marksmanship which include shooting and moving, using a variety of drills, with varying round counts. You don’t get to choose when you might have to do this. This applies doubly so to units tasked with hostage rescue and close quarter combat. Team tactics depend on shooting and moving into hard corners.
Like all things shooting and CQB, it is a useful technique when applied correctly. This data indicates that it may not be the right technique for a close range engagement, in the open. If you liked this kind of article don’t forget to join the email list below. Now get out there and get training!
The opinions in this article represent the authors personal opinion and are not representative of any unit, police department, or other organization. All images and media are used for educational purposes only.
