Accuracy and speed are in fact both subordinate and essential to the control we have of our firearm, especially when we talk about handgun.
Control is formed by a series of very complex work plans both at a mechanical and biomechanical level and at a cognitive level.
If we do not have a control of the firearm adequate to the technical coefficient of the performance we are about to perform, we will be faced with different scenarios depending on which parameter is prevalent in the performance itself, that is: precision, speed or both.
In case that we have to perform a drill in which precision is the priority technical index and speed is reduced to a minimum to favor the best accuracy on our shooting performance, an inadequate control of the weapon would make us absolutely inaccurate and our performance would therefore still be poor or nil even in the absence of speed.
If, on the other hand, we have to face a technical performance on a drill in which speed is the dominant factor, in which precision can be partially reduced, as in the case of short distances and targets of consistent size (accuracy should never fall below the minimum standard required ), if we do not have a mechanical and cognitive control of our firearm the scenario is completely different.
In this case, in fact, the risk is no longer just that of carrying out a poor performance, but that of losing control of one’s firearm during the performance due to the speed which in this case becomes a parameter of exponential difficulty and therefore consequently an exponential risk, the consequences of which could be disastrous.
So to return to the fateful question “Precision or Speed” I would say that there is a form defect because in reality both are part of an incremental technical process which however starts from an absolute point: the CONTROL.
Once we have full control of our firearm in STATIC condition, we will work to maximize accuracy, which is nothing more than a perfect synergy of several elements that combine on different work surfaces in a unique way, a bit like an orchestra. .
Once I have the control and the accuracy, I will start working on the biomechanical level creating those fundamental sequences that I will have built and assembled according to my needs and my structural characteristics (my body).
When I have created my biomechanical patterns in the total absence of speed, taking care of the absolute perfection and cleanliness of the movement, in every single frame of the sequence, I will begin the long and tiring process of repetitions.
Now, the acquisition of a biomechanical sequence or a cognitive pattern requires an adequate time and number of repetitions but which varies from subject to subject, based on multiple parameters, speaking of standards in terms of time or repetitions is purely empirical and relatively useful.
When my brain has learned to recognize the various mechanical patterns and biomechanical sequences and will process them as a single movement, when my body at a structural level will be able to sustain the cognitive speed with which the order is processed and the sequence is activated, then I can say that I have acquired the “Speed”.
All this, however, I did it starting from the static or semi-dynamic condition, now I have to follow the same process but, this time with an extremely high difficulty index, that is, starting from a DYNAMIC condition.
Having clarified the technical sequence between Precision and Speed, we come to what is the illusion that is often linked to these two fundamental aspects of matter, that is the condition in which we evaluate speed and accuracy and the importance we give to the measurements we obtain, especially by what are nowadays the majority of shooting qualifications.
But we will talk about this in the second part otherwise then you say that I am too verbose…
There is a common say which says : I know my chickens