Talk:Modern technique

message: If you read the footnote to the paragraph you will see that Jeff Cooper lists the Combat Masters and does not mention Ken Gunari. Therefore, he's not a Combat Master. Sigi-Meyer (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ken Gunari' as a 'Combat Master 

message: November 2007:
Readers, this page has been vandalized from the one I constructed 
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Modern_Technique_of_the_Pistol&oldid=155627028
to something like this
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Modern_Technique_of_the_Pistol&oldid=163373659
I am preparing a much longer edition of the Modern Technique with more detail as well as photographs with the help of some other contributers. We will be up on the page as soon as we can. Horst.Bender 18:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Spent 3 hours redoing this page so it was readable.  I got down to the last 25% of the page or so and pretty much ran out of stamina.  I mostly reused the information that was up there, got rid of all the crap and irrelevant stuff, got rid of all the rambling, tried to cut out some of the stuff that was repeated over and over, and corrected spelling and grammar.  I made things much more clear, added in some more specifics about the technique itself.
Like I said, though, I ran out of gas in the last 25% of the page or so.  I might come back and finish it later, unless it's being totally replaced as is suggested above.  Thjothvitnir (talk) 04:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redid most of this page 

message: The article describes the evolution and status of the technique but never actually described what the modern technique is, or looks like. I've read it, I know who and when it was developed, but I still am none the wiser what exactly the Modern Technique of the Pistol looks like, or information about using it!
-- I've attempted to remedy this with "the technique used by actors pretending to be cops on TV". Umptious 14:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section needed 

message: UMPTIOUS WROTE: "The Modern Technique as defined by the creator of the term, Jeff Cooper consists of the use of the Weaver Stance, a large-caliber handgun, the use of the pistol sights for aiming, the compressed breath, and the surprise break. "
The original author of the page did not seem to get around to parsing the modern technique but repeating training materials does not make an encyclopedia entry: What is a "surprise break" ? This is does not explain anything to the non-shooter.
UMPTIOUS WROTE: "Modern Technique can be most simply understood as the technique usually seen used by police officers on TV and films - i.e. with the handgun held outstretch in a double handed grip at eye level "
This is in error. The modern technique cannot be seen as used "by police officers on TV and films". These fictional accounts almost universally contain crass errors in both gunhandling and in self-defense. The exception to this being the single episode of "Miami Vice" in which a SWCPL champion was an actor, the link to which you have deleted.
-- Note the use of "simply". And the request on this page above for some idea as to what MT is  and looks like, which the previous, partisan, unsourced (or using biased sources) version totally failed to provide. Umptious 14:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of the Modern Technique 

message: UMPTIOUS WROTE: "It has been questioned that Modern Technique was really a true innovation "
Use of passive voice: It has been questioned by whom ? 
UMPTIOUS WROTE: "rather than clever branding to sell the training services that Cooper provided."
Col. Cooper invented the technique in the Fifties. He built Gunsite training school in the late Seventies.
The history of the modern technique was on the page you have deleted.
UMPTIOUS WROTE: "For instance, Cooper's followers have claimed "
Some of Col. Cooper's followers have claimed Elvis is still alive. So what ? Unless it is either a demonstration, like the old SWCPL competitions, or material by Col. Cooper or those others who worked on the modern technique, then it is inconsequential whether Col. Cooper's followers believe Elvis is alive or dead.
-- If Cooper's followers who teach the technique today have made claims on MT, they are relevant to a discussion of the subject. Because the subject is MT, ***not*** Cooper. To further aid you, if Cooper had made claims regarding Elvis, they would probably be irrelevant here also, relevancy being dictated by ***the subject of the article***., hmm? Umptious 14:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genuine innovation or branding? 

message: UMPTIOUS WROTE: "Modern technique has been criticized as being relatively ineffective in real combat:"
Passive voice. "The modern technique has been criticized" by whom ?
-- Passive voice is a sin in writing horror novels, but not in academic articles. The "who" follows in detail and is *sourced*. Also: don't be petty. Umptious 14:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mudawarra-HJ (talk) 12:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Mudawarra-HJ (talk) 12:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern Technique versus Point Shooting 

message: Does the article really need four links to the Miami Vice clip? —Tamfang (talk) 11:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miami Vice 

message: As noted before, the semi iliterates that created this rubbish need bringing to book. The whole point of the article should be about the drill, it's history and it's application.
However the article is just examples of what the drill does, using boorish phrases like 'the student'. There are phrases like 'critics say' - well who? It's just an excuse for personal opinion masquerading as facts.
Needs work, lots of work. I have tagged accordingly...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.68.30 (talk) 22:32, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  this article stinks 

message: Rather counter-productive for an article about weapon stance, hold, etc... If anyone is able to add an image/diagram illustrating the technique in question, please put/up, or suggest possible ones to put up. Armuk (talk) 19:57, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a SINGLE diagram/image? 

message: Shouldn't we mention the Harries technique? It's the one where you hold the pistol with the right hand, and the left arm is under the right, at a perpendicular angle, holding a flashlight forward. Echo Two-Three (talk) 05:56, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harries technique 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Modern technique. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.molonlabe.net%2FCommentaries%2Fjeff7_4.html&date=2015-01-30 to http://www.molonlabe.net/Commentaries/jeff7_4.html
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.molonlabe.net%2FCommentaries%2Fjeff3_8.html&date=2015-01-30 to http://www.molonlabe.net/Commentaries/jeff3_8.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:20, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)