Coming of age in the world of men of action, guns,
and danger, one is taught that the subject of “Tactics” (capital “T”) is
something you should know and be good at applying in order to stay “safe” and
be effective. To learn to be “tactical,”
you’re generally given a list of actions to take given a specific incident or
event—and there are a lot of events where tactics are necessarily employed. Those who are good at memorizing and then
recalling under the pressure of the real world tend to excel at tactics. But what about the others in the profession
at arms who do not?
But there are many who “don’t get it.” They got the same lists of do’s and don’t’s
that everyone else did. Like everybody
else, they were forced to memorize them.
And yet, the ability to apply these lists and act tactically didn’t
take. Everyone has these folks in their
agency, team, or unit. And for some
reason, they often don’t get hurt when they probably should have—until they do,
or they get someone else hurt or killed.
What is it about “tactics,” that some get it and
others do not?
Many of those who “get it” actually tend to
grasp what is behind the laundry list of tactics, seeing the principles that
are the basis of the tactical laundry list.
However, tactics are not about a laundry list of do’s and
don’ts. Tactics are fundamentally a way
of conducting business that puts your opponent into a recognizable disadvantage
from which he is unable to survive (whether that means he is defeated/killed/injured/taken
into custody, etc., he is unable to continue his present course of action
against you).
Tactics are essentially an application of the
three foundational components of tactics:
-
Angles and proxemics.
-
Applied OODA Theory.
- Relative capabilities of the combatants,
equipment, and their weapons.
ANGLES AND PROXEMICS
Angles are primarily “angles of attack.” It is the direction and angle by which one is
attacked. Whether that is through
trajectory (the parabolic flight of a missile—bullet or otherwise—through the
air) or a fist, vehicle, sword, stick, explosive, air delivered munitions—whatever
the mechanism to injure employed—there is an angle of attack that must be
identified and protected against to increase your safety.
All angles of threat have a direction. It may be from the gunman five feet away, a
man with a shotgun 20 yards away, that sniper 800 meters away in an elevated
position, or mortar fire. Traditionally
it has been called a kill-zone. A
kill-zone can be defined as any area permitting the intersection of a weapon or
missile (and its effects) with its target.
If you get shot, you were in a kill-zone. If you suffer the effects of an explosion,
you were in a kill-zone. The same if you
are kicked in the shins or knifed through the ribs. All result from a directional component, or
angle of attack. Identifying and
avoiding the kill-zone created by the angle as determined by the proxemics is
key to preventing injury while creating injury (or threat of injury) to the
opponent.
Proxemics is the relationship of bodies in space
and geography. The combatants’ position
relative to the other becomes a threat or not based on their weapon’s
capabilities, e.g., a man armed with a knife at 50 yards is not a serious
immediate threat, whereas a man with a shotgun or rifle likely is. A man with a scoped rifle who is 40 feet
higher than his target is important information in determining either how to
shoot the target or in not getting shot, depending on which side of the muzzle
one finds himself. Determining the position
of an opponent prior to a shot being fired, explosive being detonated, or a
kick beginning or the knife striking provides valuable intelligence that
permits you to avoid the kill zone, negating—or, at least, mitigating—the
weapons’ capability to harm you.The same goes when selecting an area or place in
which to confront an opponent. Your
position can give you an advantage over your opponent. Selecting a favorable site or creating a
circumstance for the confrontation greatly influences the outcome. Understanding the advantages and
disadvantages inherent in proxemics provides a foundational opportunity to
create or eliminate angles of attack based on your present needs.
APPLIED OODA THEORY
Within tactics, the concept of time and your
understanding of how to use it to your advantage greatly impacts the outcome of
the conflict. Making it a conscious part
of the tactical response is the second foundational component.
All physical conflict is about time. Decisively putting enough force “on-target,
on-time” is how a conflict is won.
Fighting, whether with empty hands, handheld weapons (including
firearms), individually, and in groups—or even in armies—is really nothing more
than a desperate battle for time.
Whoever bests manages and ultimately controls the time—and therefore the
timing—of the conflict, generally wins.
Once he is beaten mentally, physically
overwhelming him will not be a problem.
He gets behind the curve and is finally buried (either figuratively or
literally) by the unrelenting pressure because he cannot catch up to the
rapidly changing events dictated by the victor.
His every decision becomes increasingly late relative to the tempo of
the fight, until his decisions—and therefore his actions, defenses, and ability
to create harm—are completely irrelevant to the current situation. At this point, the outcome is certain—he will
lose. The concept of getting inside the
opponent’s ability to react (mentally and physically) and make decisions, and
staying there until resistance is overcome is best described through the
doctrine of “Boyd’s Cycle,” or “getting inside his OODA Loop.”
Controlling the time is not necessarily about
who moves faster (although it can be). It is, instead, about
overwhelming the opponent’s ability to understand the context of one’s moves
and actions, affecting his ability to react effectively to the changing
circumstances. It is positively directing the relevance of his
decision-making under threat. While most people think about shooting
technique when the subject of a gunfight comes up, warriors think about “time
management” in order to hit the suspect and avoid being hit.
Physical conflict is more a battle for the
internal time structure of one’s opponent than it is a physical contest of
strength or accuracy. Getting into his
head and disrupting his ability to decisionize and react in time is most often
the key to physically winning and overwhelming his defenses. It is about controlling his ability to
recognize and change the direction and tempo of the conflict, confusing and/or
injuring him sufficiently to prevent his ability to recover.
OODA is a concept of describing the
decision-making process a human being undergoes under threat. Developed through extensive conflict research
and synthesis by Col. John Boyd (USAF, deceased), it properly—and very
clearly—explains how we operate in a threat environment under time constraints
where personal safety is involved. It is
vital, as a police and military trainer of combatives problem-solving, to
understand how we mentally operate and react to a perceived threat. This influences how and what we teach.
While linear time (microseconds, tenths of
seconds, seconds, minutes, hours, etc.) is constant, perceptual time is
subjective. In every conflict, there is
a perception of time by everyone involved.
Winners often experience others moving as if in slow motion, easily
anticipating the opponent’s next move and beating him there effortlessly. However, losers, if they survive, often feel
as if they “didn’t have enough time” to make decisions, that the attacks came
too quickly and from unexpected directions and sources that refused to let them
understand what was happening until it was too late. Realizing that an attack has been initiated
and knowing that there is nothing you can do to stop it results in you losing,
with all the consequences that entails.
-
The Threat(s) makes a decision to attempt to
injure or kill you—he or she decides to shoot you.
- You make a decision based on what you understand the situation to be to respond with force.
- Both the Threat and you continuously decide
whether to fire, continue firing, to stop firing, to flee, aggress, move,
dodge, grab, strike, etc.
Rapidly pressing the trigger or throwing
multiple punches for the sake of speed is not the determinant factor of
success/survival. The decision to press
the trigger of an in-battery weapon when the bore axis is aligned on the Threat’s
vulnerable body structure is. The
decision to strike a target on-time, in-time is the critical factor.
Each shot requires a decision. To continue firing, or to stop shooting again
requires a decision. The same with
throwing a punch or blocking a punch. This
decision-making under threat is a function of a continuous series of decision
“loops” that depend on constant feedback.
Each of these loops contains at least four distinct components, and is
described by the acronym, “OODA:”
Observe. In
an individual fight, this is information gathered by the senses. Information gathering comes from the eyes,
sound, and touch. This is raw data (primarily eyesight in a
gunfight) transmitted to the brain for processing.
- One cannot purposely
defend against something that is not first perceived.
- Observing and seeing are, however, often two very different things.
What
does the observed information actually mean?
Orientation concerns
recognizing the “essential elements of threat” of the situation—the fact that
the Threat has blue eyes is unimportant if you miss the essential elements of
threat immediately facing you: his
quartering his body to you, his far elbow poking out from behind him as the
same shoulder rises slightly, the subtle shift of body weight first to the
rear, the apparently intentional lack of emotion being shown. Noticing the color of the Threat’s eyes may be useful later in offering a
description, but failing to notice the other essential elements of threat might
mean you won’t be alive to give that description.
Making the leap between any change in the status quo represented by this new information
and the ability to appreciate or discern its relevance is key to success in the
OODA concept: orienting to the new information quickly enough to make a
difference in the outcome. The more
rapidly you orient to the actual events as or just before they occur, the more
likely you will be able to make decisions that will benefit the outcome you
want.
Orientation is a dynamic pattern-matching of
past experiences (including those events actually lived through as well as
other warriors’ experiences as relayed by word, video, or in print—including
meaningful training), intelligence or information received prior to the event,
and other sources that all combine into the orientation process.
Successful “orientation” is delayed when the
Threat’s actions are not recognized, either through a lack of familiarity or by
intentional deceit. Orientation is
prevented as well by injury or fatigue.
OODA Ums. The “OODA Ums” are commonly experienced when
orientation stalls. When a situation
begins to change, and the warrior doesn’t quite yet understand that he or she’s
in combat, there is a tendency to experience a series of pauses before sufficient
orientation takes place. It can sound
like this:
- "What’s that?...um…Oh, it’s a guy…um…why’s he
moving like that?...um…He’s moving kind of funny…um…The look on his face just
changed…um…What’re his hands doing?...um…OH!
Knife!”
Anyone who’s been in combat, especially the
first few times, knows the OODA Um’s can get you killed. The earlier you orient to the threat, the
more likely your decision-making will be rapid enough to make a difference in
your prevailing.
Decide. Based
upon the information received, a decision about a response, and how that
response will take place is made. Again,
the more closely the pattern-matching matches the experience base (either
through real-world experience or through relevant training), the quicker the
decision-making capability, and the more likely it will affect the outcome of
the conflict.
The decision process is also where the Loop’s
cycling can significantly bog down, and you can lose your advantage—many a
battle has been thrown away by a hesitant commander—or fighter—who delays a
decision because of a fear of incomplete information. Remember: an adequate solution early is
better than a perfect decision that is too late to favorably affect the outcome.
Act. The
decision having been made, the action is committed to and efforted. The level of commitment to that action is
generally determined by the degree of surety one has about their orientation to
the situation—if you are convinced you are right, your commitment will be
complete. If not, your actions will
likely be tentative. However, once a
physical action (e.g., punch, trigger press, etc.) is committed to and acted
upon, it is impossible to stop until the initiated action is completed.
Feedback Loops Begin. The moment any action is taken, feedback
begins. This feedback tells you about
the action taken, whether it had no effect on the Threat, a partial effect, or
was completely successful. Feedback forces
a continuous series of OODA Loops that cycle at inconsistent speeds depending
upon your ability to orient to the changes in the fight relative to the
Threat’s.
If the fight is straightforward against an
incompetent opponent, his threat patterns are easily recognized and something
you are completely prepared for, your OODA Loops will cycle effortlessly.
If, however, he is prepared and capable, and his
attacks create confusion and frustration for you, your OODA cycling will
slow. As injuries and fatigue on both
sides increase, orientation is adversely affected, and decision-making
progresses or retards—and eventually stops completely.
One combatant will suffer sufficient
injuries or fatigue to the point where he becomes combat ineffective, unable to
continue orienting and deciding upon an action, and the fight either stops, or
the loser is killed.
Prevailing in any type of combatives depends
upon quick and accurate decision-making.
If there is a failure to observe a change in the status quo, or a threat
pattern is not recognized for some reason, the lack of quickly orienting while
under threat leads to debilitating confusion.
As confusion increases, decision-making stalls. This, in turn, builds on itself to create
more confusion. At some point, the
combatant becomes no longer able to function in any relevant manner. The fight is all but over.
Engineering the Conflict. Your task is to create confusion in the mind
of the Threat. As you make decisions
faster and combine them with actions that increasingly frustrate and confuse
him, his ability to target and hit you decreases. The moment confusion begins, OODA cycles for
each combatant are distinctly different:
-
Your OODA Loop cycles are normal or even faster
than normal rates. It may seem like the Threat
moving in slow motion. You are clear
about what needs to be done, and your decisions result in actions that are
on-time, in-time.
-
His OODA Loop cycles begin to stall. He doesn’t understand what is going on. He begins to get frantic and tries harder to
understand what is happening now. His
decision-making, or OODA cycle, slows and stalls. His actions falter and become impotent—he begins
flailing wildly without focus, or simply presses the trigger faster because he
can’t think of anything else to do--while his strikes or bullets might hit something, it is not through purposeful effort. He just doesn’t have enough time. The real threat he represents at this moment is seriously hampered and reduced,
and the outcome will soon become inevitable.
Understanding the Observe-Orient-Decide-Act
cycle permits you to better engineer success in any situation. Getting within and then remaining “inside his
OODA Loop” is the freedom to direct the conflict by managing the Threat’s
attention—the time it takes to make effective decisions and act upon them. Your “time-management” of his OODA Loop
creates confusion and frustration, further slowing his decision-making, and
resulting in his making irrelevant combat choices.
Put him into a “Goofy Loop.” The “Goofy-Loop” is a condition of the mind
where confusion reigns. The Goofy-Loop
describes the inability to make a decision under increasingly ominous and
oppressive threat. When orientation
stalls and decision-making stops, the Goofy-Loop is impossible to escape from
unless the opponent relents. Examples of
quickly putting a Threat into the “Goofy-Loop” might be:
-
Moving quickly to an angle and drawing/engaging
as the enemy begins to direct his weapon at you.
-
An unexpected quick slap to the Threat’s ear,
stunning him.
-
Aggressing into and through the attack.
Now keep him there! An “increasingly oppressive threat” simply
means to continue to injure or move against the Threat until he can no longer
operate effectively. BE UNRELENTING.
By shrinking your Decision-Loop (and expanding
his), he is making decisions to defend actions you initiated three or four
iterations ago—far too late for him because he is now taking injuries that he
will not be able to overcome.
OODA is About Timeliness. Col. Boyd taught that all conflict is
“time-sensitive.” The time between the
observation and the action must be on-target, on-time, in-time. That is, between observing, orienting,
deciding, and acting upon that observation, the action must be on-target and on-time
to make a positive difference, and in-time to favorably affect the
conflict. A late action will therefore
have a negligible—or even a negative—effect on the outcome. It is attempting to influence events that no
longer exist because the situation has already significantly changed. Make
him fight in the past.
Misunderstanding “timeliness.” Many have misunderstood the “time
competitiveness” of this model to be an admonition to constantly, almost
frantically increase the speed of the conflict.
Pushing to be “faster” isn’t necessarily beneficial. Again, it is being “on-time, in-time”
relative to his actions that is key.
Shooting faster and putting more rounds downrange than a Threat may assist in your survival. However, eight fast misses is not the answer
to winning a gunfight. Putting rounds
on-target, in-time is a better predictor of safety and success. Similarly, throwing more punches hoping to
overwhelm him isn’t necessarily better than hitting him solidly with every
punch you throw.
Timeliness is about context. Context is about “relative” speed. It is your action relative to the Threat’s
that wins or loses the fight. Serious
practitioners know that “fast is slow, and smooth is fast.” E.g., being smooth will get a weapon on
target faster than a fast, frantic draw that gets fouled.
Tempo. Within
this concept of “on-target, on-time, in-time,” there can be no slowing of the
tempo (“tempo” is the rapidity or rate of movement relative to another; the
concept of gaining or losing time relative to one’s continued mobility or developing
position). Accelerating the tempo may be
desirable as long as it results in meaningful gain. Again, the whole concept depends upon making
good decisions earlier and more quickly than the other guy.
It is speed that is relevant to disrupting the Threat’s decision-making and effective
action; that of getting ahead of his decision-making loops and staying there
that is important. It is almost like a
man leading in ballroom dance. As long
as the male dancer takes charge and is aware of the female’s response, the
dance is successful. The failure of the
male partner to remain ahead, or in the lead, relative to the female half of
the dance team, destroys the effort. The
female is left on her own, now unaffected by the male's lead, and the dance is
no longer graceful or even meaningful.