How to spot a fraud

[JNieman]

It's just me but I don't quite understand why certificates don't matter. To me a few would make your instruction highly plausible.

Because they don't mean anything. All they mean is you managed to not shoot yourself for at least 2 days, mostly. Most instructors don't have a "test" to even "pass" you from the class. Tom Givens does an exam that you have to do until you pass it. I've seen someone have to shoot it 4 times and that was the worst. I don't know if he ever gave up on someone and didn't give them the cert. Other classes I took, the certs were given out when the day was over and no requirement other than "not getting kicked out"

And like you said, you've trained with Nate. Well. Who knows who Nate is? If I go to some of the local instructors in Missouri where I'm at, I don't know if they know him. I don't know if he knows Dave/Don/Chris of Milcopp, or the guys at this new place in Farmington, MO. So to either of them, the others' certs may as well be a diploma from Hamburger University.

They don't show what topics were covered - your ability to grasp them, or anything of the sort. The closest you can get is if you KNOW the instructor, KNOW the curriculum of the class specified on the cert, and even then you still don't KNOW how the student actually did, or how safe they were.

I keep my certs because "you never know" but they mostly just sit there in a folder on my gun parts shelf in the man-cave, where some other gun-related paperwork is kept.

 

[Cat]

Doesn't Tom Givens give an instructors class particularly FOR instructors.

I'm not talking about just any old certificates.

 

[SpeedRacer]

Cat, if you read further through the thread I think I expounded a little more on my take on it. The problem with certificates is they're only worth wherever they came from. Beyond the NRA, which offers very basic certifications (such as CHP instructor), there's no standards. Someone could have a wall full of certificates, but unless you know about the places they came from you're not in any better shape as far as validating the company you're looking at. Simply put, there's just too many certificates flying around to place any stock in them by default.

Certainly there are exceptions and they can definitely be a valid part of the bigger picture, which is pretty much what I'd say about every individual detail.

 

[JNieman]

Doesn't Tom Givens give an instructors class particularly FOR instructors.

I'm not talking about just any old certificates.

I guess I just don't understand what your point is. You're saying if someone had a Tom Givens "Instructor Class" certification, then you'd know you could trust them?

If so.. Why?

 

[Cat]

But you know... At the end of the day this tells me that if a beginner wants to be sure where to go, one of the gun schools is the best bets.

 

[SpeedRacer]

But you know... At the end of the day this tells me that if a beginner wants to be sure where to go, one of the gun schools is the best bets.

What makes you determine that? Are "gun schools" good by default? Or do you think that, because you've heard good things about them from people's opinions you trust?

 

[JNieman]

But you know... At the end of the day this tells me that if a beginner wants to be sure where to go, one of the gun schools is the best bets.

You say that, but to me, the stationary gun schools like Thunder Ranch and stuff... I'm biased against them from second-hand peer review.

 

[Cat]

Cat, if you read further through the thread I think I expounded a little more on my take on it. The problem with certificates is they're only worth wherever they came from. Beyond the NRA, which offers very basic certifications (such as CHP instructor), there's no standards. Someone could have a wall full of certificates, but unless you know about the places they came from you're not in any better shape as far as validating the company you're looking at. Simply put, there's just too many certificates flying around to place any stock in them by default.

Certainly there are exceptions and they can definitely be a valid part of the bigger picture, which is pretty much what I'd say about every individual detail.

*nods*

Jnieman, I am basing it on Personal experience. The people I KNOW who are awesome at what they do have spent many many many long hours in these national gun schools. Gomez was on his way to becoming another published expert. We knew he was amazing. But the rest of the nation didn't. Not yet. But he also spent hours days and weeks talking to the people I'm referring to. So yes. An instructor that constant references his personal experiences with these gun schools, I'm more inclined to trust

 

[Cat]

What makes you determine that? Are "gun schools" good by default? Or do you think that, because you've heard good things about them from people's opinions you trust?

Curt you know that's why I am expressing this opinion.


I'm not knocking you. I may have came off more snarky than I intended. But at the moment, that's what I think is the better idea. For a beginner, it's with going somewhere that has a very strong national reputation. Not just local.

 

[SpeedRacer]

Curt you know that's why I am expressing this opinion.


I'm not knocking you. I may have came off more snarky than I intended. But at the moment, that's what I think is the better idea. For a beginner, it's with going somewhere that has a very strong national reputation. Not just local.

I know, I was just pointing out that we agree. I've already stated that to me, word of mouth and relayed experiences by people whose opinions you trust are what I consider the most valuable tool in choosing instruction.

That's why you see so many reviews and "AARs" on the web. People realized a long time ago it's a very valuable tool in the training community.

 

[JNieman]

That's why you see so many reviews and "AARs" on the web. People realized a long time ago it's a very valuable tool in the training community.

yea, that's my #1 goto for research, after I ask around to see if anyone knows the people already.

 

[Cat]

I know, I was just pointing out that we agree. I've already stated that to me, word of mouth and relayed experiences by people whose opinions you trust are what I consider the most valuable tool in choosing instruction.

That's why you see so many reviews and "AARs" on the web. People realized a long time ago it's a very valuable tool in the training community.

But that brings us back to certificates and so forth.

I know who to ask here. If I moved, I wouldn't know who to trust. But if I walked into an instructor's facility and saw he trained among the same people and places my trusted sources trained... I might not be guaranteed but it'd come close.

IMO certification matters.

 

[Jack]

But that brings us back to certificates and so forth.

I know who to ask here. If I moved, I wouldn't know who to trust. But if I walked into an instructor's facility and saw he trained among the same people and places my trusted sources trained... I might not be guaranteed but it'd come close.

IMO certification matters.

The internet is world wide. Local forums are available anywhere. National schools are nice and all, but it doesn't take long to go to the misc training section on M4carbine.net or a local forum, find some trainers, then google it up.

Just because it is a "national school" doesn't make it worth a ****.

 

[JNieman]

But that brings us back to certificates and so forth.

I know who to ask here. If I moved, I wouldn't know who to trust. But if I walked into an instructor's facility and saw he trained among the same people and places my trusted sources trained... I might not be guaranteed but it'd come close.

IMO certification matters.

I know a number of people who rack up certs and are still stupid and suck at shooting more than me, who used to average 2 short classes a year, and now barely gets to one. And I'm not even bragging about my own skill. I've deteriorated very much recently, unfortunately.

I just think you are setting yourself up for disappointment by putting /any/ weight into certificates, is all.

What Jack said is right - the internet is your best tool. It spreads word-of-mouth so much better. If you move to a new state, that doesn't mean you have to use some local nobody. I don't understand the odd limitation you are imposing in your hypothetical "moved to another state" scenario. I mean... I lived that scenario. I did just that. First person I trained with in Louisiana came at the recommendation of people here on Bayoushooter, after much discussion.

 

[SpeedRacer]

But that brings us back to certificates and so forth.

I know who to ask here. If I moved, I wouldn't know who to trust. But if I walked into an instructor's facility and saw he trained among the same people and places my trusted sources trained... I might not be guaranteed but it'd come close.

IMO certification matters.

Sure they can be part of the puzzle. But certificates can't help with one huge question: are they a good instructor? Teaching in itself is a skill. Then there's the X-factors...personality, etc that all make up the complete picture.

Like Jack said, just because you don't know someone personally doesn't make their opinion invalid, and there's plenty if info to be had through the magic of Google. To play devil's advocate, there IS a lot of dumbasses out there writing reviews and AARs. It's not too hard to get a feel for the reviewer though, and typically they list their previous experience as well. Obviously for me someone who has taken lots of classes with different instructors, and expounds on what they liked/didn't like about the class will hold more merit than a "this was my first class and it was awesome!" review.

 

[JNieman]

The things i look for in AARs are objective factual statements.

What drills did they practice?
How did the instructor progress the class through topics?
What was the round count per day? (can't draw a real conclusion from this alone, but coupled with other information, it can be a clue)
What was the teacher/student ratio?
Did the instructor exhibit 1-on-1 tutelage? (though this can be subjective, admittedly)
Did the instructor focus on accuracy standards ever?
Did the instructor even have a timer in his hand at any point?

Then I can check for photos of the class and see if there's anything alarming or out of place that might raise a flag. All while keeping in mind "I wasn't there" and that there is often a good explanation for things. However, if I see an instructor tea-cupping a 1911 for any reason other than showing why it's a bad idea... lol.

There are some cues and tips that will let me know what is going on, most of the time. After all the mostly-objective **** is noted, then I'll try to get an idea of a /trend/ in commentary about perception of the instruction/instructor(s).

AARs help. I always try to do one after a class. Even if people beat me to it and cover everything I would have said, I at least try to hop in an second/third certain points I feel are worth echoing.

 

[Cat]

The internet is world wide. Local forums are available anywhere. National schools are nice and all, but it doesn't take long to go to the misc training section on M4carbine.net or a local forum, find some trainers, then google it up.

Just because it is a "national school" doesn't make it worth a ****.

I didn't say national schools were the ****.

I've spent a few years reading here. I know the ones here, or were here, who are deeply respected hands down. Personality clashes aside, most everybody could agree they know their ****.

I move to a place that I don't know anyone. But three local instructors are in the area. The local forums have pissing contests on who is better. but nobody is saying here are the documents proving where I have trained.

How the hell am I supposed to make a decision based on Internet yes he's good, no he sucks? AARs are great, but some AARS suck. I think we can agree on that.

I might have two instructors in front of me. One shows a remarkable similarity to the folks I trusted back home with a mini-interview and documented credentials. One doesn't really have anything except word of mouth. I'm going with the person who can prove he's done the same training as the people I trust. And fact is, when certification is the only method to establish a degree of trust, even if its not perfect, it's better than "trust me"


I'm not saying certificates are end all and be all. There was more good info than certificates but a few people here are suggesting they're absolutely worthless across the board. And they aren't. Not by a long shot.

 

[JNieman]

Ok, then, yes in that extremely hand-picked and selective hypothetical situation where it's "zero reason to trust him" versus "zero reason to trust him but has some papers in a folder" then yes, B is better than A, but at this point we're talking about the nuttier of two turds.

If those are the two choices I'm faced with, I'm traveling, or waiting to hear more.

 

[Jack]

I didn't say national schools were the ****.

I've spent a few years reading here. I know the ones here, or were here, who are deeply respected hands down. Personality clashes aside, most everybody could agree they know their ****.

I move to a place that I don't know anyone. But three local instructors are in the area. The local forums have pissing contests on who is better. but nobody is saying here are the documents proving where I have trained.

How the hell am I supposed to make a decision based on Internet yes he's good, no he sucks? AARs are great, but some AARS suck. I think we can agree on that.

I might have two instructors in front of me. One shows a remarkable similarity to the folks I trusted back home with a mini-interview and documented credentials. One doesn't really have anything except word of mouth. I'm going with the person who can prove he's done the same training as the people I trust. And fact is, when certification is the only method to establish a degree of trust, even if its not perfect, it's better than "trust me"


I'm not saying certificates are end all and be all. There was more good info than certificates but a few people here are suggesting they're absolutely worthless across the board. And they aren't. Not by a long shot.

Never said you did cat. You are right, if it is an absolute tie, with no word of mouth, no meaningful AARs, no ability to go somewhere else to train, and I am being forced to take a class(waiting somehow isn't an option), and I can't speak to either instructor directly to form my own opinion, then I guess pieces of paper are a good tie breaker.

There are instuctors who take lots of classes, have certificates, but all that paperwork doesn't mean they will even show up sober.

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

Why am I being used as the example consistently in this thread?!? I have feelings to you know.