I was on Aimpoint’s Taking Aim podcast with Rich Nance. We covered some really good stuff, and went pretty broad on the subjects.

Jelly Bryce was a phenomenal shooter. Not only could he do things on the range for show, he could also use those exact skills in life or death battles with bad guys, and did so, and did it often. He, as my friend and terrific instructor Wayne Dobbs puts it, plucked a lot of weeds from God’s garden. No one can ever deny any of that.

However, where things get sticky is when others try to emulate and follow his example without understanding some key things.

It is not just with this specific example, but it happens over and over again in many different areas and contexts, and it is almost always problematic.

The high performers in a given field most often get there in large part to specific physical attributes. Certainly, they may also have an incredible work ethic which helps push them over the top, but that is layered over the aforementioned attributes.

Jelly Bryce for example had an amazing work ethic. Many people verified what he said was his daily routine – two hours every single day dry firing in front of a mirror. He did not do this for a short period of time. From all accounts, he did this even as he got much older and was close to retiring as an active duty FBI agent. So he would have probably been fairly successful in most of his gunfights, but that practice was backed up by some incredible attributes. His hand/eye coordination was incredible, and his ability to see probably equaled the best major league baseball players who were great hitters.

Where this is an issue is when his example becomes the beacon of what others believe is the correct path. Bryce was a point shooter. The gun for most of his gunfights stayed below his line of sight, and that worked well for him. However, when others who wanted to ape his results blindly followed the path of “point shooting” without doing the training Jelly did, and without his attributes could never come close to replicating his results.

Technique does not exist in a vacuum.

Technique is powered by certain drivers. Really, the main drivers are things based on concepts, principles, training methodology, and other global engines, but physical attributes do play a part. That is okay when your actions are not fueled by physical attributes, but they are just additions. So when we decide on what “techniques” we are going to use, we indeed to make sure that 1) the training methodology is supportive of our context (i.e. not having to train 5 hours a day every day for 5 years to see results), and 2) the techniques can work just as well with our own current attributes and capabilities.

Jelly Bryce is a good example of the fallacy of following an expert’s path without an in depth understanding of their journey, but it happens all over. In the Combstives world for example, what works for Islam Makhachev in the UFC cage MAY work for us, but it may not. He may have some unique qualities that do not transfer for the lay person. On the basketball court, we can ape Michael Jordan’s moves, but the chance we can play at an NBA level is nil.

So let us look to the greats and the high performers, but let’s make sure we understand context as we do.

*note* this may be footage of Jelly Bryce. I have not seen absolute proof, but it still serves as a good illustration of what he advocated and did in his shooting.