A.I. Kondrukh
President of Practical Shooting Federation of Russia, Moscow

Keywords: general integrative sport theory, basic practical shooting theory

Introduction

It is typical for modern sports that active sport disciplines are numerous in numbers, and these numbers are still on the rise. Each of the sports need to be supported by the relevant theoretical and methodological provisions otherwise there is no way to expect a sport discipline being dynamically developed and improved with the relevant positive implications in the public entertainment domain supported by the growth of sport accomplishments, training process efficiency and the athletic standards on the whole.

Objective of the study was to indentify and provide scientific substantiations for the basic practical shooting theory within the frame of the general integrative sport theory.

Study results and discussion. When theoretical fundamentals of any sport category or specific sport discipline are considered irrespective and independent of the mainstream avenues of modern sport science (that is quite often the case, regretfully) the analysts striving to develop the specific sport-discipline theories are always at risk of the following two typical misconceptions.

First, there is always a high chance that the analysis of the sport-specific empirical data arrays may go astray in the sense that the analyst may fail to spell out the key design, operation and progress regularities of the sport discipline or, what is even worse, may formulate them in a wrong/ distorted way. Any distortions in the theoretical provisions for the sport may not only slow down the progress of the sport discipline but direct the sport movement to a dead-end road and thereby trigger its deep and acute crisis. Modern science on the whole and sport science in particular have seen quite a few such crises in their history, and many of them were evoked by the attempts to portray the sport-specific and relative aspects as absolute and generally applicable ones. Extraordinary ideas and inadequately tested and proved hypotheses – not matter how bright they may seem – are known to lead rather to delusions than sound knowledge.

Second, even the most sound (in the sport-specific theory design domain) analysis always claims much time and efforts to open up, invent and sort out basics and grounds of many things that may have long been found, proved and established by other people in probably more fundamental, comprehensive and consistent manner.

In developing the theory and practical methodology for practical shooting as a sport discipline, we would like to avoid the above misconceptions that are normally unavoidable when the theorizing process is too sport-specific and/or narrowly empirical in its design. This was the prime reason for us, being fully aware of the need to follow the general methodological principles of the analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, logical and historical, theoretical and empirical aspects being integrated and harmonized in the sport theory and practice, to proceed from the few fundamental provisions of the general integrative sport theory by L.P. Matveyev that are relevant to the modern problems and methodological aspects of the sport theory as such [1, pp. 73-83].

Following the mainstream logic and methodology of the sport theory by L.P. Matveyev, we would design the basic practical shooting theory as composed of the following three fundamental semantic modules:

• Frame practical shooting concept describing and explaining module to spell out the sport appearance and progress history, essential structural, operational and design specifics of the sport system, and the mainstream development trends of the sport in the global and national context;
• Competitive process organization and management module to consider the key specifics and problematic issues of the sport competitions; and
• Sport training process design module to provide a systemic concept factoring in a variety of key factors of importance for high accomplishments in the practical shooting sport.

We expect that the theoretical and empiric research within the frame of the above three fundamental semantic modules will result in an integrative Russian practical shooting model (or school) being developed and broadly implemented in the regular national educational curricula.

With the above goal in mind and with due regard to the methodological fundamentals provided by the L.P. Matveyev theory, we considered it beneficial to apply the following three integrative research-and-cognitive approaches or general research methods as recommended by the latter: general classification method; system design method; and theoretical modeling method. In these methods being applied in the basic practical shooting theory design process, the following aspects need to be emphasized.

We are not the first and unlikely the last to be concerned by the fact that a systems approach is often substituted by a systemization one. Having considered and analyzed a few available studies on the subject (we mean only the serious research and methodological ones as opposed to the multiple popular, promotion and/or fiction literature) i.e. with concern to the modern practical shooting theory and practices, we found ample evidence in support of the above statement – as we mostly see that as soon as an author makes an attempt to summarize the known empirical (mostly personal) experience and sort out, group and/or classify the data array (no matter how short it may be), he/she would tend to pass it as a system concept. One would expect that the completed primary systematization/ classification of empirical material should give the right and grounds to go further to a more consistent and maybe even systemic analysis – but not a bit of it. The elementary (or even elementaristic as we would call it, atomic) approach have never been and can never be improved to perfection by a simple (or even complex) systematization. Much like no integrity can be fully described as a simple physical combination of its constituent parts (or elements), a system on the whole may never be adequately described as a grouped integrity (or an isolated integrity as such) but rather as a specially and logically structured integrity. It may sound somewhat tautological we afraid, but we would define a system as the systemically structured integrity having the three specific features as provided by the L.P. Matveyev's theory [1, pp. 77-78]. His idea in brief was that any system implies the following key elements: some system-generation factor that forms the integrity and ensures it being functional as integrity proper; sub-system components combined in the integrity and acting as sub-systems; and recognition of the fact of integrity being formed and functional as a relatively separate complex-structured integrated object.

Having shaped up the notion of the practical shooting system a really formed and functional complexly structured integrated object; and having matched the interpreted empirical data –   collected through a broad-based and long-timed experiment – with the relevant theoretical provisions of the general concept and study program, we will get the opportunity to design a theoretical model of the system. To put it in other words, we will build up a logical and system model for the practical shooting training/ education process – in full compliance with the methodology offered by L.P. Matveyev [1]. Therefore, we will ensure a due niche for the basic practical shooting theory within the frame of the regular professional education curricula, and this will be the final step in our study process.

Conclusion. Practical shooting activity as a competitive sport discipline and an application service/ combat sport category shall undoubtedly be considered a mature system notwithstanding it being a relatively new sport movement in fact. Maturity of this sport discipline is explainable by its closeness to and inheritance of the vast practical and historically sound firearm usage traditions in every relevant category – including handgun, rifle, carbine and three gun.

It should be noted, however, that any integrated and systemically designed system – even based on a considerable experience and high shooting gifts albeit insufficiently supported by the relevant systems approach – is always very difficult in being presented in as a systemic education model. And it is exactly one of the top priority objectives for our research efforts.

References

1. Matveyev L.P. Obshchaya teoriya sporta i ee prikladnye aspekty (General theory of sport and its applications). 4th ed., rev. and sup. – St. Petersburg: Lan', 2005. – 384 p.

Corresponding author: alisa.gorba4eva@yandex.ru

Abstract

The article describes the methodology and organization of the general theoretical and empirical research in the area of practical shooting touching upon the matter of construction of the educational model.

Having got a systematic idea of practical shooting as an actually existing, complex, consistent object, as well as having checked (interpreted) empirical data obtained during the extensive and long-term experiment with the theory of the general concept and research program, the authors realize the newly opened opportunity of theoretical modeling. In other words, they design a logical educational-system model of practical shooting training, which again is entirely consistent with the methodology of L.P. Matveev. The authors find a place for the general theory of practical shooting in the field-specific vocational education. And this is the final step of our research.

Despite being relatively new in the sports movement, practical shooting as a sport and applied service-military discipline is undoubtedly a mature system. Its maturity is due to maximum proximity to the real and practical traditions of using firearms, and in all developing varieties (pistol, rifle, shotgun, trigun).

However, it is extremely hard to imagine as an educational system model even the most systematically organized integral phenomenon, even in the presence of significant shooting experience and talent, but without the proper level of knowledge of the systems approach. And it is this problem that serves as one of priorities in this study.