# Survival > General Survival Discussion >  10-80-10 Theory

## Spartan300

I was doing a little reading on survivors a few days ago and came across a study called the Theory of 10-80-10. In every survivor situation there are those who have a mindset to survive and those who simply panic or surrender. There are folks who actually are more "prone to dying" than others. The difference in the folks that survive and the folks that die is all about the engineering system called your brain! After examining countless disasters and categorizing the ways people respond to life threatening situations, they came up with the Theory of 10-80-10

The first 10%: These are the folks that will handle a crisis in a relatively calm and rational state of mind. The top 10 percent are true survivors. They know how to pull themselves together quickly. They can asses the situation clearly. Their decision making is sharp and focused. These are the folks that can develop priorities, make plans, and take appropriate action. The first 10% can keep their emotions in check so they can think and solve problems. They refuse to let themselves get overwhelmed. Psychologists call this process "splitting" and it's common among people who keep their cool under the greatest stress.

The 80%: This is the group most folks fall under. The vast majority of people you know are in this category. In a crisis, this group will very simply act "stunned and bewildered" like a deer in the headlights. Reasoning is significantly impaired and thinking becomes difficult. These people behave in a reflexive, almost automatic mechanical manner. Under tremendous pressure, these folks will feel lethargic and numb, will sweat, and feel sick, with hearts racing. Most folks will look straight ahead, will barely hear people around them, many times losing sense and sight of what is going on around them, experiencing tunnel vision. In short, most people when in a crisis turn into statues in the first moments of a crisis. It's okay and not necessarily fatal, but can't last very long in order to survive! The key is to recover quickly from this "brain-lock", shake off the shock, and figure out what to do!

The last 10%: This is the group you want to avoid in an emergency. Simply put, the members in this group do the wrong thing. They behave in a manner that is counterproductive to anything you are doing to survive. They make a bad situation worse. They are the ones that lose control of themselves, and just "freak out" to the point that they can't pull themselves together. These hysterical people are normally the ones that will not come out of the crisis alive, plain and simple. 

I thought it was a great theory actually, I have known people in all 3 groups. What group are you in? Have you witnessed a crisis and know a person that is clearly in the first or last group? 
__________________

----------


## hunter63

Most everything could be plotted on a "bell chart", your 10-80-10.......
Look around at people at work, at school,, jsut the way it is.

Just by virtue of being here on this forum, probably puts most of us in the top 10 percent.

----------


## Rick

I have always believed those those numbers although I've never seen a study to support them. As Hunter said that's just the way people act every day. A crisis only amplifies it. Generally a few surprises but pretty darn close.

----------


## WY21lmb

The 10-80-10 and bell curve ideas fit well with my experience.  I have never been in combat (or anything similar) but I have been in way more life threatening situations at work than I care to remember.   Oil refining in a plant that had some equipment and controls that dated from as far back as the 1930's tends to do that.  A very few operators were calm and methodical, most of the operators at one time or another literally froze stiff (so scared their legs hurt to move them), and there were a few operators who for everyone's safety it would have been best it there had been time to lock them up in a bathroom or someplace.

----------


## crashdive123

I tend to agree with those numbers as a snapshot of the general population.  I also believe that certain segments, or careers that train to overcome the 80 and bottom 10 is very possible.  Police, EMT, Firefighters and Military are a few that come to mind.  I can say for a certainty that onboard Submarines it was probably more like 90-10-0 as I'm sure it is in other similar segments.  If you were in the bottom 10 statistic you were weeded out during training and sent to the surface fleet. :Innocent:

----------


## BENESSE

Seems like a reasonable assumption. 
If you're in the top 10, dealing with the 80 on a daily basis can be a pita. Driving and getting lost. Working on a project with a tight deadline. Being sick. On and on. The bottom 10 are so dangerous that they can often pull some of the rest down with them. It would be a tough call--helping them or running the other way.

----------


## mwshadow

I can see this at my job. Unfortunately executive decisions are generally made by the 80% group.

----------


## Old Professor

I believe that those percentages are correct and that I fit into the first percentage group - those who remain calm and think things through before acting. Over the years I have been involved in a few critical situations where life or serious injury was facing me and my first thought was "Oh S**T, I DID IT AGAIN!" Then I think about how to get myself out of the situation and then go about it. I believe that my training as an EMT and my experience in an ambulance service and a rescue squad have served me well and developed my self confidence in coping with crisis situations.  I highly reccommend taking EMT training or First Responder training.  I am also a Wilderness First Aid Instructor. I realize that not everyone is psychologically suited to do that kind of work - basically the other 90%, but if you can handle sytress, these are great skill to have if the SHTF!

----------


## finallyME

Classic bell curve.  Couldn't agree more.

----------


## Rick

Surface fleet. That's funny.

I really believe folks are just hard wired the way they are. It' genetics. I don't blame them. Some folks you expect to perform well under stress don't while the ones you expect to fail step up to the plate. It's interesting to me that we somehow equate size to be a better performer. Small guys aren't expected to do well and the big guys the heroes. Often it's just the opposite.

----------


## Aurelius95

This topic was just discussed in the book, _The Survivor's Club_ for our book club at work.  Has nothing to do with our type of work (we sometimes choose books outside of our work).  It's a good book, and the author illustrates the 10-80-10 rule in detail.

----------


## Wildthang

Well if you get rid of the bottom 10% of the people that just cant handle stress or extreme challenges, I think that a large majority of the middle 80% is in that group because of unfamiliarity, no experience, and no training. If you take those people and get them out into the woods and train them in at least the basics, and train them in responding calmly to an emergency, they would then begin to rise into the top 10%.
In my opinion the top 10% are people that are natural born survivors and decision makers that have the inate ability to remain calm, such as most of the people here. I really doubt if the average person in the lower 2 categories ever have a thought about survival and managing crisis. They go through life thinking that nothing will ever happen to them, and have no interest in survival skills. It is not because they cant survive, it is because they are no even remotely mentally prepared for even the smallest crisis.

----------


## kyratshooter

I see three terms being used over and over in this discussion; Theory, assumption and bell curve.

First, this is a theory.  No documentation to prove it.

Second, that makes it an assumption, and you know the definition of that word.

Third, as a teacher I worked on the bell curve theory all my life.  What is being done here is not a "bell curve".  What is being doen here is placing people in their own little box so they can be classified and disposed of and written off as unsavable, therefore not to be worried over.

Inside that 80% of the bell curve you have some of the lower level A students, all the B and C students and a few of the high D scores.  You have as many Fs as you do As.

Yes it is the 80% of the bell curve that makes the world run.  The high As are not the average and neither are the Fs.  And the average is just that, it is the mid point, there is only ONE average student in a classroom.

Situation, training, learning rate and personal motivation will detirmine who survives, not a bell curve position.  Some of the 80% will become A students within moments in a stress setting.  Some of the High A students will curl up in the fetal position and sob uncontrolably.    

Take the American mountain man, a superior survivor by any standard.  Just remember that 4 out of 5 of the mountain men retruned to civilization after their first year and never returned to the wilderness.  Of those that returned 80% did not live for another 5 years.  What happened to the ones that survived a career in the mountains? ( a fraction of a percent of the total American population at the time) They wound up as advisors to the settlers that followed.  They became trade post operators, wagon train guides and Army scouts.

Or your pioneer forefathers.  In Nashville TN 250 men stepped off the flatboats in the first migration wave.  All of them were already respected and seasoned wilderness survivors.  One year latter 50% of them were dead.  What happened to the survivors?  They built a city, made their fortunes and had streets, villiages and occasional universities named after them. Their decendents still run that city, and the entire state, from behind the scenes. 

Thing is, you do not know where you fall on the curve until the balloon bursts.  You have preps, you have gear, you go out and "practice survival", but just like combat, you do not know what you are going to do once the shells start falling and the bullets start whizzing past you ears, not until you have been there.  and the guy you never expected to be a positive preformer may be the one that shines.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> Most everything could be plotted on a "bell chart", your 10-80-10.......
> Look around at people at work, at school,, jsut the way it is.
> 
> Just by virtue of being here on this forum, probably puts most of us in the top 10 percent.


My thoughts exactly.  "10-80-10" is close enough to a classic bell curve, where the "middle group" is about 68%, and the groups on each side of the middle are about 14% each.  Then there are the two extreme groups, of about 2% each, that bring the total to 100%

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> And the average is just that, it is the mid point, there is only ONE average student in a classroom.


Not to be TOO picky, *kyratshooter*, but what you described is the _median_, not the average (aka mean). There are three measures of "central tendency" -- the Mean or average, the Median, and the Mode.  They are similar, but they are by no means the same thing.

The Median is the score or value that falls at the midpoint, or exact center, of the range, meaning that there are an equal number of scores/values on either side of it. Even then, and particularly in large populations, there can be more than one incidence (or result or person, or...) with the same score/value.  Sometimes the Mean and Median are identical; sometimes they are not. I can give an example if necessary.

Regards,

-- *Daniel* (who suffered through countless painful hours of learning, using, interpreting and defending statistics) *Nighteyes*

----------


## Rick

Rick (who has suffered through countless painful hours of learning and avoiding statistics at all cost)

----------


## Sarge47

Interesting.  I've always maintained that the survival kit you always have on you is your brain.  Going along with what Crash wrote I do know that there is a problem, sometimes, when rescuing a drowning person when they panic.  There is the danger that they will take you under with them, and, unless they've changed it, you were told to find away to restrain them.  Submariners and scuba divers are taught to have rigid discipline in an underwater survival situation.  I don't know for sure about the 10-80-10 rule, but I do know that proper training and discipline should work for helping those in the 80% stay focused and be helpful.  I've read where a group starting to panic have been brought under control by a strong-willed, trained, leader.  

Those in the last 10% can serve as "long pig."   :Creepy:

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> Rick (who has suffered through countless painful hours of learning and avoiding statistics at all cost)


 :FRlol:   :FRlol:   :FRlol:

----------


## Rick

Statistically speaking of course.

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> ... I do know that there is a problem, sometimes, when rescuing a drowning person... there is the danger that they will take you under with them, and, unless they've changed it, you were told to find away to restrain them.


Actually I was taught (and was taught to teach, and actually practiced) that, in this circumstance, if you cannot get them under control, to just back off and wait until they'd tired themselves out to the point of exhaustion.  At that point they're relatively easy to handle/rescue.




> I've read where a group starting to panic have been brought under control by a strong-willed, trained, leader.


Generally speaking, the practical, real-world research backs you up on this.  The problem comes when this strong-willed leader is quite charismatic, but untrained (etc.).

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> Statistically speaking of course.


Of course...  :Laugh:

----------


## kyratshooter

> Not to be TOO picky, *kyratshooter*, but what you described is the _median_, not the average (aka mean). There are three measures of "central tendency" -- the Mean or average, the Median, and the Mode.  They are similar, but they are by no means the same thing.
> 
> *Nighteyes*


Yep, that is pretty picky!  Read on past the word AVERAGE.

You know the point I am trying to make.  

Everyone here now thinks they are a top 10 percenter and a 12 percenter has no hope.

The truth is that even though I have all the required skill set, I have a crap load of gear and have been through enough to know my reactions in various circumstances, I will be dead in less than a year if a long term survival situation erupts due to medical requirements.

One of the 20 percenters that is just barely squeeking by is going to come across a dead guy with enough gear to restart civilization.

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> Yep, that is pretty picky!  Read on past the word AVERAGE.


Actually, I read the entire post.




> You know the point I am trying to make.


Sort of, I guess...




> I will be dead in less than a year if a long term survival situation erupts due to medical requirements.


Now, THAT I really understand.  With my background, I might possibly be able to surmise why this is so.  In any case I am very sad to learn it.

Regards and best wishes,

-- *Nighteyes*

----------


## Thaddius Bickerton

There is something else you have to hold in mind when applying things like bell curves.

They show the distribution of a population, but at any given moment not the location of that populstion.

for example, go to a commi socialist meeting and you might find that the 10% that scream and loose control will be more like 99% of those there.

Go to a bushcrafter camp and maybe some of the other get togethers that people who tend to frequent places like this on the web and you might find the 10% you like are more like 99% represented.

Go to average places, and probably more closer to the center of the curve with just a few on each end represented.

Location impacts generalizations.

Was it Samuel L. Clemons who said: there are 3 kinds of lies, Lies; Dam Lies; and Statistics.

Useful tool, but not perfect prediction for sub sets of the population unless randomly assembled, and even then chance plays a factor.

Still If one wants some generalized thinking I agree.

Thad.

----------


## hunter63

Appling the 10-80-10 rule to any situation, will mean that the cream floats to the top, the dregs sink to the bottom and everything else falls in between.

Actually I don't see any reason or defined use for this rule other than just knowing its there, and possibly having an insight as to how things are.....

Besides I came to the mountains to get away from people like that....I was told there would be no "malf".....

----------


## natertot

> If you were in the bottom 10 statistic you were weeded out during training and sent to the surface fleet.


Nah....They sent me to an anti-subsurface warfare platform! Hoo Yaah U.S.S. Elrod!

----------


## natertot

I think thos numbers are correct for someone who has not had training and are solely in their "natural state". I think that training and experience can over ride that theory. I think naturally I fall into the 80, but training and other expierences have brought me up to the first 10. It is good thoughts though!

----------


## crashdive123

> Nah....They sent me to an anti-subsurface warfare platform! Hoo Yaah U.S.S. Elrod!


My point exactly.  Didn't find me did ya? :Whistling:

----------


## Sarge47

> Generally speaking, the practical, real-world research backs you up on this.  The problem comes when this strong-willed leader is quite charismatic, but untrained (etc.).


Sorry Daniel, my bad!  You're right, of course.  The training, discipline, and experience all work together.  On the PLUS side, think of that military "top-kick," the Sargent that keeps his men cool and focused under fire.  On the minus side think of people like Jim Jones...or somebody like that!     :Crying:

----------


## natertot

Here is a pic of the last sub we destroyed!

destroyed sub.jpg

----------


## mountainmark

> Statistically speaking of course.


"There are three types of lies; Lies, D@mn lies, and Statistics." Mark Twain

Sorry, just made me think of that. 85% of statistics are made up on the spot I hear. Or was it 95? Yes, definitely 95  :Innocent: 

Edit: Sorry, didn't know there was a page two... Someone already used my quote...... Oh well  :Smile:

----------


## crashdive123

> "There are three types of lies; Lies, D@mn lies, and Statistics." Mark Twain
> 
> Sorry, just made me think of that. *85% of statistics are made up on the spot I hear. Or was it 95? Yes, definitely 95* 
> 
> Edit: Sorry, didn't know there was a page two... Someone already used my quote...... Oh well


95% of statistics are made up 65% of the time.

----------


## Celticwarrior

I take issue with the idea of a 10-80-10 situation. First, it assumes people are all-in on every situation, and still fall into those rigid categories. I think we have all seen the grandma-lifts-bus-off-child stories, where some ordinary, average citizen, faced with some calamity or another, digs deep and acts in a superhuman way to overcome adversity, whether it be physical or emotional or some spiritual way like leading others out of a dangerous area or taking charge and inspiring others. Because it is out of character, those people would not be lumped into the top 10 percent, but overcame their modest 80 percent expectations. It also doesn't take into account that depending on the circumstances and how out of the norm it might be for a particular person, even being a top 10 percenter doesn't stop you from being shocked into inaction by a specific event, or being put into a situation where your natural fear might overwhelm your training or where personal survival might override your desire to do your duty or what is 'right' in an emergency. It even assumes that at the bottom of the gene pool are these creatures who will always act in a contrary way to the group's survival, who will always defy any authority, and will always be a liability. That isn't possible. Even someone who is a complete idiot, given the right motivation and leadership, will be able to be kept out of the way if not be somehow made useful in an emergency situation. 10-80-10 sounds very finite, like there is no flexibility or hope if you are stuck in a situation where you need all hands on deck and all you are stuck with are 80 percenters, or worse.  Survival and emergencies bring out a lot in most people. Things might not be so bleak as those numbers might make it seem. In a real bell-curve, you don't have right angle cliffs, taking you from top ten to eighty and back down to bottom ten percent. You have 11 percent, you have 69 percent, you have 88 percent. You have people who are far better at dealing with things than others, and you have people who will freeze completely. Some folks will take a while to get up to speed, but afterward, they will be one of the best survivors of the group. There are others who seem to be all there and with it at the beginning, making decisions and giving 110% to the group, only to crack later on and become worthless, or worse, a danger to themselves and others. There are many shades of gray within those numbers.

----------


## Rick

All I know is my preps include a large barrel of good luck. It doesn't matter where you lie on the numbers line if the meteor falls on your house while you are home.

----------


## mountainmark

> I take issue with the idea of a 10-80-10 situation. First, it assumes people are all-in on every situation, and still fall into those rigid categories. I think we have all seen the grandma-lifts-bus-off-child stories, where some ordinary, average citizen, faced with some calamity or another, digs deep and acts in a superhuman way to overcome adversity, whether it be physical or emotional or some spiritual way like leading others out of a dangerous area or taking charge and inspiring others. Because it is out of character, those people would not be lumped into the top 10 percent, but overcame their modest 80 percent expectations. It also doesn't take into account that depending on the circumstances and how out of the norm it might be for a particular person, even being a top 10 percenter doesn't stop you from being shocked into inaction by a specific event, or being put into a situation where your natural fear might overwhelm your training or where personal survival might override your desire to do your duty or what is 'right' in an emergency. It even assumes that at the bottom of the gene pool are these creatures who will always act in a contrary way to the group's survival, who will always defy any authority, and will always be a liability. That isn't possible. Even someone who is a complete idiot, given the right motivation and leadership, will be able to be kept out of the way if not be somehow made useful in an emergency situation. 10-80-10 sounds very finite, like there is no flexibility or hope if you are stuck in a situation where you need all hands on deck and all you are stuck with are 80 percenters, or worse.  Survival and emergencies bring out a lot in most people. Things might not be so bleak as those numbers might make it seem. In a real bell-curve, you don't have right angle cliffs, taking you from top ten to eighty and back down to bottom ten percent. You have 11 percent, you have 69 percent, you have 88 percent. You have people who are far better at dealing with things than others, and you have people who will freeze completely. Some folks will take a while to get up to speed, but afterward, they will be one of the best survivors of the group. There are others who seem to be all there and with it at the beginning, making decisions and giving 110% to the group, only to crack later on and become worthless, or worse, a danger to themselves and others. There are many shades of gray within those numbers.


Definitely some good points there CW.

----------


## natertot

> All I know is my preps include a large barrel of good luck. It doesn't matter where you lie on the numbers line if the meteor falls on your house while you are home.


Ain't that the truth! :Thumbs Up:

----------


## tsitenha

I'd like to think that I was in the top 10%, the more I learn about myself I realize that I fall in the 80% catagory, then my wife and son tell me the truth that I would have a hard time just to get into the bottom 10%, but my dog loves me or is it the milk bones I give him.
Humanity is quick to adapt, sure at first there will be a lot of people left behind but the others will learn quick enough.
Then there's the X factor in all levels, s***e happens.

Kinda leaning with Kyratshooter, I think.

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

I think 10-80-10 is intended as a general conceptual model rather than a rigid classification system.  Generally speaking, it matches fairly closely to other conceptual models that attempt to describe similar things.

One such example is the well-known Pareto Principle (aka the 80-20 Rule) which, among other things, states that 80 percent of the problems are caused by 20 percent of the people, and that 80 percent of the possible improvements can be gained from fixing 20 percent of the problems.  I have also seen this labeled as the 85-15 Rule (Joseph Juran).

In other words, and IMO, it is the _concept_ or _idea_ that is being communicated rather than specifics.

As always, YMMV.

-- *Nighteyes*

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> On the minus side think of people like Jim Jones...or somebody like that!


That was *exactly* the person I was thinking of!  Too, in every disaster flick, there is the well-intentioned & charismatic/authoritative person who gathers his/her flock and leads them straight to their completely avoidable deaths.

----------


## hunter63

DN, I'm thinking the numbers are more like 95/5.....but then again, I was told there would be no "malf"
Carry on, at least I know where I stand....LOL.

----------


## BENESSE

Jim Jones, IMO, belongs to a whole 'nother category of people who are just plain nuts. You can no more talk about him in general terms than you could about, say, Hitler or Idi Amin Dada or any other certifiable "leader." And then there's the flock. Another sub set of people who are damaged enough to want to follow the nut. I am much more concerned about these types of people than the bottom 10% of the 10-60-10 equation.

----------


## Spartan300

> Jim Jones, IMO, belongs to a whole 'nother category of people who are just plain nuts. You can no more talk about him in general terms than you could about, say, Hitler or Idi Amin Dada or any other certifiable "leader." And then there's the flock. Another sub set of people who are damaged enough to want to follow the nut. I am much more concerned about these types of people than the bottom 10% of the 10-60-10 equation.


Good point. The likes of Jones, Hitler, and some dude named Osama that is now fish food, are in a group totally outside of ANY equation in my opinion. Not sure what bell curve would describe these kinds of personalities. I assume there is a tyrant scale someplace for those kinds.

----------


## Stairman

You sure better be in the 1st 10 % if your a cavediver. So much of the training is learning how not to panic and its said that people who are easily mad get scared or panic faster since the 2 emotions are closely related. Open water divers can ascend but cavers must swim out then up and sometimes its 2000 ft back or more so you better be able to solve all problems calmly because with adrenlin your respiration goes up and you can overbreathe your reg and feel like your suffocating. Injecting humor is helpful but not always easy but panic will kill you . Im still not as crazy as bike riders with there back to traffic though.

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> DN, I'm thinking the numbers are more like 95/5.....but then again, I was told there would be no "malf"
> Carry on, at least I know where I stand....LOL.



Me too: nearly up to my -- ah -- billfold in alligators most of the time.  :Crying:   :FRlol:   :FRlol:

----------


## techiedude

> Interesting.  I've always maintained that the survival kit you always have on you is your brain.  Going along with what Crash wrote I do know that there is a problem, sometimes, when rescuing a drowning person when they panic.  There is the danger that they will take you under with them, and, unless they've changed it, you were told to find away to restrain them.  Submariners and scuba divers are taught to have rigid discipline in an underwater survival situation.  I don't know for sure about the 10-80-10 rule, but I do know that proper training and discipline should work for helping those in the 80% stay focused and be helpful.  I've read where a group starting to panic have been brought under control by a strong-willed, trained, leader.  
> 
> Those in the last 10% can serve as "long pig."


As a former Navy Diver and a Submariner I agree. From having been thru both of the trainning sessions where the weaker are sent home there are just some people that fall apart under bad situations and some that become Hero's. Some will survive and some just wont.

----------


## Renatus

deleted.....

----------


## Rick

I think group think was the thought most were thinking as a group.

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> The theory may have some validity as it applies to percentage ranking for a "group", but can not be applied to ranking how an "individual" would perform under all survival situations which may include both wilderness and big city environments.


Agreed, on all levels.  Statistics, conceptual models and etc. cannot be applied to any individual or small group, any more than they can predict one roll of the dice, or which card will be drawn first from a shuffled deck.

They can be used, in combination with other things, to _suggest_ how an individual *may* perform in a given situation.  As always, the best predictor of individual actions in the future is their previous behavior in the same or similar circumstances.

----------


## kyratshooter

> I think 10-80-10 is intended as a general conceptual model rather than a rigid classification system.  Generally speaking, it matches fairly closely to other conceptual models that attempt to describe similar things.
> 
> -- *Nighteyes*


Yea, every time I see the thread heading I think it is a discussion of nitrate based fertilizer.

Perhaps it is mostly the fertilizer more commonly derived from the male of the bovine species?

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> Yea, every time I see the thread heading I think it is a discussion of nitrate based fertilizer.
> 
> Perhaps it is mostly the fertilizer more commonly derived from the male of the bovine species?



H-m-m-m-m-m-m, could be!  :Thumbup1:

----------


## Celticwarrior

> Yea, every time I see the thread heading I think it is a discussion of nitrate based fertilizer.
> 
> Perhaps it is mostly the fertilizer more commonly derived from the male of the bovine species?


10-80-10 would have a helluva lot of phosphorus. Yikes. And the 10% nitrogen and 10% potassium would be virtually useless as fertilizer unless you were putting the stuff on every 2 weeks.

----------


## kyratshooter

Once again:

picky..picky..picky

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> Once again:
> 
> picky..picky..picky


Something I'm really beginning to appreciate -- should you lock any four of us denizens into a room, there are going to be at least five (maybe six) opinions in there with us!

----------


## backtobasics

> Well if you get rid of the bottom 10% of the people that just cant handle stress or extreme challenges, I think that a large majority of the middle 80% is in that group because of unfamiliarity, no experience, and no training. If you take those people and get them out into the woods and train them in at least the basics, and train them in responding calmly to an emergency, they would then begin to rise into the top 10%.
> In my opinion the top 10% are people that are natural born survivors and decision makers that have the inate ability to remain calm, such as most of the people here. I really doubt if the average person in the lower 2 categories ever have a thought about survival and managing crisis. They go through life thinking that nothing will ever happen to them, and have no interest in survival skills. It is not because they cant survive, it is because they are no even remotely mentally prepared for even the smallest crisis.


I agree with this. My wife had always lived in the city before getting with me and was totaly dependent on everything. Now that she has been in the woods and the dessert she knowns the signs of water from a distants. It's something she just never had to think about before.

----------


## Rick

I think there is a huge difference between learning new tricks and performing under pressure. All go through the same military training yet some will perform beyond all expectation while someone else might soil themselves. It has nothing to do with training. It's about how your brain and body react to fear and that's mostly genetics.

----------


## backtobasics

> I think there is a huge difference between learning new tricks and performing under pressure. All go through the same military training yet some will perform beyond all expectation while someone else might soil themselves. It has nothing to do with training. It's about how your brain and body react to fear and that's mostly genetics.


Yea thats probably true.

----------


## Rick

Of course at my age soiling yourself is also about forgetfulness. So I guess it Depends......(I slay myself).

----------


## backtobasics

Well don't forget your Depends on your next trip out.

----------


## kyratshooter

> I think there is a huge difference between learning new tricks and performing under pressure. All go through the same military training yet some will perform beyond all expectation while someone else might soil themselves. It has nothing to do with training. It's about how your brain and body react to fear and that's mostly genetics.


While there is a germ of truth to that statement the U.S military would not agree.   It is the very reason the military TRAINS constantly.  Training makes the strong, stronger and it also makes the weak stronger.  Almost every person comming out of a combat situation will tell you that training and luck were their salvation.  

I have heard the question dozens of times: "How did you overcome your instinctive fear?"

In almost every case the answer is: "Training, I was operating on reflex."  

Even people here use "muscle memory" as part of their firearms training.  One trains until the reaction is reflex rather than rationalized.

It is why one wears their gear in the same place if possible.  It is why I carry my wallet in the same place I have since I was 16 and my money in one pocket, my keys in the same spot and my other gear properly distributed.  My lockblade folder is clipped inside my right pocket and my Case pocket knife is in my left pocket.  My CCW is in the same spot it has lived in since I got the permit.

How many people are genetically programed to render first aid, or do CPR?  

Until we began studying, practicing, acquired training and knowledge WE were part of that 90% of useless surplus DNA.  We were part of the horde that is being compartmentilized as "expendable sheeple" or religated to the status of "long pig" for for our "betters".  It is a convinient way to sooth our guilty conscience while we engage in the very thought process that the looters and raider of an appocilipse use to rationalize their behaviors.

They were weak and had no "instinctive ability", they were on the wrong side of the curve, they deserve to die.  Is that our new consensus? 

The bell curve we are adressing should be looked at as a learning curve.  Humans have survived for ? million years due to their ability to learn rapidly.  We are not as strong as the other top level predators, or as fast, and our senses are not honed to their standards.  It is our ability to think, transfer the information to another and learn rapidly that sets us apart.  We accumilate knowledge and compound it, passing more than we inherited to others.  Otherwise our kind would have briefly served and fertilizer on the plains of Africa and disappeared. 

One edge of our curve is not guarenteed survival and the other edge death.  

For many years I have prepared for the enevitable.  At first it was for my own survival and that of my family.  For some time now I have continued preparing with the emphisis on my ability to teach others in my extended family what I have learned as quickly as possible AFTER the disaster occurrs.  I will have a short window of opprotunity.  I am detirmined for them to not look back and say "Dad knew how to do that, I wish he had clued me in!"

Part of my "hope" for the other end of the bell curve is the very place where I live.  The people in my area are not conditioned to whimp out or curl up in the fetal position and wait for death.  In stress situation they tend to band together and slug away at the problem, not each other.  The weak are encouraged by the strong and the strong take their leadership positions as a trust, not a right.  ust because a guys house blew away and he will be in shock for a few hours is not reason to fire up the bar-b-que and eat him!

----------


## crashdive123

Welllllll ---- to an extent.  The military also screens, so the crop they are training are more likely able to perform to the standards of the training.

----------


## Wildthang

For most of the 80% group, I beleive that most can be familiarized with certain dangers, and drilled to become more calm when dealing with a sudden survival situation. I have taught a lot of people to ride motorcycles, and there are normally a lot of chances to panic when riding. I have noticed that the beginners panic easily, and after they become a seasoned rider, they start reacting instead of going into panic mode. 
I think exposure and training will go a long way to prevent panic, and have seen it first hand. The more familiar a normal person becomes of a certain danger, the better they handle it and react to it.
The key to avoid panic is to not hesitate, because doing anything is better than doing nothing and freezing up, and most people have the ability to learn to react.
For the people that have an abnormally high panic reaction, they will probably always be that way, but the majority of the 80% can be saved if they choose to train and familiarize themselves with various dangers and threats.

----------


## Wildthang

I think that people in a group, will naturally fall into whatever group they belong in. For instance, 10 people get lost in the wilderness a long way from civilization with no way at all to return. In this situation the alpha type leader that stays calm, and knows how to make decisions will normally take over and calm and try to organize the group.
Then he will peck a second in command for when he cant be with the group. Invariably the leader will pick a second in command who has close to his same abilities to remain calm and make sound decisions. Those 2 will then evaluate the group, and determine who is good at what, and begin assigning duties that fit each individuls talents and capabilities.
So there you already have the top 20%, which does not fit the 10-80-10 theory.
Out of 10 people there will be 1 or 2 that just complains and worries, and takes it to the point that they are near worthless to the group as a whole, normally this is 2 people, and again that is the lower 20% that doesn't fit the theory.
Then there is the middle 6 people, 60%, that work together as a team, and with the 2 leaders, support the whole group. Yes this can vary but in most cases, this is how it normally works out.
So I think the 10-80-10 theory is just an assumption that somebody cooked up because it sounds good! I think in reality 20-60-20 is a more reasonable percentage based on my experiences.
And as the 2 leaders have teamed up with the other 6 people that are willing to work and survive, they all begin to think alike, and become the top 80% which then would be divided top 80% and lower 20%. And that is how it will stay for that group.
Groups evolve in any situation and the percentages change!

----------


## Rick

When you get to make up the numbers and personalities you can establish any curve you want or none at all. I just assigned 7 panic stricken people to assist you in the scenario above. There are just 8 of you. They are running around weeping, gnashing teeth and proclaiming the sky is falling. No, you can't shoot them. Now what about those numbers? Hang on, I have to get popcorn. I don't want to miss this.

----------


## Wildthang

> When you get to make up the numbers and personalities you can establish any curve you want or none at all. I just assigned 7 panic stricken people to assist you in the scenario above. There are just 8 of you. They are running around weeping, gnashing teeth and proclaiming the sky is falling. No, you can't shoot them. Now what about those numbers? Hang on, I have to get popcorn. I don't want to miss this.


I would leave until 60% of them calmed down and realized that the panic is getting them nowhere, and they need leadership to survive. Then I would begin organizing them, and giving them the plan. The rest would die on their own :Smartass:

----------


## Rick

Let me know when 4.2 of them calm down. (snicker, snort)

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> Jim Jones, IMO, belongs to a whole 'nother category of people who are just plain nuts.


I agree with you, as long as we're talking about the "after" Jim Jones.  The "before" Jim Jones was intelligent, cogent, caring and oh-so-persuasive -- simply put, he was a good man and a good shepherd.  The difference between the "before" Jim Jones and the "after" Jim Jones was his ingestion of drugs -- primarily stimulants -- to keep him going so he could meet the needs of his flock.  The drugs bent him into a severely aberrant, destructive, and completely unnecessary path -- and, of course, his flock followed him.

You see, Jim Jones is one whom I have studied extensively, along with David Koresh.  Though I am most definitely *not* drawing a direct comparison, both have some similarity to Adolf Hitler, Idi Amin Dada, and others.

[Yes, I am a long-term, permanent student of human behavior...]

-- *Nighteyes*

----------


## doug1980

I think I fall into the 80 category and I'm fine with that.  Still pretty good odds I think.

----------


## whitis

> All I know is my preps include a large barrel of good luck. It doesn't matter where you lie on the numbers line if the meteor falls on your house while you are home.


Free iron ore :-)

There have been three documented cases of people being hit by meteorites and they  resulted in minor injuries.   A boy in uganda was hit in 1992 but not injured by a tiny one that bounced off a tree,in 2009 a german boy, Gerrit Blank was left with a 3 inch scar on his arm and thrown back  from a pea sized one that glanced off his arm then left a 1 foot crater in the ground, and an Alabama woman was bruised by an 8 pound meteroite that crashed through her roof, bounced off a radio and hit her while she slept.   There have been some very near misses.
Meteor/asteroid risk is dominated by the rare extinction level events.  While it is possible, the odds are in your favor on that one. 

The "80%" may largely be unprepared mentally for unusual events.    They haven't really thought about it, let alone trained, and have no idea how to respond unless someone gives them instructions.   Then some of them will be able to function.

One poster on another forum described how in his neighborhood, there were three separate accidents on a risky piece of road where a large crowd assembled but none called 911, let alone gave first aid, until the poster arrived. - worse, they were some of the same people.   At least around here, people do have enough sense to call 911 when necessary before I show up.

In cases where someone is prone to panic attacks, having a known, trusted, and capable person around can make a difference in the severity of these incidents.

No matter how much you prepare, you can be overwhelmed by insurmountable bad luck and often you can survive without being prepared (good luck) but in between being prepared improves your odds.

----------


## BENESSE

> No matter how much you prepare, you can be overwhelmed by insurmountable bad luck and often you can survive without being prepared (good luck) but in between being prepared improves your odds.


And there you have it, folks. It ultimately comes down to that, no matter how you look at it.

----------


## Rick

It would be just my luck to be the first person crushed like a grape from a giant asteroid. I did get picked on once by a giant hemorrhoid but that's for a different post. 

I've always said luck trumps preparedness every time.

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> It would be just my luck to be the first person crushed like a grape from a giant asteroid. I did get picked on once by a giant hemorrhoid but that's for a different post. 
> 
> I've always said luck trumps preparedness every time.


And I've always said that I'd MUCH rather be lucky than good.  [Are you SURE we aren't related?  Heh-heh-heh!]

----------


## Rick

Two brothers from different mothers.

----------


## Daniel Nighteyes

> Two brothers from different mothers.


Amen to that...

----------


## johnathanwinter

Nevermind.  :Smile:

----------


## Rick

I think you overlooked the fact that NASA eliminated those that might have panicked through ceaseless testing both physical and psychological. In fact, the three astronauts were the top 10% whether they were trained or not. And to say it was 100% controlled is far off the mark. No one even knew what the problem was until they jettisoned the service module just prior to reentry. They could only assess the systems and try to deal with them as best they could. Fortunately, it came together and they made it home.

Whether you are correct or not on the core issue is for you to decide but your example was not a good one.

----------


## johnathanwinter

Nevermind  :Smile:

----------


## Rick

Not to speak for Spartan but he further clarified that statement in the next to last paragraph.

----------


## johnathanwinter

Nevermind  :Smile:

----------


## old2531

rick as to your no. 10 entry my dad told me this when i was a young man "never trust a smaller man in a fight he knows hes gonna get stomped so hell cheat to win " he also said this "theres no shuch thing as a fair fight ".---- both alvin york and audie murphy explained medal of honor deeds as they (the enemy) were  killing my friends .

----------


## old2531

> Yep, that is pretty picky!  Read on past the word AVERAGE.
> 
> You know the point I am trying to make.  
> 
> Everyone here now thinks they are a top 10 percenter and a 12 percenter has no hope.
> 
> The truth is that even though I have all the required skill set, I have a crap load of gear and have been through enough to know my reactions in various circumstances, I will be dead in less than a year if a long term survival situation erupts due to medical requirements.
> 
> One of the 20 percenters that is just barely squeeking by is going to come across a dead guy with enough gear to restart civilization.


when shtf kidnapp an herboligist might help some or be a leader for us 80%ers and send us to pharmacys to grab your meds for u --most meds have a 2 yr shelf life so if u can get to them for 2 yrs u should be ok

----------


## hunter63

Don't forget, ......Dumazzluck.....as there are people in the world that would be able to walk thru a SHTF, trip over a fully equipped survivalist that expired by carrying 70 pounds of gear....and declare.....Hey, lookie what I just found, even a AR and 300 rds of ammo......That was cool....any one got a Snickers bar, and a beer?"

Some times all the cyphering in the world doesn't mean squat.....Just sayin'.....

----------


## WolfVanZandt

As for the medical conditions, I'm more and more impressed with alternative medicine and, especially, natural medicine. I'm beginning to think there's hope for us "medical cases".

----------


## BENESSE

> As for the medical conditions, I'm more and more impressed with alternative medicine and, especially, natural medicine. I'm beginning to think there's hope for us *"medical cases".*


You mean "mental". 
No brains no headaches.

----------


## DSJohnson

I just love this forum....I really do

----------

