Book review please: The Last Hundred Yards by John Poole

[Rifleman]

1) Who's read it?

2) What did you think of it?

3) Is it a worthwhile read for police officers with things like active shooters, baricaded suspects, high risk warrant service, etc., in mind (Common sense and gut hunch says that it would be just for principals, but I want to know what people who've read it say).

The Amazon reviews were favorable but I wanted to get the opinion of boardmembers here.

[William F. Owen]

1) Who's read it?

I have.

2) What did you think of it?

It's by far Poole's best work - and is still actually pretty good. A lot of the language is a bit dated, there is a lot of "Poole" baggage, but it's in the top five of works of this type

3) Is it a worthwhile read for police officers with things like active shooters, baricaded suspects, high risk warrant service, etc., in mind (Common sense and gut hunch says that it would be just for principals, but I want to know what people who've read it say).

Not sure. I'd see it as being mostly military, but you will not suffer from having read it. I'd buy it.

[Infanteer]

I've read it - I'll echo the "baggage" part - especially with the goofy Corel Clipart. However, it is my favorite book of his as it focuses on individual soldier skills and Squad Command in a technical way as opposed to his usual abstract philisophical means.

You will probably find some use of it, although alot focussed on stalking through the wilderness.

It'd be a worthwhile addition to your library.

[jcustis]

I've read it, as well tried to stomach other of Poole's works.

I don't think there is any relevance for police officers with the situations that you described. I think that some of the money spent towards copies of those would be put to better use to NTOA subscriptions.

If you haven't heard me say it before, I think Poole is a fruitcake, from having heard him speak.

[Ken White]

Like Jon, Poole gets to wrapped up in Pooleisms for me. Wilf is correct in that it has some merit if you can wade through that. I don't recall a lot of relativity for LE (but you should recall my recall ain't what it was... ). My son, the military history nut who has more books than my local Library, bought it (and several of Poole's later books) and let me read it (and them -- agree with Wilf, don't bother with the others). Doubt I'd have bought it myself, mostly because I was about to retire for the second time when it was published back in the mid-90s...

[William F. Owen]

If you haven't heard me say it before, I think Poole is a fruitcake, from having heard him speak.

I think I can safely say that Poole and I see the world in very different ways, but I be very interested to hear what he says.
Some folks almost worship him, and some of his observations are extremely worthwhile, but you may have to dig deep!

[Fuchs]

He got some good ideas (actually re-discovering stuff that's 101 elsewhere), adds a lot of useless stuff, draws several wrong conclusions, wraps it up into a kind of ideology and publishes it as book.
Several times.


The reader who's already able to discern the diamonds from the crap does probably not need to read Poole any more anyway.



I dislike his "Eastern" and "ninjutsu" fixations the most. He's really off when he attempts to convince the reader about reasons and history.

[William F. Owen]

Concur with a lot of what Fuchs says. - nobody does blunt, like the Germans!

Having said that, this thread caused me to go and pull some of his books from the shelf, and I do remember consulting both "Tigers Way" and "Phantom Soldier" about field fortifications, on Iwo Jima.