STANCE

[gwtrikenut]

I know or have heard the stance one should take when shooting is feet apart, side by side, and lean a bit forward. But to me, I feel a little better and more balanced with one foot slightly behind the other. In my instance, being right handed, my right foot behind the left. To me I feel better and in control more. Standing a bit off square and a smaller target. Or more narrow if you will.

[gigag04]

I know or have heard the stance one should take when shooting is feet apart, side by side, and lean a bit forward. But to me, I feel a little better and more balanced with one foot slightly behind the other. In my instance, being right handed, my right foot behind the left. To me I feel better and in control more. Standing a bit off square and a smaller target. Or more narrow if you will.

All the training I have been through advocates what you describe, commonly referred to as a fighter's stance. Narrow isn't always better though if you're wearing a vest or plate carrier. A bullet getting sucked into the armpit is very deadly since it's a straight path to the heart/important stuff.

[paulhailes]

I know or have heard the stance one should take when shooting is feet apart, side by side, and lean a bit forward. But to me, I feel a little better and more balanced with one foot slightly behind the other. In my instance, being right handed, my right foot behind the left. To me I feel better and in control more. Standing a bit off square and a smaller target. Or more narrow if you will.

That is a viable shooting stance, the most important thing is how do you shoot from it? are you accurate? are you well balanced? can you move easily while in it? I take a fighting stance because it just feels natural.

[gwtrikenut]

I know or have heard the stance one should take when shooting is feet apart, side by side, and lean a bit forward. But to me, I feel a little better and more balanced with one foot slightly behind the other. In my instance, being right handed, my right foot behind the left. To me I feel better and in control more. Standing a bit off square and a smaller target. Or more narrow if you will.

All the training I have been through advocates what you describe, commonly referred to as a fighter's stance. Narrow isn't always better though if you're wearing a vest or plate carrier. A bullet getting sucked into the armpit is very deadly since it's a straight path to the heart/important stuff.

I agree about the bullet getting sucked into the arm pit area. But if one were unlucky enough to actually get into a shoot out with the bg, do these guys really do much practice? I doubt it. So with the practice I do, I figure I am puting myself into a much better situation and have the upper hand, so to speak. I am not going to get into a shoot out with an arms instructor or a police officer. And the way the "gangsta" holds his gun, he is most likely going to shoot to my left or right side by a mile and even more the more quick shots he takes.
So the best "stance" is to keep from getting into that situation in the first place.

[CEOofEVIL]

I shoot very simliar to how you've described. Feet shoulder width apart, left foot leading the right by a bit, knees slightly bent, arms punched out straight and leaning forward - I just tailor so It's comfortable for me. I figure if it's hurting you (over extending an arm or something), something isn't right!

At any rate, it's always worked great for me, and I'm comfortable with it. No need to worry about your stance being incorrect according to others - just explain that it works for you if questioned.

[C-dub]

I've practiced both ways and shoot equally bad either way.

I am more comfortable in the Weaver stance and it would be more useful from cover.

[Texas Dan Mosby]

I've practiced both ways and shoot equally bad either way.

The stance is the foundation of shooting, and SOOOO many shooters try to build a house on a poor foundation, which never works out very well...

Check out this muldoon..



First shot, maybe on target, follow up shots = crap/slow due to poor stance that does NOT facilitate recoil management.

How about these folks...



What you SHOULD be seeing in the photo are the instructor types lovingly placing a boot in the keister of all those shooters standing straight up like a post, or standing with their feet too close together...

While there are pro's and cons to each of the contemporary stances taught today, they ALL share some common characteristics...

1. The feet should be spread far enough apart to provide balance and stability.
2. The knees should be flexed for balance, comfort, and to facilitate recoil management.
3. Weight should be forward to facilitate recoil management.
4. The stance should be comfortable and provide an all around stable shooting platform.

Whether you use isoscelese, modified iso, or weaver, if your stance doesn't have these characteristics, you're doing something wrong.

Check out "the great one"...



Arguably THE greatest competitive action shooter in.....well...EVER.

While most competition shooters use some form of the iso stance, you will see that they all incorporate the same characteristics listed above.

I treat the stance similar to how I would treat a tackle in football. If I try to make a tackle from a position of poor balance, stability, and with my weight back instead of forward, then I am going to get knocked right on my keister. Recoil is similar, and while it won't necessarily knock you on your tail, it is far easier to manage with a good aggressive stance, and it is easier to transition from shooting to "hands on" should things go...not so well.

Here's a couple of nice aggressive stances....casual, but still aggressive...





Note how they share similar characteristics as the stance used by this muldoon...



Best of luck

[gwtrikenut]

I did notice the stance on most of these, and they do have one foot ahead of the other. And it does not matter as long as you are comfortable and are shooting very well. And all these stances are well and good, but, should one not practice as if someone was shooting back at you? Make yourself as small of a target as possible? And by standing somewhat sideways, you are dividing the bg's target in half. Yes it is possible to receive a shot to the side and directly to the heart. But by standing straight on, knees bent slightly, you are also giving the bg a larger target. And is it not just as easy to hit the head as the heart? After all, the head is only about three times bigger.
If, and lets hope none of us ever find out, it is yor turn in the cage, the stance is going to have nothing to do with it. Practice as if someone is shooting back at you. The bg is not going to give you time to get into your stance.

[RPB]

One of my arms is several inches shorter than the other and only 1 hand so:

At the (outdoor) range
I practice Weaver (been doing that since the 1980s, Isosceles never worked with 1 shorter arm for me.)
Kneeling
Laying down

Left foot forward a little, left arm bent, right holding the pistol is how I'm most accurate.
left arm straightened and I'm less accurate.


Against a bear, I might make myself look big, if lead is gonna be flying my way, I'm getting small if I'm trapped and getting to/kneeling behind cover..... and smaller and smaller and smaller as I run away if possible. Even if I'm on the ground, I'll be moving.

I know or have heard the stance one should take when shooting is feet apart, side by side, and lean a bit forward. But to me, I feel a little better and more balanced with one foot slightly behind the other. In my instance, being right handed, my right foot behind the left. To me I feel better and in control more. Standing a bit off square and a smaller target. Or more narrow if you will.

All the training I have been through advocates what you describe, commonly referred to as a fighter's stance. Narrow isn't always better though if you're wearing a vest or plate carrier. A bullet getting sucked into the armpit is very deadly since it's a straight path to the heart/important stuff.

True, My late buddy Les Early took one in the Arm hole of the vest. He was first in the door on a multi-dept raid. http://www.google.com/search?q=les+earl ... 24&bih=610" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I just now figured out why I still have a 1989 Glock I can't seem to part with/sell/get a newer Generation etc, Les upgraded it for me. He was a Glock Armorer and trained the new guys at the Academy. That's why >Pasadena approved naming the police department's firearms range as the Les Early Firearms Training Center. ... And the police dept is located on Jeff Ginn Memorial Ave (another friend I used to have; shot by a mentally ill person while trying to reload his revolver)

[gigag04]

I know or have heard the stance one should take when shooting is feet apart, side by side, and lean a bit forward. But to me, I feel a little better and more balanced with one foot slightly behind the other. In my instance, being right handed, my right foot behind the left. To me I feel better and in control more. Standing a bit off square and a smaller target. Or more narrow if you will.

All the training I have been through advocates what you describe, commonly referred to as a fighter's stance. Narrow isn't always better though if you're wearing a vest or plate carrier. A bullet getting sucked into the armpit is very deadly since it's a straight path to the heart/important stuff.

I agree about the bullet getting sucked into the arm pit area. But if one were unlucky enough to actually get into a shoot out with the bg, do these guys really do much practice? I doubt it. So with the practice I do, I figure I am puting myself into a much better situation and have the upper hand, so to speak. I am not going to get into a shoot out with an arms instructor or a police officer. And the way the "gangsta" holds his gun, he is most likely going to shoot to my left or right side by a mile and even more the more quick shots he takes.
So the best "stance" is to keep from getting into that situation in the first place.

What about the former tier 1 operator that is having a PTSD episode, or the well equipped bank robbers hitting the LA bank? You will most likely not have the upper hand in a gun fight because you will be on the reaction side of the event, and action is always faster than reaction. Whether an adversary is trained or not, a stray round can hit wherever it pleases.

[gigag04]

I've practiced both ways and shoot equally bad either way.

The stance is the foundation of shooting, and SOOOO many shooters try to build a house on a poor foundation, which never works out very well...

Check out this muldoon..



First shot, maybe on target, follow up shots = crap/slow due to poor stance that does NOT facilitate recoil management.

How about these folks...



What you SHOULD be seeing in the photo are the instructor types lovingly placing a boot in the keister of all those shooters standing straight up like a post, or standing with their feet too close together...

While there are pro's and cons to each of the contemporary stances taught today, they ALL share some common characteristics...

1. The feet should be spread far enough apart to provide balance and stability.
2. The knees should be flexed for balance, comfort, and to facilitate recoil management.
3. Weight should be forward to facilitate recoil management.
4. The stance should be comfortable and provide an all around stable shooting platform.

Whether you use isoscelese, modified iso, or weaver, if your stance doesn't have these characteristics, you're doing something wrong.

Check out "the great one"...



Arguably THE greatest competitive action shooter in.....well...EVER.

While most competition shooters use some form of the iso stance, you will see that they all incorporate the same characteristics listed above.

I treat the stance similar to how I would treat a tackle in football. If I try to make a tackle from a position of poor balance, stability, and with my weight back instead of forward, then I am going to get knocked right on my keister. Recoil is similar, and while it won't necessarily knock you on your tail, it is far easier to manage with a good aggressive stance, and it is easier to transition from shooting to "hands on" should things go...not so well.

Here's a couple of nice aggressive stances....casual, but still aggressive...





Note how they share similar characteristics as the stance used by this muldoon...



Best of luck

Excellent info here, and well inline with contemporary training.

[shootthesheet]

I know or have heard the stance one should take when shooting is feet apart, side by side, and lean a bit forward. But to me, I feel a little better and more balanced with one foot slightly behind the other. In my instance, being right handed, my right foot behind the left. To me I feel better and in control more. Standing a bit off square and a smaller target. Or more narrow if you will.

All the training I have been through advocates what you describe, commonly referred to as a fighter's stance. Narrow isn't always better though if you're wearing a vest or plate carrier. A bullet getting sucked into the armpit is very deadly since it's a straight path to the heart/important stuff.

I agree about the bullet getting sucked into the arm pit area. But if one were unlucky enough to actually get into a shoot out with the bg, do these guys really do much practice? I doubt it. So with the practice I do, I figure I am puting myself into a much better situation and have the upper hand, so to speak. I am not going to get into a shoot out with an arms instructor or a police officer. And the way the "gangsta" holds his gun, he is most likely going to shoot to my left or right side by a mile and even more the more quick shots he takes.
So the best "stance" is to keep from getting into that situation in the first place.

What about the former tier 1 operator that is having a PTSD episode, or the well equipped bank robbers hitting the LA bank? You will most likely not have the upper hand in a gun fight because you will be on the reaction side of the event, and action is always faster than reaction. Whether an adversary is trained or not, a stray round can hit wherever it pleases.

Don't think we have an advantage in anything. Some criminals are dumb and go in unprepared but some train and learn everything they can about potential situations they may face. Not all gun involved crimes are "Crimes of Opportunity".

I agree with others that posted to find a comfortable position among those that are accepted by experienced people and adjust as necessary. I didn't even think of the connection between other sports related positions and shooting positions but it is accurate not only for shooting but for being able to move effectively.

[Steve133]

When I was in college, I was on the pistol team (we had a really small shooting club instead of a competitive team, so it's probably more accurate to say "I was that guy who shot pistol most of the time when folks took the club-owned guns out to the range"), and I kind of wound up in charge of coaching new shooters that came to our range outings. Not anything complex or groundbreaking, just basics of how to hold and shoot a gun safely, and maybe accurately enough to hit paper at 7 yards. I was consistently amazed at the incredibly contorted stances that most newbies would come up with. Maybe it's subconscious fear of the weapon or something, but they would all pull their shoulders way back and lean backwards, awkwardly thrusting the gun out as far away as possible. Feet all over the place. I remember one girl not only did the back-lean, but actually crossed one foot behind the other in some weird sort of ballet pose or something. Goes without saying that they never hit the broad side of a barn.

Personally, I've always shot Weaver-style for the simple reason that it feels comfortable. I always naturally stood that way, even before I recognized it as a formal stance. I have no clue how some yahoos get to using the horked-up stances that they do - they don't look the least bit comfortable. Nothing says "I don't know what I'm doing" like a twisted-up, un-natural stance.