# Shooting stance



## Runs With Fire (May 3, 2019)

I'm getting more and more into firearms training.  I use the same stance as when fighting, because it's stil a fight. Isosceles, I think.  Just a basic lead foot half a step up from a neutral stance.  I reach that stance, generally by stepping back a half step with my non lead foot, while drawing or presenting if already drawn.  Both hands on my pistol, both arms equal and nearly completely extended. Even pressure from both hands.

PROS. it's easy to walk,run, side step, take an angle, advance, retreat  and have a good base I'f it goes hand to hand.  

CONS. apparently, it's considered an unnatural responseive position to an aggressive threat? And apparently, alot of law enforcement and trainers aren't on board with it because "you'll just end up shoulders and feet squared to a violent unexpected threat and then you will be out of your training element". 

The Neutral stance.
Feet placed shoulder length apart, pointed forward and shoulders squared with your body. All squared with your target.  I have some people telling me I have to to the "Neutral" shooting stance because it's "just a natural response". I said "try managing recoil that way with a real pistol". They try and manage recoil by lwaning forward into the pistol, squatting a bit, and sticking their butt out to keep balance.  I think it's stupid.  Wat do you think?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (May 3, 2019)

What's "natural" (they mean something you'll respond to by habit, rather than thought) is changed by training. My "natural" response is closer to a traditional hanmi. When I shoot, I use what I'd call an open j-hanmi, with my weight shifted forward (leaning slightly forward to the lead leg) to counter recoil. It's not a normal stance for most folks, but decades of training make that j-hanmi an automatic response for me, and a bit of firearms work made the forward lean automatic, too.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (May 3, 2019)

By the way, as I understand it, most LE training is also trying to keep the front of the ballistic vest toward a threat, rather than the exposed side. If you're not wearing a vest, an angle is a better idea.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (May 3, 2019)

I think i have done weaver.    As in straight to the side with weaver.  (not tactical)

Is there a stance where you are at a 45 degree angle?   So its kind of like weaver but the front of your plate (if present) is actually facing the threat somewhat.

edit:  apparently the CAR system is based on the neutral stance most police officers would stand in when doing traffic stops etc.   Or something like that.


----------



## wab25 (May 3, 2019)

Thought this might help here: Top Five Shooting Stances

Gerry - are you talking about a Chapman Stance?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (May 3, 2019)

wab25 said:


> Thought this might help here: Top Five Shooting Stances
> 
> Gerry - are you talking about a Chapman Stance?


I have no idea if there's a formal name for the stance. It's the natural result of the combination of my training in Aikido and my firearms experience.

Looking at Shooting Illustrated's descriptions, Chapman's pretty close, except the strong arm is bent like Weaver. And to add to it, my right hand is dominant, but my left eye is dominant, so I am bladed more than normal, to get the sights lined up with the left eye.


----------



## wab25 (May 3, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> And to add to it, my right hand is dominant, but my left eye is dominant, so I am bladed more than normal, to get the sights lined up with the left eye.


Are you shooting right handed, but lining up to aim with your left eye?


----------



## CB Jones (May 3, 2019)

Runs With Fire said:


> apparently, alot of law enforcement and trainers aren't on board with it because "you'll just end up shoulders and feet squared to a violent unexpected threat and then you will be out of your training element".



All the Academies and Agencies I know teach a version of isosceles




Runs With Fire said:


> I have some people telling me I have to to the "Neutral" shooting stance because it's "just a natural response". I said "try managing recoil that way with a real pistol". They try and manage recoil by lwaning forward into the pistol, squatting a bit, and sticking their butt out to keep balance. I think it's stupid. Wat do you think?



I shoot handgun, rifle, and shotgun from  neutral isoceles and dont have any trouble with recoil.

 Slight lean forward, slight bend in knees, and shoulders kinda up and forward with down looking barrel.  This position reduces muzzle rise and naturally brings the gun back on target after recoil.  It also allows you to grouch walk without a lot of muzzle movement.

IMO, Isoceles work best moving forward and back while groucho walking and is the better stance in open gound.  Also, when cutting the pie.

CAR is good while walking laterally and in confined spaces.


----------



## hoshin1600 (May 3, 2019)

I remember watching a youtube interview about Jack weaver and if I remember correctly he was saying that what we know today is more an exaggerated version of what he really did.  I don't really see a difference in the posted link between the weaver and chapman.


----------



## jks9199 (May 3, 2019)

wab25 said:


> Are you shooting right handed, but lining up to aim with your left eye?


That's the easiest solution for a cross-dominant shooter with a pistol.  It's natural, and it happens automatically if you don't force something else, like turning the head to line up the sights.  The only time you have a major problem is if you're using a really sideways/angled stance where you just may not be able to reach all the way across the body... 

Most LE shooting today starts from an isosceles stance modification.  There are several reasons, like it keeps the body armor lined up with a potential threat, and it reflects what we're seeing actually happen under pressure.  It's also easier to teach people to start moving and shooting that way.  Personally, I use a modified version because I was originally taught the modified Weaver, and I just can't undo all of the early training.  My lead foot is about even with the toes of the back foot...

Oh... and I shoot shotgun and rifle lefty... though I can shoot either right handed, but have to really turn my head to line up my left eye.


----------



## Runs With Fire (May 3, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> By the way, as I understand it, most LE training is also trying to keep the front of the ballistic vest toward a threat, rather than the exposed side. If you're not wearing a vest, an angle is a better idea.


  that's one thing I found out from military guys.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (May 4, 2019)

wab25 said:


> Are you shooting right handed, but lining up to aim with your left eye?


Yes.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (May 4, 2019)

jks9199 said:


> That's the easiest solution for a cross-dominant shooter with a pistol.  It's natural, and it happens automatically if you don't force something else, like turning the head to line up the sights.  The only time you have a major problem is if you're using a really sideways/angled stance where you just may not be able to reach all the way across the body...
> 
> Most LE shooting today starts from an isosceles stance modification.  There are several reasons, like it keeps the body armor lined up with a potential threat, and it reflects what we're seeing actually happen under pressure.  It's also easier to teach people to start moving and shooting that way.  Personally, I use a modified version because I was originally taught the modified Weaver, and I just can't undo all of the early training.  My lead foot is about even with the toes of the back foot...
> 
> Oh... and I shoot shotgun and rifle lefty... though I can shoot either right handed, but have to really turn my head to line up my left eye.


I wish I'd learned to shoot long guns lefty. I never spent enough time on them, so I end up closing an eye to sight.


----------



## Buka (May 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I wish I'd learned to shoot long guns lefty. I never spent enough time on them, so I end up closing an eye to sight.



That's okay, though, we're all one eye dominant over the other anyway.

I've been shooting so long I don't remember half the stuff we do or used to do. I can't even remember what stance I use now, they're all the same to me. But qualifications are this month so I'll see what stance I have.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (May 4, 2019)

Buka said:


> That's okay, though, we're all one eye dominant over the other anyway.
> 
> I've been shooting so long I don't remember half the stuff we do or used to do. I can't even remember what stance I use now, they're all the same to me. But qualifications are this month so I'll see what stance I have.


I only remember because I had to pay attention to it when I had a 1911 officer's model for a while. It was compensated, and shoved back pretty hard. I had to figure out how to adjust to that shove, which was a big change from the 9mm flip I was used to (and had built my habits around).


----------



## jks9199 (May 4, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I wish I'd learned to shoot long guns lefty. I never spent enough time on them, so I end up closing an eye to sight.


I am EXTREMELY left eye dominant, though I'm right handed. (Like off the testing chart when they test it...)  Shooting a long gun lefty just makes more sense...


----------



## Bill Mattocks (May 4, 2019)

Stance is modified Weaver.  Feet are in zenkutsu dachi, sometimes kokutsu dachi. Right handed, right eye dominant.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (May 4, 2019)

jks9199 said:


> I am EXTREMELY left eye dominant, though I'm right handed. (Like off the testing chart when they test it...)  Shooting a long gun lefty just makes more sense...



See from what i have seen of CAR they aim using both eyes.    at least for some positions.     Dont ask me how you do that, i dont know.


----------



## CB Jones (May 4, 2019)

Rat said:


> See from what i have seen of CAR they aim using both eyes.    at least for some positions.     Dont ask me how you do that, i dont know.



It's for close quarter  battles.  You are point shooting just using your front sigt.


----------



## Dirty Dog (May 4, 2019)

Neutral stance, unless circumstances for something else. Recoil is no problem. And yes, I shoot real pistols.
Neutral stance makes it far easier to track a target moving across. It's the easiest to move.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (May 5, 2019)

jks9199 said:


> I am EXTREMELY left eye dominant, though I'm right handed. (Like off the testing chart when they test it...)  Shooting a long gun lefty just makes more sense...


It would have made more sense for me, too. My left eye is strongly dominant (I don't know how strongly - I'm not aware it's ever been measured) AND my eyes don't align properly (I pretty much always see two images overlaid - the word "see" in this sentence looks like it has 3 e's). When I try to sight with my right eye (with the left open) I'm just looking down the side of the gun with my left eye.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (May 6, 2019)

I'm a Firearms Instructor and also a Law Enforcement Firearms instructor for my departments academy.  When I am running the range and people already come with training I do not try to adjust their stance but instead work on the other fundamentals such as grip, sight alignment, sight picture, trigger control, breathing and follow through.  If I have someone new I will always teach them a modified isosceles or fighting stance which is identical to the power isosceles in the link.  This is the defacto stance of premier shooters now a days and would be the ideal stance for anyone to learn.  Like many I initially learned the Weaver stance and then modified it because like jks9199 I am right hand with left eye dominance.  The fight stance/power isosceles is ideal for law enforcement and military, competitors and civilians.  You have better movement ability, better peripheral vision, better recoil, etc.  

Here are some other articles to look at: The 3 shooting stances: Which one's right for you? 

The Modern or Modified Isosceles Shooting Stance - USA Carry


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 6, 2019)

Runs With Fire said:


> Both hands on my pistol, both arms equal and nearly completely extended. Even pressure from both hands.


The shooting posture is exactly the same as the "rhino guard" posture.


----------



## punisher73 (May 10, 2019)

I've never been able to actually track it to confirm it, but I have often been told that Jack Weaver himself told people the only reason he did what he did was because he couldn't extend both arms out due to an injury so he learned how to best compensate for that.  If someone else has heard that or has a source, I'd be interested in confirming it or putting it to rest as an urban legend.

The thing about "shooting stances" is that each one has a purpose, just like your stances in karate or other martial art.  What is your goal?  Are you preparing for a shooting competition to hit the bulls eye?  Or, are you in LE or a soldier who is carrying multiple platforms and have to think about moving and transitioning between different weapons.  How am I going to stand if my primary arm is injured and now I have to use my support side?  What is my best platform if kneeling?  

Also, each instructor usually has what they like the best (either through training or vested interest to promote their product) and will sometimes preach that as "the best" method for everyone.  When it comes to guns and training, everyone has an opinion and everyone thinks that their method is the best.  Get good foundational/functional skills and find out what works best FOR YOU.


----------



## DocWard (May 14, 2019)

If you look at what many people call a "Weaver Stance," it often bears little resemblance to the actual stance Jack Weaver used during the Leatherslap Competitions, and what he described and demonstrated in later times. Many modern shooters drop into a much deeper stance than he typically did, blading their bodies more. Weaver's right foot would often be back only slightly, and he dropped his head and tilted it slightly to align with the sights. His posture was often almost straight upright. Weaver was looking more to get quick, accurate single shots for competition, believing it was better to hit a little slower than to miss fast. Even then, he wasn't really slower.

As for my personal stance, I can only say "it varies." I'll try not to be too confusing as I write this. I shoot rifles and shotguns right handed, and I am right eye dominant, despite being left handed. I shoot revolvers for Cowboy Action "Double Duelist" style, shooting first one with one hand, then the other with the opposite hand. Otherwise, I will shoot pistols with a two handed grip most of the time, unless I am training for something specific. Prior to taking up Cowboy Action, I shot trap competitively for years, beginning in college about the same time I was shooting rifles in the Army. I became involved in Kenpo while shooting trap, all of which means it feels natural for me to drop my right foot back into what would typically be a Kenpo Fighting Stance. This is true for all types of firearms. The exception being when shooting for Cowboy Action, where I will square up for revolvers, since I am shooting one handed, with both hands.

When the Army began training toward the isosceles stance with pistols, to keep ballistic plates toward the threat as others have mentioned, I worked hard to shift my training in that regard with pistol and with the M4 Carbine. I still tend to drop my right foot back, although I keep my body fairly square. I also tend to put my weight forward somewhat and bend my knees. The big difference for me, is that where Jack Weaver relied on an isometric "push-pull" grip, I definitely follow the isosceles method in pushing out from the chest and allowing that to cause my grip to tighten on the firearm. This is true even though I will still leave my arms bent slightly at the elbow.


----------



## W.Bridges (May 15, 2019)

i was taught to shoot weaver at an young age so when I went to the academy in 2010 it was hard for me to adjust to the neutral stance.


----------



## Buka (May 15, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I only remember because I had to pay attention to it when I had a 1911 officer's model for a while. It was compensated, and shoved back pretty hard. I had to figure out how to adjust to that shove, which was a big change from the 9mm flip I was used to (and had built my habits around).



Man, I loved the Officer's Model. A regular 1911 is way too big for my hand. Sold all my firearms when I moved here. But good old Massachusetts, the Commonwealth did me right. They outlawed a bootload of guns - in that you could only buy a used model of certain guns, nobody could sell new ones. Every single handgun I owned was on that list, including the Officer's model.

All the outlawed models? Their price sky rocketed. I sold everyone of them for five to ten times what I paid for them. Unbelievable.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (May 15, 2019)

Buka said:


> Man, I loved the Officer's Model. A regular 1911 is way too big for my hand. Sold all my firearms when I moved here. But good old Massachusetts, the Commonwealth did me right. They outlawed a bootload of guns - in that you could only buy a used model of certain guns, nobody could sell new ones. Every single handgun I owned was on that list, including the Officer's model.
> 
> All the outlawed models? Their price sky rocketed. I sold everyone of them for five to ten times what I paid for them. Unbelievable.


I miss that gun. I made the mistake of buying a ported model, and should have just picked up an un-ported barrel for it. It felt good in the hand.


----------

