stance from BB @ pyramydair
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
Forum rules
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
-
guest1
-
Steve Swartz
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:06 am
- Location: Auburn, AL
Well, that was a little harsh . . .
There are several websites/bulletin boards/listservers/blogs on international shooting. I kind of like this one, because the signal/noise ratio has historically been very good. The "pyramidair" one looks o.k., but typical for blogs in general (not as good a signal/noise ratio as targettalk).
The stance thread looked pretty basic. It didn't cover the underlying criteria of what makes for a "good" stance, or why one stance would be preferred over another, what the individual elements are that make up "Stance," or what the tradeoffs are between "more open" vs. "more closed" stances, etc.
That kind of discussion is what you would have seen here several times in recent istory.
Do you have a question about "stance?"
How can we help you improve yoiur "Stance?"
There are several websites/bulletin boards/listservers/blogs on international shooting. I kind of like this one, because the signal/noise ratio has historically been very good. The "pyramidair" one looks o.k., but typical for blogs in general (not as good a signal/noise ratio as targettalk).
The stance thread looked pretty basic. It didn't cover the underlying criteria of what makes for a "good" stance, or why one stance would be preferred over another, what the individual elements are that make up "Stance," or what the tradeoffs are between "more open" vs. "more closed" stances, etc.
That kind of discussion is what you would have seen here several times in recent istory.
Do you have a question about "stance?"
How can we help you improve yoiur "Stance?"
-
Steve Swartz
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:06 am
- Location: Auburn, AL
O.K., first things first.
The desired outcomes for a "stance" are
1. Comfort
2. Repeatability
3. Stability
Also
"Stance" is very multidimensional . . . the position of your "toes" is only one (minor) element in the system.
So, seri atem:
- "Stance" includes foot position, leg position, torso position, head position (to include neck and eye), arm position (to include shoulder roll, elbow position), and hand alignment.
- They are all connected to each other; a chnage in one affets the parameters of the other.
- There are tradeoffs among the three outcomes (the most comfortable may not be the most repeatable, etc).
Skipping the last few years of detailed conversation on this topic, what are your stance concerns/issues?
Are you getting tired quickly?
Are you not seeing your sights settle quickly and naturally?
Are you settling in a different downrange area every time?
What do *you* see as the desired platform (stance) for delivering the perfect shot?
O.K., simple answer:
- You want to be facing 75-90 degrees away from the sight line to the target
- You want your toe pads "shoulder length" apart
- You want your heels 1 foot length apart
- You want to lean forward with your legs
- You want to lean rearward with your torso
- You want your interior elbow facing 45 degrees from the vertical
- You want your head vertically aligned with the direction of the earths center
- You want your face horizontally aligned with the target face
????????????????????
[p.s. what you really want is STABILITY, COMFORT, and REPEATABILITY which will require you to experiment with several elements until you find what works for your body structure]
Good Luck and Happy Experimentation!
The desired outcomes for a "stance" are
1. Comfort
2. Repeatability
3. Stability
Also
"Stance" is very multidimensional . . . the position of your "toes" is only one (minor) element in the system.
So, seri atem:
- "Stance" includes foot position, leg position, torso position, head position (to include neck and eye), arm position (to include shoulder roll, elbow position), and hand alignment.
- They are all connected to each other; a chnage in one affets the parameters of the other.
- There are tradeoffs among the three outcomes (the most comfortable may not be the most repeatable, etc).
Skipping the last few years of detailed conversation on this topic, what are your stance concerns/issues?
Are you getting tired quickly?
Are you not seeing your sights settle quickly and naturally?
Are you settling in a different downrange area every time?
What do *you* see as the desired platform (stance) for delivering the perfect shot?
O.K., simple answer:
- You want to be facing 75-90 degrees away from the sight line to the target
- You want your toe pads "shoulder length" apart
- You want your heels 1 foot length apart
- You want to lean forward with your legs
- You want to lean rearward with your torso
- You want your interior elbow facing 45 degrees from the vertical
- You want your head vertically aligned with the direction of the earths center
- You want your face horizontally aligned with the target face
????????????????????
[p.s. what you really want is STABILITY, COMFORT, and REPEATABILITY which will require you to experiment with several elements until you find what works for your body structure]
Good Luck and Happy Experimentation!
-
Steve Swartz
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:06 am
- Location: Auburn, AL
Short answer:
Try the position and see if it "works" for you.
"Works" =
1. It is comfortable for you to shoot over the period of an extended match, with minimal fatigue
2. You can reliably "Step Into" the stance again and again, precisely and consistently
3. From that stance, you can loft the pistol and settle it down into your aiming area with minimum arc of movement smoothly and quickly
HOWEVER
For MANY shooters (not all; perhaps not even most) there is a "standard template" for shooting stance elements (feet, address line to target, leg/torso lean, arm/shoulder rotation, head position, grip).
The standard template (as described by A.A. Yur'Yev and others) is what I was trying to describe above.
NOTE:
A change in "grip" affects the other elements of stance. A change in foot position affects the other elements of stance. A change in body lean (legs or torso) affects the other elements.
"Stance" is a holistic technique that consists of many other individual elements that are related to one another.
Try the position and see if it "works" for you.
"Works" =
1. It is comfortable for you to shoot over the period of an extended match, with minimal fatigue
2. You can reliably "Step Into" the stance again and again, precisely and consistently
3. From that stance, you can loft the pistol and settle it down into your aiming area with minimum arc of movement smoothly and quickly
HOWEVER
For MANY shooters (not all; perhaps not even most) there is a "standard template" for shooting stance elements (feet, address line to target, leg/torso lean, arm/shoulder rotation, head position, grip).
The standard template (as described by A.A. Yur'Yev and others) is what I was trying to describe above.
NOTE:
A change in "grip" affects the other elements of stance. A change in foot position affects the other elements of stance. A change in body lean (legs or torso) affects the other elements.
"Stance" is a holistic technique that consists of many other individual elements that are related to one another.
Not having ever been a top competitor, I'll add my 2 cents. This looks good as a starting point, but don't make the mistake that I did when I was first starting out. Don't think that stance or grip is something carved in stone. This diagram is a good starting point, but you must determine what works best for you. Just because top shooter so and so uses a certain stance or grip doesn't mean it will work best for you. You must learn by trial and error and be willing to make adjustments when fatigue sets in, say during a match, and also make adjustments in the long run when your body changes. The changes will usually be minute, but might make a difference in your comfort level and your ability to hold still in your natural aiming area. You must not be afraid to try something different in training. When you do, make sure that you give it sufficient time to show whether or not it helps.
-
2650 Plus
Post Subject
Misny, What you and Steve just said. You filled in the blanks in Steves dissertation very well indeed. Steve does the intelectual stuff and you are writting for the shooters. And Steve is very good at what he does as are you. I am truly enjoying the discussion. Good Shooting Bill Horton
Great discussion! I enjoy hearing meaningful, quality information presented in a helpful manner.
As a new shooter, my ah-ha moment when working on my stance was finding my natural point of aim.
I initially started shooting at a 90 degree angle, identical to my old fencing stance. Someone told me about natural point of aim and after a few hours over several weeks my stance is now closer to the 75 degree mark. I learned this by raising my pistol over and over with eyes closed. Now, 80% of the time, when I raise with eyes closed, my sight is on the target from my initial foot placement. If it's not, I adjust foot position and do it until it is on target with eyes closed. Over the course of 120 to 140 trigger pulls at night, it is very interesting to see how my NPA subtley changes as muscle groups tire and new groups compensate. I still have a lot of fine tuning and tweaking, but my stance has a lot of the work roughed out and it's exciting. Time to take some of the points and continue refining will continue to evolve.
As a new shooter, my ah-ha moment when working on my stance was finding my natural point of aim.
I initially started shooting at a 90 degree angle, identical to my old fencing stance. Someone told me about natural point of aim and after a few hours over several weeks my stance is now closer to the 75 degree mark. I learned this by raising my pistol over and over with eyes closed. Now, 80% of the time, when I raise with eyes closed, my sight is on the target from my initial foot placement. If it's not, I adjust foot position and do it until it is on target with eyes closed. Over the course of 120 to 140 trigger pulls at night, it is very interesting to see how my NPA subtley changes as muscle groups tire and new groups compensate. I still have a lot of fine tuning and tweaking, but my stance has a lot of the work roughed out and it's exciting. Time to take some of the points and continue refining will continue to evolve.
-
Guest
guest...check out Gaylords credentials http://www.airgunwriter.com/credentials.html
You're an idiot
You're an idiot
Not really sure what the purpose of dragging up this three month old thread is. I looked at Mr. Gaylord's credentials but I must be missing something. Which credentials should I be impressed with, his writing, his consulting, most of which are not on ISSF style airguns and I might have missed it but I didn't see anything regarding 10m air pistol at all.
-
Steve Swartz
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:06 am
- Location: Auburn, AL
Could be a language issue, culture issue, basic misunderstanding . . . or just another trolling expedition.
Steve
(not sure what the poster is selling; other than "come visit my website to get my hit count up so I can charge more for pop-up ads"????? The vast and curious dimensions of the human experience continue to amaze me. Of course, as a professor on a college campus, I do get exposed to a pretty stout ration of weirdness.)
Steve
(not sure what the poster is selling; other than "come visit my website to get my hit count up so I can charge more for pop-up ads"????? The vast and curious dimensions of the human experience continue to amaze me. Of course, as a professor on a college campus, I do get exposed to a pretty stout ration of weirdness.)