TargetTalk

Hi,
I have begun 10 meter pistol shooting some 4-5 months back. At that time, I had learnt from forums like TT(I don't remember which one but I saw on couple of those ) that the correct stance is 45° to the firing line. So, I followed that and now I stand at an angle of about 35-40° to the firing line. I score around 355-360/400. However, something strange is happening to my shots since last 3-4 shooting sessions (2 weeks to be precise, since I practice only at weekends). A large bunch of shots are landing to the left of the 10 ring. Owing to this, my coach has advised(forced will be appropriate:P) to stand parallel to the firing line, which I find totally uncomfortable. I also saw some YouTube videos of world cups and found all of them to be standing parallel to the firing line with the right leg slightly tilted outwards.

I have also tried following the close your eyes and lift your hand method to find my Natural point of aim, but that is not constant everytime.

Pls guide me.

thanks,
major

It really depends whether you trust your coach.

If you do then follow his advice.

If you don't then find another coach.

You appear to be asking a bunch of strangers whether your coach is right; not a good idea.

thanks David,

I found all my answers with that post of yours. I have made up my mind to follow the teaching of my coach .

thanks

"I have also tried following the close your eyes and lift your hand method to find my Natural point of aim, but that is not constant everytime."

You also discovered that there is no NPA, so you can stop looking for one.

You also discovered that some stances are more comfortable than others.

Not bad for someone just starting.

I was taught natural point of aim and it seems to work for me. Obviously it doesn't work for everyone. When I was actively competing it was a fairly uniform position for me. Then I stopped shooting for 15 years and have just recently begun shooting again. Now I find that my natural point of aim varies with how tired I am. I believe that as one's "hold muscles" become developed and stamina improves a more uniform position will result.

My personal opinion... do what works for you. If you are fighting to keep your aim on target, change your position. If you feel that you don't have a natural point of aim, don't worry about it. Pay attention to the messages your body is sending to you.

Just my humble opinion.

Steve

Your coach is partly right. A more inline stance is better than a stance of 45 degrees, but totally inline is not right for everyone. Your coach should work with you to explain what works best and why, and you should come up with a stance that is both comfortable and stable. You will most likely need to try it a few times and perhaps change each session until you get to an optimum stance for you. One thing the position should not be is tense or uncomfortable, and too inline will for many shooters be too stressful on the neck, or they end up peering out the side of the eye - all not ideal. If you find that then back it off to for example 10 degrees.

Have a talk to you coach if you're not sure he's telling you right and ask him to explain his reasoning. A good coach will know why he's asking you to do things and will happily explain the reasons.

If you want to 'do some homework', take a look on on the ISSF academy website and their pistol techniques section. It's written by the ISSF pistol coach trainer so he knows what he's talking about.

Rob.

Rob.

If you've followed the coach's advice for a while and find that your discomfort is getting worse, I'd ask about that. If you get used to a stressed position and your scores improve, great, but don't hurt yourself just because a coach tells you to do something. Neck muscle injuries can be significantly disabling for quite a long while if you are strain it too badly.

Just to be clear; when you say 'parallel to the firing line' do you mean parallel to the path of the projectile? Or parallel to the edge of the bench? The edge of the bench, and the line past which your foot must not project in competition, is what's usually referred to as the 'firing line' not the path of the shot. In international 10m competition most shooters are actually not completely parallel to the shot path, but slightly off from it, with the odd shooter actually being closer to 45 degrees though this is usually something which happens in older shooters as the neck tends to stiffen and make such a severe rotation painful. If you can take a look at these video examples you'll quite a bit of variation among a number of air pistol and other shooters:
http://targetshooting.ca/reframerize.cf ... heatre.htm
Most are showing stances close to parallel with the pistol barrel, but there is some variation, as there is in upper body positioning and non-shooting arm position. There's a lot of room for finding a personally ideal stance, and of course you need to work with your coach in finding what this means for you in your current condition, as well as any fitness development such as might aid in improving your stance. Flexibility and strength are both important for shooters, though perhaps not to the extent they are for gymnasts.

How you stand has a lot to do with whether you have a natural point of aim or not.

One US Olympic/ Army AMU coach has written symposium presentation on the stance. His presentation at sport forum concludes most ideal stance is about 30cm apart and about 15-17 degree off line. He lined up many high level shooters and measured their daily comfortable stance over a long period of time, and that was his presentation.

So those numbers are true of many high level shooters.

But for me, the bottom line comes down to the question of "Are you a human bipod or a human ameba?" If you stand like a tall human bipod, you will get a natural point of aim. If you stand like a earth hugging, comfortable ameba, you won't have a natural point of aim.

There are bipods and amebas out there. Bipods look better than amebas. Bipods will out shoot amebas most of the time. But there are some amebas out there who will out shoot most human bipods.

For me, I am just a human bipod. I ascribe to 30cm /17 degree. I stand as tall as I can like Dumoulin and Nestruev. I really try to stand tall.

I recently read an article from the ISSF magazine from 6 or so years ago about this.

The big take away was pick a stance that uses the least amount of energy to maintain. Something that is natural and does not cause you to strain one set of muscles more than others. You use lots of them in your back, chest and shoulder to hold your arm up.

Coaches have styles and use what they think is going to work for you. You have to trust he is making the correct call for you and if you find it is not working or causing other issues you have to let him know. He will not be a god coach if you do not provide feedback other than your score.

Most of all you need to try what he wants you to for a few months to see to benefit.

Hello,
You may find the following article written by former Olympian and USAMU pistol coach Ray Arredondo to be helpful as well:

http://www.usashooting.org/library/Inst ... _daryl.pdf

Take care,

Steph

I suggest you read my article in the European Journal of Sports Sciences on stance angle, January 2013. One has to ask themselves how important is the biomechanical and kinesiological principles in pistol stance. I would propose that the fundamental principles are fairly universal. Finding a stance angle that provides the greatest muscular endurance should provide the shooter with improved performance as they progress in their competition. How often do shooters tire near the end of their course of fire. Using a stance angle of 15 to 25 degrees to the line of fire, should provide for the best use of their deltoid muscles. Too inline, and the posterior deltoid muscles will be used the most. Facing the target and the anterior deltoid muscles as well as the pecs will be used. Using a 15 to 25 degrees angle, will allow all three deltoid muscles (anterior, middle, and posterior) to hold up the pistol and provide for the best use of their muscles. Using the strongest muscles in the shoulder while lifting the pistol will improve the shooter's ability to maintain their endurance.

As for stance width, I suggest you read my article in the Journal of Sports Sciences, September 2011. Shoulder width stance does not provide the most stable position for static balance. A narrower stance (12 inches from center of left heel to center of right heel) provides an improvement in stability. It is a simple mathematical principle. A wider stance provides a corresponding increase in motion with the same amount of weight shift. As an individual sways, a corresponding change in weight shift will happen.

Very little pistol research has been conducted, so coaches have often used personal opinions and tradition as their basis of information. Using techniques founded on research should provide for a more useful method.

While it does seem fairly obvious that a moderately angled stance would better spread out the strain of holding up the pistol, I suspect that this might be more important for novice pistol shooters whose shoulders have not developed the endurance acquired after 100,000 shots or more. I recall clearly how as a beginning pistol shooter 2 years ago I would find it difficult to hold the pistol up for more than a couple of seconds without shaking. This was surprising, considering I work out with fairly heavy dumbbells... but the static hold of a pistol isn't the same as lifting weights. But after many months of shooting and many tins of pellets I found this effort becoming less and less, such that by the middle of my second year shooting air pistol it wasn't really significant so long as I hold for less than about 10 seconds.

Other factors become more apparent after the initial training to 'pistol fitness' is achieved. One of those factors has to do with adding rigidity to the stance by moderate muscular strain. Some coaches advocate a 'stressed' stance for this reason; whether by introducing twist in the trunk, a forward lean at the ankles, both of these together, or other elements which contribute to a stiffening of the body and reduced sway. Provided the shooter's overall fitness is adequate, the 70 to 90 shots of a match and warm-up cycle really shouldn't fatigue one to the point of losing accuracy towards the last shots. Of course without basic fitness one will fatigue! But that's the point of a comprehensive training regimen, including cardiovascular work, moderate weight training, stretching, and and a healthy diet and sleep pattern. There's a lot more to it of course, but by covering the basics of fitness and adequate pistol-specific training fatigue ceases to be very relevant in a healthy competitor.

For what little it's worth considering I'm only shooting in the low 550's so far, I've found a narrow-ish stance (about 14 inches between feet - I'm a tall guy with big feet) and about 5 degrees off-line from the barrel suits me well. My neck flexibility is reasonable at age 51 but not as supple as a much younger competitor, so I'll leave the fully parallel stance to those guys. And watching ISSF World Cup matches it's hard to find many shooters who are anywhere near 15 degrees, with most between zero and 10.

Another factor which has interested me lately is a sort of torso tilt to the rear. A 'hunching' sort of position, settling myself back onto my rear hip. Kostevych does this as do quite a few other Eastern European shooters. Nothing too extreme, but it feels quite well settled when I get it right. Less feeling of mobility in the waist/spine, more of an anchored feeling so my shoulders feel connected better to my legs. It's something I'm experimenting with anyway, and when everything else comes together well it seems to be helping get my scores up.

I experienced that 0° stance is working best for me.
My neck and also my shoulder has no problem with that, assumed some stretching and warming up half an hour before the shooting begins.

What I also discovered is, that I'm lifting the AP up, going slowley down and at the stopping point, the latissimus dorsi is locking the down movement of the gun, so I don't have to strain to hold the gun in the right high, just let the weight laying on this muscle.

Don't know if this is a personal feature of my muscles but this is only if I have the 0° stance, otherwise the muscle doesn't "stand in the way".

RN Hawkins wrote:I suggest you read my article in the European Journal of Sports Sciences on stance angle, January 2013. One has to ask themselves how important is the biomechanical and kinesiological principles in pistol stance. I would propose that the fundamental principles are fairly universal. Finding a stance angle that provides the greatest muscular endurance should provide the shooter with improved performance as they progress in their competition. How often do shooters tire near the end of their course of fire. Using a stance angle of 15 to 25 degrees to the line of fire, should provide for the best use of their deltoid muscles. Too inline, and the posterior deltoid muscles will be used the most. Facing the target and the anterior deltoid muscles as well as the pecs will be used. Using a 15 to 25 degrees angle, will allow all three deltoid muscles (anterior, middle, and posterior) to hold up the pistol and provide for the best use of their muscles. Using the strongest muscles in the shoulder while lifting the pistol will improve the shooter's ability to maintain their endurance.

As for stance width, I suggest you read my article in the Journal of Sports Sciences, September 2011. Shoulder width stance does not provide the most stable position for static balance. A narrower stance (12 inches from center of left heel to center of right heel) provides an improvement in stability. It is a simple mathematical principle. A wider stance provides a corresponding increase in motion with the same amount of weight shift. As an individual sways, a corresponding change in weight shift will happen.

Very little pistol research has been conducted, so coaches have often used personal opinions and tradition as their basis of information. Using techniques founded on research should provide for a more useful method.

Richard,
I'm curious but what did the ISSF make of your latest article ? I notice with interest a lack of endorsement of your 'stance width' article, which to me leaves more questions unanswered than answered.

Whilst your correct that little empirical research has been done, a lot of practical work has been done by specific coaches who in turn have produced world leading athletes. I'd suggest that their results endorse their methods, certainly until such time as they are superseeded.

Rob.

Neon21 wrote:I experienced that 0° stance is working best for me.
My neck and also my shoulder has no problem with that, assumed some stretching and warming up half an hour before the shooting begins.

What I also discovered is, that I'm lifting the AP up, going slowley down and at the stopping point, the latissimus dorsi is locking the down movement of the gun, so I don't have to strain to hold the gun in the right high, just let the weight laying on this muscle.

Don't know if this is a personal feature of my muscles but this is only if I have the 0° stance, otherwise the muscle doesn't "stand in the way".

I tested this idea, and seems I can feel the same thing. But there's one more trick (a crossover from my archery days): You can pull your shoulderblade back to "lock your back" as described, and then move your arm forwards without moving the back/shoulder. This enables a more "open" stance while retaining most of the shoulderblade support.