Single most effective modification I've made to my stance recently (based on something in an article in the USA Shooting News) is to place my feet shoulder width apart and PARALLEL to each other. The latter action seems to lock the hip, knee and ankle joints and gives a feeling of rigidity. A lot of the elite shooters appear to do this. Helps too to have very thin soled shoes so there is no sponginess underfoot. Weightlifting shoes are a good alternative to expensive shooting shoes.
I'll follow this regime until the next good idea comes along!
Bob
Hi Bob, Skateboarding shoes are an even better alternative to expensive
Skateboarding shoes are an even better alternative to expensive Weight Lifting shoes!
Tony
Hi Tony,
What makes skateboarding shoes suitable for shooting? The ones I looked at on the 'net look as if the soles are similar to trainers/joggers which tend to have spongy soles. They also didn't look that much cheaper either, certainly here in Oz. Maybe California is different.
Skateboarding shoes are an even better alternative to expensive Weight Lifting shoes!
Tony
Hi Tony,
What makes skateboarding shoes suitable for shooting? The ones I looked at on the 'net look as if the soles are similar to trainers/joggers which tend to have spongy soles. They also didn't look that much cheaper either, certainly here in Oz. Maybe California is different.
Bob
keep looking - skateboard I have seen have flat soles and are fairly rigid.
Real skateboard shoes have a stiff flat sole to better "connect" the rider with the board. They help shooters in the same fashion.
There are "look alike" shoes with softer more flexible soles to give the skater look, but avoid the rather uncomfortable experience walking with such a stiff sole.
Since starting this discussion I have worked out with the 45degree and 90 degree stance. I think I detect more strength to lift using the 90 degree position. The 90 degree seems to lend adding a small back lean better that the 45 degree. Perhaps different muscles are employed.
DLS wrote:Real skateboard shoes have a stiff flat sole to better "connect" the rider with the board. They help shooters in the same fashion.
Make sure that they aren't too stiff.
Even if you don't enter competitions where you are likely to be tested with the proper rule 6.5.3 shoe sole flexibility testing equipment, remember rule 8.5.6.d:-
To demonstrate that shoe soles are flexible, athletes must walk normally (heel-toe) at all times while on the field of play. A warning will be given for the first offense, a two-point penalty or disqualification will be given for subsequent violations
DLS wrote:Real skateboard shoes have a stiff flat sole to better "connect" the rider with the board. They help shooters in the same fashion.
Make sure that they aren't too stiff.
Even if you don't enter competitions where you are likely to be tested with the proper rule 6.5.3 shoe sole flexibility testing equipment, remember rule 8.5.6.d:-
To demonstrate that shoe soles are flexible, athletes must walk normally (heel-toe) at all times while on the field of play. A warning will be given for the first offense, a two-point penalty or disqualification will be given for subsequent violations
Yes, real skateboard shoes would pass. It's not so much that the soles are "stiff" but that there is not really any padding. It's just the sole - little to no spongy cushiony stuff, because that doesn't let you "feel" the board.
DLS is correct - most skateboard shoes that you see for sale are "poser" skateboard shoes, not real ones. When I skate, it totally makes a difference what kind of shoes I'm wearing. If you can't find real skate shoes without spongy padding try going to a skate shop and just explain what you need.
But by the way, if you have a Chinatown (or Wal-Mart) nearby, you can get even better shooting shoes for like $5 or $10, like these: http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/140780164655?lpid=82
Try doing yoga balance poses on thick spongy mats, then try doing the same poses on bare floor or just on one thin mat. You'll see that it's much easier to balance with less padding because not only is there greater tactile sensation with the floor but also any corrective movements you send through your feet are more precisely delivered.
DLS wrote:Real skateboard shoes have a stiff flat sole to better "connect" the rider with the board. They help shooters in the same fashion.
Make sure that they aren't too stiff. ...
Skateboard shoes are not so stiff that you would not be able to walk in a normal heel to toe fashion so you shouldn't have any problems with the rules.
They are stiff enough that you really wouldn't want to walk around in them day to day, especially when more comfortable options are available.
What about wrist position? In a full side stance the pistol is in line with forearm in the natural position. If you move towards a front stance the barrel needs to be rotated towards the right so much that grip adjustment is not enough, or one needs to rotate the wrist in an unnatural position.
therider wrote:What about wrist position? In a full side stance the pistol is in line with forearm in the natural position. If you move towards a front stance the barrel needs to be rotated towards the right so much that grip adjustment is not enough, or one needs to rotate the wrist in an unnatural position.
I'm not following this, perhaps I'm missing something?
I can place my shooting arm anywhere from straight ahead to 90 degrees and never have to rotate my wrist and the pistol stays in the same alignment with the are throughout.
DLS wrote:...I can place my shooting arm anywhere from straight ahead to 90 degrees and never have to rotate my wrist and the pistol stays in the same alignment with the are throughout...Thanks.
If you can do this with your head anywhere near erect, lucky you. Probably only about 1 degree, but it is there.
DLS wrote:...I can place my shooting arm anywhere from straight ahead to 90 degrees and never have to rotate my wrist and the pistol stays in the same alignment with the are throughout...Thanks.
If you can do this with your head anywhere near erect, lucky you. Probably only about 1 degree, but it is there.
Why the snarky remarks? I asked a legitimate question.
Any normal human can take their extended arm and swing that arm via the shoulder joint medially and distally from an anterior (forward) to a fully distal (90 degrees from forward) position without tilting the head or rotating the wrist.
So we are obviously talking about two different things, hence my request to "therider" that he clarify his post.
DLS wrote:...I can place my shooting arm anywhere from straight ahead to 90 degrees and never have to rotate my wrist and the pistol stays in the same alignment with the are throughout...Thanks.
If you can do this with your head anywhere near erect, lucky you. Probably only about 1 degree, but it is there.
Why the snarky remarks? I asked a legitimate question.
Any normal human can take their extended arm and swing that arm via the shoulder joint medially and distally from an anterior (forward) to a fully distal (90 degrees from forward) position without tilting the head or rotating the wrist.
So we are obviously talking about two different things, hence my request to "therider" that he clarify his post.
snarky - No - just the view of an engineer/mechanic/coach
them's the mechanics of it
DLS
If you are full side, i.e. 90 degrees, you can have barrel, wrist, arm, shoulder and eye lying on a single line.
Think now at the opposite extreme: full facing the target, i.e. 0 degree. Arm is stretched and perpendicular to your shoulders.
However the homerus and your stretched arm, wrist and barrel are 25cm or 10" to your right. Obviously you cannot sight.
The only way to have eyes, front and rear sight in a line is to move your hand in front of your eyes. So the arm cannot be perpendicular to your shoulders but will make 70-80 degrees. If you do this keeping the arm and wrist frozen the pistol is in front of your eyes but it is pointing to the left! So you have to rotate the wrist to the right to have eye and sights on a single line.
Two problems here: the wrist is not relaxed and the barrel is not aligned with arm and therefore a strong recoil will push the stretched arm to your chest and you will hit to the left of target ( I guess this is insignificant when shooting with lupi).
RobStubbs wrote:
Turning your feet more inwards than normal is generally a rescue tactic that some shooters use for a short period in a match when they become more unstable - or feel they are more unstable. It's not a stance I'd recommend to shoot with all the time, as it will cause undue stress and strains on the legs, especially the knees
I think that it is a perfectly acceptable stance and not just a "rescue tactic" as so many elite/Olympic shooters use it. And, as you mention, it introduces stability which wasn't there before. Locking the lower joints is a good thing in the same way as locking the wrist, elbow and possibly shoulder is a good thing. It may increase the stress on the joints but no shooter is locked in that position for more than a few minutes at a time before they can relax. I shall continue to adopt this stance and recommend others to try it - remember, parallel not pigeon toed.
Still looking for the skateboard shoes though the Do-Wins are fine, if a bit heavy.
therider wrote:DLS
If you are full side, i.e. 90 degrees, you can have barrel, wrist, arm, shoulder and eye lying on a single line.
emphasis added by DLS
Got it thanks! I missed that you were discussing the entire "line" from eye to gun. With that additional information I agree with you regarding alignment. As an old BE shooter from way back, I personally don't think it really makes that much of a difference from say 45 degrees to 90, even with the recoil of a .45 in rapid fire. Especially if the small rotation of the gun in the hand affords a better trigger finger position.
But of course, being more in line can't hurt either.
I've recently taken up the air game now (both rifle and pistol) and have been experimenting with a full on 90 degrees. My shots keep drifting back to the left (toward my old position) but this has become less and less the more I work the newer position. I'll see where it takes me.
I'm probably influenced by the fact that I have a bad back, but I believe that the fewer the number of muscles you use to maintain your stance the better. I find it almost impossible not to feel some use of my lower back when trying to hold the 90 degree stance, and just generally feel I have more muscles in play when trying it. More muscles in use, more natural movement and less stability IMO.
We are evolved to use our hands in front of our bodies, not sticking straight out to the sides. (Name one thing people do on a daily basis with their arm sticking out sideways.) I've heard the argument that your arm is more neutral in that position, but frankly that's just not true. If you relax your body, your arms don't stick straight out sideways! We are evolved from four-legged animals, and a sleeping dog, for example, doesn't have its legs jutting out at 90 degrees with its stomach on the ground. ;-)
