TargetTalk

I came across this drawing that represents several stances a shooter can adopt when shooting an ISSF pistol contest:



Please, note that this little drawing may have a copyright to which I'm not aware of.

Myself, I shoot like in position "C"--10º to 15º to the right.

I know of many people using the "B" stance as well.

I may have seen somebody use the "A" stance once or twice.

But I have never seen no one using the stance represented in "D"--please note the feet position. So I would like to know who uses it and in which disciplines it may be advisable to use such a position.

I shoot B.

Most at my club shoot A or C.

The only pistol discipline that I shoot is AP, and my position is close to B.
My left foot would be a fraction further forward, by slightly more than the length of the big toe.
I have, in the past, experimented with a position more like D.
I don't think I've ever seen A.

I only shoot free and air, I shoot about between B and D, probably closer to D, some times it varies a little bit either way throughout a match I shot sport pistol 2 times last year as a junior last year and in dueling i adopted position C. Also i shoot right hand left eye

i shoot AP and i used to shoot position D but i found that the sway of the body was greater in this position i have now moved to position B but then someone said that the new position is now 22% to the target and now i have tried this one i seem to be edging towards the A/B position and i find this one gives less sway on the target but i have only just started to use it so my shots are not going straight at the moment until i refine it ,

Beware, every poisition has faults as illustrated. Go to the AMU manual for most correct information. Good Shooting Bill Horton

Folks,

the AMU and other expert opinion usually suggests starting around 45 degrees and then refining. That is C. But so far most of the respondents are using something more like the old eighteenth century duelling position (B-D).

I find this surprising, because the head has to be turned so far.

Myself I use A, and even a little tighter than A, but this is specific to my wheelchair shooting platform, which I believe benefits from major use of the chair back to maintain stability. If I could get the same stability farther out I would use C (and did for a long time) because that is where the head and shoulder seem most natural.

Bill: What is your angle? Closer to A or closer to B ?

Best Regards,

Gordon

Response, My angle is closer to C, but the foot position is very unusual as most shooters use a slightly toe out to increase the size of the support area and to relax the leg muscles. Good Shooting, Bill Horton

Bill,

That is what I expected. And I think it is most natural.

I mispoke in post. My position is not quite A. I have my arm as close to ninety degrees as I can get without having to push it there. So the arm is just slightly to the outside where the shoulder wants it to be.

Best Regards,

Gordon

From what I understand you have the best ability to hold still using plus or minus about 10 to 15% from straight. this however makes your muscles more tired than shooting in position B so can be detremental towards the end of a match, then there is many other factors to take into account like body shape, eye dominance, disabilities ect. There isnt really a right or wrong way just what works best to produce the best score.

Muffo wrote:From what I understand you have the best ability to hold still using plus or minus about 10 to 15% from straight. this however makes your muscles more tired than shooting in position B so can be detremental towards the end of a match, then there is many other factors to take into account like body shape, eye dominance, disabilities ect. There isnt really a right or wrong way just what works best to produce the best score.

Agreed :)

I agree TOTALLY with that statement " . . . many other factors to take into account like body shape, eye dominance, disabilities ect. There isn't really a right or wrong way just what works best to produce the best score . . . "

But while I am in "boisterous agreement" with the fact, there is a related issue.

. . . people get tired of hearing "you have to look at 'expert recommendations' as guidelines to start with to figure out what works best for you as an individual" . . .

1. Most people want the "magic shortcut"
2. Most people don't really know how to "figure out what works for them:"
a. They don't know what they are looking for in terms of "better"
b. They are uncomfortable with trying different techniques
c. They aren't sure what a good process would be for "experimenting" in this way

So

The standard answer "you have to figure out what works best for you" while 100% absolutely true . . .

. . . seems to be equally absolutely useless for a lot of folks.

Therefore

We need more good coaches!!!!!

[which of course opens up the argument about "what makes for a good coach!]

Steve

We need more. We are lucky when we can find one. We shouldn't necessarily expect that good coaching is free just because for most shooters, this is a hobby.

Qualities in good coaching:

Understanding of the mechanics (physical, mental AND equipment) with an ability to observe, analyze and communicate the evaluation to a student.

And a quick follow to the above statement: enthusiasm to encourage, prod and inspire dedicated efforts toward improvement.

Lastly, it wouldn't be amiss for a coach to have above average demonstrable skill. It is not totally necessary, but students will respect and listen a bit more intently to an instructor/coach who walks the walk.

For Steve: I know (and have followed for some time) your exceptions to Russ Diatlov, but based on my personal experience, he meets/exceeds the above criteria. That alone is not going to make me a great shooter, but I have tools with which to dissect the process and work on improving. It is up to me for the results. To your point regarding the "what works for you" being useless unless gained through some guidance, I couldn't agree with you more!

Craig

Steve Swartz as Guest wrote:I agree TOTALLY with that statement " . . . many other factors to take into account like body shape, eye dominance, disabilities ect. There isn't really a right or wrong way just what works best to produce the best score . . . "

But while I am in "boisterous agreement" with the fact, there is a related issue.

. . . people get tired of hearing "you have to look at 'expert recommendations' as guidelines to start with to figure out what works best for you as an individual" . . .

1. Most people want the "magic shortcut"
2. Most people don't really know how to "figure out what works for them:"
a. They don't know what they are looking for in terms of "better"
b. They are uncomfortable with trying different techniques
c. They aren't sure what a good process would be for "experimenting" in this way

So

The standard answer "you have to figure out what works best for you" while 100% absolutely true . . .

. . . seems to be equally absolutely useless for a lot of folks.

Therefore

We need more good coaches!!!!!

[which of course opens up the argument about "what makes for a good coach!]

Steve

Thats why my post contains more than just saying what works for you. I continually here people telling new shooters to close their eyes then raise the pistol and open their eyes and if the pistol points to the right then close their stance, or if it points to left then open their stance. they tell them this is their natural point of aim and its where they should shoot. I think that NPOA is a learnt thing and this technique should be used after you have been shooting for a while, training to keep the same position.

Muffo, I like your description of how one should arrive at determining their NPA. IMHO the absolute worst approach is to try to copy the best shooter on the line at the moment. My issue is that I am only certain about the solutions that work for me and hesitate to advise anyone on the basis of something I heard another shooter [ no matter how good he may have been ] describe as I may have misunderstood him or we just didn't communicate well. So, I will have to stick with those things of which I have tested in competition and believe that I really do understand what I'm talking about. This approach will at least keep me honest, and the information I post true to how I do our thing. I say again your comment is one of the best description of a way to arrive at a correct NPA that I have seen on this forum. Good Shooting Bill HOrton

It's in all the books, and then they moderate it by telling you how to test your NPA. Don't expect to find much more advice than what's already been given by a bunch of respected authorities.

What may we add? Well, som ideas maybe.

Here's one that I intend to test further:
which stance makes you able to stand steady?
Just stand upright looking past a reference point ( like a piece of tape on a window, anything stationary really) and at a background with other reference points (the neighbours house, a telephone post etc.). Just stand and see whether you can keep the close and distant marks aligned. You may also close your eyes and see where you are when opening them.
If you can't stand still, your gun arm has to make corrections for the movement: no good!

So check out different foot positions, different shoes, toe-in and toe-out etc. Try sitting in a chair: notice how much easier it is to shoot sitting?

BTW:
my stance looks a bit like C, guess that's pretty normal, and maybe for a reason. Works fine for me, main reason is my arm/shoulder works best that way.

Just my 2 cents.......

ok earlier i said i shoot in position A but have just started to try it out well the shots were like a sub machine gun and no matter wghat i did i couldnt hit the bull got close but not in it so i have gone back to poss C and they all came back to the bull just got to refine this position now i suffer with dry eyes and its a nightmare running water everywhere how you can call it dry eyes when they leak like a tap i dont know this can cause me to see a second ghost target and if i pull teh trigger when this is showing you can bet it will go to the 6 ring aint old age a bitch

[quote="luftskytter"]

Try sitting in a chair: notice how much easier it is to shoot sitting?

quote]

Hi Luft,

Actually this is a common misconception. Many people assume this to be true, so I think it is worth pointing out that it ain`t so. Shooting from a chair is not easier.

At the paralympics everybody has the option of shooting sitting down, and yet the majority do not. Here are some photos from Beijing and Athens to illustrate the point.

First two qualifying round pics.

http://img10.beijing2008.cn/20080910/Img214594923.jpg

http://www.daylife.com/photo/0fpC48fcvSbTC

and a pic of a gold medalist in the finals

http://www.daylife.com/photo/0bNLeMM9LDgkr

These guys are all at the very top of the sport. And as you can see, three out of four shoot standing allthough all could sit if they wished.

Of course, to be fair there really some are who have no choice but to sit, and here is one of them, with once again, standing shooters farther down the line.

http://www.jamd.com/image/g/51321570

Best Regards,

Gordon

Gordon:

I won't argue with that, and this is an opportunity to address another idea:

Easy/pleasant/secure or even heakthy is not always synonymous with "maximum potential" or "best results under strain". And what functions at club level may be a hindrance if you want to progress further.

I do believe that shooters at a basic level will mostly see improved results when using all manner of support systems.

I remember reading one of the Russian coaches finding that some of his top level shooters were shocked to find that teir accuracy didn't improve much when shooting with wrist support.

But as a basic level AP shooter I certainly notice a dramatic improvement , not compared to my best shots, but in "reliability" and steadiness of hold. If I had the ability to produce my best shots all the time, it wouldn't make much difference. I guess that's what separates me from better shots!

Just to illustrate:
last week we had an informal 30 shot club match where I performed significantly below my normal level. Looking at the targets, this was mainly caused by 4 stray shots. If I'd sorted these 4 pellets out to be just my everyday average, I would have shot a score that could be considered normal for me. So at a basic level it's the ability to avoid those shots below par that makes you improve.

At a higher level (and that would include Paralympics) it's another game.

luftskytter wrote:Gordon:

Easy/pleasant/secure or even heakthy is not always synonymous with "maximum potential" or "best results under strain". And what functions at club level may be a hindrance if you want to progress further.

Luft,

This reminds me of what Muffo wrote ealier in the thread:

Muffo
"you have the best ability to hold still using plus or minus about 10 to 15% from straight. this however makes your muscles more tired than shooting in position B so can be detremental towards the end of a match"

I take this to mean that for many people C would be best if they have the physical condition to finish a match with it.

And in the same way, shooting sitting down may relax a person, because they have all those muscles they don't have to think about, but if you have masered the use of all those muscles, then the standing platform is better.


luftskytter:
"If I had the ability to produce my best shots all the time, it wouldn't make much difference. I guess that's what separates me from better shots! ...I performed significantly below my normal level. Looking at the targets, this was mainly caused by 4 stray shots."

Boy do I understand that statement! Definitely the same for me.

To track my progress (or lack thereof), I follow three results:

How many good shots (for me these are nines and tens)
How many tens
How many stinkers (for me I say this is wide of the eight ring)

It is interesting to see how these things average out to produce scores. I always find something positive to console myself with. For instance, I might say, "The score was a little low, and I didn't get many tens, but at least I had nothing outside the eight" (translation: I have more eights than tens). Or again, "it was too bad about that six, but all the other shots are in the nine ring so my group is very good". Maybe, "Only six of my shots are in the nine, but five of those are tens. And that is five very good shots even if I have two sevens to spoil it."

It is very frustrating to be under score, when you know that most of your shots are good.

This is definitely the hurdle seperaing us from the elite.

Best Regards,

Gordon