Support index finger in front of trigger guard?

[perttime]

There's always the Weaver Stance...

But seriously, good technique and enough strength can minimize muzzle flip. For mere mortals like me, there's a point where trying to minimize gun movement results in worse hits and slower speed.

[AzShooter]

I thought I stopped putting my finger on the trigger guard.  Worked on it for months but obviously in  the moment or truth I go back to what I learned.  A picture tells a 1000 words.  I don't have to think about putting it there it just comes natural to me.

 

Edited December 28, 2016 by AzShooter

[DukeEB]

19 hours ago, Jake Di Vita said:

 

 

I just can't get on board with this line of thinking.

I think both speed and accuracy at speed are negatively effected by being soft behind the gun. Ron is a good enough shooter that I'm surprised he would say something other than this.

No one is trying to "defeat" the gun. The goal of a proper stance and grip is to redirect as much of the energy from recoil as possible through your body into the ground instead of letting the muzzle do whatever it wants. The better you can do this the more control you'll have over the gun and the less it will move during recoil. I think it's logical to say the less the gun moves the faster you'll be back on target and the closer you'll be to where it was during the previous shot.

Squeeze hard and never stop driving the gun to the target.

It's not about being "soft".  It's about overcoming the flinch response.  Ron wrote about it in this page.  Check it out and see if it makes more sense to you.  Overcoming the flinch response: "Let recoil happen!"

[Jake Di Vita]

2 hours ago, DukeEB said:

It's not about being "soft".  It's about overcoming the flinch response.  Ron wrote about it in this page.  Check it out and see if it makes more sense to you.  Overcoming the flinch response: "Let recoil happen!"

I've read the article and I think there is a lot of good stuff there but I disagree with a lot of it. I'm not going to break the article down point by point but I want to touch on a few specific areas.

Quote

Trying to excessively tense your body only makes recoil harsher and worsens the flinch. You must learn to grip the handgun without tensing the rest of your body.

On the face of this it seems ridiculous to me. I agree that excessive tension is bad although I bet our definitions of what that is are pretty different. The only way I can interpret this to make sense is he's saying feeling the impulse snap of the recoil is causing some people to flinch. Maybe that's true for some people but it just doesn't make any bit of difference to me and I'd encourage you to try to be the same way. He addresses the mental aspects of flinching in other areas of the article, but excluding brand new shooters I think most of the time the issues causing the flinch are just simple technical errors. 

Quote

As an experiment, stand with your hands extended out in front of you as if holding a handgun and tense every muscle in your body except your face and neck. Now have someone start tapping your hands with a closed fist. It will jar you right down to your toes. Now relax your shoulders, stomach, and legs while the person is tapping you. If done correctly, the feeling should be greatly reduced. What you are doing is letting your body absorb the recoil. You have turned a harsh, jarring punch into more of a push. You need to have just enough tension in your grip and stance so that the gun returns on target to the same point after recoil

The biggest thing I disagree with is the assertion that a relaxed body (I call this being soft behind the gun) will give you more control and decrease flinching. As I mentioned before, the end goal of my grip and stance is to transfer as much of the energy from recoil into the ground as I can. Ron seems to think if you relax the recoil energy just dissipates, but I don't think it works like that. You have to bleed the energy from recoil off somewhere, the places I know I don't want to do that are moving the gun and moving my body. The only avenue left is the ground. The path the energy has to take is through the arms, into the torso, into the legs, through the feet, and into the ground. It is readily apparent that energy does not move as well through a relaxed body as it does through a tight and integrated body. The efficiency of this kinetic chain is killed when a piece of it is relaxed, the weakest link analogy is applicable here. It's clearly an imperfect line to get from gun to ground through the body while standing which makes it all the more important you set your body up to give you as much of an advantage as possible. This is the braced neutral spine/hip position, knees/hips bent, weight forward into the gun, tight from my toes to my fingertips.

So in my opinion, when Ron is telling you to relax your shoulders, stomach, and legs he is actually setting up the conditions for either letting the gun flip if your grip is bad or if your grip is good letting the gun push your body around. If I see your shoulders moving every time you fire the gun I know the energy is coming through your arms and blowing straight out the back of your shoulders. I'm a firm believer that it's extremely difficult to perform to the peak of your ability if you let the gun push you around.

He finishes that paragraph up talking about having just enough tension in your grip and stance that the gun returns to the same point after recoil. Now I think we have a philosophical difference. I don't want to put words in Ron's mouth, my impression is that he wants to "let" the gun return while I want to force the gun to return. To me the primary concern for forcing the gun to return is minimizing the amount that it moves. In my experience achieving that requires a good body position with a lot of force behind it. Both are required.

As far as minimizing the flinch. I think we have two differing concepts of how to shoot. The first is holding the gun on the target while moving only your trigger finger straight back to the rear of the gun gradually applying pressure until the shot breaks. The second is holding the gun on target and mashing the trigger fast while forcing the gun to stay still. I think the mentality between "don't let the gun move" and "I'm going to keep the gun still" are way different. Training to force the gun to remain still while you smesh (Khabib?) the trigger will inherently lead to fewer problems with flinching.

[DukeEB]

It's actually the opposite.  Having been through the training, I'm going to disagree with you on these points.  I won't press the issue however.

[Jake Di Vita]

6 minutes ago, DukeEB said:

It's actually the opposite.  Having been through the training, I'm going to disagree with you on these points.  I won't press the issue however.

By all means, please explain what you disagree with and why.

[DukeEB]

48 minutes ago, Jake Di Vita said:

By all means, please explain what you disagree with and why.

I can't articulate it well enough to do it justice, that's the main reason   But i'll try.

A major part of what he teaches is based on Kinesiology.

He did an exercise with the flinch that helped me understand it.  Load one round, bring it up, pull the trigger.  lower it, and raise it again and pull the trigger before your brain can adjust.  I did see a flinch in that exercise.

A relaxed body can absorb impact and recoil better than a tensed body.  I don't bleed off the energy, I absorb it.  The tension is in my grip, and in my arms, not the rest of my body.  If I'm riding in the back of truck on a bumpy road (standing up), I don't tense up, I relax my body to absorb the impacts and roll with it.

For the philosophical difference section, he promotes a strong grip as a major component. The pressure is applied front to back, straight lines.  The gun will come back to the same spot naturally, and quickly.  I don't need to "force" it down like I'm fighting it.  One other thing he teaches on this is that you can use the force of the recoil to assist in your target transitions

For trigger pulling, what he teaches is that it is one motion.  It should end at the same speed that it started. 

I hope I was able to convey at least a sense of what he means and trains.  I believe it's made me a better shooter.

 

[Jake Di Vita]

7 minutes ago, DukeEB said:

He did an exercise with the flinch that helped me understand it.  Load one round, bring it up, pull the trigger.  lower it, and raise it again and pull the trigger before your brain can adjust.  I did see a flinch in that exercise.

I don't think I'm accurately picturing the drill you're describing. If you could link a video, that'd be helpful. I can't speak further to it until I know for sure what you're talking about.

11 minutes ago, DukeEB said:

A relaxed body can absorb impact and recoil better than a tensed body.  I don't bleed off the energy, I absorb it.  The tension is in my grip, and in my arms, not the rest of my body.  If I'm riding in the back of truck on a bumpy road (standing up), I don't tense up, I relax my body to absorb the impacts and roll with it.

Please send me a link to a video of you shooting as I'd like to see what you absorbing recoil looks like. I'm willing to bet that your shoulders are being pushed around at the minimum.

If I'm riding on a bumpy road, I make sure my back is straight with a tight stomach. The basics of good posture don't change regardless of what you are doing. The braced neutral spine position is the safest and strongest position for our backs to be in for almost anything. However just adopting the position isn't enough, you also need to actively stabilize it by contracting the muscles around it which of course are the abs, spinal erectors, etc. If I'm lifting something really heavy, or trying to apply force in some other way, the first thing I do is set body position, then I squeeze myself into that same position with the stabilizing muscles, then I do that activity. We're a biological machine. The principles that apply in strong and safe fundamental movement (pressing, squatting, deadlifting, running, etc) are universal. They are the most fundamental expressions of human movement. When I'm shooting I'm only maybe 50% as tight as I would be if I were deadlifting but the same principles of setting a neutral spine then stabilizing it apply. I just don't need the same level of stability to shoot as I do to deadlift.

To say that a relaxed body can absorb impact and recoil better than a tensed body is something I just can't agree with. If you're talking about a car accident or falling off a cliff then yeah sure maybe but I don't think that applies to shooting or most other athletics. You aren't going to tell me that you wouldn't tighten your belly if you were gonna get hit in it.  Being at least a little bit tight is a requirement for good posture. If I'm awake, I'm at least 10% tight. It's literally an all day every day thing.

Humans have an ideal position for any activity that varies with the anthropometry of the person. The best position might look a bit different from person to person, but it is applied the same way. Unfortunately it just doesn't happen on it's own while being relaxed.

32 minutes ago, DukeEB said:

For the philosophical difference section, he promotes a strong grip as a major component. The pressure is applied front to back, straight lines.  The gun will come back to the same spot naturally, and quickly.  I don't need to "force" it down like I'm fighting it.  One other thing he teaches on this is that you can use the force of the recoil to assist in your target transitions

I'm in total agreement for the stronger grip, although he talks about a firm handshake. I think that is much too soft. I also don't apply it anything like he recommends. I was talking about this to a protege of mine last night, I'll copy and paste what I wrote to him about my grip.

Strong hand is as high on the gun as possible. With my weak hand, the first thing I do is try to reach the base knuckle of my index finger past the trigger guard. When I wrap my grip my support hand is squeezing hard in a bit of a cupping/clamping motion that creates a ton of friction on that first knuckle back against the trigger guard. If you're doing it right you'll severely callus (first blister) the outside of your support index finger first knuckle and eventually the callus gets big enough that it catches on the trigger guard and slightly increases your friction. From there the rest of my hands are crushing inward towards the top of the gun which I do while trying to not let my elbows raise high and outside. I feel all of this executed together makes for a very firm and stable grip that doesn't easily slip while shooting. I don't worry much about the back of the gun except being as high as possible on it.

That's the basics of what I do, I think I've heard JJ describe his much in the same way. As you can tell it is radically different from what you described.

I think it's really difficult to get down to the real fast split and transition times when you're just riding the recoil and letting things happen on their own accord. No you don't NEED to force the gun down to shoot, but I firmly believe it is faster and better to constantly drive and force the gun to each target.

41 minutes ago, DukeEB said:

For trigger pulling, what he teaches is that it is one motion.  It should end at the same speed that it started. 

I don't even complicate it that much. In general, pull the trigger very quickly on all but the most challenging targets.

[DukeEB]

 

https://www.coreconcepts.com.sg/article/muscles-your-shock-absorbers/

 

"When muscles are tight, weak or poorly coordinated, their shock absorbing properties are limited.

Tight muscles have limited contracting range because they are already tense and short. Going back to the basketball example, it is like trying to gracefully slow the ball down from the point of impact over 1-2 inches towards the chest instead of 5-6 inches. Less momentum is bled off, leaving more for the rest of the body to absorb."

The punch in the stomach example is not the same as recoil in my opinion, because it's passive.  Accepting recoil is active.  Also, he's not saying to be limp or a jellyfish.

unfortunately, I don't have any videos online yet. I just took the class last September.  I do have a few on my phone, and I don't see my shoulders moving at all.  I have a lot of lead in my behind though lol.

 

[drewbeck]

The best way I've been able to explain it or convey it to others was as simple as this.

 

Your strong hand is the trigger puller, your weak hand is the vise. Close the vise as tight as you possibly can without disrupting the trigger puller.  If the sights move after the explosion, build a better vise.  If the sights move before the explosion, fix the trigger puller.  If you can't SEE the fire ball coming out of your hands to begin with, worrying about how you're holding it is pointless.

 

I think this is an impossibly question to try to answer because the question can only be answered by each person through self discovery.  

Here's my own example. I now shoot an open 2011 based gun. If I had my choice I'd shoot a glock frame/shape gun. Ergonomically my grip and hands fit better on a glock and I can control recoil far better than I can on the shape of the 2011.

To break the glock frame and grip down further, I can control a compact G19 way better than I can a full size G17. And I can manage recoil on the pocket G43 better than the subcompact G26.  On the G19, my index finger is front of the trigger guard and on the G43 my thumb is 1/4" from the muzzle and my index is in front of the trigger guard, wrapped around the frame and is in front of the ejection port riding the slide.

 

So in this example did my "grip" really change?  Does having my finger in front of the TG on the 19 make it better? Should I modify my grip on each gun so I'm holding it in a consistent way even when the ergonomics of the gun are different? 

I think people get too hung up in the "technique" and should be more worried about the fundamental aspect of doing whatever it takes to get the best possible grip you can on the specific gun you're holding in your hands at the time.

 

 

 

 

[ngodwetrust21]

Hmmmm.... I am just going to have to agree to disagree on the let recoil happen thing. Just doesn't make sense to me.

I am going to keep gripping the mess out of the gun with my finger in front of the trigger guard. I feel I have better control over the gun that way, the muzzle flip is lessened, the sights return faster, and it makes me feel more manly.

[Jerome]

Though I would add a Yong Lee take on the grip.

 

[ngodwetrust21]

18 minutes ago, Jerome said:

Though I would add a Yong Lee take on the grip.

 

This is what I try to do with my grip as well. Very informative post sir. Thank you for sharing that.

[Jake Di Vita]

10 hours ago, DukeEB said:

 

https://www.coreconcepts.com.sg/article/muscles-your-shock-absorbers/

 

"When muscles are tight, weak or poorly coordinated, their shock absorbing properties are limited.

Tight muscles have limited contracting range because they are already tense and short. Going back to the basketball example, it is like trying to gracefully slow the ball down from the point of impact over 1-2 inches towards the chest instead of 5-6 inches. Less momentum is bled off, leaving more for the rest of the body to absorb."

The punch in the stomach example is not the same as recoil in my opinion, because it's passive.  Accepting recoil is active.  Also, he's not saying to be limp or a jellyfish.

unfortunately, I don't have any videos online yet. I just took the class last September.  I do have a few on my phone, and I don't see my shoulders moving at all.  I have a lot of lead in my behind though lol.

 

Are you telling me that you shoot with arms that are the same degree of tightness as they would be if you were catching a ball? I think that's horrificly ineffective but if that's what you wanna do I'm not gonna stop you. The punch in the stomach was more an analogy towards when you said "absorbing impact". I don't know how you could think getting punched in the stomach is "passive" but you can think that if you want to.

He is saying to be relaxed. That is one tiny step above limp. I don't think that's ideal in any way shape or form and I'd be happy to test my ability to manage recoil and by extension raw speed against Ron or anyone else. I'm telling you right now, anyone that is relaxed and rides recoil from shot to shot is not going to be able to keep up with me.

 

9 hours ago, drewbeck said:

I think people get too hung up in the "technique" and should be more worried about the fundamental aspect of doing whatever it takes to get the best possible grip you can on the specific gun you're holding in your hands at the time.

Uhhh I don't know about you, but I'd call the fundamental aspect of gripping a gun technique.

[DukeEB]

9 minutes ago, Jake Di Vita said:

Are you telling me that you shoot with arms that are the same degree of tightness as they would be if you were catching a ball? I think that's horrificly ineffective but if that's what you wanna do I'm not gonna stop you. The punch in the stomach was more an analogy towards when you said "absorbing impact". I don't know how you could think getting punched in the stomach is "passive" but you can think that if you want to.

He is saying to be relaxed. That is one tiny step above limp. I don't think that's ideal in any way shape or form and I'd be happy to test my ability to manage recoil and by extension raw speed against Ron or anyone else. I'm telling you right now, anyone that is relaxed and rides recoil from shot to shot is not going to be able to keep up with me.

 

Uhhh I don't know about you, but I'd call the fundamental aspect of gripping a gun technique.

Thanks for the discussion.  I'm going to stick with Ron's science based approach.   Have a great day!

[ngodwetrust21]

O snap! Ron's approach is science based. Now I just feel silly...

[Jake Di Vita]

15 minutes ago, DukeEB said:

Thanks for the discussion.  I'm going to stick with Ron's science based approach.   Have a great day!

Yep. But, "science based"? C'mon. I hope you don't think quoting a random coreconcepts article qualifies as science and proof of the validity of your technique. That doesn't even address my primary point of tension in the core to create more intra-abdominal pressure which helps stabilize the spine and therefore the rest of the body. You're really cherry picking the points that you respond to while I'm trying to address everything you're trying to say. I'd appreciate it if you'd put as much effort into this conversation as I have.

Remember you're talking about "absorbing recoil" while I'm talking about transferring the energy into the ground. The concepts are completely opposite. I've tried it your way. Have you tried it my way? I bet you haven't, and you really should at least experience both before you say one way is better don't you think?

Ron's recommendations are just that..recommendations. They are what he wants to do/teach and it works pretty good for him, and that's totally cool. I get that he's your guy and you're behind him, but let's not put things on artificial pedestals. Science is only as good as the information you put into it. Some of the stuff I've read is questionable at best.

[CHA-LEE]

If shooters spend the same amount of time training their grip strength as they do talking about gripping guns one way or another this whole discussion wouldn't exist. 

As Jake has probably said many times already, it takes focused and dedicated training effort to figure out and refine an optimal grip that effectively manages the recoil and allows you to shoot at an aggressive pace with a high level of accuracy.

What I see a lot of shooters do, is talk about different techniques but never really put much effort behind truly vetting each technique to actually know which one is better. This does not only apply to gripping the gun but pretty much any skill or technique we leverage while shooting.

Step outside your comfort zone and actually put some training effort into understanding, testing, and learning things. Oh wait, that takes dedication and work which most shooters are really not willing to do. Most shooters simply want to show up to the range and use whatever technique they feel is going to work best with their current skill set because its too much effort to actually try to build a skill set that works properly.

Are you trying to figure out what works for you or what you can work towards figuring out? These are two completely different scenarios that also have completely different outcomes.

[drewbeck]

1 hour ago, Jake Di Vita said:

10 hours ago, drewbeck said:

I think people get too hung up in the "technique" and should be more worried about the fundamental aspect of doing whatever it takes to get the best possible grip you can on the specific gun you're holding in your hands at the time.

Uhhh I don't know about you, but I'd call the fundamental aspect of gripping a gun technique.

I was more referring to technique as it relates to the nuances of whether a finger in front of the trigge guard is better or worse, thumbs forward or flying in the wind, etc.  To me, the fundamentals of grip are get your hands as high as possible, get as much meat on the gun as possible, and squeeze it as hard as possible without disrupting the sights.  After that a person has to figure out to make it comfortable and consistent

[Jake Di Vita]

20 minutes ago, drewbeck said:

I was more referring to technique as it relates to the nuances of whether a finger in front of the trigge guard is better or worse, thumbs forward or flying in the wind, etc.  To me, the fundamentals of grip are get your hands as high as possible, get as much meat on the gun as possible, and squeeze it as hard as possible without disrupting the sights.  After that a person has to figure out to make it comfortable and consistent

I get where you're coming from, and I agree the fundamentals you listed are for the most part the most important things. However, I do think it is valuable to analyze the grip deeper along with how it relates and works with your stance. For example, along with what you listed I think it's valuable to clamp the hands inward towards the top of the gun. That's probably not something that will happen accidentally or when just using a general overview to develop your grip.

I don't view comfort as a concern. I tell people all the time if it feels nice and comfortable it's probably wrong or at least not as good as it could be. I'm a big believer that it takes effort to do things correctly and most of the time the effort and body positions required are uncomfortable. My hands don't feel good after a dryfire session. It's real comfortable to stand up straight with a loose grip and dry fire, I'm sure both of us would call that a bad idea.

Edited December 29, 2016 by Jake Di Vita

[drewbeck]

Agreed with all the above.  And it should be about as comfortable as doing squats.  You shouldn't experience shooting pain but if it's comfortable your not getting much out of it.

 

not sure if your married but I also found that my ring was a hindrance because I couldn't squeeze as hard due to it crushing my finger of my strong hand.  

[KrymSIX]

One thing that I really liked about Jerry's video is he openly states that plenty of top shooters have won big competitions with variations of those two grips. So I think finding out what works for you would might make playing around a bit with both styles of grips. 

One interesting thing with Vogels grip video was that he mentioned having the weakside hand pointer finger riding under the trigger guard. So I wonder if that position does something similar to having a finger in front of the trigger guard? 

Great info in both of those vids. Great to hear the logic behind why shooters are choosing one grip or another.

[BeerBaron]

On 30 December 2016 at 9:12 AM, drewbeck said:

Agreed with all the above.  And it should be about as comfortable as doing squats.  You shouldn't experience shooting pain but if it's comfortable your not getting much out of it.

 

not sure if your married but I also found that my ring was a hindrance because I couldn't squeeze as hard due to it crushing my finger of my strong hand.  

Yes. I remove my wedding band to shoot. Painful otherwise  

also plus1 on the callus thing. My support hand index finger has a nice callus on outside of the knuckle. Maybe I'm doing something right!?

i do agree the whole 'let the gun do its thing' approach may work for slow bullseye shooting but it's flawed in action/practical shooting. You need control of the gun both to shoot fast second shots and to drive the gun between targets. If you're letting it recoil you're wasting time. There's a reason jake can shoot .12 splits or lower and hit 2 A's and it's because he's squeezing the snot out of the gun. A 'firm handshake' is not going to cut it. 

I took a grip dyno to a match one day and tested a bunch of guys for fun. Almost universally the best shooters had massive grip strength in both hands. 

Edited January 5, 2017 by BeerBaron

[ThomasPI]

Do it with my Walther but not my Glocks, yet anyway.

[rowdyb]

for my hand size it doesn't work. for people with larger hands and the right shape of trigger guard they seem to love it.

 

for a long time i wore my wedding ring on my right hand due to a finger injury on the left hand. my tungsten wedding ring wore grooves in my pistol grips/frame. i now wear a silicone wedding ring back on the traditional american left hand and notice zero issues with it bothering my hurt finger or when smashing my hands together to shoot the gun.

Edited January 31, 2017 by rowdyb