Your grip

[JD45]

Over the years I have changed the way I hold a pistol slightly. I also woke up one day and realized that the old push/pull Weaver stance that I use had transformed into more of a "Chapman" type hold.

I never tried to change, it just happened. I would like to hear if anyone else has noticed their grip or stance change.

My main question is about trying to conciously change my grip and stance to what the Masters use. I currently grip strong-hand thumb curled down, under the safety, weak-hand thumb locked down over strong thumb. No more push-pull, and the sharp bend in the weak elbow is more like a Chapman stance now.

Should I switch to what most of the top guys use? And will it take forever to change?

[short_round]

I never tried to change, it just happened. I would like to hear if anyone else has noticed their grip or stance change.

I am experiencing this ... it hasn't been a mostly conscious effort either. At times during practice there are stance positions and grip relationships that I concentrate on.

However, when it's game time and I get into a shooting stance I let my body flow into what "feels" natural (basically into what I have been training it to do). Sometimes at the end I look around and think, "that was a little different." If I made the shots and the difference was good I try to identify what the change was and absorb it a little more ...

[ErikW]

I changed my grip consciously years ago, and maybe my stance with it too. I've noticed my stance evolving to move my strong foot back a bit (from pure neutral isoceles) for indexing my draw on the first target.

[short_round]

Should I switch to what most of the top guys use?

If you experiment and find out that it works for you.

And will it take forever to change?

Life is change.

[Duane Thomas]

I consciously changed my stance from Chapman to Isosceles, and my grip from thumb-over-thumb to the straight-thumbs "IPSC grip" and thence, recently, to a grip that's almost the same except the support hand thumb is curled down. To see what I mean, click on this link and scroll down to the photo that says, "You just can't have too much materializin'."

http://brianenos.com/pages/phbc.misc.html

As time goes by, your technique will change, sometimes subconsciously, sometimes as a conscious act of will. Those who never change, stagnate.

[Pierruiggi]

When I first started shooting, a humble 4 years ago, I was taught the "basic" stances, such as weaver, old style iso and one handed bullseye kind. From day one I felt really uncomfortable with old style iso and one handed bullseye so I kept using a bastard not technically correct weaver (like for example, not always using push pull, hand position in the gun varied a lot etc.), that later transformed into a kinda chapman with my strong arm straight.

Then I got interested in IPSC, and naturally I read every article on technique I could find and tried to imitate what I saw in the pictures of the pros. My shooting improved a lot from where I was, but still basically sucked.

Then I stumbled upon this forums and started to lurk a lot. From here I learned that "there is no one way to do it" and found that is way more important to understand what the gun is saying to you, how it responds to your technique, than trying to imitate some guy from some picture. I also learned that its also more important to understand and hopefully master the visual and mental aspect of shooting than having perfect text book technique.

Now, I developed a gripping (and overall shooting) style unique to myself that is in constant evolution, always changing based on small or big epyphanies that happen in my everyday life. I think this is what we all do, "feed" our technique from the experiences, findings and teachings of others and adapt them to suit us.

[Jasonub]

I used to do the weaver stance and after awhile it became isoceles without thought.

i think its an evolution, let the grip stance happen and it will

[Flexmoney]

Should I switch to what most of the top guys use? And will it take forever to change?

I did. My goal was to do better in matches. That meant having to get rid of some of the stuff I had been doing forever...and learn a "better" technique.

I worked on it in dryfire...and still found myself going back and forth in matches. So, I picked up some extra live fire to help speed the process.

Maybe it took me 6 month to complete the switch. It's not a thought or factor now. Well worth it to me.

[JD45]

Thanks everybody.

It just seems that nobody uses the Weaver stance anymore. Even searching this forum for Weaver doesn't come up with anything.

I really don't want to delay progress any farther. If the new way works and will help me improve faster, I'm ready to change. The years are flying by, and I want to be good before my hair turns white.

[SmittyFL]

The way I look at is this; look at what the best in the world do, and do it that way.

I was briefly looking at a thread on 1911 forum and a guy was asking about grip styles. Most folks seemed to be thumb over thumb because you "can't use an IPSC style grip with full house factory ammo". It's easy to tell the folks who get all their training from Guns n' Ammo.

I'm not saying look at one guy and copy what he does. But when everybody at the top of the sport does something one way, I think it's worth looking into.

[Zerwas]

I think a person owes it to themselves to try new methods. If it is an established grip that works for many an expert shooter, then heck yeah, try it out.

In my NRA classes, I teach "experienced" shooters new methods, and by golly a great number of them change to that style. It is very important to keep an open mind to new techniques.

[Pierruiggi]

The way I look at is this; look at what the best in the world do, and do it that way.

........

I'm not saying look at one guy and copy what he does. But when everybody at the top of the sport does something one way, I think it's worth looking into.

Be careful though, as not "everybody at the top of the sport" do everything the same way; look at the differences in technique of Rob Leatham and Eric Grauffel, for example.

I believe you are right when you say its woth "looking into" a technique , rather than adopt it. At first I started copying body and hand position of top shooters; then trying to adopt the subtleties of the technique from what I read in this forum mostly. I didn't get great results but I refused to change because that is how the pros did it, so it should be right.

Well, it seems its right for them individually, not for everyone, since everyone is different in many levels.

So I made variations on my style until it fitted ME, and I still make regular experiments, changing the way I do some things and see if it works better.

My point is that you should embrace the "core" and principles of a given techinique and make the appropriate changes to suit you.

In a few words: ADAPT a techqnique, don't ADOPT it.

[benos]

ADAPT a techqnique, don't ADOPT it.

That's a good one.

And don't be afraid to keep adapting.

It's never too late to start.

(Dennis Hopper)

[Pierruiggi]

Thanks Brian