First match!

[will marshall]

Wow had my first match today. Was way more fun than I expected. I've shot USPSA before. I think USPSA was definately more fun but I didn't realize how much I need to slow down. I hit every target and had fast times. But I had minus points on every single target! Really need to sloooow down.

I'm in the military and use the weaver stance. I tried at this match to do the isoceles type shooting. I found it very hard to line the sights up with my arms fully extended(i'm 6'4" so those arms are long). When using weaver its very easy as the sights are about 1 foot from my face instead of 3-4. I was using novak rear all black sight with a fiber optic front to. Kept hitting low, probably because it's an H&K USP and im not used to the european style sighting system where you aim over the target and not pumpkin on a post style.

I bought brian's book so maybe that will sort things out for me. It's very distressing to shoot so bad when thats a big part of my job. Should I go back to weaver or keep trying the isocelles. I don't care that i've spent 1.6 billion hours training on the weaver, if the isocelles works better i'll switch to that.

[JimmyZip]

Well this year I switched after shooting Weaver since I was 11. I am now turning 40 this year and it took a good month of dryfiring three times a week for me to get rid of Weaver stance.

What I did discover though was that when you use the proper thumbs forward grip, the isoceles stance will feel better and more natural. (At least after a couple of weeks) Also, if I grip primarily with the support hand, I find the sights track very consistently. This really made my accuracy better, so your post is where I was with grip and stance six-seven months ago.

Now I can't believe I ever used Weaver, but it was THE WAY some really great shooter taught back in the 70s and 80s and guess who I went to for pointers in the 80s?

I too am 6'4", and can't speak to the alignment issues. I do not find the extra distance to the front sight a problem. I have been shooting both eyes open and looking at the front sight the same way all my life so I don't know. Hopefully someone with that issue will chime in.

On the Weaver thing again, you will see it try and come back after a reload or when you do any type of odd start, because that is what your muscle memory knows. So, when you practice the iso, load some dummy rounds so that you can practice unloaded starts and such as this is where you will find it lurking. You need to be consistent to imprint the new on your muscle memory. This will make you better all around anyway because you might be practicing what you might not normally, and that is just a plus.

Well that's my story and I'm sticking with it.

Jimmy

[Jane]

I've got less years of experience than either of you guys.

When I started shooting, the classes at Front Sight insisted on Weaver.

After I started shooting IDPA/USPSA, I found that it's hard to run around much and stick to Weaver

What helped me a lot were some of Matt Burkett's DVDs. He points out that the handgun challenge isn't recoil (which the Weaver advocates emphasized to me), but rather muzzle-flip... and he's got some good pointers for dealing with that.

And there's nothing that says your arms have to be locked in isoceles. I really think you'd find the DVDs a worthwhile expenditure of 40 bucks.

[will marshall]

Jimmy thats exactly what was happening I think. Since it was my first time doing IDPA and I was all amped up I think I ended up doing like isoceles at first because Im still trying to switch and then after the reloads or stage movement I would find myself doing weaver. So I was doing some horrible hybrid of the two. Not recommended;) More snap cap drills for me:( Oh well more snap cap drills are always good to slowly whittle away at my USP's double action trigger.

Jane, I'll try the DVD. Books can only show you so much you know?

[Duane Thomas]

I hit every target and had fast times. But I had minus points on every single target! Really need to sloooow down.

Well, that's one possible approach. You could slow down and become more accurate. Orrrrrr....you could keep shooting fast and become more accurate. Which do you think is more desirable?

[Duane Thomas]

I'm in the military and use the weaver stance. I tried at this match to do the isoceles type shooting.

Did you practice the new technique extensively, dry and live fire, for weeks before the match, or did you just go to the match and "try to shoot isosceles"?

[Duane Thomas]

Kept hitting low, probably because it's an H&K USP and im not used to the european style sighting system where you aim over the target and not pumpkin on a post style.

Not sure I understand the "aim over the target" comment. The HK USP uses a conventional post/notch sight system. If the sights are zeroed properly, it should be a simple matter of putting the front sight right where you want the bullet to impact. (?)

[will marshall]

Kept hitting low, probably because it's an H&K USP and im not used to the european style sighting system where you aim over the target and not pumpkin on a post style.

Not sure I understand the "aim over the target" comment. The HK USP uses a conventional post/notch sight system. If the sights are zeroed properly, it should be a simple matter of putting the front sight right where you want the bullet to impact. (?)

The sights come zeroed from the factory in the european style which is where your POA needs to be over the center of the bullseye to have a POI of dead center at 25m. Other sights like SIG's from the factory are designed to have a POA of the pumpkin on the post style with the sights below the lowest part of the center ring at 25m to have a POI of dead center. Really only a difference of 1-2 inches which is more accurate than I am at 25m without a rest anyways.

[mjoy64]

I hit every target and had fast times. But I had minus points on every single target! Really need to sloooow down.

Well, that's one possible approach. You could slow down and become more accurate. Orrrrrr....you could keep shooting fast and become more accurate. Which do you think is more desirable?

I sure am glad to see someone else say this. For whatever reason, my results never seemed to be better when I adopted, the "shoot A's as fast as you see them" mentality. For me (and this is just my personal experience), I seem to be progressing with my vision and thinking starting to catch up to my desire to go fast.

I realize I'm probably not in the majority of current thought on this issue but... I'm sure there is more than one way to skin a cat!

[Glshooter]

Back to the stance issue, I took the defensive courses and was taught to shoot weaver but once I started IDPA, stances went out the window. Don't know about where you guys shoot but there are not many stages by me where you just stand and shoot. When shooting from behind cover, moving, seated, etc, you have to adapt to the situation. No specific stance is suitable for most shooting positions.

[Duane Thomas]

True, however it's still a very desirable thing to put a fair amount of effort figuring out out what is the "perfect" stance for you. Once you've learned to shoot from a "perfect" stance that allows your absolute maximum performance, what you find is that there's really nothing that a match, or life, can throw at you that's anything more than a minor modification off the perfect stance.

[Duane Thomas]

The sights come zeroed from the factory in the european style which is where your POA needs to be over the center of the bullseye to have a POI of dead center at 25m.

Really. Wow. That's the first I've ever heard of that.

[MemphisMechanic]

STANCE

I would suggest putting in the effort to learn an iso/thumbs-forward grip on your own time, using a combination of a LOT of dryfire, and as much live fire as needed.

However, based on experiences with two local 60yr old weaver shooters, your subconscious will eventually modify your stance into what you need to shoot quickly, move, and transition between targets to finish a stage quickly and smoothly. In other words, if you compete in IPSC or IDPA with a goal set on improving... You will eventually be an iso. shooter whether you like it or not.

Notice that I said STANCE. You need to unlearn the thumbs-crossed or thumbs-down grip on your own.

SIGHTS

I've had some experience with guns set up for a 6 o'clock hold. I hate them. POA is where it's at. If the tip of the sight blade is tucked in underneath some hardcover, I want the bullet to land in the -0 ... not in the hardcover just above it.

[RobMoore]

I happened to take a break from my 4th time reading through Brian's book "Beyond Fundamentals", on page 46, where he talks about stance, when I saw this thread. How coincidental.

To your question as to which of the two you should develop, weaver or iso, I suggest developing yourself an iso based stance. Here is why:

I'm paraphrasing from the book a bit here, but the purpose of the grip and stance is to recover from recoil precisely, consistently, and quickly. When your body is lined up behind the gun (modern iso) the recoil can be absorbed more evenly, thus requiring less muscle tension and keeping the sights tracking along a consistent line, with minimal correction needed shot to shot (ideally none)

With weaver, the force of recoil is pushing mostly on the strong side of your body, causing you to use muscle tension to balance the force, which means you probably need more corrective input to return the sights to the intended point of aim. Makes sense that if your focus is on going fast, and you need more sight correction shot to shot than you should, and you're not giving yourself time to make that correction, the result will be -1, -3, or miss.

Good call on buying the book, do you have it handy or is it in the mail?

Edited March 18, 2009 by RobMoore