Stance - Isosceles, Weaver, and Other

[KentF]

What impressed me aside from SLG's excellent instruction, was how squared away the students were. No problematic hobby pistols, no weaver stances, and spare mag carriers and good holsters were in abundance. Proper Isosceles stances were the rule of the day - no exceptions. The students I worked with needed only fine tuning. All in all, I believe these facts speak very highly about the makeup of this forum. We are shooters, not simply owners. Everyone there was truly there to learn.

With regards to SLG's instruction, I will bet money that there are many that have paid for instruction that did not rival the quality of SLG's. I've had the privilege of learning from a few distinguished folks (ToddG, Larry Vickers, Kyle Defoor), and I was making mental notes while Simon spoke and instructed.

What's with the hate for the Weaver Stance? I was taught the Weaver back in the early 1980's when I was LEO. I've tried Isosceles and have had some good luck with it, but for me -being cross-eye dominate- I find using a modified weaver it is easier to line up my sights.

I have no real preference one way or the other, but I am curious as to why the weaver has seemed to fall out of favor so much.

[joshs]

What's with the hate for the Weaver Stance?

This should probably be split off into its own thread, but I'll post the short answer version of why I dislike weaver.

-It doesn't look anything like what our bodies naturally do under stress.
-It sucks for shooting on the move.
-It isn't as good for recoil control.

That said, the modern isoceles isn't really a single stance, many shooters probably think of themselves as mod iso shooters, but there are many individual variations. For example, when I get to choose how to place my feet, I prefer to have my strong side foot significantly farther back than most iso shooters. I also roll my elbows out and up which keeps my arms from looking anything like a triangle. I find the rolled out elbows helps me use my chest to grip the gun.

[JV_]

This should probably be split off into its own thread

I moved his post before you finished replying, but your reply ended up in the correct thread, pretty slick!

[LittleLebowski]

What do you see Sevigny and others winning national championships with, Kent?

[joshs]

I've tried Isosceles and have had some good luck with it, but for me -being cross-eye dominate- I find using a modified weaver it is easier to line up my sights.

What do you see Sevigny and others winning national championships with, Kent?

Sorry, I forgot to address cross dominance in my previous post, but its interesting that Sevigny's stance was mentioned because I think he is also a cross dominate. If you move the gun toward your dominant eye side slightly, it should line up perfectly with your dominant eye and the target. Doing a press out helps because you will be aligning the gun with you dominant eye during the press out, so everything should be lined up by the time you reach extension. If moving the gun feels to awkward, you can try turning you head a very small amount to line up the sights.

[Tamara]

What's with the hate for the Weaver Stance? I was taught the Weaver back in the early 1980's when I was LEO. I've tried Isosceles and have had some good luck with it, but for me -being cross-eye dominate- I find using a modified weaver it is easier to line up my sights.

I have no real preference one way or the other, but I am curious as to why the weaver has seemed to fall out of favor so much.

Because champion shooters use modern isosceles, and therefore if you use modern iso, you are a champion shooter, or as the selection you quoted put it, it is tribal signaling that "We are shooters, not simply owners." Whereas that guy holding his pistol like some black-and-white photo of Chuck Taylor with sideburns is kinda... *snicker behind the hand* ...you know, just an "owner". Amirite?

And no, I haven't consciously shot from a Weaver stance myself in eleven years, because all the cool guys stopped doing it and only the old farts were anymore.

Now, I don't pick up that vibe at this forum, of course, but you know it's out there. You've seen it.

[YVK]

Because champion shooters use modern isosceles, and therefore if you use modern iso, you are a champion shooter, or as the selection you quoted put it, it is tribal signaling that "We are shooters, not simply owners." Whereas that guy holding his pistol like some black-and-white photo of Chuck Taylor with sideburns is kinda... *snicker behind the hand* ...you know, just an "owner". Amirite?

And no, I haven't consciously shot from a Weaver stance myself in eleven years, because all the cool guys stopped doing it and only the old farts were anymore.

Now, I don't pick up that vibe at this forum, of course, but you know it's out there. You've seen it.

There is truth to that, of course, but there is a counterargument. You don't need to look at champions to realize Iso's benefits, you just need to pay attention.

SecondsCount dragged me out to my first-ever pin shoot yesterday. Lot's of fun, BTW. There were 36 shooters, different levels, all ages, different guns, different styles. No champions, just dudes. A bunch shoot Weaver, many of them were very accurate, but none turned in great times due to slow follow-up shots. Just a random observation from a random shooting event involving regular earth people.

[Tamara]

SecondsCount dragged me out to my first-ever pin shoot yesterday. Lot's of fun, BTW. There were 36 shooters, different levels, all ages, different guns, different styles. No champions, just dudes. A bunch shoot Weaver, many of them were very accurate, but none turned in great times due to slow follow-up shots. Just a random observation from a random shooting event involving regular earth people.

True. I bring this up mainly because I have a friend who's been going to gun school for his vacations for years and years, since the early '90s, which means he has a LOT of hours mostly under old-school Modern Technique instructors. And he shoots very well, a lot better than me (which isn't saying much, granted), but at some point it has obviously just become ingrained in him that "This is how you shoot a pistol."

[hoodoo_operator]

I'm curious about this, because I'm a relatively new shooter, and I've noticed I seem to shoot better, or at least more accurately, with a more asymmetrical stance. I was taught that your grip is the only thing that really matters, and from the forearms back, "use whatever works for you."

[YVK]

Not an expert by any stretch, but I think most would agree that grip per se doesn't affect accuracy that much. Add speed component, and then things change.