I was taught to shoot one handed, standing facing 90 degrees from the target. I now read or am told to face the target and use a two hand grip. I'm always open to change, but shoot closer patterns using the stance and grip that i was trained on. Should i stick with what works, or will my skills improve if i adopt the more accepted technique?
stance and grip
- Thread starter jfurlong
- Start date
- Status
ColtPythonElite
Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2011
- Messages
- 10,473
I wouldn't change what works if the results suited me.
Thanks CPE. I'm happy with my results with what i learned on, standing there looking like an 18th century duelist. My modern stance and grip results are not as good and i was pondering if i should retrain. I'll stick with tried and true but continue to experiment with the new method.
Panzerschwein
member
The one-handed revolver grip has been used for decades by U.S. Law Enforcement and Military, with success. I personally believe the Weaver stance is better for more stability and especially when firing hard-kicking magnum loads, but if you are comfortable with and are used to a one handed grip than by all means... keep doing it. It is still perfectly acceptable and effective, if out of style.
I've started to do more one-handed shooting recently, it is fun and also is useful if one hand is injured in a fight. It's folly to learn to shoot exclusively with two hands I think.
I've started to do more one-handed shooting recently, it is fun and also is useful if one hand is injured in a fight. It's folly to learn to shoot exclusively with two hands I think.
stu1ritter
Member
You might read this manual, cover to cover http://www.bullseyepistol.com/amucover.htm
It is the Army Advanced Marksmanship Unit's manual of bullseye shooting.
It will answer all of your questions about shooting bullseye style targets. It has been the bible for many many years.
Stu
It is the Army Advanced Marksmanship Unit's manual of bullseye shooting.
It will answer all of your questions about shooting bullseye style targets. It has been the bible for many many years.
Stu
g.willikers
Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 1,027
If you want to really know how to use a revolver, check out Jerry Miculek's web site and videos.
Any web search will find them.
Any web search will find them.
jfurlong said:
Bullseye shooters certainly attest to the fact that one can be pretty accurate shooting 1-handed "bullseye-style". If shooting cloverleafs is your only goal, stick with what works.
The 1-handed bullseye stance will start to show its limits, though, when you start expanding your skill repertoire by shooting faster (and accurately), shooting multiple targets, and/or shooting double action. If you want to be proficient in these skills and are satisfied with your performance using a bullseye stance/grip, great. If not, a 2-handed grip and a more forward stance (e.g. isosceles, weaver) certainly ought to be looked into.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Just as Mr.Borland says, different techniques help you achieve different goals. If your goal is to produce the most precise shooting you can under the guidelines of the Bullseye Conventional Pistol, then the one-handed dueler's stance is very effective.
If you're looking to achieve accurate (enough) hits at greater speed and with mobility, learning one of the more dynamic two-hand holds will get you those results.
Some shooters want to shoot 6 shots into a 2" group at 25 yards over the course of a minute. Others want to be able to put six shots into an 8" group at 7 yards, but do it in two and a half seconds, from the holster.
Sort of like how you might shoot a groundhog, or shoot for small groups with your AR, prone off a bipod, at 400 yards is not the same as how you'd shoot if you're clearing rooms in a building with a similar carbine.
If you're looking to achieve accurate (enough) hits at greater speed and with mobility, learning one of the more dynamic two-hand holds will get you those results.
Some shooters want to shoot 6 shots into a 2" group at 25 yards over the course of a minute. Others want to be able to put six shots into an 8" group at 7 yards, but do it in two and a half seconds, from the holster.
Sort of like how you might shoot a groundhog, or shoot for small groups with your AR, prone off a bipod, at 400 yards is not the same as how you'd shoot if you're clearing rooms in a building with a similar carbine.
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
The very first time I fired a handgun, my natural inclination was to go into a Weaver stance, though it was of course, very sloppy. I also didn't know it was a Weaver stance at the time, as all I was trying to do at that point was hit my target.
I got faster and faster with it and had fun. It just felt stable. I also noticed that with my vision, it seemed to give me the best sight picture. I was able to shoot with both eyes open, but it let me sight along my better eye. The interesting part is that at the time I was cross eye dominant. I shoot right handed, but was left eye dominant. It never bothered me, but did require me to hold a gun a little farther to the left then seemed natural.
Then came the FNP45. That gun would regularly eject brass down my shirt, into my glasses, and onto my collar bone. After being smacked and burned enough time, I decided I was going to start training myself to shoot right eyed, and therefor hold the gun just far enough to the right that ejecting brass wouldn't hit me. It took a solid year and a half of willfully dry firing with my non-dominant (right) eye. Sure enough, I am no longer left eye dominant, and if I do the eye dominance test now, my right eye has in fact taken over. I do not know if this is actually a neurological change that I forced my body into, which seems unlikely if not impossible, or if I simply trained my body to use my right eye as the dominant spatial reference receiver. (i.e. muscle memory)
What was the result? I have been experimenting more and more with the isosceles stance. For me, I don't necessarily see more accurate shooting, and I am not really any faster at presentation, but I find it much faster when transitioning between targets. I'm not sure why. The unfortunate part is that I blew out a few disks when I was 25. This means that the forward position of the isosceles stance tends to screw with my spine a bit, which might be why I naturally incline towards the Weaver stance.
I'm just sharing my experience. I do practice one handed shooting as well, in a bulls eye capacity, as well as a self defense type training.
If one handed shooting works for you, keep it up man. If you are concerned about defense, you might want to experiment with some other stances.
I agree. In a bad situation, that practice could save your life.
I got faster and faster with it and had fun. It just felt stable. I also noticed that with my vision, it seemed to give me the best sight picture. I was able to shoot with both eyes open, but it let me sight along my better eye. The interesting part is that at the time I was cross eye dominant. I shoot right handed, but was left eye dominant. It never bothered me, but did require me to hold a gun a little farther to the left then seemed natural.
Then came the FNP45. That gun would regularly eject brass down my shirt, into my glasses, and onto my collar bone. After being smacked and burned enough time, I decided I was going to start training myself to shoot right eyed, and therefor hold the gun just far enough to the right that ejecting brass wouldn't hit me. It took a solid year and a half of willfully dry firing with my non-dominant (right) eye. Sure enough, I am no longer left eye dominant, and if I do the eye dominance test now, my right eye has in fact taken over. I do not know if this is actually a neurological change that I forced my body into, which seems unlikely if not impossible, or if I simply trained my body to use my right eye as the dominant spatial reference receiver. (i.e. muscle memory)
What was the result? I have been experimenting more and more with the isosceles stance. For me, I don't necessarily see more accurate shooting, and I am not really any faster at presentation, but I find it much faster when transitioning between targets. I'm not sure why. The unfortunate part is that I blew out a few disks when I was 25. This means that the forward position of the isosceles stance tends to screw with my spine a bit, which might be why I naturally incline towards the Weaver stance.
I'm just sharing my experience. I do practice one handed shooting as well, in a bulls eye capacity, as well as a self defense type training.
If one handed shooting works for you, keep it up man. If you are concerned about defense, you might want to experiment with some other stances.
I agree. In a bad situation, that practice could save your life.
Last edited:
Generally, two hands (and arms) offer better support for the gun, and therefore is advantageous. However some forms of competition may have rules requiring one-hand only. This used to be true of the classic bullseye sport, but this may have changed.
Having been there and done that, I suggest that you try a 2-hand stance while keeping up with enough practice with what you are used too so you don't lose the skill. The perfect ideal is to be able to do both.
Having been there and done that, I suggest that you try a 2-hand stance while keeping up with enough practice with what you are used too so you don't lose the skill. The perfect ideal is to be able to do both.
stu1ritter
Member
If you would like to practice rapid fire, especially into multiple targets, you should look into ISU (Olympic) rapid fire for training purposes with one hand. The gun starts at 45 degrees to the ground, the five targets turn and you have 4 seconds to place one round into each of the 5 targets at 25 meters. Probably one of the most difficult of shootings disciplines there is.
Stu
Stu
Olderbutwiser
Member
Comfort is the word for the day. If you're comfortable shooting in a certain position and you achieve your goal of what you're looking to accomplish with your handgun , then stick with it. Myself, I practice with self defense for my goal. I find the best stance in getting the best results is in a combat stance, feet apart and slightly crouched, using both hands and locking both thumbs together. I don't rely on using my sights. I recover rapidly from recoil, able to bring the weapon back to it's level position to repeat the 'drill' as often as needed to 'end' the aggression.
I also practice with one hand shooting using either left or right with the thought that I might be unable to use my standard stance. So , again I'd say try all positions a few times , if your purpose is Self defense and see what is most effective.
In my own opinion, the stand at 90 degree is OK if no one is coming at you with a baseball bat , or shooing at you, or looking to do you harm. But if someone is ,Then I'd strongly recommend changing your method and practice in the 'combat stance'. If you're just plinking away at a stationary target on the range , stand there all day and have fun.
I also practice with one hand shooting using either left or right with the thought that I might be unable to use my standard stance. So , again I'd say try all positions a few times , if your purpose is Self defense and see what is most effective.
In my own opinion, the stand at 90 degree is OK if no one is coming at you with a baseball bat , or shooing at you, or looking to do you harm. But if someone is ,Then I'd strongly recommend changing your method and practice in the 'combat stance'. If you're just plinking away at a stationary target on the range , stand there all day and have fun.
SlowFuse
Member
I shoot revolvers one handed most of the time. Slow fire with one hand back holding the reigns of my horse.
Ok I don't have horses, so sometimes I put a thumb in a belt loop.
Never do I shoot autos one handed unless I'm doing some sort of drill. I'm usually more accurate with the revolver, one handed slow fire bullseye style.
Ok I don't have horses, so sometimes I put a thumb in a belt loop.
Never do I shoot autos one handed unless I'm doing some sort of drill. I'm usually more accurate with the revolver, one handed slow fire bullseye style.
Deaf Smith
Member
If you are a good and fast shot using that dueling stance then use it. But if you cannot control it well when shooting fast with powerful loads, then rethink your technique.
Deaf
Deaf
BobWright
Member
Pay little attention to books other than sight alignment and trigger squeeze.
Concentrate on sight alignment and trigger squeeze and steady yourself as best as you can. Concentrate and improve your target groups, stance and grip will develop on its own.
Bob Wright
Concentrate on sight alignment and trigger squeeze and steady yourself as best as you can. Concentrate and improve your target groups, stance and grip will develop on its own.
Bob Wright
RUT
Member
>>I was taught to shoot one handed, standing facing 90 degrees from the target<<
As was I. But of course, we're talking the very early 60s here. And the left hand was firmly placed in the back pocket.
But you know, when I shot in a bullseye league a few years ago we pretty much shot the same way.
As was I. But of course, we're talking the very early 60s here. And the left hand was firmly placed in the back pocket.
But you know, when I shot in a bullseye league a few years ago we pretty much shot the same way.Johnny_B_Goode
member
I do not shoot as well with one hand but I make better use of cover when shooting with one hand so I do shoot a few rounds with one hand when I practice. Another thing I practice is shooting while sitting in the truck using the door for cover. A local state trooper has an old car on his place he has shot all to hell.
Here it is. Learn from the greatest revolver shooter of our time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEHNZFTfSD8
1MoreFord
Member
If all you want to do is poke holes in targets then continue to shoot the way you learned and are comfortable. If you want to be able to shoot quickly and accurately when it counts then you need to learn to shoot with a more modern technique. I'd suggest one of the variations of the isosceles stance. The one handed bullseye stance, the FBI crouch, the Weaver stance, and the Chapman stance have all seen their day come and go. Don't even get me started on point shooting from the hip. Just my $0.02
huntershooter
Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2005
- Messages
- 1,058
Agree with above.
It certainly won't hurt to add to your shooting bag of tricks; by all means retain your "strong hand only" technique, but give the "modern technique" (Weaver/isosceles) a fair chance.
It certainly won't hurt to add to your shooting bag of tricks; by all means retain your "strong hand only" technique, but give the "modern technique" (Weaver/isosceles) a fair chance.
- Status
