Elbows, bent or straight

[mikemyers]

I thought I already knew the answer to what to do with elbows when target shooting with a handgun - for the best accuracy, keep your elbows straight, and "locked". Everything in your stance should be rigid.

I spent the past two weeks in Colorado, and got to shoot at the local indoor gun range in Boulder. Not having my gun with me, I rented a 9mm Glock - wanted to see what it was like, and wanted to shoot. The fellow who runs the front of the shop spent forever going over the rules and regulations (good, no chance for misunderstanding), and when he got to me, he gave me a short course in using the Glock. He told me to hold the gun as high as possible (I knew this), to NOT let my left thumb go across the back of the gun (makes sense, as the slide would probably cut up my thumb), and to keep my elbows at a slight angle (huh???).

When I questioned him, he said that if your elbows are locked, all the recoil forces force the gun to move upwards, but if your elbows are slightly bent, the gun can move backwards instead, which allows you to quickly push it forward again for the next shot.


If speed is not an object, and the only thing that matters is accuracy, is there any benefit from following this fellow's advice?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

As a side note, it was fun to go shooting, and I thought their range was excellent - clean, well lit, and with lots of room. Other things didn't work out so well - I didn't bring my shooting glasses with me, only my vari-focus glasses, which meant I had to cock my head up at just the right angle, to bring the front sight into focus. Also, I'm used to the "target sights" I usually get to shoot with, while the Glock only had three dots you're supposed to line up.... it seemed to be a very crude setup for target shooting, but I guess it's great for self protection.

The fellow tried REALLY hard to get me to start shooting at 5 yards, and completely disagreed with my desire to use 15 (they also had 25). I shot at 15, was quite disappointed in my accuracy (All but two or three shots out of 50 were within a 5" circle) but the guy up front was surprised at how "well" I did. Maybe he's used to people coming in who can't even hit the backing board.......

That's something I need to ask about in the appropriate forum, but the reason I'm posting here in this forum, is to find out what one ought to do with one's elbows..... Watching Jerry Miculek's videos, I could swear his elbows are NOT locked in place, because of how easily he can bring the gun back to him, then put it right back in the stance for the next shot.

 

[Slamfire]

When I get tired of shooting offhand, I let my elbows touch my chest. (Actually Pot Belly!)

My wrists are strong enough I have never had the experience of a limp wrist malfunction. Arm position for fast shooting, I always preferred the "Weaver" Stance.

I really think this is much ado about nothing. Find what works for you.

 

[royal barnes]

I was not taught to "lock" my elbows and never have regardless of the caliber. Wrists locked, elbows bent a little bit.

 

[David E]

Lock em out, then "break" them slightly.

 

[MrBorland]

If speed is not an object, and the only thing that matters is accuracy, is there any benefit from following this fellow's advice?

A slight bend in your elbow is actually quite natural. Use a mirror to see how you stand with your hands at your sides. Keeping your elbows stiff and locked actually takes some effort, so, at least when shooting 2-handed, it's not as relaxed and neutral a position. Relaxed is good because it's repeatable.

 

[MrBorland]

he can bring the gun back to him, then put it right back in the stance for the next shot.

Technically, he doesn't "bring" the gun anywhere.

It's a neutral grip that allows the muzzle to return to it's starting place, and it does so very quickly. A shooter can therefore go fast, not because he uses muscle power to control the muzzle, but because he doesn't have to realign sights for the next shot (they're already aligned); he just quickly & subconsciously confirms alignment before breaking the next shot.

 

[murf]

one-handed target shooting, elbow locked. two-handed shooting, elbows slightly bent.

murf

 

[mikemyers]

Thanks, everyone. My question was more than answered. I'll continue doing it the way Jerry seems to, elbows just slightly bent, and not locked. It certainly does feel more "natural". I only shoot two-hand, at least for now.

 

[BCRider]

Elbows bent slightly. But that's only HALF the answer. For best recoil control you also want to rotate your arms so the elbows are angled outwards instead of down. Angling them outwards makes the recoil come back instead of up to some extent.

It also gives your arms far better stability for transitioning from one target to another quickly and with less whipping of the gun and hands. Try it yourself with an empty gun and some pictures on the wall and you'll quickly see what I mean. Elbows slightly broken and pointed down then angle them strongly outwards short of serious straining and try it again. Rotate your whole upper body together in both cases like a ship's turret rotating.

Watch some top notch IPSC and USPSA shooters and you'll see the elbows turned out as well. It's for just these reasons.

 

[Ed Ames]

There seems to be an older style of shooting that involves more of a bend in the elbows.

I went shooting recently with a fairly old guy (OK, not by THR standards... he was about 75) who shot two handed with his elbow really bent. Google search for "weaver stance" or "steven segal stance" and you will find pictures of oothers shooting the same way. It looked awkward but he did OK (was accurate, etc).

I quietly hid my .454 Casull down at the bottom of my bag...didn't want to tell him no, didn't want to see the results of that stance + unexpectedly heavy recoil.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

I learned original Weaver (both arms bent) not what is being called Weaver today with the right arm locked and left arm bent.

I am very accurate with both arms bent. One thing I have noticed with simulated stress shooting is that there is a natural tendency to push under stress that turns traditional Weaver into new Weaver and really reduces my accuracy. I had a talk with a trainer after a class as to whether I should relearn and change my stance at my current age (43, was 42 at the time) and he thought it would be a lot less work to learn to suppress the pushing than change stances.

Here is a pretty good video showing Weaver (midway between classic and new) vs. Isosceles: http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/10/09/which-is-better-the-isosceles-or-weaver-stance/
Although it is older, the main argument for Isosceles is new (body armor presentment). I find the Weaver leg position much closer to a EMA stance which my body seems to have internalized (even after being out of EMA for 12 years after a knee injury).

Mike

 

[CraigC]

Bent slightly, certainly not locked. Somewhere between the Weaver and modern isosceles.

 

[mikemyers]

........you also want to rotate your arms so the elbows are angled outwards instead of down. ..... It also gives your arms far better stability ........

I read that last night, and tried it today. Made for a significant difference on the targets! In the past, I've tried elbows locked, and arms slightly bent, but today was the first time I pivoted my arms such that the elbows pointed directly "out".

Thank you for pointing that out!!

 

[Dframe]

I've always shot with my elbows bent.

 

[Art Eatman]

Interesting video. His version of the Weaver stance certainly was awkward. I learned it with the feet spread about shoulder width and my strong-side foot dropped back only about a half-step. Nowhere nearly so "body-binding". Much like a boxer's stance, really.

 

[9mmepiphany]

Interesting video. His version of the Weaver stance certainly was awkward. I learned it with the feet spread about shoulder width and my strong-side foot dropped back only about a half-step. Nowhere nearly so "body-binding". Much like a boxer's stance, really.

Might be because he apparently learned, and teaches, it wrong. But then he's a Field Editor for G&A (the Motor Trend of gun rags) What he had Jason demonstrating was more of a modified Chapman...modified because Chapman locked his shooting arm out.

Unfortunately this is what often passes for a Weaver these days.

The Weaver, as taught at Gunsite (the birthplace of the Modern Technique), uses the same foot placement as the Modern Isosceles.

Taking advantage of body armor coverage wasn't even a consideration for development of the Modern Isosceles. It was developed to facilitate faster followup shots and better balance on the move...it is also better when shooting around cover

 

[bannockburn]

I don't know for sure how I would actually classify my shooting stance but basically my lower body is in a boxer's stance and both my elbows are bent. I'm not sure if this is a Weaver, Modified Weaver, or someone elses designated method but it has worked well enough for me all these years.

 

[DT Guy]

 

[9mmepiphany]

The first picture above is a good example of the original Weaver.

Note that the asymmetrical elbows. The support elbow is pointed more downward to help the support hand pull back and downward to control recoil.

This is what makes followup shots with the Weaver slower

 

[Jim Watson]

I learned the Chapman, with gun arm straight, support arm bent.

As said, the usual approach these days is isosceles which is simple to describe and fronts up your bullet proof vest to the threat.

I am a little hazy on actual stance and foot placement. Sure, I learned about natural point of aim and foot placement in class, based on shooting to the front in an open field. But are you supposed to plant your feet just so in action with different positions and different locations?

 

[moxie]

The guy at the range gave you some good advice, i.e., start close then move slightly back once you master that distance. In fact, 3 yards is a good starting point. THEN 5, 7, 10, etc.

 

[BCRider]

read that last night, and tried it today. Made for a significant difference on the targets! In the past, I've tried elbows locked, and arms slightly bent, but today was the first time I pivoted my arms such that the elbows pointed directly "out".

Thank you for pointing that out!!

You're very welcome.

I shoot a monthly Speed Steel match up this way. And I find that when it all falls apart it's almost always because I started getting lazy and forgetting to turn my elbows out. For quickly switching from one shooting direction to another and for re-directing the recoil so it's more back than up turning out the elbows works like 4 aces in a poker hand...

One thing no one has said here which bears typing out. Practice doesn't help if you're practicing the wrong thing. That much I fully agree with.

Being largely self taught I worked hard at listening to my body and studying the results and integrating the pearls I got from other shooters and watching some of the better videos on You Tube. And the only way that works is if I'm constantly sensitive to my grip, stance, balance, sight focus and a host of other things that are needed to shoot handguns well.

If you take what you learn and try things and adopt or change based on your results you can teach yourself quite effectively. It'll take longer I grant you but it can be done. Just don't fall into the trap of thinking you're doing it right but your groups are falling apart and look more like handfuls of tossed pea gravel. And when you can't seem to hit diddly then go back to the basics. Because 9 times out of 10 when you are having trouble it is because you're sliding on one of the basic fundamentals. The other 1 in 10 is due to loose sights....

 

[JohnKSa]

Miculek has a number of videos on his youtube channel and goes into some depth on the topic of grip and stance.

 

[slickracer]

Look at Jerry M. No straight arms there.

 

[Drail]

If you've ever taken a hard fall forward and stuck your arms out straight and locked ( a natural reaction for most people) you will suffer considerably more joint damage than if you allowed them to flex and absorb some of the shock from hitting the pavement. Don't ask how I know. You want to spread the impact force over a longer time period rather than taking it all at once. DT guy, thanks for the great photos of Mr. Cooper. Those bring back a lot of fond memories.