testtest

Is Your Grip Why You Miss?

KLGunner

Moderator
Staff member
The video I’m sharing here is by Geauga Firearms Academy. Watch this video below and let’s have a discussion.


So is your grip the reason you miss? This conversation seems to be wide spread here lately with the release of the new Hellcat. There has been several complaints about the “Low Left” shots with the Hellcat. It’s not the gun folks!!!! Now I don’t have huge hands but they aren’t small ether. Grip is so critical when shooting all types of firearms. I’m sure that when growing up and learning about guns you probably shot a shotgun and felt like it just whooped your behind and I’m sure your instructor told you grip it tight and shoulder it tight right? Fun lesson to learn yes? I personally had a bruise for a week (thanks to my brother putting a high brass slug in the chamber without me knowing). It’s reasons like this that grip is so important. However grip on a handgun is just as important if not more. Attached is some pictures I show everyone that I’m teaching to shoot. Take a look.
CE518F31-1F08-42EB-A260-BD790A60D6DE.jpeg

1720292A-1F44-4407-9E69-D78D1FE1F8D7.jpeg


E3F343D6-AE92-421C-B241-61143635A111.jpeg
4565F995-5D7C-4135-A623-4C1577EC9CD3.jpeg

Thank you guys for letting me share this information. Let’s have a conversation below. Are you low left? Is your grip causing you to miss?
 
Last edited:
That stance too me is for target shooting, but for tactical I stand at an angle so less of a target area. A and B are most of my grips depending on what gun I have. I counteract sights with finger placement, so if I shoot too left or right when I pull the trigger my aim is the opposite. Works well for me!
 
I've shot the Hellcat at 30ft It shot really well if you ask me.

I've noticed on quite a few occasions people anticipating recoil when shooting and the shots landing low and left with any pistol. When I bring new shooters to the range I have them practice the B grip as I use that grip myself.
 
I don’t think it was my grip, probably should keep my eyes open.....seriously, grip is very important on how you will shoot, your stance is equal to your grip, you need to find a grip that’s comfortable to you and practice using it, also your stance, I have always used the weaver stance , but that doesn’t work in all occasions.
 
I don't use any of those, actually.

Right hand grips my XDs. 7-rd flush mag, my pinky curls under the baseplate; 8-rd mag, I grip like normal.

Left palm faces upwards, and cups my right pinky and hand for support. I basically slap my left hand upwards till the baseplate slaps into my palm, and close my left hand around my right. Left thumb curls over right thumb, pointing upwards, not towards the muzzle (or the slide release lever). Left fingers curled around the right side (outside) of my right hand.

I also tend to offset my stance - not full Weaver, but not full-side either. I was an archery instructor for YEARS, where you draw a line from your rear heel through your front toe to the target. I fight that every time I'm at the range with my pistol, but I do still plant my left foot forward about half a step, weight on my left foot, right foot as a stabilizer. That has my right shoulder back a bit with a straight right elbow, and a slight dip to my left elbow. If I need to adjust elevation, I can do it by bending my left elbow more or less, pushing or pulling my right hand up or down in the process. If I have to adjust windage, I move my rear foot to one side or the other. That keeps me from twisting and holding my "structure" at the waist, for stability and repeatability. I never twisted my torso for windage on the archery range, and I guess that's translated into pistol work for me as well.

Maybe right...maybe wrong...but it works for me and keeps me consistently accurate. Most importantly, it's easily repeatable for me - my body naturally "falls" into the correct position for me to put shots on target.
 
1580233953215.png


^ I find this to be grossly simplified and oftentimes inaccurate.

Finger placement on trigger is a variable that will necessarily change depending on the strength, physical size and other anatomic variables of the individual shooter's hand, and how those factors interact with both the physical dimensions of the gun and the specifics of its trigger path.

"How much finger" Steve Fisher gives a 1911 will be very different than how much finger Earnest Langdon places on DA/SA Beretta versus Tatiana Whitlock on a Glock.


The idea is to "finish flat," and how any one of our fingers achieves this with any one specific gun is something that is individually determined and unique.

This can even be affected by personal preference:



------


1580234612661.png


^ "Correction targets" such as this needs to be used with caution.

One big thing to note is that these were originally spawned from single-handed Bullseye shooting at the 25+ yard line.

Using both hands as well as using the targets at closer distances can both introduce significant confounding factors into the target's interpretation.

Factually, relying too heavily on this target is often one of the biggest reasons why shooters making certain errors get stuck in a rut - they try to correct what "the chart/target says," when their actual fault lies elsewhere. ( Here's an article by the late ToddG on P-T.com about the use of this target, with a few other very important considerations to keep in-mind: http://pistol-training.com/archives/292 , and yet another - https://aegisacademy.com/blogs/test-blog-post/pistol-correction-chart . )

If you're using the chart/target for corrections and you notice that you're not making any improvements, I would urge you to stop - and instead seek out live help from a good instructor or otherwise capable shooter instead, as you'll quickly find that the money you're spending in range-fees and ammo will rapidly approach the cost of a simple session with an instructor or class tuition.

There's also a more detailed target/chart that addresses potential vision/lighting induced issues, below:

1580234998995.png


John "Shrek" McPhee has a very interesting take on the grip versus trigger interaction:


^ And this is something that - this being an SA Forum, we should all know that Rob Leatham has taught since the early oughts (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread...er-Control&s=ec6389ad23ce27fb5d7ebf0a27c88fce).

McPhee places tremendous emphasis - rightfully so - on indexing and the grip:


And we revisit the "Pie Chart" handgun correction target, as a part of his presentation here:


With this as the follow-up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzKiAQaCpB8

As for how to achieve "the grip?"

The "thumbs forward" grip is the one that's in-favor now.

However, you'll need to realize that the "thumbs forward" descriptor is just that: and it actually covers a whole range of different specific techniques that each shooter tweaks (Vogel in the video above alluded to this, when he mentioned that he has some small cuts on the top of the web of his hand from the slide - there's actually scars there - where some guys with meatier hands can get really flayed open with the same). If you're interested in the grip, take a look at this thread on DC.com: https://www.defensivecarry.com/foru...ning/132220-proper-grip-recoil-managment.html

- Specifically, take a look at this post of mine, and track out to that outlink so that you really get an idea of how there are small but important (and if you were to ask these shooters, they're critical) variations even among the top shooters:

^ If you didn't get what's critical in that post, read it again, here:

With this article in Handguns - https://www.handgunsmag.com/editorial/tactics_training_combatg_100306/138866 - being probably among the most cited in the effort to train/re-train pistol shooters to the modern "thumbs forward grip, " we need to realize that even among the top-tier shooters, there are distinct differences in how they achieve and execute this grip. While a quick look in their direction may show that they're "thumbs forward," there's actual significant nuance/detail in their precise execution which may have each of the cited shooters doing very different things from another.

Robert Vogel's grip is also something that many shooters focus-in on:



What Vogel doesn't mention in that video segment above is just how athletic he is, and that this plays a big factor in why his techniques work - for him.
:)


Vogel made it plain to us that a serious shooter (and no, you don't have to be a competition shooter or other professional gunman to qualify: you can just be a serious hobbyist) should be able to crush-out a #2 Captains of Crush grip trainer. A big part of his technique hinges on raw strength and athleticism. (Similar to this, another relatively famous Ohio shooter, Chris Cerino - Top Shot runner-up for both Season 1 and the All Stars - came around the class to demonstrate how much grip pressure he uses with his support hand...I simply said "wow."
:lol:
)

To further this, near the 3:30 mark in the video, he talked about how he exerts inward force to lock-in the gun. This is done with not only the arm muscles, but also with the rest of your upper body muscles - pecs, traps, all of it.

I'm not a small guy - here's me with Vogel, from a class he taught in the spring of 2012:

1580236875145.png


- but I was completely unprepared for what happened when he asked us to assume our normal shooting stance, dropping our support hand/arm, and to let him assume the support side duties while we "countered" his inboard torque with our weapon/dominant hand/arm. Yup, he just about toppled me over on my right side. :oops:

I know that I presented a lot of stuff, here, and to be honest, KLGunner, I hope you know that I'm not trying to be negative either towards you or the information that you'd cited (which I actually think is good info.).

Rather, what I am hoping to bring out with all of this that I wrote above is that the individual shooter needs to figure out what works best for him/herself: to understand that breadth of knowledge is just as important as depth of knowledge.

Learn what works for these top shooters, and give their techniques a good and honest try to see if they work well for you. Adopt what works, and discard what doesn't. We're all different, and what works for another person may work the same, better, or not at all for you.
:)
 
Last edited:
View attachment 1246

^ I find this to be grossly simplified and oftentimes inaccurate.

Finger placement on trigger is a variable that will necessarily change depending on the strength, physical size and other anatomic variables of the individual shooter's hand, and how those factors interact with both the physical dimensions of the gun and the specifics of its trigger path.

"How much finger" Steve Fisher gives a 1911 will be very different than how much finger Earnest Langdon places on DA/SA Beretta versus Tatiana Whitlock on a Glock.


The idea is to "finish flat," and how any one of our fingers achieves this with any one specific gun is something that is individually determined and unique.

This can even be affected by personal preference:



------


View attachment 1248

^ "Correction targets" such as this needs to be used with caution.

One big thing to note is that these were originally spawned from single-handed Bullseye shooting at the 25+ yard line.

Using both hands as well as using the targets at closer distances can both introduce significant confounding factors into the target's interpretation.

Factually, relying too heavily on this target is often one of the biggest reasons why shooters making certain errors get stuck in a rut - they try to correct what "the chart/target says," when their actual fault lies elsewhere. ( Here's an article by the late ToddG on P-T.com about the use of this target, with a few other very important considerations to keep in-mind: http://pistol-training.com/archives/292 .)

If you're using the chart/target for corrections and you notice that you're not making any improvements, I would urge you to stop - and instead seek out live help from a good instructor or otherwise capable shooter instead, as you'll quickly find that the money you're spending in range-fees and ammo will rapidly approach the cost of a simple session with an instructor or class tuition.

There's also a more detailed target/chart that addresses potential vision/lighting induced issues, below:

View attachment 1249

John "Shrek" McPhee has a very interesting take on the grip versus trigger interaction:


^ And this is something that - this being an SA Forum, we should all know that Rob Leatham has taught since the early oughts (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread...er-Control&s=ec6389ad23ce27fb5d7ebf0a27c88fce).

McPhee places tremendous emphasis - rightfully so - on indexing and the grip:


And we revisit the "Pie Chart" handgun correction target, as a part of his presentation here:


With this as the follow-up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzKiAQaCpB8

As for how to achieve "the grip?"

The "thumbs forward" grip is the one that's in-favor now.

However, you'll need to realize that the "thumbs forward" descriptor is just that: and it actually covers a whole range of different specific techniques that each shooter tweaks (Vogel in the video above alluded to this, when he mentioned that he has some small cuts on the top of the web of his hand from the slide - there's actually scars there - where some guys with meatier hands can get really flayed open with the same). If you're interested in the grip, take a look at this thread on DC.com: https://www.defensivecarry.com/foru...ning/132220-proper-grip-recoil-managment.html

- Specifically, take a look at this post of mine, and track out to that outlink so that you really get an idea of how there are small but important (and if you were to ask these shooters, they're critical) variations even among the top shooters:

^ If you didn't get what's critical in that post, read it again, here:

With this article in Handguns - https://www.handgunsmag.com/editorial/tactics_training_combatg_100306/138866 - being probably among the most cited in the effort to train/re-train pistol shooters to the modern "thumbs forward grip, " we need to realize that even among the top-tier shooters, there are distinct differences in how they achieve and execute this grip. While a quick look in their direction may show that they're "thumbs forward," there's actual significant nuance/detail in their precise execution which may have each of the cited shooters doing very different things from another.

Robert Vogel's grip is also something that many shooters focus-in on:



What Vogel doesn't mention in that video segment above is just how athletic he is, and that this plays a big factor in why his techniques work - for him.
:)


Vogel made it plain to us that a serious shooter (and no, you don't have to be a competition shooter or other professional gunman to qualify: you can just be a serious hobbyist) should be able to crush-out a #2 Captains of Crush grip trainer. A big part of his technique hinges on raw strength and athleticism. (Similar to this, another relatively famous Ohio shooter, Chris Cerino - Top Shot runner-up for both Season 1 and the All Stars - came around the class to demonstrate how much grip pressure he uses with his support hand...I simply said "wow."
:lol:
)

To further this, near the 3:30 mark in the video, he talked about how he exerts inward force to lock-in the gun. This is done with not only the arm muscles, but also with the rest of your upper body muscles - pecs, traps, all of it.

I'm not a small guy - here's me with Vogel, from a class he taught in the spring of 2012:

View attachment 1250

- but I was completely unprepared for what happened when he asked us to assume our normal shooting stance, dropping our support hand/arm, and to let him assume the support side duties while we "countered" his inboard torque with our weapon/dominant hand/arm. Yup, he just about toppled me over on my right side. :oops:

I know that I presented a lot of stuff, here, and to be honest, KLGunner, I hope you know that I'm not trying to be negative either towards you or the information that you'd cited (which I actually think is good info.).

Rather, what I am hoping to bring out with all of this that I wrote above is that the individual shooter needs to figure out what works best for him/herself: to understand that breadth of knowledge is just as important as depth of knowledge.

Learn what works for these top shooters, and give their techniques a good and honest try to see if they work well for you. Adopt what works, and discard what doesn't. We're all different, and what works for another person may work the same, better, or not at all for you.
:)
The problem with instructors is they are like most coaches, they teach/coach everyone the same way and not too each ones type. Don't correct on what you think is wrong, but on what can make them right. The one thing about rebuttals are there are too many butts.
 
To me, all grips don’t work for everyone, I myself, grasp the gun with my right hand with a firm grip, but not that tight to have my knuckles turn white, and with my left hand I over lap my right hand on grip, my right arm is almost straight while my left arm, the elbow is slightly bent. This works for me, but others it probably won’t. You need to try different ones, and find one that’s comfortable for you while maintaining a firm grip and control on the gun.
 
View attachment 1246

^ I find this to be grossly simplified and oftentimes inaccurate.

Finger placement on trigger is a variable that will necessarily change depending on the strength, physical size and other anatomic variables of the individual shooter's hand, and how those factors interact with both the physical dimensions of the gun and the specifics of its trigger path.

"How much finger" Steve Fisher gives a 1911 will be very different than how much finger Earnest Langdon places on DA/SA Beretta versus Tatiana Whitlock on a Glock.


The idea is to "finish flat," and how any one of our fingers achieves this with any one specific gun is something that is individually determined and unique.

This can even be affected by personal preference:



------


View attachment 1248

^ "Correction targets" such as this needs to be used with caution.

One big thing to note is that these were originally spawned from single-handed Bullseye shooting at the 25+ yard line.

Using both hands as well as using the targets at closer distances can both introduce significant confounding factors into the target's interpretation.

Factually, relying too heavily on this target is often one of the biggest reasons why shooters making certain errors get stuck in a rut - they try to correct what "the chart/target says," when their actual fault lies elsewhere. ( Here's an article by the late ToddG on P-T.com about the use of this target, with a few other very important considerations to keep in-mind: http://pistol-training.com/archives/292 , and yet another - https://aegisacademy.com/blogs/test-blog-post/pistol-correction-chart . )

If you're using the chart/target for corrections and you notice that you're not making any improvements, I would urge you to stop - and instead seek out live help from a good instructor or otherwise capable shooter instead, as you'll quickly find that the money you're spending in range-fees and ammo will rapidly approach the cost of a simple session with an instructor or class tuition.

There's also a more detailed target/chart that addresses potential vision/lighting induced issues, below:

View attachment 1249

John "Shrek" McPhee has a very interesting take on the grip versus trigger interaction:


^ And this is something that - this being an SA Forum, we should all know that Rob Leatham has taught since the early oughts (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread...er-Control&s=ec6389ad23ce27fb5d7ebf0a27c88fce).

McPhee places tremendous emphasis - rightfully so - on indexing and the grip:


And we revisit the "Pie Chart" handgun correction target, as a part of his presentation here:


With this as the follow-up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzKiAQaCpB8

As for how to achieve "the grip?"

The "thumbs forward" grip is the one that's in-favor now.

However, you'll need to realize that the "thumbs forward" descriptor is just that: and it actually covers a whole range of different specific techniques that each shooter tweaks (Vogel in the video above alluded to this, when he mentioned that he has some small cuts on the top of the web of his hand from the slide - there's actually scars there - where some guys with meatier hands can get really flayed open with the same). If you're interested in the grip, take a look at this thread on DC.com: https://www.defensivecarry.com/foru...ning/132220-proper-grip-recoil-managment.html

- Specifically, take a look at this post of mine, and track out to that outlink so that you really get an idea of how there are small but important (and if you were to ask these shooters, they're critical) variations even among the top shooters:

^ If you didn't get what's critical in that post, read it again, here:

With this article in Handguns - https://www.handgunsmag.com/editorial/tactics_training_combatg_100306/138866 - being probably among the most cited in the effort to train/re-train pistol shooters to the modern "thumbs forward grip, " we need to realize that even among the top-tier shooters, there are distinct differences in how they achieve and execute this grip. While a quick look in their direction may show that they're "thumbs forward," there's actual significant nuance/detail in their precise execution which may have each of the cited shooters doing very different things from another.

Robert Vogel's grip is also something that many shooters focus-in on:



What Vogel doesn't mention in that video segment above is just how athletic he is, and that this plays a big factor in why his techniques work - for him.
:)


Vogel made it plain to us that a serious shooter (and no, you don't have to be a competition shooter or other professional gunman to qualify: you can just be a serious hobbyist) should be able to crush-out a #2 Captains of Crush grip trainer. A big part of his technique hinges on raw strength and athleticism. (Similar to this, another relatively famous Ohio shooter, Chris Cerino - Top Shot runner-up for both Season 1 and the All Stars - came around the class to demonstrate how much grip pressure he uses with his support hand...I simply said "wow."
:lol:
)

To further this, near the 3:30 mark in the video, he talked about how he exerts inward force to lock-in the gun. This is done with not only the arm muscles, but also with the rest of your upper body muscles - pecs, traps, all of it.

I'm not a small guy - here's me with Vogel, from a class he taught in the spring of 2012:

View attachment 1250

- but I was completely unprepared for what happened when he asked us to assume our normal shooting stance, dropping our support hand/arm, and to let him assume the support side duties while we "countered" his inboard torque with our weapon/dominant hand/arm. Yup, he just about toppled me over on my right side. :oops:

I know that I presented a lot of stuff, here, and to be honest, KLGunner, I hope you know that I'm not trying to be negative either towards you or the information that you'd cited (which I actually think is good info.).

Rather, what I am hoping to bring out with all of this that I wrote above is that the individual shooter needs to figure out what works best for him/herself: to understand that breadth of knowledge is just as important as depth of knowledge.

Learn what works for these top shooters, and give their techniques a good and honest try to see if they work well for you. Adopt what works, and discard what doesn't. We're all different, and what works for another person may work the same, better, or not at all for you.
:)
I didn’t see anything you sad as negative and I greatly appreciated your response and time spent typing it out. Your information is very detailed and I like it. The whole point here is to have healthy debates and getting good information out there. Thanks again.
 
So much to say on this, but no time at the moment. Simplifying missing to just grip understates everything that goes into shooting.

Be back later.
Agreed there is a lot of factors that go into it but grip is one of the major reasons. Can’t wait to read what you have to say.
 
The problem with instructors is they are like most coaches, they teach/coach everyone the same way and not too each ones type.

Not necessarily always - and I think that this is something that more folks should understand.

Look at the top-tier of sports: one-on-one coaching is the norm, not the exception.

Why should shooting be any different? In-reality, it's not.

I am a confessed range-rat training-addict myself, but while I do love to attend training classes and love both the camaraderie of fellow students and take great benefit from the group learning atmosphere (I learn just as much, if not more, by watching my fellow classmates make mistakes, and I'm inspired by their excellence to excel, myself) , I do think that we in the firearms community often place too much value on this type of teaching.

The few times that I've been able to enjoy one-on-one sessions, I've gained tremendously from such interactions.

And towards this, one-on-one isn't the only venue in which instructors can teach towards the student. Even in large classes, good instructors can provide individual students with the help they need.

For example, in Costa's class in the summer of 2012, he noticed that I was struggling with the prone position for handgun shooting, and he took the time out both during the drills themselves and then throughout the evolution to offer me directed advice and show me alternative ways to accomplish what I need to.

Don't correct on what you think is wrong, but on what can make them right.

I'm not sure that I fully understand what you mean by this?

If you mean that most instructors teach towards their experience, that's definitely the case - it's rare that any one of us have all the answers available. :) Even the most well-versed and well-diversified instructor (some have both law-enforcement/military experience *and* competitive shooting experience and are recognized SMEs in the former while simultaneously hold high rankings in the latter) are necessarily still limited to the experiences that they've had and the knowledge that they themselves have been exposed to.

If you instead mean that instructors tend to impose their will or "their way" on students, this is definitely -NOT- the case of good instructors. Most good instructors realize that their way is not the only way, and that their role is simply to transfer their knowledge in the best possible way to their students. As a matter of fact, the good instructors recognize their limits - be they skills, knowledge, or physical - and will actively encourage their students to seek out other instruction to supplement or compliment their own.

If anyone here is in a training class and any instructor says something to the effect of "this is the only way," or that after getting instruction from them, the student never needs to seek knowledge elsewhere, I would advise the student to definitely -NOT- return to that instructor ever again.

The one thing about rebuttals are there are too many butts.

Agreed.

But - alas ;) - this is the divergence between depth of knowledge and breadth of knowledge.

Neither by itself is all that great. ;) Sometimes, in knowing the "butts," we gain a more complete view of what we're looking at. :)
 
Not necessarily always - and I think that this is something that more folks should understand.

Look at the top-tier of sports: one-on-one coaching is the norm, not the exception.

Why should shooting be any different? In-reality, it's not.

I am a confessed range-rat training-addict myself, but while I do love to attend training classes and love both the camaraderie of fellow students and take great benefit from the group learning atmosphere (I learn just as much, if not more, by watching my fellow classmates make mistakes, and I'm inspired by their excellence to excel, myself) , I do think that we in the firearms community often place too much value on this type of teaching.

The few times that I've been able to enjoy one-on-one sessions, I've gained tremendously from such interactions.

And towards this, one-on-one isn't the only venue in which instructors can teach towards the student. Even in large classes, good instructors can provide individual students with the help they need.

For example, in Costa's class in the summer of 2012, he noticed that I was struggling with the prone position for handgun shooting, and he took the time out both during the drills themselves and then throughout the evolution to offer me directed advice and show me alternative ways to accomplish what I need to.



I'm not sure that I fully understand what you mean by this?

If you mean that most instructors teach towards their experience, that's definitely the case - it's rare that any one of us have all the answers available. :) Even the most well-versed and well-diversified instructor (some have both law-enforcement/military experience *and* competitive shooting experience and are recognized SMEs in the former while simultaneously hold high rankings in the latter) are necessarily still limited to the experiences that they've had and the knowledge that they themselves have been exposed to.

If you instead mean that instructors tend to impose their will or "their way" on students, this is definitely -NOT- the case of good instructors. Most good instructors realize that their way is not the only way, and that their role is simply to transfer their knowledge in the best possible way to their students. As a matter of fact, the good instructors recognize their limits - be they skills, knowledge, or physical - and will actively encourage their students to seek out other instruction to supplement or compliment their own.

If anyone here is in a training class and any instructor says something to the effect of "this is the only way," or that after getting instruction from them, the student never needs to seek knowledge elsewhere, I would advise the student to definitely -NOT- return to that instructor ever again.



Agreed.

But - alas ;) - this is the divergence between depth of knowledge and breadth of knowledge.

Neither by itself is all that great. ;) Sometimes, in knowing the "butts," we gain a more complete view of what we're looking at. :)
This is based on what I have seen. I am not saying that all teach this.
 
^ Ah, understood. :)

Not all instructors are like that - actually, luckily, MOST aren't like that, and what's more, -NONE- of the good ones are.
 
Not necessarily always - and I think that this is something that more folks should understand.

Look at the top-tier of sports: one-on-one coaching is the norm, not the exception.

Why should shooting be any different? In-reality, it's not.

I am a confessed range-rat training-addict myself, but while I do love to attend training classes and love both the camaraderie of fellow students and take great benefit from the group learning atmosphere (I learn just as much, if not more, by watching my fellow classmates make mistakes, and I'm inspired by their excellence to excel, myself) , I do think that we in the firearms community often place too much value on this type of teaching.

The few times that I've been able to enjoy one-on-one sessions, I've gained tremendously from such interactions.

And towards this, one-on-one isn't the only venue in which instructors can teach towards the student. Even in large classes, good instructors can provide individual students with the help they need.

For example, in Costa's class in the summer of 2012, he noticed that I was struggling with the prone position for handgun shooting, and he took the time out both during the drills themselves and then throughout the evolution to offer me directed advice and show me alternative ways to accomplish what I need to.



I'm not sure that I fully understand what you mean by this?

If you mean that most instructors teach towards their experience, that's definitely the case - it's rare that any one of us have all the answers available. :) Even the most well-versed and well-diversified instructor (some have both law-enforcement/military experience *and* competitive shooting experience and are recognized SMEs in the former while simultaneously hold high rankings in the latter) are necessarily still limited to the experiences that they've had and the knowledge that they themselves have been exposed to.

If you instead mean that instructors tend to impose their will or "their way" on students, this is definitely -NOT- the case of good instructors. Most good instructors realize that their way is not the only way, and that their role is simply to transfer their knowledge in the best possible way to their students. As a matter of fact, the good instructors recognize their limits - be they skills, knowledge, or physical - and will actively encourage their students to seek out other instruction to supplement or compliment their own.

If anyone here is in a training class and any instructor says something to the effect of "this is the only way," or that after getting instruction from them, the student never needs to seek knowledge elsewhere, I would advise the student to definitely -NOT- return to that instructor ever again.



Agreed.

But - alas ;) - this is the divergence between depth of knowledge and breadth of knowledge.

Neither by itself is all that great. ;) Sometimes, in knowing the "butts," we gain a more complete view of what we're looking at. :)
Then kudos too the ones that can think/teach outside the box!
 
^ Agreed, and that's why it's so important for beginning shooters to properly vet the instructors/schools they're looking to learn from, as I wrote at the very beginning of the "Attending your first firearms class...." thread:


It's really a buyer's market out there where it comes to training. Shop around, and don't be afraid to ask both the instructor/school for their student referrals/contacts or to jump on Forums such as this to ask about any school/instructor. Similarly, online AARs (After Action Reports) exist for many of the top-name and most sought-after instructors/schools and the classes they teach/offer, and these are often written by serious students of the gun, who will honestly assess the instructor/school's capabilities and shortcomings.
 
Ideas on grip:

In my opinion, the primary purpose of grip is to control recoil for a faster follow-up shot. We want to maximize skin to weapon contact so we can mitigate the recoil. While the grip is valuable, I don't think it is as important as trigger manipulation for accuracy, unless you are competing, which still doesn't place it as important as trigger manipulation. IMO.

My other issue with perfect grip and stance is that it mainly only applies on a flat range world. This is great if you are learning to shoot, learning a new weapon, or just testing accuracy. If you are in a life and death situation, you better be getting to cover, and learning to shoot in ways that aren't vertical. When practicing these you suddenly have a slightly modified grip that doesn't allow you to square your shoulders. It feels awkward but is something you can get used to and should. Practice shooting around barriers whenever you can.

Finger placement is another thing that seems to cause some issues. I index my finger differently on different pistols. On my Glocks I place the trigger almost to the crook of my finger, on my xdms I place the trigger in the middle of my finger. I learned to notice what my finger placement was doing to the gun when I pulled the trigger. The best way to explain this is to watch the Pat McNamara video from above. You want the trigger to move straight back, otherwise you are pulling your shots one way or another.

 
Back
Top