Changing to ISo stance

HighValleyRanch · March 29, 2008, 04:47 PM

After trying some recoil experiments on my own at the range and then finding Brian Enos site, I've decided to change from my typical weaver stance over to the isosceles stance.
A few questions. I read that the supporting hand should be much firmer than the gripping strong hand. What is the theory behind this? Since I've been a bullseye shooter for many years, this hardly makes sense. I understand the concept of relax hand/easier trigger pull, but the strong hand is the base for the recoil, not the support hand. Should the palm of the support hand come in from overwrapping the fingers and touch the grip? Found this helped in preventing rolling in the recoil.

Should the elbows be dropped in with both arms evenly extended, or "naturally" turned out for more push.
Since the weaver uses the push/pull theory, I find it hard to figure out what the support hand is pushing against. Pushing out with the support hand seems to lessen my grip. The strong arm is pushing out against the gun and recoil, but what is pushing the support arm working against?

yar · March 29, 2008, 08:24 PM

There is no push/pull in iso. Push pull is not that effective anyway for managing felt recoil.

The keys for iso is that the support hand wrist is cocked downwards. The thumbs are pointed at the target. This provides more leverage. The arms are extended but not locked. You will have to experiment with elbows out or elbows down. I like elbows at 45 degrees.

While you can grip the gun fairly hard with the support hand it is really not all that nessasary. It is more about the posture and it's natural mechanical leverage. It is also not about trying to fight the recoil. Let the gun recoil naturally as long as your using the proper mechanics. The benifit is the sights track more consitantly and return to target faster. There is still muzzle flip, It just just faster and flatter

RickB · March 29, 2008, 09:05 PM

The theory behind gripping the gun tighter with the weak hand is that it frees the strong hand for more delicate control of the trigger. I think I grip the gun more nearly equally, but but I don't have a 1.5# trigger that requires a delicate touch. The palm of the weak hand is going to be in contact with the fingers of the strong, but everything below the palm is in contact with the gun. While you don't consciously "fight" the recoil, I find a lot of the recoil "management" comes from having the wrist joints in different "planes"; the strong wrist is oriented parallel with the grip frame, while the weak wrist is cocked forward, so the two are not both "broken" by recoil, the way they would be if both wrists aligned the same. This helps transfer recoil to the arms and upper body, and the "neutral" effect of the more symmetrical iso stance, compared to weaver, allows the gun to "track" up and down consistently.

HighValleyRanch · March 29, 2008, 09:23 PM

Thanks for the replies. I will consider all this.

I spent the whole training time at the range watching how various grips and holds affected my recoil. I did not fight the recoil, I only applied various types of grips to see how they affected the muzzle flip.

I have no problem punching out the center of the target with any hold I use, but the problem is in the flip. The more the gun flips...without naturally coming back down to target, affects the shot time. So I am looking for the most efficient method of hold. I want to increase my speed without fighting the recoil.

What I found was with the isosceles stance, the gun flipped STRAIGHT up without any roll and only minimally.

I did read on BE's site about the support fingers (if opened) should be 45 degrees down, so I understand the cant. The idea of the two different axis of holds to control recoil was new and is helpful.
Can't wait to get back out to work with some of this. In the mean time, I am practicing various stances at home and the ease of movement with them. I found that it is easier to relax the out stretched locked arms while moving and then quickly punch out again. Trying to fluidly move around with out stretched locked arms seemed very unnatural.

yar · March 29, 2008, 10:17 PM

Moving with arms out will change your center of gravity. You definately want to bring your arms and gun in when moving. how much depends on your body type and amount of movement needed.

For me anything that is 1 step I keep the arms out, from 2-5 steps I bring the arms and gun into my chest with muzzle pointed forward. How many steps and how fast dictate how far i need to bring the hands in. If I need to use the wheels or move more than 6 steps I unmount the gun, Bring the gun in to around the strong shoulder (muzzle pointed forward), and pump the weak arm as I run.

Lurper · March 29, 2008, 10:59 PM

Try these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQgLmQl1zDw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wbg2s2bfjhw

The grip should be neutral, not harder with one hand. If you achieve neutrality, the gun will return to where it started from. That is why the weak hand wrist is rotated. It allows neutrality by evening out the tension in both arms. Your wrists should be firm, elbows relaxed. Relaxing your elbows will help convert upward motion to rearward motion. This is one of the keys to shooting quickly. Really, what we are talking about is not a true Iso stance, it is a natural stance. That is what makes it effective, it is natural and neutral. Another key point is to not exert force on the gun with the thumbs (either one).

drail · April 6, 2008, 02:27 PM

Enos's book Beyond Practical Shooting covers this in detail. He preaches a completely neutral grip. Don't fight the gun.

March 29, 2008, 04:47 PM	#1
HighValleyRanch Senior Member Join Date: July 15, 2005 Posts: 4,066	Changing to ISo stance After trying some recoil experiments on my own at the range and then finding Brian Enos site, I've decided to change from my typical weaver stance over to the isosceles stance. A few questions. I read that the supporting hand should be much firmer than the gripping strong hand. What is the theory behind this? Since I've been a bullseye shooter for many years, this hardly makes sense. I understand the concept of relax hand/easier trigger pull, but the strong hand is the base for the recoil, not the support hand. Should the palm of the support hand come in from overwrapping the fingers and touch the grip? Found this helped in preventing rolling in the recoil. Should the elbows be dropped in with both arms evenly extended, or "naturally" turned out for more push. Since the weaver uses the push/pull theory, I find it hard to figure out what the support hand is pushing against. Pushing out with the support hand seems to lessen my grip. The strong arm is pushing out against the gun and recoil, but what is pushing the support arm working against? __________________ From the sweet grass to the slaughter house; From birth until death; We travel between these two eternities........from 'Broken Trail"

March 29, 2008, 09:23 PM	#4
HighValleyRanch Senior Member Join Date: July 15, 2005 Posts: 4,066	Thanks for the replies. I will consider all this. I spent the whole training time at the range watching how various grips and holds affected my recoil. I did not fight the recoil, I only applied various types of grips to see how they affected the muzzle flip. I have no problem punching out the center of the target with any hold I use, but the problem is in the flip. The more the gun flips...without naturally coming back down to target, affects the shot time. So I am looking for the most efficient method of hold. I want to increase my speed without fighting the recoil. What I found was with the isosceles stance, the gun flipped STRAIGHT up without any roll and only minimally. I did read on BE's site about the support fingers (if opened) should be 45 degrees down, so I understand the cant. The idea of the two different axis of holds to control recoil was new and is helpful. Can't wait to get back out to work with some of this. In the mean time, I am practicing various stances at home and the ease of movement with them. I found that it is easier to relax the out stretched locked arms while moving and then quickly punch out again. Trying to fluidly move around with out stretched locked arms seemed very unnatural. __________________ From the sweet grass to the slaughter house; From birth until death; We travel between these two eternities........from 'Broken Trail"

March 29, 2008, 08:24 PM	#2
yar Senior Member Join Date: September 25, 2005 Posts: 134	There is no push/pull in iso. Push pull is not that effective anyway for managing felt recoil. The keys for iso is that the support hand wrist is cocked downwards. The thumbs are pointed at the target. This provides more leverage. The arms are extended but not locked. You will have to experiment with elbows out or elbows down. I like elbows at 45 degrees. While you can grip the gun fairly hard with the support hand it is really not all that nessasary. It is more about the posture and it's natural mechanical leverage. It is also not about trying to fight the recoil. Let the gun recoil naturally as long as your using the proper mechanics. The benifit is the sights track more consitantly and return to target faster. There is still muzzle flip, It just just faster and flatter

March 29, 2008, 09:05 PM	#3
RickB Senior Member Join Date: March 1, 2000 Location: Boise, ID Posts: 8,518	The theory behind gripping the gun tighter with the weak hand is that it frees the strong hand for more delicate control of the trigger. I think I grip the gun more nearly equally, but but I don't have a 1.5# trigger that requires a delicate touch. The palm of the weak hand is going to be in contact with the fingers of the strong, but everything below the palm is in contact with the gun. While you don't consciously "fight" the recoil, I find a lot of the recoil "management" comes from having the wrist joints in different "planes"; the strong wrist is oriented parallel with the grip frame, while the weak wrist is cocked forward, so the two are not both "broken" by recoil, the way they would be if both wrists aligned the same. This helps transfer recoil to the arms and upper body, and the "neutral" effect of the more symmetrical iso stance, compared to weaver, allows the gun to "track" up and down consistently.

March 29, 2008, 10:17 PM	#5
yar Senior Member Join Date: September 25, 2005 Posts: 134	Moving with arms out will change your center of gravity. You definately want to bring your arms and gun in when moving. how much depends on your body type and amount of movement needed. For me anything that is 1 step I keep the arms out, from 2-5 steps I bring the arms and gun into my chest with muzzle pointed forward. How many steps and how fast dictate how far i need to bring the hands in. If I need to use the wheels or move more than 6 steps I unmount the gun, Bring the gun in to around the strong shoulder (muzzle pointed forward), and pump the weak arm as I run.

March 29, 2008, 10:59 PM	#6
Lurper Senior Member Join Date: March 21, 2006 Posts: 943	Try these: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQgLmQl1zDw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wbg2s2bfjhw The grip should be neutral, not harder with one hand. If you achieve neutrality, the gun will return to where it started from. That is why the weak hand wrist is rotated. It allows neutrality by evening out the tension in both arms. Your wrists should be firm, elbows relaxed. Relaxing your elbows will help convert upward motion to rearward motion. This is one of the keys to shooting quickly. Really, what we are talking about is not a true Iso stance, it is a natural stance. That is what makes it effective, it is natural and neutral. Another key point is to not exert force on the gun with the thumbs (either one).

April 6, 2008, 02:27 PM	#7
drail Junior member Join Date: February 2, 2008 Posts: 3,150	Enos's book Beyond Practical Shooting covers this in detail. He preaches a completely neutral grip. Don't fight the gun.