So this is happening again.



This is the shooting stance they're now calling the "C-Clamp", I guess.  It's in vogue right now.



Here's an instructor from Magpul talking about this stance. He first says that not everything works for everyone, that not everything is best in every situation, but then goes onto insist that this is objectively better and "guarantees" that you will shoot better if you adopt this stance.

This article recently came out: http://loadoutroom.com/5695/the-over-exaggerated-c-clamp-grip-hype-or-not/

The Over Exaggerated “C” Clamp Grip…Hype or Not?

Over the past 6 years or so, combative and realistic shooting techniques have adopted a new, exaggerated shooting stance/style.  I first saw this way of shooting while serving overseas and a couple of guys were using it during shooting drills before an op.

The shooters who use this style of shooting claim that it reduces recoil, allows the operator to transition faster between targets, and keeps the sights on target during a rapid engagement.  As of late, I’ve seen students using this style of shooting with an over exaggerated grip and stance, simulating something they’ve seen on a DVD, or YouTube Channel.

History of the Shooting Style

It isn’t unusual for us “shooters”, to quickly adapt a  new technique, especially if we see it being used by “spec ops veterans”, top competitive shooters, etc.  As humans, we often feel the need to do something simply because the masses are doing it, it is called the Bandwagon Effect.  The Bandwagon Effect is a well documented form of group-think in behavioral science and has many applications. The general rule is that conduct or beliefs spread among people, as fads and trends clearly do, with “the probability of any individual adopting it increasing with the proportion who have already done so”.  As more people come to believe in something, others also “hop on the bandwagon” regardless of the underlying evidence.  While we may adopt a new style of shooting, we often neglect to ask ourselves, “what is the purpose of this?”, and, “will it apply to what I’m training for?”

This particular style of shooting comes from the competition side of the field and started some time ago.  Shooters such as Pat McNamara (Former 1SFOD), Kyle Defoor (Former SEAL),  Jerry Miculek (competitive shooter), and Mike Pannone (Former 1SFOD) use this shooting style, but only to some degree.  The theory behind using this style of shooting, or the “C” clamp grip, is that it will allow the operator to transition targets faster, reduce muzzle rise, and allows the operator to shoot faster while maintaining a sight picture on target.  This is true to some extent, but on certain DVD’s, YouTube Video’s, etc., I’ve seen this grip extremely taken out of context and morphed into something else.

Let’s break each claim down using something no human can argue against…physics and our bodies natural way of moving.

    Transition targets faster?:  This claim does have truth to it.  Think if it as this, imagine walking into a dark room and someone jumps out to scare you.  The first thing your body does naturally is identify the threat with your eyes, followed by the head turning towards the threat and the body along with its limbs in follow.  Or think of it as if you are in dark room and you are told to point at a sound hear, such as someone snapping their fingers.  I’m sure all of us can point to something without seeing it, we’ve been pointing at things with extreme accuracy since we were babies, so I’m sure we’re pretty good at it by now.  Shooters, may it be competitive or tactical, use the same technique to transition targets quickly.  As the shooter moves between targets, the eyes snap to the target first, followed by the weapon.  Having the arm slightly extended with the thumb facing forward, NOT over the top, is the same as pointing at a target.  This has nothing to do with recoil management.
    Reducing Muzzle Rise?:  Looking at the way our body is designed and how recoil is distributed, we can analyze the claim using physics.  Newtons Third Law explains  this best.   A gunpowder explosion creates hot gases that expand outward allowing the rifle to push forward on the bullet. Consistent with Newton’s third law of motion, the bullet pushes backwards upon the rifle, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.  Seeing this, the only way for the rifle to recoil, in theory, is straight back into our shoulder, if the weapon experiences any extreme muzzle rise (although there will be some due to the way weapons are made and the pivoting points on the weapon), it is because something our body naturally bends when pushed. Seeing some of the shooters who use this shooting style, wrap the thumb over the top, extend as far out as possible on the rail, and flare the elbow up, all in the belief that by doing this, it will prevent muzzle rise.  Of course, if you are pushing the muzzle down, or keeping downward tension/pressure on the top of the rail when shooting it will reduce the muzzle rise, but at further distances on partially obscured targets (50 – 100 yards) take note of the point of impact.  The support arm is only their to support and maneuver the rifle while maintaining a light rearward tension into the shoulder pocket and can be applied almost anywhere along the forearm of the rifle.  Try a simple test on a Glock pistol. Aim the pistol in a safe direction downrange, fire one round.  The recoil causes the weapon to flip upward.  Now, place your none firing hand against the back of the slide applying enough pressure as to not allow the slide to function.  What happens to the recoil?  Reducing the upward rise of the M4, etc., comes from applying forward upper body pressure and lowering the axis point of the rifle into the body. Note that this shooting style tucks the weapon deep and low into the should and near the pectoral muscle.  This amount of “meat” behind the weapon is what reduces recoil, not the foregrip.

Facts About the Shooting Style

   1. Peripheral Vision Obstruction:  For those who adopt this unique style of shooting, there is nothing wrong with that, just understand what the purpose of this shooting stance was designed for.  The style of shooting stance this would apply perfectly in, would be the competition community, a one way range where targets are predetermined and do not maneuver the way a live target would when being engaged.  Having the elbow cocked as high as it is in the featured picture, only obscures the peripheral to the support side.  Sure, some will say, “my partner covers my flank.”  What if the guy you had there a minute ago goes down?  What if your clearing your house late at night when your wife or kids hear someone break through the front door?  I’d want to be able to see EVERYTHING around me, another reason why I teach the importance of shooting with both eyes open.  Try out a simple test with one of your shooting partners.  Next time you’re at the range and you see them shooting with the support eye closed, or the elbow flared to a point that it obscures their vision, stand to their support side and flick them off. After they are done shooting, see if they noticed it.  I’ve done the test with multiple students at close distance, within 3 feet of them and they had no idea that I was there. ***Take a look at the following picture. Can the operator see anything to his left?  This can be a potential game changer in an actual combative environment.***




    2. You shoot faster?:  I’ve heard this from individuals using this style of shooting during a few combative carbine courses.  My first response to this is, “awesome!”, the second being, “No man has ever won a gun fight because he shot 30 rounds in 1.5 seconds, the guy who usually wins is the one who shot one round accurately.”  The over extended forearm “C” clamp grip has nothing to do with trigger speed.  Trigger speed comes from properly understanding trigger reset.
   
 3. Obstruction of Sights:  Having the thumb wrapped over the top when training, we start to build shooter muscle memory.  I know a lot of us put aftermarket optics on our rifles, zero it in and purchase the greatest backup sights and place them on the rifle for a just in case scenario.  There is nothing wrong with that at all, I do the same.  What I do have a problem with is building a muscle memory that may cost you time in a desperate situation.  As we all know, things break or stop working for a ton of reasons, much like an aftermarket optic, I’ve had my share.  Let’s say your optic refuses to work in a life threatening situation and you have to resort to your backup sights, your thumb is wrapped over the top, you adjust your eyes to acquire the backups and what do you see…your thumb!  The second it takes to readjust the hand position to remove your thumb obstructing the front sight is valuable time.  Try using the over the top “C” clamp grip with an AK-47 and note the results.
   
 4. Over Exposure to Vital Organs:  Of course stating the obvious that this stance is exposing some very vital organs with the elbow flared so high.  I had to state this due to the fact that in Iraq, one of my Ranger buddies took a round to side, penetrating his lungs and heart.  Some will say, “well, that’s why we present our body armor to the threat.”  This is true, but, I’m sure we’ve all heard of ricochet and there may be multiple threats (left, right, oblique, etc.)  Let’s say there is a threat to the front and one to the side, the closest threat to the front and furthest to the side.  Through training and common sense we know to eliminate the closest first, that being the front.  The side target only needs one lucky shot.  Having the elbow flared so high only gives the bullet a clear obscured path to vital organs. I’d rather place bone and meat there.
   
5. Comfort:  Stating the obvious here, but for those who haven’t used this technique, it isn’t something that one can sustain for an extended amount of time due to muscle/joint fatigue. Locking your elbows increases the impact of recoil on that joint.

The Way The “C” clamp grip was intended to be Used

If you are going to use this style of shooting grip and stance, there is nothing wrong with that.  Just know the way that the style/”C” clamp grip was intended to be used.  The style as of late has become over exaggerated in my personal opinion.  What do you think? Also, be sure to check out another view on this topic here: http://www.gunnuts.net/2013/07/02/curing-the-tactical-turtle/

*************

Curing the Tactical Turtle



Meet the Tactical Turtle Stance. I used to shoot like this, until I realized that it’s not very good. The image above is a screencap from this video*. Today I’m going to talk about the Tactical Turtle and why it’s not a very good way to shoot a gun. Unfortunately, I am but a lone prophet in the desert, because the Tactical Turtle is rapidly becoming the dominant handgun stance in the “tactical/ccw” firearms community.

*

If we go back to the foundation of modern pistol shooting, aka the Modern Technique of the pistol, we find the Weaver Stance. Weaver is still taught at Gunsite, although the Weaver of 2013 looks a little bit different from Col. Cooper’s Weaver back in the day. Be that as it may, Weaver is Genesis for modern pistol shooting. As IPSC shooters pushed the envelope of shooting performance, Weaver fell out of vogue because it didn’t offer the physiological advantages of modern isosceles. The Tactical Turtle was born of Modern Iso when applied to rifle shooting. If you look at the Turtle, the head is down low, in a similar position to where it would be if you were looking through a rifle optic.

There are some benefits to the Tactical Turtle. It is an excellent stance for shooters who lack upper body strength for controlling recoil. It is readily adaptable from long gun to pistol and back. It also isn’t very good if you want to be really good at shooting.

In the action shooting sports, the concept of stance is somewhat mutable. We run around a lot, and shoot from awkward positions. You really only see consistent “stances” on classifier stages or in Steel Challenge. I’ll give you a little tip: none of the top GMs use the Tactical Turtle stance. In fact, to a man they all stand up relatively straight with their weight biased forward on the balls of their feet. There are some very good reasons for this.

First is vision. The Tactical Turtle stance puts your head down low, between the shoulders. That puts your eyes not in a natural line with the pistol’s sights, forcing you to look through the “top” of your eyes, or roll them up somewhat to see the sights. Contrast this with the “gamer” stance, where the pistol is instead brought directly into the eyeline, and the shooter can look directly forward, taking the most advantage of the way we see.

The next problem with the Turtle comes in the form of target transitions. With your head hunched down between your shoulders, the act of snapping your head and eyes to the next target for a speedy transition is harder than if you’re in a more erect posture. Try it. Get in the Turtle, focus on an object 5 yards away and then whip your head to focus on another object at the same distance. Now do it with a more upright stance. It’s easier when your head is up. Think about Steel Challenge, which is all transitions at high speed. No tactical turtles in the top 10 there.

Problem number three is muscle/joint fatigue. Hunching your shoulders like that is tiring. Locking your elbows increases the impact of recoil on that joint, which can cause all manner of problems (like tendinitis). Intentionally using a stance that causes muscle fatigue and joint pain doesn’t really seem smart to me.

Of course, the advocates of the Tactical Turtle stance will tell you that “under stress” in a “dynamic critical incident” your body’s startle response will force you to default into this position. So essentially, what they’re telling you is that there is no way to train yourself to be better than your startle response. That’s bullcrap. Most drivers startle response when something bad happens is to hit the brakes, regardless of whether or not that’s the smartest action. We see danger, we want to stop. However, driving schools can and do teach that sometimes speeding up and driving around is the best response. Race car drivers and cops are two examples of groups of people who have trained past their startle response. If they can do it, so can shooters.

Don’t train to be someone who panic stops. Train to be a racecar driver. Train to be better than your evolutionary survival reflex.

****************

So there are both sides of this discussion.  I don't have much of a dog in this race, but I will make some points.

First, I don't use this stance, for a couple of reasons.  Number one, I don't get to shoot often enough where a slight change in the location of my support hand is going to do anything for me. I don't shoot competitively. I need a lot more range time and practice before I'd be in a position to worry about my split times.

Secondly, look at the pictures. I'm left-handed. I don't think having  my right elbow joint pelted with hot brass would be conducive to good shooting.

Third, I have tried it, and it's uncomfortable for me. My neck doesn't like to bend that way. Also, they make a valid point about how the head is hunched down so low that you're looking through the tops of your eye sockets. This is much more noticeable for me because I wear prescription glasses.  If I assume this stance with my normal everyday wear glasses (the kind I'd be wearing around town, as opposed to the range), snapping to this stance almost always results in me looking over the tops of my lenses instead of through them.

Four, the butt-hurt on the internet is already beginning. Chris Costa linked to the article, and in perusing the hundreds of comments, you can see how freaking offended people are getting already.  I mean, seriously guys? Are we that attached to our sacred cows that we can't stand having them questioned at all?

Five, it strikes me that this stance was developed around running an AR-15 type carbine with a longer handguard and a short stock. It's not going to work with a pump shotgun (your elbow needs to be down when pumping the shotgun if you want to do it comfortably).  It may cause problems with semiauto shotguns as your thumb is on the barrel (which gets hot) and is blocking the sights. It might be less than ideal for an AK, simply because the AK has a very short useable handguard. If you try to extend your support arm too much, you're going to be wrapping your hand around the gas block (sizzle!). Bolt action rifles, forget about it (but obviously that kind of speed isn't obtainable with a bolt gun anyway). It's not going to work if your weapon has an M203 bolted onto it, unless you have really big hands.

Seven, I've seen guys use this technique and shoot very well.  I've seen guys use the magwell grip and shoot very well. These things come and go out of fashion. Each time, mental gymnastics are engaged in to justify what's popular. There are many arguments by people who aren't at all qualified to discuss human physiology about why this is better.  A few years ago, I remember Pat Rogers himself penning an article for SWAT Magazine about why the vertical foregrip was better, and advocating an "elbows down" fighting stance. He liked the foregrip because it brought you more naturally to that fighting stance.  As far as I know, he still teaches it:





Whatever your opinions of one instructor over another, one can hardly discount the man's qualifications. He was teaching classes when Magpul was just getting by making little rubber jobbies to slide onto magazine bodies.

I guess the long and short of it is, there's not any one right way to do this stuff, regardless of the dogma of the shooting community.  Hell, I remember seeing a picture of an Army Special Forces soldier shooting in Afghanistan, actually in combat, awkwardly trying to use a mud wall for cover, and a slew of comments from internet commandos about how bad his stance was.









Above are some videos of actual firefights in Afghanistan. This is a real war, life or death. The topic of what's best isn't academic for these guys. Notice how little actual combat looks like anything you see in a lot of internet training videos.

I'm not saying this to disparage shooting instructors. I'm not saying everything the military does is better (believe me, I've been in long enough to know that's not true); as a matter of fact, the civilian sector has really driven advances in weapons and tactics in a lot of ways. I'm certainly not going to argue with anyone's success. If what you're doing is allowing you to shoot better, by all means, keep it up!

But if these guys can go into combat not worrying about if their arm is sufficiently clamped enough, maybe folks on the internet back here in the states are getting their tactical panties in a wad over nothing? It's like arguing about 9mm vs. .45. At the end of the day it's a thing that launches pieces of metal out of a tube.

Or am I way off base here?

Quick! Somebody get a 9mm vs .46 or Glock vs. 1911 thread going to divert attention away from this dangerously diver dive topic ( works for the media...)

It seems like this technique is mainly geared towards one kind of rifle.   I'm not sure how well it would work with something that wasn't an AR-15 with a bunch of Magpul furniture on it.    ALso, I'm wondering how well it would work for longer range shooting,  might be great for close carbine type stuff, but I'd have to give it a try to see if it works for the type of shooting I do.   

For the last time, Stubborn Ogre, I don't use a teacup grip. My right hand is grasping both my left hand and the grip itself. Meat on steel, as it were. When I'm doing it right, I'm applying isometric tension to the gun.

A teacup is when you hold the gun in your strong hand and just let it rest in the palm of your support hand. That's not very effective, especially with a magnum revolver.

Believe me, after 250 rounds of .44 Magnum at your class, I had the tender spot in my right hand to prove it. 

The nice thing about my grip style is, it works on everything. It works on the M9 I went to Afghanistan with. It works on the S&W 620 I used to carry at work, and the 642 snubby I carried as a backup. It works on my Colt. It works on my Redhawk, my Super Blackhawk, and my SP 101. I don't have to change anything around when I change guns.

I can teach people the thumbs forward grip but I can't use it very well. In any case I haven't had any range time in months; I'll be satisfied if I can hit paper at 7 yards, when this is all said and done. It's going to be a frustrating process getting back what I've lost, especially since ammo is so expensive now.

And then Ogre goes and moves, so I lost my main shooting partner. Huff!

LOL

Ksguy-

It won't work well for long range shooting or precise shots. It is a standing-up-fighting stance, and it works pretty well for that. If I was in a position to take a precise shot and I had time to do anything besides break the shot rightfreakingnow, I would get low, get support, sling up, shift my grip and stance, etc. I would not use a high power shooting stance for working my way up an alley on a shooting scene, and I would not go to an Appleseed event and try to shoot c-clamp. Different tools for different jobs.

My thoughts on stance wars are as follows:

Everyone is different.

Some stuff will work better for some people than it will for others.

Some stuff works better in general for a given task, and to pretend otherwise is foolish, nothing is 100% better for everyone.

Everything has drawbacks. The key is knowing what they are and dealing with them.

Mike

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

Nine, I apparently can't count.

Here are some comments from Curing the Tactical Turtle.

You know a theme I'm seeing?  A guy who's not a competition shooter, who isn't as good of a shooter as a competition shooter, scoffs at the competition shooter's input.  He'll throw out some jargon he learned at a tactical shooting class, like "two-way rifle range" or "in combat" or blather on about "when things go south" or "preparing for a gunfight".

To listen to these people you'd think they were getting into gunfights all the time.  The truth of it is, even being a seasoned combat veteran doesn't make you a good shooter.  Actually shooting at people is only a portion of what goes on on the battlefield.  They act like being a ranking competitive shooter that can shoot, move, and reload at blinding speed means you'll just fall to pieces when you're actually in danger.  But not the tactical shooter, no sir.  He took a three-day class from Magpul, so he's ready for anything!

 

There are a lot of things in competition shooting that have no application in a self defense or battlefield scenario.  But there are a lot of things in tactical shooting that have no application in a self-defense scenario.  People show up for these things dressed head-to-toe in Multicam, wearing the latest plate carrier, war belt, and with their high-end AR-15. When on earth are you going to be so adorned in the first place? In the real world, I mean.  It's not like when some cartel hitmen kick in you're door, you're going to run upstairs to put on your Crye clothing and PIG plate carrier before defending your home.

I like doing firearms training like that because it's fun.  Also, there's a teeny tiny chance I might have to use it in one of my professions.  But mostly because it's fun.

There's nothing wrong with being well trained, either competitively or by a "tactically-oriented" instructor.  There is something wrong with being so emotionally attached to something as minor as a shooting stance that you get offended and butt-hurt the second someone on the internet questions it.  There's also something wrong with taking yourself that seriously. Some of these people need to switch to decaf or something. 

Dave Er · Pasadena, California
Caleb. It's obvious you do not carry gun for a living and never had to deploy a weapons system and be on target. Get your facts straights you tool. Hollywood and Voodoo actually speak from practical life combat experience.

The response to this was hilarious:

Gun Nuts Radio
    This post is so full of tactical timmy nonsense that it should be 300 lbs and wearing a plate carrier to a carbine class.

Charles Ferrera
Bob Vogel is one of the best shooters out there. Look at his video and see what he does. He dips his chin down and the video is on your site. All the grand master shooters that shot with a head up posture, do not win because their heads are up its simply because they are good shooters. From a life or death situation shooting plate form of using the tactical turtle you speak of, bro, you don't know s___. Just please, tell me the last time you played on a two way range. When have you ever been shot at or had to put rounds on another human being? Seeing how you were attempting to run that 1911 that was kicking your ass it surprises me that you have such strong convictions when you, yourself have a difficult time running the gun. Oh, and by the way, the guy in the photo you are talking about is my fellow team mate and instructor at Falcon Operations Group who is a competition shooter as well. Retards man, everywhere! I digress.....

Wow, that really makes me want to train with this guy. I'm always impressed with improper punctuation and name-calling. By the by, I found the website to "Falcon Operations Group".

“Dedicated to training those who defend the sheep from the wolves here at home and abroad”

Since 2006, Falcon Operations Group, Inc. has provided quality training for Civilian, LEO/Military, Government and Corporate Contractors. Falcon focuses on teaching the fundamentals of weapons manipulation, strategy, and tactics utilizing a systematic progressive learning approach.

Every action performed at Falcon is done with the 3 D’s – Done Deliberately with Determination. Courses of instruction are delivered in a professional manner with a steady progression of incrementally induced stress. This is situationally dependent on course type, level of instruction, and level of students attending the course.

The “no man left behind” mindset not only applies during combat situations, but also to instruction. Falcon works hard to ensure that no student is left behind. We maintain a student-to-instructor ratio of 5:1 so that every student is observed, monitored, and progresses during training. Our goal is not only to demonstrate proper technique, but more importantly, to have the student retain the information and skills that are disseminated.

We do not teach “THE WAY” but “A Way.” We have streamlined and vetted what we believe are best practices. Our focus is to explain why certain weapons manipulation techniques are preferred, because the “why” of shooting is an integral part of learning. These techniques are informed and refined by our own life experiences ranging from overseas operations, domestic executive protection, law enforcement duties, and competition shooting. It is this blend of experience that makes Falcons courses so unique.

Institutionalized inertia is a cancer plaguing shooters from all walks of life. We do not want our students to be limited by a mentality that says, “what was done then, must still be good today.” In the ever-changing theater of modern operations, it is important that ones training be equally dynamic. Falcon is committed to bringing that training to our students.

All of FALCON’s instructors carry one or more of the following credentials:
N.R.A. Law Enforcement Division Certified
CA P.O.S.T. Certified Instructors
Insured for both Law Enforcement & Civilian Training Courses

There are a lot of pictures of guys in Multicam, guys with Opscore and Airframe helmets, target posters that look like terrorists, stuff like that.

Chad Myers · Area Director - New York / Forensic Genealogist at Forensic Investigator
He must work somewhere that buys the good BA... I prefer not to be penetrated between my 2nd & 3rd ribs and then the lungs.... then again, he could just be shooting at paper targets all weekend

Yeah, becasue Forensic Genealogists get shot at like all the time. The US Army is even fielding a special Airborne Forensic Genealogy detachment, aligned with SOCOM, to provide assistance to Special Operations Forces.

Steve Brown
Where's the name of the Mall Ninja that wrote this one? You obviously don't know how to box and fight. If you did you'd know the factor of center of gravity and engaging your core. By your continuing reference to competitive shooting your a theoretic noober

Burn! 

Kent Christen · Top Commenter · Works at Retired Combat Veteran
Except experience is really the only way to break the involuntary response, so it doesn't matter how you react when the buzzer goes off--the first gunshot will default you to the turtle.

I was shot at in Afghanistan. Went right past my head. I wasn't any more hunched up on my M4 than I normally am.

"It is an excellent stance for shooters who lack upper body strength for controlling recoil."

If you're relying on upper body strength to handle recoil (or do anything else really), you are going to suffer in the accuracy department, period. Top shooters will tell you that muscular tension is a bad thing.

"In the action shooting sports, the concept of stance is somewhat mutable."

The concept of upper body alignment is not. What's happening from the waist down is situational and not nearly as important as what's going on waist up. It's hard to argue the truth or success of this.

Finally, is Gunsite still teaching Weaver? That's irresponsible on their part. Only total hack trainers are still clinging to Weaver.

That's Gunsite, all right.  Bunch of hacks.

Again, folks.  If your first reaction to having something as minor in your life as your preferred handgun shooting stance questioned is to start flinging insults, maybe you're a little too far up your own ass.  I'm jus' sayin'.

And you know, all they're talking about is how hunched forward you are when you're shooting iso. It's a variation on the same thing.

As for locking your elbows in ANY stance (sidearm or longarm) I think it's pants-on-the-head retarded. My 2 copper. Flame away. I won't feel the burn.

I've shot a lot of .44 Magnum.  You can lock your elbows if you want, but then your wrists will flip and it'll be worse. Better to let the bigger, stronger joint absorb the recoil than to let your wrist do all the work.

Indeed. It's worse the more powerful of a handgun you're shooting. With a .44 mag you will wind up seeing your target beneath your hands/gun in between shots.

Honestly Jesse, with a .500 S&W or .50AE, there's only so much you can do.  The gun is going to rise. I attempt to keep my wrists locked and transfer the recoil energy to my arms/elbows. I can manage it with .44, but I haven't shot much that was more powerful than .44.

You don't have your chin down below your shoulders. You're not turtling up, which is apparently a huge point of contention on the internet. I find it to be uncomfortable and, as I said, it often leaves me looking over the top of my glasses instead of through them.  (Hard to focus on the front sight when it's all blurry.)

You need more tactical turtle...


Jim

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

There is some tendency in the shooting community to think that if a little bit of something is good, then a whole lot must be better. If it feels awkward and slow, it is awkward and slow.

I wonder how many people, on either side of any debate, actually put themselves on the clock to see which technique works best for them?

Mike

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

I wonder how many people, on either side of any debate, actually put themselves on the clock to see which technique works best for them?

Mike

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

Yup.  I have.  Shooting a string that include 3 targets for speed and accuracy... I was faster in my Vulture Stance.  Keeping the accuracy is important.... it's the Key. 
But the LOCK is getting those first hits onto target as fast as possible.  You engage the biggest threat first - you want that threat to go down.  Then you can engage the other targets.     
Hit the first hard... Flip to the second and engage him.  At this point, if you are not moving - you are wrong.  Painfully wrong.  But I might not hurt for long.