Skill Set: Isosceles vs. Modified Weaver

[SeekHer]

Brought to your attention by: KNOW THY ENEMY™©

Submitted for your perusal and edification, E-mail Blog report received from:
The Tactical Wire sponsored by Bushmaster

*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*

Skill Set: Isosceles vs. Modified Weaver
by Tiger McKee


9mm vs. .45, point shooting vs. aimed fire, Glock vs. whatever - these are a few of the great debates of our time. Along with these, and others, is the debate over whether you shoot using your arms in an isosceles position, which has both arms straight out in front of you, forming a "V" between the arms and chest, or the modified Weaver, where the strong arm is almost straight and the support arm is bent at the elbow.

Jack Weaver was one of the original shooters of the "Leatherslap" competitions that Jeff Cooper ran in California back in the 1950's in Big Bear, California. Weaver developed his own style of firing, and as Jeff Cooper stated, "He showed us the way." Cooper modified Weaver's arm and hand positions to form what today is known as the Modified Weaver technique. The key to this technique is that the strong arm pushes forward, with slight pressure, while the support arm, bent at the elbow, and pulls back with the same amount of pressure. This isometric pressure allows you to recover from the recoil quicker, getting follow-up shots on target faster.

Eventually the Leatherslap matches became known as the South West Combat Pistol League, which lead to the International Practical Shooting Confederation, and then the USPSA. Along the way the highly modified pistols, holsters specially designed for competitive use, and other gear began to become common in the quest for winning. In this environment the Isosceles position, where both arms are held straight out in front of you with the body squared up to the target, rapidly gain popularity.

Which method you should shoot with depends on a lot of factors. When teaching a new student, I find that I get better results with them if I teach them the Modified Weaver. For a student with previous experience, who uses the Isosceles, I don't try to change them, as long as they are getting hits on the target. To me, what really counts is hitting the target, not the position you use.

In combat you'll fire from whatever position works at the time. All the pristine stuff we do on the square range goes out the window during the dynamics of actual combat. Working around the side of cover will change the technique you shoot from. With thick body armor wrapped around your body your position will change. You may even be firing from one hand, and maybe using the weak hand because the strong arm or hand is injured.

The key is to learn to fire your weapon from a variety of positions, so you'll have the technique you need as dictated by the situation. What ultimately matters is that when you press off the shot you hit with predictable results. As I like to say, "do whatever is needed to get the hit." If you're not hitting the threat you're not ending the fight. That's the end of the debate in my opinion.

Tiger McKee is director of Shootrite Firearms Academy, located in northern Alabama, author of The Book of Two Guns, a staff member of several firearms/tactical publications, and an adjunct instructor for the F.B.I. (256) 582-4777 www.shootrite.org

[blackeagle603]

Yeah, in a pinch I tend to instinctively blade toward the threat anyway. I let the cool guys talk me out of Weaver into Iso a couple years ago but I've been tending back toward Weaver. Esp with the heavier calibers the Weaver gives me more control.

[Whirlibird]

I'll disagree and say that isosceles is the way to go for most two handed 'combat' uses.
Clearing more buildings than most, outside of 'competition' types, I've found that most of the time I end up using only one hand or going to the iso method while 'groucho' walking.
First reason, I wear armor and weaver tends to bind up the arms and chest using weaver.
Second, wearing all the other garbage that gets hung on a police uniform, you snag, bump and catch on everything if you start bringing your arms across the chest.

I can use the 'turret' style Iso method and get more useable range of movement than any weaver style, from side to side and if I go farther, it actually transitions into a modified weaver stance.

Weaver and two handed shooting is all nice and good but in an emergency, you often find that your spare hand is occupied, getting your spouse under cover, opening a door, etc.

And shooting heavy recoiling handguns, I find that the recoil is much easier to manage when I don't fight it using Weaver.

Weaver works great on the range but fails in my experience on the street.
Any more I practice and qualify with only one hand, save for reloading.
Applegate/Fairbairn and Cirillo 'turret' styles still work and are deadly, quickly.

[Aglifter]

Cross-dominant seems to force me into a weaver... well, that, and an old shoulder injury which used to prevent me from being able to go into isoceles. I actually used to shoot better single-handed than two handed -- I still think it might not make much difference to me (Either because my two-handed technique is so poor, or because I find it very easy to hold the weight of a pistol out at arms length...)

[Frankingun]

Cross-dominant seems to force me into a weaver... well, that, and an old shoulder injury which used to prevent me from being able to go into isoceles. I actually used to shoot better single-handed than two handed -- I still think it might not make much difference to me (Either because my two-handed technique is so poor, or because I find it very easy to hold the weight of a pistol out at arms length...)

Did you do Olympic type shooting when you were younger?

[Aglifter]

Nope, but I think I did usually shoot one handed -- I actually started pulling back w. my weak hand a couple days ago -- messing w. my 329NG, and have really seen an improvement.

[Whirlibird]

How is it possible to maintain an isosceles stance when you are properly presenting a minimal target aspect?

Oh wait, right, when you're in body armor you're trained not to do that because it puts the weakest part of the armor in the path of the bullet.

Bingo.
That and I'm hiding behind the muzzle of a 1911.
Standing full-on is somewhat contrary to most 'fighting' or arrest control styles but with practice they all work 'better' this way because it allows one to use either hand or side without any extra steps to switch. As an instructor I have to teach it one way, generally right handed but showing how to do it both ways is very helpful so some. And being able to do it 'off-sided' makes it easier to teach the left-handed people in classes.

As for the minimal target, at 6' and 230lbs in full daily kit, I'm not that small a target regardless.

Actually I started some 25+ years ago shooting the old fashioned target shooters way, one handed and standing up. It translated easier to use Iso than Weaver or Modified Weaver ever did.

[PawPaw]

Chris asks: How is it possible to maintain an isosceles stance when you are properly presenting a minimal target aspect?

When you're as thick as I am, it really doesn't matter. LOL! Being a fat man makes it hard to "blade" your body.

Seriously, I was trained initially in the Weaver stance and re-trained in the isosceles. I revert to the Weaver every time.