i recently attended my first training course,which was handgun level I,and i was taught to shoot with a “thumbs up” pistol grip. i went in trying to shoot the way i saw on youtube videos with thumbs forward and isosceles stance and was promptly corrected. the instructor told me to switch to a “fighting” stance which from my understanding is the weaver stance. throughout the whole course he kept referencing “fight”.
i was a little shocked that what i was taught was not like i see on the net, but then again i didnt know what to expect. im not saying it was bad because i learned a lot and i was shooting really good, i was just dumbfounded since it was not like the fancy stuff i see. the only thing i did not like was that the thumbs up grip was giving me trouble with my vickers slide stop. when running malfunction drills sometimes my high thumb would stop the slide from going forward when i tap and rack.
what sort of stances and grips were some of you taught? do you still use the same? why or why not?
it is uber rare for an instructor to have a clue, esp to be able to diagnose ballistic impediments…
Thumbs fwd, iso, is a good solid start. I would question other methodology used as a baseline.
In any event the clock and tgt trump personal “style”.
For ergonomic reasons I use a high (rear) thumb with some specific pistol models. This enables (me) to have better contact with the heel and manage recoil better.
i have been thinking about what i was taught and i am trying to decide if if i should take another course from this instructor. looking at other stuff on the net it seems as if his methods are somewhat dated. i recall during the class him having small talk with another student and him replying that he is basically teaching the class as outlined by somone else.
this was a level 1 handgun course. he did not teach shooting while on the move, it was if you are not shooting you should be moving. there was also a night shoot where we were taught to shoot with handheld flashlights, one method was holding the light weak hand right above the head in contact with it and the other was with the back of both hands touching while pressed out. what do you think?
The training sounds questionable, but it’s usually best to roll with it during the class and then decide what works for you after. If you were having issues with your slide stop, I’m surprised the instructor didn’t help you mitigate that.
I’ve always felt that the time to save money or distance on training is not during the first few classes in a discipline. You need a good foundation to build from.
If you want to branch out later just to get some other perspectives, fine, but keep it mainstream in the beginning. LAV, Defoor, Falla, Hackathorn, etc., etc., etc. There are more quality instructors travelling the country than at any other time. Go see one of them.
All instructor differ as to which philosophy they adhere too.
I wouldn’t be comparing or questioning what I learned as compared to what is out there on the net.
You find whats best for you and find ways to incorporate it into what ever training you receive.
I for one find it ridiculous to try and change someone’s stance from one version to another unless they are really limiting themselves. Isoceles, modified or weaver all have there places and work.
You’ll find that the age of the instructor or the course creator tells you what you can expect. Especially the lesser knowns.
Frank is a good guy and he intends well. He has been AI under John Farnam for some years and I assume he is teaching John’s curriculum or a version of, including Weaver grip with this thumbs up business. Take what you found valuable in his class, and then take longer than 2 hours drive to train with somebody else, and compare notes. I personally love the attitude and mindset that John cultivates in his classes and, as I said, I truly appreciate him paving the road, but, as far as technical aspects of running handgun or rifle are concerned, nope, unless it changed in recent years.
I couldn’t agree more with the above posters who said take what worked well for you, and then seek out different trainers and see what shakes out. There are so many folks out there who will “marry” the first professional trainer they encounter and lose all perspective about different schools of thought. The idea here is to build a depth of knowledge and be able to adapt what works for you, and your needs.
Just from your short description the curriculum seems to be a little “dated”. Nothing wrong with that if it works.
I would echo others here and HIGHLY recommend a Larry Vickers Basic Pistol by either the man himself or one of his several REI. They are located in both NC and SC so they are probably closer to you than in PA.
Not only will it give you a solid foundation, but a real perspective in the accuracy standards that Larry requires in future classes. These standards will only push you to excel. When I did my Vickers basic pistol it was better and honestly tougher than several people’s “Pistol I” classes. Tougher because at the end of the day you will be MENTALLY fatigued due to the accuracy standards that you are required to attempt for the entire day. A truly eye opening experience…so much so that I am signing up for basic carbine in December.
Dude, you are in Indianna, take a VSM class from Mr. Smith in KY that does the custom work, I think he is in Lousiville or take a class from Boone Co. IN Sheriff Ken Campbell if he is still teaching.