Chapman's Stance

S

sonrider657

New member
Although not normally considered a tactical publication, Backwoods Home Magazine always has excellent gun articles by Massad Ayoob.

In the current issue (July/August 2010), Mas describes "Chapman's Stance" as developed by the late Ray Chapman whereby one uses the same basic shooting stance for rifle, shotgun, and pistol.

Anyone shoot this way?
 
Kind of, I guess I do. I like balance. I stand up straight with equal weight on both legs. Rifle, pistol and shotgun. Not considered the norm for combat shooting, but works for me.

One thing you should consider about Chapman's or anyone else' stance, YOU AIN'T THEM. All people are different, regardless what any instructor tells you, you have to adapt a stance that fits you.
 
I shoot weaver but everyone is different. Figure out what works for you Kraig is right. You may have to modify it a bit but once youv'e got it don't let it change a bit. I got a great stance going after years of practice I automatically go into, it works and I'm not changing it.
 
Chapman was my preferred stance for years.

Lately I seem to be keeping both arms bent a bit more at the elbows, dunno why. I also seem to shift into isosceles more when I'm trying to go fast, especially up close. I guess I don't really think much about it any more, and just think about the sights and trigger. Any stance that gets me there and then back on target for repeat shots is OK.

The concept of "universal sports stance" is worth paying attention to, I believe. This means knees slightly flexed, weight a bit forward over the toes, elbows slightly bent and hands in front of you, and able to shift in any direction quickly. Karate, skeet, soccer or tennis, it's all the same and quite natural. Mind you, I don't start in that stance, but shift into it as things get going. Any any handgun grip and stance that grafts onto that and works for you is the way to go.
 
Last edited:
Never heard of it. I was brought up shooting weaver and it is still my instinctive stance, but I am developing the muscle memory to shoot isoceles. The problem is that I shoot as a civilian much more than I do as a soldier and unless you're wearing body armor Weaver is far superior in terms of presenting a smaller cross section to your oponent and multidirectional stability.

Like I said, I never even heard of Chapman, but the picture I have in my mind makes me wonder if it might make a shooter more susceptible to limp wristing or the semiauto long gun equivilent.
 
ISC ~

Less so, actually.

Photos of different stances here: www.corneredcat.com/Basics/stance.aspx

Chapman's most significant weakness, IMO, is that it doesn't work well for people who are cross-dominant. A left eyed, right handed shooter using a Chapman stance pretty much has to blind himself in order to get his dominant eye behind the sights in Chapman. (Weaver is slightly better, as far as that goes. Only Isosceles deals well with the cross dominant shooter.)

Chapman's strengths include excellent recoil control & recovery, esp for people with less upper body strength; an easily consistent shooting position with good felt indexes; and a very solid shooting platform including the wrist solidity you were concerned about.

pax
 
Well apparently the way I've been shooting for the last 20 years is called the Chapman stance.
 
TylerD; You may have to modify it a bit but once youv'e got it don't let it change a bit.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you Tyler, strongly. Stance is something that, quite frankly, doesn't really matter that much unless you are exclusively involved in precision target shooting (Olympic style shooting, for example).

In any dynamic shooting, stance and grip are continually being modified, even if only slightly. What should remain constant is front sight tracking, and that is accomplished through trigger manipulation and focus (focus through observation, not to be confused with concentration). Your objective should be to produce consistent trigger manipulation and front sight tracking regardless of stance or position/movement.

As our bodies change, with every round that we shoot, we should be observing and learning. That means our "technique" is constantly evolving. What works for the new shooter won't necessary work when they are ready to shoot IPSC. Likewise when they are suited up to raid a drug house, those IPSC fundamentals won't necessarily all translate. Even if you aren't going from application to application, if all you do is IPSC, you should be open minded and flexible to allow your stance to change otherwise you will always limit your performance.

And these ideas aren't all my own, I have borrowed them from the greats. If you listen and watch some of the better shooters of our time (Brian Enos, Rob Leatham, Todd Jarrett, etc.) you will find these same ideas being consistently repeated. Open yourself up and allow your shooting to grow the way it naturally is inclined to do.
 
Last edited:
In any dynamic shooting, stance and grip are continually being modified, even if only slightly. What should remain constant is front sight tracking, and that is accomplished through trigger manipulation and focus (focus through observation, not to be confused with concentration). Your objective should be to produce consistent trigger manipulation and front sight tracking regardless of stance or position/movement.
Click to expand...

+1

That's pretty much the whole enchilada.
 
Interesting Booker definitley taking that into account because it makes a he** of a lot of sense. I meant find a stance (weaver) and stick to that one so you don't confuse yourself with thinking about stances in a time saving situation. Like I said modify it, like my weaver is different in different positions, but its what comes most natural. Trigger manipulation and Sight Alignment are definitley more important than stance. My post was kind of close minded though. Side Note: If you know of any good self defense books to read about shooters, shootings, anything like that. I am always interested in the most knowledge possible.
 
Tyler, I agree with you 100% on that one, being comfortable with some basic elements of stance and grip are certainly important, especially for the beginner, if for no other reason than safety, but also to provide a sound foundation to work from. This is why I suggest that new shooters who are interested in developing their shooting spend a little money to get training from a quality instructor.

One point of clarification.. sight alignment and front sight tracking are distinct things. I believe (some agree, some do not) that even (active) sight alignment isn't ultimately all that important for dynamic pistol shooting. With practice and a solid index, by visualizing the front sight, your sight alignment has taken care of itself because of a well-developed index. On the other hand, visualizing the front sight's movement immediately following the trigger break is absolutely vital to placing rapid follow-up shots. And the motion of the sight is irrelevant; it can go straight up, it can go to 2 o'clock, it can do a figure 4, but find what it does and watch it intently (the value of both eyes open). If it doesn't do what you expect it to do, then it's telling you what's wrong with your shooting while you're shooting, so you can correct for the next break. "Heady" stuff I know, but worth putting out there.

As the shooter matures from beginner to intermediate (which usually happens pretty quickly), I think there is benefit in not being hung up on techniques or equipment, as people are prone to do in whatever field they are in (photography, fitness, shooting pool, golf, etc.). Perhaps the only area where people don't think better equipment or supplements or "pro secrets" will actually make them better is chess. hah What I'm driving at is, work on the shooter. Shooting isn't a very difficult task, allowing your body to naturally perform without becoming tense from excessive thought is the largest hurdle.

Some resources that immediately come to mind (as I've read or looked at them recently) are:

Practical Shooting: Beyond Fundamentals, Brian Enos
http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Sho...=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1279648679&sr=8-2

Or http://www.brianenos.com/store/books.html, he has a number of excellent books available. I would consider him my go-to author for pistolcraft.

Surgical Speed Shooting: How To Achieve High-Speed Marksmanship In A Gunfight, Andy Stafford
http://www.amazon.com/Surgical-Spee...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1279648722&sr=1-1

T.A.P.S. Tactical Application of Practical Shooting: Recognize the void in your tactical training, Patrick McNamara
http://www.amazon.com/P-S-Tactical-...TF8&coliid=I37H8Z6RXGOQDP&colid=1CL07PD0KL43J

Tactical Pistol Shooting: Your Guide to Tactics & Techniques that Work, Eric Lawrence
http://www.amazon.com/Tactical-Pist...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1279648953&sr=1-1

The Gun Digest Book of Combat Handgunnery, Massad Ayoob
http://www.amazon.com/Gun-Digest-Book-Combat-Handgunnery/dp/0896895254/ref=pd_cp_b_1

The Gun Digest Book Of Concealed Carry, Massad Ayoob
http://www.amazon.com/Gun-Digest-Book-Concealed-Carry/dp/0896896110/ref=pd_cp_b_2

Stressfire, Vol. 1 (Gunfighting for Police: Advanced Tactics and Techniques), Massad Ayoob
http://www.amazon.com/Stressfire-Vo...hniques/dp/0936279036/ref=reg_hu-wl_list-recs

..and no I don't get paid by Amazon.com, but I wish I did! Happy shooting & be safe.
 
Last edited:
COOL. Thanks for all those books references I got a coulpe of Ayoob's already :D. I have been shooting for a while, 14 years now and started young, With my SW1911 45ACP at 30 ft. I regularly shoot 1.0-2.0" groups with a decent rate of fire. So I have defintley grown as a shooter but I still have a he** of a lot more growing to do, including my firearm collection ;)
 
There's a couple more ways that haven't been mentioned yet.

One has the gun arm bent and the support arm straight,
Kind of backasswards from what is mostly taught.
It helps control recoil and point the gun very well.

Another is the close quarter version of the isosceles.
The gun is held close to the chest, in front of the face.
The elbows are bent a lot more than the regular isosceles, just about touching the ribs.

Which to use, when to use it?
Life is so confusing.
 
One of my instructors says ChapmanHold, as he does Weaver Hold, and Iso Hold The stance can be anything as solid as possible but should be a good crouched fighters stance.
 
I personaly shoot from several stances. When shooting steel plates at 15 yards with my .41 mag I find my self in a weaver stance. Fast combat style shooting is usualy isoc., when shooting carbines it would be the Chapman. I do what works for me, it might not work for you. I consider what works best for me by how costantly I hit what I am shooting at.
 
I tend to shoot that way. It's a good confrontational position for lots of things, from boxing to rifle and pistol shooting. How else would you shoot a rifle other than foot back similar to Chapman pistol?

On the other hand, I never tried to position my self precisely in accordance with someone's personal technique.

I did what came natural, and I'm willing to bet that most of us have, also.

One day, years ago, I read that the shooting position I'd been using all along was known as the "Chapman" position, which is a variation of the "Weaver" stance. I suspect that my position is actually a slight modification of the Chapman.

Chapman did what was natural for him and may be natural for the rest of us as well.

Speaking for myself, it's the Isosceles that requires learning an unnatural technique
 
Last edited:
Shooting Stances -- Definitions from LFI

THE TRADITIONAL WEAVER STANCE
(1.) Body bladed about 45 degrees in relation to the target (boxer stance)
(2.) Legs are locked at the knees.
(3.) Firing arm is slightly bent at the elbow (pre-lock).
(4.) Support arm elbow is sharply bent and pointing down at the lead foot.
(5.) Firing hand pushes out.
(6.) Support hand pulls in
(7.) Because the bent arms may lower the position of the gun, the head may have to be tilted to the side to achieve proper sight alignment.

The advantage of the traditional Weaver Stance is that the bent arms and isometric tension of the pushing and pulling muscles create a shock absorber effect that significantly reduces felt recoil and snaps the gun rapidly back on target. Since the gun is closer to the body, it feels lighter and in fact exerts less leverage weight on bent arms than it would on fully extended, locked out arms.

The disadvantages are that the stance is uncomfortable for many people. Shooters with shorter arms, greater upper body mass, or women with big bosoms (!) find it difficult to blade in relation to the target and reach across their chest. Sometimes the strong arm will over-power the weak arm, sending
bullets high to the left side for the right handed shooter. More often, the shooter may not lock the elbow of the support arm down enough, which results in the stance becoming unlocked and causes shots to drift low right for the right handed shooter.



THE CHAPMAN MODIFIED WEAVER STANCE
1.) Body slightly bladed in relation to the target.
2.) Weak side foot forward
3.) Strong side foot back
4.) Weight balanced slightly on the lead foot.
5.) Center of gravity slightly forward.
6.) The foot position should be like driving a punch -- the forward leg bears the weight and the rear leg is the drive leg.
7.) Elbow of the strong arm is locked.
8.) Elbow of the support arm is bent down and aimed at the lead foot
9.) Lead shoulder over the lead knee
!0.) Isometric Tension -- strong hand pushes out and weak hand pulls back.
11.) Bring the head down to the sights. If you bring the gun UP to your eye,
you may shoot HIGH.
12.) Cheekweld the side of your jaw on the strong side upper arm, just like
cheeking a rifle stock. This consistently positions your eyes in relation
to the sights, every time.
13.) Wide stance -- pyramidal base

(this position is my personal favorite by far. I find that bringing my head down to the sights, establishing a cheek weld with the upper arm on my strong side, and keeping the center of gravity forward works very well when firing multiple rapid shots or when
engaging multiple targets. )

MODIFIED ISOCELES POSITION (aka the "turret" )
(1.) Wide stance -- pyramidal base
(2.) Weak side foot forward
(3.) Strong side foot back
(4.) Weight on the lead foot/shoulders forward of the feet
(5.) Center of gravity slightly forward
(6.) Arms locked out
(7.) Slight crouch -- kneels unlocked
(8.) Lean into the gun

With the torso bent slightly at the waist and the gun straight out ahead in both hands, the body is balanced by the flexed knees, which automatically compensate for balance by lowering the center of gravity for the body in the pelvis. This technique can be made even stronger by taking a step toward the target with the weak foot and bending the lead knee, applying the weight forward. Think of it as leaning into the gun.

The body is now poised to move instantly forward or back, or side to side, and a considerable portion of upper body weight, coupled with the muscular tension of the locked arms, helps snap the handgun down in recoil.

(this position is essentially Isoceles from the waist up and Weaver from the waist down, and seems to be the most comfortable for many people)
 
Yup I use different stances depending on the firearm I'm using. My AR? I don't care felt recoil is next to nothing so I just fire the rounds in whatever position I want. Tantal? Same thing. My WASR? Since I replaced the recoil spring with an extra pressure spring then I generally do the same.

My pistols are a lil different. Lack of a stock makes recoil less forgiving sometimes.

My XD-40 Service, 1911 and Desert Eagle I take a decently wide stance go weaver and pivot from target to target using my waist to minimize arm and hand movement in my sights. The 1911 and XD I know I can negotiate scanning cover with one hand on the pistol only if I have to but I'd better have two hands on the DE before I pull the trigger (Common sense on that one right?)

My 460V? I can do what I want with that one just the same if I get the right load. My SD load for such a thing is not full blown .460 rounds or .454 rounds (Which would list me in the crazy and stupid section when I have to room enter and clear my own house.) Chances are I'd want reloads (Shame I can't reload) for that pistol. 255 grain with performance similar to a .44 magnum. Reason is, sucker is so heavy that it absorbs a lot of recoil so I get to pack nastier and not worry about slowing down on a follow up shot if I need it.

If I'm goofin at the range with full blown .460 loads then a good wide stance and a modified grip is in order so I don't bruise the finger on my left hand with the downward pressure from the trigger guard. Locked elbow is also helpful along with leaning into it. Anything to redirect the recoil as straight back as you can will help with those rounds. I imagine the .500 S&W would be sorta the same.


My in house SD preference my 870? Wide Stance, Hunch over and lean into that one. If I lean into it like that I noticed I can unload at a pretty impressive rate for a pump if I have to but only for a few seconds (My arm gets worn out lol).
 
The problem is that I shoot as a civilian much more than I do as a soldier and unless you're wearing body armor Weaver is far superior in terms of presenting a smaller cross section to your oponent and multidirectional stability.
Click to expand...
I don't like your theory. Why? Because blading off or shooting the old military way (sideways) to present a smaller target is likely to get you killed.

Hunters wait, wait, wait for that broadside target, the chance to drop both lungs and end the game then and there.

You can take a torso shot and even live without one lung. Plenty of people do. Your combat lifesavers have the equipment and training to manage one dropped lung. You can even survive a heart shot if your medic is close by and can treat tamponade. But a broadside shot to both lungs will drop you in your tracks just as surely as it drops a deer. It is a game-ender.

Integrate movement--primarily lateral movement-- into your training and get good at putting rounds on target while doing it. Remember that the BEST cover is well-aimed fire.
 
You are absolutley right about a broad shot to both lungs being the ENDGAME. You are done for, both popped with one shot. Yes people can survive heart shots as well, the human body is a lot tougher than most people give it credit for. Especially when you add deliberation. I don't think he meant really broadside though. The weaver just allows to reduce profile a bit. My brother and I practice CQB with gas airsoft pistols (closest thing we can get to SIMS and use regularly). People may think its goofy but it helps to make it muscle memory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top