Well I'll forgo the stance issues and go right to the rigid arm extension and lock out. This creates an upward recoil as the arms are locked and can't absorb the recoil like a shock absorber would therefore the upward recoil will hurt follow through a small bend in the elbows and locking of the wrist will fix this issue you are not addressing in your stance and this is also part of a proper stance. Also notice her hips and shoulders are not in alignment squared together causing a lot of tension in her torso. which is show naturally in the natural pointing stance. If her right foot was further out approx. shoulder width apart or slightly more you'd see her hips more square with her shoulders making a more natural position and stance. IMO
The arms are slightly bent in the elbows, but the camera angle does not show that correctly. Elbows also need to be stiff. We will argue that locking the elbows will cause the lofting effect of the arms (the upward recoil as you've called it). This effect is caused more by the fact that the shooting stance is without enough forward lean and the level of the gun is higher than the level of the shoulder line. That will create leverage that the gun will have over the shooter in recoil.
@@TacticalPerformanceCenter Well maybe think about locking the wrists a little and less tension on the elbows if elbows are locked then they are like 2 X 4 and recoil will raise the whole arm and firearm control of recoil by slightly bent and alittle tension in elbows however the wrist lock is 1 of the biggest parts of recoil management as well as the forward lean rule of thumb is usually chin over front foot toes as I do see her doing.
I'm sorry, but being able to push her over that easily when she goes into a negative stance is completely unrealistic... This is similar to what you see in fake martial arts.
The idea isn't to show how easy it is to push her down. The idea is to show how unbalanced the stances are. And in that regard the demonstration works quite well as far as I'm concerned. I was able to study each stance closely, and examine the physics, and find the proper stance; which was the one Joann took for the final one; head forward, almost a straight line from the forehead to her right heel at a forward slant, left leg under the chin. Complete balance.
@@markl2322 Great analysis. As a former martial arts practitioner I just think fighting stance. I really appreciate, in addition, how her head is not drastically dropped down and forward, like I see a lot of people tend to do. It's bad enough people are getting bad posture from too much screen time, lol.
You can try this experiment on your own. The idea is, for the shooter to stay passive and not to take any proactive actions in order to preserve balance. Why that is important? Because that can lead to anticipation of the shot! We teach passive reoil management. That will help not to be equipment dependent.
@@everythingisaworkinprogres5729 that's because people are taught incorrectly or watch too much TV. The FIREARM should be brought up to the eyes with the head level, your head should not be tilted forward and down to find the sights.
This is great for diminishing the effects of Newton's 3rd Law of energy conservation, but what about the close encounters, during which the bad-guy is so close that he can grab your gun. Nose too far forward of forward toe means the center-of-form is too far ahead of the center-of-gravity, resulting in a forward tip-over and likely a loss of balance and potentially loss of gun control. Love your videos, but humbly disagree about that very small part.
If the bad guy is close, obviously you are not going to do a full presentation of the gun. Always need to keep your gun under control! Regarding balance, different people need more or less a forward center of gravity based on their weight. If the ankles are relaxed and the shins are pushing forward, there will be no issue with the balance. But we need to take into consideration that different situations require different reactions and modifications of the shooting stance.
There is no such thing as a bad stance in a self defense shooting. The defender shoots whenever and from whatever position his/her body is in when he/she must shoot.
This is partly true. The first accurate shot is critical to the outcome of the shootout. However, the stance can help with this through the natural point of aim and will guarantee better recoil management if multiple shots are fired in a rapid manner. That will assure more accurate engagement for a minimum time. The desired effect is a stopping effect on the adversary as quickly as possible without collateral damage.
@@TacticalPerformanceCenter If my life is in genuine jeopardy, I will move my gun hand and arm and nothing else. People should practice shooting their pistols with one hand from odd positions so they learn how to manage the gun and place good hits.
@@danqodusk8140 We agree that speed is a critical factor in self-defense situations, especially at close range and in an open area. We assume you are talking about the "Speed Rock" type of draw and point shooting. Well, that doesn't work that well on distances greater than 5 yards, even with a solid training behind. If the adversary is at about 6 yards and greater it's way faster, more accurate, and efficient to use a two-handed grip, aimed fire engagement. Take under consideration the cone of error as well. The greater the distance, the greater is the chance of error or the accuracy can become a greater factor. You can not miss fast enough to neutralize the bad guy! 😉 We didn't touch the more important aspect of a gunfight in an urban environment, the potential collateral damage. You can not afford such an incident, or you will be held accountable for it. What about the moral aspect if you injure or even kill an innocent person close by the place of the engagement. Every missed shot carries the risk of such an event.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for the help specially with the third one
Good Job
these are very good videos. very informative and well explained. makes total sense!
We are glad you like it!
Well I'll forgo the stance issues and go right to the rigid arm extension and lock out. This creates an upward recoil as the arms are locked and can't absorb the recoil like a shock absorber would therefore the upward recoil will hurt follow through a small bend in the elbows and locking of the wrist will fix this issue you are not addressing in your stance and this is also part of a proper stance. Also notice her hips and shoulders are not in alignment squared together causing a lot of tension in her torso. which is show naturally in the natural pointing stance. If her right foot was further out approx. shoulder width apart or slightly more you'd see her hips more square with her shoulders making a more natural position and stance. IMO
The arms are slightly bent in the elbows, but the camera angle does not show that correctly. Elbows also need to be stiff. We will argue that locking the elbows will cause the lofting effect of the arms (the upward recoil as you've called it). This effect is caused more by the fact that the shooting stance is without enough forward lean and the level of the gun is higher than the level of the shoulder line. That will create leverage that the gun will have over the shooter in recoil.
@@TacticalPerformanceCenter Well maybe think about locking the wrists a little and less tension on the elbows if elbows are locked then they are like 2 X 4 and recoil will raise the whole arm and firearm control of recoil by slightly bent and alittle tension in elbows however the wrist lock is 1 of the biggest parts of recoil management as well as the forward lean rule of thumb is usually chin over front foot toes as I do see her doing.
Good job sir this is awesome! Thank you for your knowledge
Ugh the mcgilla gorilla hits home hard. I would've never suspected how badly increased tension can screw up your recoil management!
Right there with ya
thanks the best videos on stance I have ever seen
I'm sorry, but being able to push her over that easily when she goes into a negative stance is completely unrealistic... This is similar to what you see in fake martial arts.
The idea isn't to show how easy it is to push her down. The idea is to show how unbalanced the stances are. And in that regard the demonstration works quite well as far as I'm concerned. I was able to study each stance closely, and examine the physics, and find the proper stance; which was the one Joann took for the final one; head forward, almost a straight line from the forehead to her right heel at a forward slant, left leg under the chin. Complete balance.
@@markl2322 Great analysis. As a former martial arts practitioner I just think fighting stance. I really appreciate, in addition, how her head is not drastically dropped down and forward, like I see a lot of people tend to do. It's bad enough people are getting bad posture from too much screen time, lol.
You can try this experiment on your own. The idea is, for the shooter to stay passive and not to take any proactive actions in order to preserve balance. Why that is important? Because that can lead to anticipation of the shot! We teach passive reoil management. That will help not to be equipment dependent.
@@everythingisaworkinprogres5729 that's because people are taught incorrectly or watch too much TV. The FIREARM should be brought up to the eyes with the head level, your head should not be tilted forward and down to find the sights.
This is great for diminishing the effects of Newton's 3rd Law of energy conservation, but what about the close encounters, during which the bad-guy is so close that he can grab your gun. Nose too far forward of forward toe means the center-of-form is too far ahead of the center-of-gravity, resulting in a forward tip-over and likely a loss of balance and potentially loss of gun control.
Love your videos, but humbly disagree about that very small part.
If the bad guy is close, obviously you are not going to do a full presentation of the gun. Always need to keep your gun under control! Regarding balance, different people need more or less a forward center of gravity based on their weight. If the ankles are relaxed and the shins are pushing forward, there will be no issue with the balance. But we need to take into consideration that different situations require different reactions and modifications of the shooting stance.
🙏🙏🙏
Thanks!!
There is no such thing as a bad stance in a self defense shooting. The defender shoots whenever and from whatever position his/her body is in when he/she must shoot.
This is partly true. The first accurate shot is critical to the outcome of the shootout. However, the stance can help with this through the natural point of aim and will guarantee better recoil management if multiple shots are fired in a rapid manner. That will assure more accurate engagement for a minimum time. The desired effect is a stopping effect on the adversary as quickly as possible without collateral damage.
@@TacticalPerformanceCenter If my life is in genuine jeopardy, I will move my gun hand and arm and nothing else. People should practice shooting their pistols with one hand from odd positions so they learn how to manage the gun and place good hits.
What is the reason not to use both hands, unless the “support” hand is occupied with something or is incapacitated?
@@TacticalPerformanceCenter efficiency, speed. Criminals don't wait for their victims to prepare to fight.
@@danqodusk8140 We agree that speed is a critical factor in self-defense situations, especially at close range and in an open area. We assume you are talking about the "Speed Rock" type of draw and point shooting. Well, that doesn't work that well on distances greater than 5 yards, even with a solid training behind. If the adversary is at about 6 yards and greater it's way faster, more accurate, and efficient to use a two-handed grip, aimed fire engagement. Take under consideration the cone of error as well. The greater the distance, the greater is the chance of error or the accuracy can become a greater factor. You can not miss fast enough to neutralize the bad guy! 😉 We didn't touch the more important aspect of a gunfight in an urban environment, the potential collateral damage. You can not afford such an incident, or you will be held accountable for it. What about the moral aspect if you injure or even kill an innocent person close by the place of the engagement. Every missed shot carries the risk of such an event.
Joanne is kooo
We like her! She's one of our more in demand instructors too. She's quite talented. -- Ken N.