Mike, I would like to add some food for thought. When old film, photographs, or drawings from the 19th century are interpreted as natural behavior, I have to wonder…how much was really natural, and how much was staged for the camera, or artist? Since photography became a way of archiving history, staging behavior and actions has been a staple of that medium, that is still used today. The photographer or artist might stage the scene he wants to project, to make it more dramatic or interesting, or to reflect his personal preferences. Pictures don't lie…but the photographer or artist will. They can embellish or altar the subject matter to suit their needs. Something to think about…

Mike has proved that even in the 19th century, had the internet existed, the debate of the best stance would have also existed.

Something just occurred to me: The shooter's dominant eye. The "duelist's" stance is going to be more difficult for a cross-dominant shooter to make work. The Bisley style will be better for the cross-dominant shooter because he or she can shift the gun and its sights over to the dominant eye's side easily; trying to get the left eye to line up with the sights on a gun in the right hand in the duelist's stance would require some uncomfortable twisting/craning of the neck.

My dad was a Bullseye shooter and taught me to shoot. When I qualified in the Military, the instructors were laughing at me. I qualified expert and they stopped laughing and just shrugged. Same instructors when I qualified for rifle, but after years of shooting high-power, I just told them to shut up and let me shoot expert. They shut up.

Your videos are always enthralling, even when they're on topics as obscure and otherwise mundane as this... Thanks!

I think the most important thing is that you have the the bones of the arm are supporting the weapon. This is something I learned from researching saber fighting. The idea is you rely on the bone aliment to support the weapon. With saber you have to withstand the impact of the other saber, in gun fighting you are absorbing the recoil. By advancing the shoulder you lock the arm into a more stable shooting platform.

Wow, you got me thinking on this subject. I am starting to work on mastering the Bisley grip and as a senior citizen I am finding it makes me more steady and gives me a clearer sight picture. Funny as a child in the fifties all we saw on TV westerns was the quick draw and shoot from the hip. Well done young man.

Mike it is always good to see and hear what you have for us.

i had never thought about stances - thanks for this.

I referenced the same book when I was researching history for my review of the Uberti "Bisley" and totally agree with what you presented. When I am firing my other single-actions, I usually find myself in the "Duelist" stance - shooting arm extended and wrist locked (as best I can). The first time I have ever seen a 'two-handed" grip was in a Cowboy Action Shooting match. While realizing this was for speed, using the support hand thumb for cocking, I discounted the grip for not being true to form, so to speak, as I do for "fanning."

The bent elbow stance or Bisley stance is one that I use when slow fire target shooting. I feel that it gives me more support.

Interesting video Mike pleased to see you back. As a Brit I have visited Bisley several times and have learnt a bit from the museum there. I have always shot handguns the same way as you and have found the bent elbow stance inconsistent. Good luck back at the Den.

Thank you Mike , I learned something new again. Not only are your videos fun to watch but very educational. Keep up the good work. And I hope you get back to Duelist's Den soon, before winter gets settled in. Thanks again

I have always used the straight arm style because that's the way my dad taught me to shoot his Colt 1911A1 when I was 9 yrs old. He was taught to use that stance in the Army in WWll and carried it on to my brother and I.

I recall reading in “Our Southern Highlanders: A Narrative of Adventure in the Southern Appalachians and a Study of Life Among the Mountaineers” by Horace Kephart which was written more than a century ago him mentioning the use of a two handed stance for pistol shooting. He noted that it was more accurate than the one handed stance that was more common in other parts of the US at the time.

Thanks again Mike. A few episodes back you talked about the tips and tricks used to reload 25-20,32-20, 38-40 and 44-40 brass without crumpling any cases. I’m wanting to reload all these cases and am hoping with the colder weather approaching you might want a few inside days to produce relative content we will all enjoy. I would personally love to see you do this so I can learn something from and expert. Thanks Steve

The Bisley stance makes a lot of sense when you consider how tiny (crappy by modern standards) revolver sights were. Especially the smaller frame ones. I think it was generally understood that at bad breath range pistols would be fired from the hip.

Excellent. Fascinating and practical research. Thanks. Hope the duelist den legal case is going along good.

Mike, I love your videos. I'm a retired US Army senior NCO and I know a lot about firearms; I use to teach firearm marksmanship and have shot competition. You always teach me something new. Thanks, and Merry Christmas.

Mike, you knocked this one out of the park! Great historical research and very informative! Thank you!

As soon as the weather warms back up, im looking forward to watching you attend some festivals hopefully.

👍 I am so glad this has been resolved, my sleepless nights are over. 😂😂😂 I would say stand whatever way you are comfortable and can hit the target repeatedly. The Bisley Stance seems awkward to me, too many joints bend in too many directions. The Bullseye Stance is probably the most sturdy and easiest to repeat. The Duelist Stance seems to present a smaller (thinner) profile as a target for the other shooter. Well, thinner if one’s profile is not as “bulky” as mine. So, perhaps better in a gunfight. However, all that having been said, my guess is that 90+% of folks (excluding competitive shooters) in the 19th Century stood whatever way they felt comfortable and were able to hit the target. Probably true in the 20th & 21st Centuries as well. Just thankful I will get a full night’s sleep tonight. I very much appreciate the obvious extensive research you put into this topic, it made for a very educational video.

Great video, Mike!

That was an excellent video on something I dont think I've ever seen anyone cover for firearms. Nicely done sir ... I enjoyed that very much.

Thank you for all the great info sir. You are a great resource for a lot of old west information

I’ve always laughed at the western movie stars holding the pistol with the Bisely style thinking it was really just a actor thing but now I know better. I can see that it might be preferable when shooting off a horse since the arm functions as a spring giving to the motion of the horse. On the other hand I’ve never tried it but I have talked to guys that have and they all say it’s very difficult to hit anything while riding. Great job as always Mike!

Always enjoy these historical perspectives. Many thanks for sharing your knowledge and expertise, Mike.

Great video! I've been looking for info on this very topic lately, and then this video drops! You know that some people had to have used the more open 'duelist' foot alignment because, even in 18th and early 19th Century duels, some people positioned both feet in a line with the target (that is, essentially sideways) in order make themselves as small a target as possible. Surely there was carry over into second half of the 19th Century.

Great video Mike, thank you. This is lots of food for thought. I think it all boils down to comfort.

fascinating stuff, thanks

This is a really interesting discussion. I can see where it might be valid when you're target shooting, but when you're in a gunfight where someone's shooting at you I really don't think you're going to be paying attention to what kind of stance you're using. You do what you need to do to survive.

Well done Mike. You've just done more honest historical research actually seeking answers than 1000 randomly chosen KZfaq vids put together.

Just an observation; you mention that the Bisley style had more muzzle flip, however looking at your video, the Bisley style allows you to keep a good grip on the gun after each shot because the flip/recoil looks to naturally be taken up by your bent arm, whereas with your arm straight, the gun’s grip moves a lot in your hand as the flip has nowhere to go, and you have to find your grip again after each shot. Never tried the Bisley grip myself, but I will next time out. Great video, thanks.

Mike, nice to see you making great videos again. Keep 'em coming!

Thanks for the video Mike I've been patiently waiting for it since yesterday, this one is a hit as usual, looking forward to your next.

Great video! I love these different looks at pieces of history.

I came across this video by chance, and I thank you for the hard work researching the topic.

There was a well known Revolutionary War historian in South Carolina (can not remember his name for the life of me) that spoke of the stance used by George Washington during battles which he participated in. The stance was the dueling stance of which George Washington would turn his body to make it a harder target to hit and to protect his heart. The historians words not mine. But it made a lot of sense. Thank you Mr. Mike for a rather interesting subject that could have turned out boring as hell.

I have found this to be most helpful. I am a very poor bullseye shooter and I also do other forms of shooting. Lately I have found that relative to grip angle relating to my wrist that a slight bisley stance helps me not to drop my aim and shoot under the bullseye. I thought that I was doing something drastically wrong. But I see some of the others also doing it at our weekly 900 matches. I am not a very serious bullseye shooter and I do it for practice and not score. On the timed and rapid fire I switch from right to left; I actually use a separate pistol for that part of the match. I also have some age related issues to.

Another interesting video. Thank you for the work you put in. Looking forward to the next video.

Great job with the research Mike. I've always seen the Bisley stance in old photos and prints but never really gave it any thought. I'm going to try that the next time I shoot my 1860 Army. I don't think I will try it with my Model 29 though...LOL

Fascinating Mike. Thank you.

Great video Mike, i never would have thought about different shooting stances either. Thanks for doing all the research!

Well done! Great topic, fairly covered.

Mike, thanks for an insightful and well-researched look at 19th Century handgun stances. I suspect that the duellist stance sacrifices stability for a narrower frontal area, and thus presents a smaller target in a duel. From your research, did anything suggest that the advent of higher-powered cartridges with increased recoil, in the 20th Century, made the Bisley stance less practical. I'm now 77 and have been shooting since elementary school. I know the first time I fired a S&W Model 29 in .44 Mag that I was glad my mother taught me to use a straight wrist and elbow. Please keep up the good work!

Good stuff Mike. Always interesting and well presented.

Awesome video! Thanks Mike!

Well researched video! The duelist stance may have come out of fencing where the sideways stance is familiar and exposes the least amount of the body. Beginning fencers take a while to learn how to maintain a "calm point" so the weapon doesn't wobble around during the extension and lunge. Once good balance and point control have developed hitting small transient openings with accuracy is routine. Just a thought.

I always enjoy your videos. They are very educational. Thank you.

Very interesting video Mike. Thanks for taking the time to research and post the information. 👍

It's great having you back🤠

Great information! Thanks again

Love your videos !!

At 12:44, I think it is more likely that the colt manual specifically mentioned not having a bent arm because the bent arm was common enough to be mentioned. This technique may be inferior, but that doesn't mean it wasn't used, or even common. Remember, for every duel a great duelist wins, someone else doesn't win. If you go to a public range today, I doubt everyone there will have a perfect shooting stance

I really appreciated this one, Mike! Gracias, Muchacho!

Absolutely brilliant Mike, thoroughly enjoyable and another fabulous production 👍🇬🇧

Fascinating as usual, thank you 👍🏻

Fascinating topic, thanks for posting

Well done Mike 👏! I enjoyed this one very much !

Good job Mike! Thank you for your research and sharing😁

Best wishes to you, Mike!

Thanks for another great video

Throughly enjoyed this!!! Thank you for your time sir! As always well done!

Excellent research amd analysis. Thanks.

Thanks Mike for the interesting video.

I've been watching your videos, off and on, for years now sir. I just want to let you know that you have the most fascinating firearms channel I've seen.

Yep, learned something new today, great informative video, thanks Mike.

Mike, I do enjoy your videos and I wish you a belated Merry Christmas and a Happy New Years !!!

Great research, Mike! I wonder how common hearing protection was? I don’t recall seeing ear-pro on any old time photos. I imagine that people like Annie Oakley were nearly deaf by age 50. What are your thoughts on that?

As someone who is legally blind, as soon as I saw the Bisley stance I always knew that people with bad eyesight and no corrective lenses used it so they can see the sights lol

Keep your head up, just remember the Roman motto - "Illegitimi non carborundom." - Latin for "don't let the badtards wear you down." !! Happy Holidays, Amigo!

Nice information to try out at the range.

This is one of your best! Primary source research! Thank you!

Great video. Will cause me to rethink my stance when shooting my BP pistols. Can't wait to try them.

Great research. Thank you, Mike for all the info.

I would think that single handed shooting stances depend on what is most comfortable. I have known many men who cannot straighten their arms completely,often caused by too much weightlifting. It does occur to me that a true “duellist” style might have been meant to make killing each other a little harder ! If it was easy, there wouldn’t have been many Military officers left !

Very educational. Great work.

Merry Christmas Mike! You give us gifts throughout the year/s. Kind Thanks! A straight armed stance is the most natural for me shooting black powder or modern powder arms. Besides, black powder flint and cap locks can throw out goodly sparks so caution practiced seems practical. I believe it’s simply a personal choice but in the heat of battle anything works I would assume. Fine and Happy Holidays to You and your Family! DaveyJO in Pennsylvania

Excellent great info

Excellent. Thank you

Interesting, never knew the way my father taught me to shoot was called a "duelist" stance, just thought it was the "right" way. As for that crooked arm all I remember about that is my grandfather telling me "Boy, you gonna smack yourself right in the face". I'm still most comfortable when target shooting with the side standing, one handed, arm extended (duelist) way of holding my firearm.

I think the goal of the 'duelist' stance is target size reduction. Bisley stance is a function of the rules of the competition. As you described the competition - target acquisition speed is important. Last the 'straight arm, would probably be the easiest transition from duelist style. Thanks for the research and analysis. Good luck on the battle for Duelist Den.

Hey Mike, nice to see you again. I like this subject a lot as it shows the variety of the way the guns were handled. In the pic of the WW1 officers could it be that the one in the 'Bisley stile' be in recoil as the muzzle appears to be higher that the other 2's muzzles, just a thought. One other thought is that both of the target shooting stiles are 'for target shooting' and not really for combat. Therefore the Duelist stance may have been the correct stance to minimize your profile in a fight. Last is that I read about an artist, not sure who, that said he saw something in a fight and later recreated it by watching troops shooting at the range much later. So some of the art may not really represent what or how it was. Anyway another great video in the can. I agree life has a bad habit of getting in the way often.

Well Mr Mike, I learned something today, thanks for the research, I am on it now myself, found this interesting. Thanks and take care

Good info. Good video.

Another great video Mike keep up the great work. Noone alive today was there to see what everone was dooing.

I love this type of content

As always a good and thorough research as it can be, short of actually traveling back in time. How ever I would venture to say that for those that were gunslingers and good ones, the stance most appropriate would be the 45 degree angle, but in a split second one would shoot out of instinct, and also having in your sight your whole arm as a projection aiming device would be more appropriate but not necessarily arm totally straight , but with a slight natural bend if one had the time, this brings me to the "they did not shoot from the hip, today we over do it, but in a fast draw it would have been near your center of gravity as long as your arm was in view of your eyes, so it is not from de hip but in-between, the alignment is what is important, and I would venture to say that the best shooters use both eyes not one eye, the one eye would be for practice shooting and hunting, when one has the time for it . Anyways glad to hear from you "Arms Historical Professor" 😁 . This of course is in my humble opinion. Good Bless 🙏❗

informative review, thanks

Quite interesting. Thank you.

Stances are something I've not thought about when looking at historical shooting. Interesting. You are Duelist1954, if you're shooting as if you're in one of those formal duels, it's all good.

Great video. Excellent info. I'd guess that the duelist stance was intended more to limit target opportunities for an opponent than to achieve the best target score.

When a hand gun is used for its intended civilian purpose, short range defense, a stance with a bent arm would bring the weapon closer to the eye for a quicker sight acquisition. In target or combat situations at longer distances the straight arm would be preferred. Even old army training films showing close quarter quick response hand gun exercises demonstrate a squared crouched stance instead of the dueling stance to lessen your target with a bent arm for a quick point and shoot shot. I would suppose a crouched stance in the 19th century would have been considered unmanly.

Thanks Mike.

Such a inspiration 👌

Using the Bisley stance with the C96 Mauser pistol, the action won't operate correctly. It requires a locked elbow for optimum results. The .30 Luger sometimes has problems with limp wrist shooting. I never shot a C93 Borchardt pistol so I don't know if limp wrist shooting would work with it. Nice research Mike. One more thing Mike, isn't sight picture the more important aspect of shooting. I hope all goes well with the suit and the judge rules in your favor.

Great perspectives Mike. I think Dirty Harry Callahan used the Bisley stance in some of his famous shots. Always thought it looked great.

Great history lesson. thank you!

Great talk and insight ; thanks from old New Orleans 😎

Very interesting, as a reenactor I may incorporate some of the other stances into my practice