# Open vs. Square stance



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

Whatever you personally find are the results, are the results for you. 

The only thing that ever matters is the score and how you get it within the rules. 
If you can personally set world records with your feet facing backwards, are you going to change to a stance which drops your performance?

Go and see what makes a difference for you. 
If you can't see a difference, then there isn't one. 

So many people start archery expecting there to be the absolute best way or an exact answer to everything. 
There is only one exact answer to high performance archery. Absolute consistency. 
How you achieve it is up to you. Some things make it easier to achieve. Go find what is the most consistent stance for you.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Hi Andy!

Wjtran, I agree with whiz that ultimately, thoughtful experimentation will bring you to YOUR best body/foot positioning.

But, the main tenant behind the open stance is that, as a general statement, it forces you to twist your upper body to get inline with the target, and to achieve that twisting you must tighten your core (abs, lower back, obliques, ribcage intercostals), thus providing more stability through the shot process.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

w - 

Opening your stance will move your arrow to the left (right handed shooter), closing it will move it to the right. 
Which one is right? Depends on anatomy and to a lesser degree, preference. Look up "natural point of aim" and test it out. 

While a neutral stance should be optimal for most people (less body torque), sometimes adding torque,like in windy conditions may be a plus.

Viper1 out.


----------



## TheXringHunt (Apr 12, 2007)

Viper1 said:


> w -
> 
> Opening your stance will move your arrow to the left (right handed shooter), closing it will move it to the right.
> Which one is right? Depends on anatomy and to a lesser degree, preference. Look up "natural point of aim" and test it out.
> ...


Plus one on the Viper1's comments. My coach had moved me to a closed stance for a while but that was done as a teaching aid to help force me with better alignment between my bow arm and my back or as it is also referred to "the barrel of the gun" while going through my shot cycle. After shooting that way for a long while and have subconsciously learned my proper alignment, he is having me move my stance to a more natural shooting position again.


----------



## cuttingedge (Feb 19, 2005)

I find that I shoot better with an open stance. For me, I feel more stable.


----------



## Bowmania (Jan 3, 2003)

Viper, I would think you want more 'body torque'? Your core is much stronger than arms. 

In that last Brady video he says something about not drawing with his arms and uses his body 75% (?) to draw. Not sure because the video was about aiming and pulling through the clicker, which he doesn't do.

Bowmania


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

Body torque IMO doesn't matter to your shot one way or the other. The far majority of the best archers in the world shoot with a square stance. I have tested shooting in various degrees of open stance, square stance and even in a closed stance, and to be honest I have seen no difference in my scores from one to the other. So I have come to the conclusion that a comfortable stable and balanced stance is the best stance. Heck if you shoot field, you will learn pretty quick that it doesn't matter how your feet are arranged, but rather how balanced and stable your stance is.


----------



## dajogejr (Dec 20, 2012)

One of our local pros taught me this...
Close your stand, draw and aim at the target. Close your eyes for a few seconds, open them.
Does your aim go off center to the right (for a right handed shooter)?

If so open your stance to where if you close your eye it remains on target after a few seconds. At that point, you're not fighting your body's natural aiming action.
It's helped me with left and rights and made perfect sense.

Your mileage may vary.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Todd - 

The more torque you8 apply, the more torque you have to fight against. 
It's the "you can't fall off the floor" principle. 

da -

That's a variation on the Natural Point of Aim test.

Viper1 out.


----------



## SHPoet (Nov 13, 2009)

lksseven said:


> Hi Andy!
> 
> Wjtran, I agree with whiz that ultimately, thoughtful experimentation will bring you to YOUR best body/foot positioning.
> 
> But, the main tenant behind the open stance is that, as a general statement, it forces you to twist your upper body to get inline with the target, and to achieve that twisting you must tighten your core (abs, lower back, obliques, ribcage intercostals), thus providing more stability through the shot process.


Well, that is the idea but it only works if you do it right. If you rotate your hips to face your target, you lose that tightening of necessary muscles.


----------



## whynotv2 (Oct 5, 2010)

dajogejr said:


> One of our local pros taught me this...
> Close your stand, draw and aim at the target. Close your eyes for a few seconds, open them.
> Does your aim go off center to the right (for a right handed shooter)?
> 
> ...


Too funny!!! I was about to post something similar, only adding that I read it in Larry Wise's book "Core Archery". The idea behind the exercise is to not waste energy fighting your body and setting your body to use the least amount of energy possible. Essentially, eliminating waste to increase your fuel stores throughout your practice session, tournament, etc. It's how I ended up with a neutral/square stance.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

wjtran said:


> What are the differences in results between using an open stance vs a square stance? Are there situations where you would use one over the other, otherwise why would you choose to commit to one over the other?


In terms of results, just about anything can work, McKinney's book is interesting in depicting everything from square to open to people with feet faced forward basically turned 90 degrees. It's ultimately what works.

Why square? I think the argument would be that you're then aligned right on target naturally. Open, your body is turned 45 degrees or whatever and you're trying to shoot straight. Some people square makes them feel closed off and tight, and opening up helps expansion and technique. I found open more relaxed but also made me fight the ergonomic push to turn left. I'm better off square so the body forces go square.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Plenty of high profile archers use square stance (most of the Koreans, I think most of the Germans, ...) .

Plenty of high profile archers use/have used an open stance, including the top three American men of all time (Pace, McKinney, Ellison). Also, here's a couple of links showing a handful of the greatest current female archers ... both stances are well represented...
https://photos.app.goo.gl/ZuOydDBasHPgexP83

Current indoor world record holder, Erika Jones (I think she still holds the record) ... https://photos.app.goo.gl/ygHxa1zq1jELe2e02


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Larry - 



> Current indoor world record holder, Erika Jones (I think she still holds the record)


And that's the problem, unless you are her, nothing she does really matters for what YOU (or I) do. 
I know it's pretty common to try to emulate "the best" or our heros, or use them as examples, but it's usually as detrimental as it is common.

A -

We start every one off with a neutral stance, because it's the easiest to reproduce, and frankly it's the most natural. Still, a good instructor will take it on a case by case basis. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Viper1 said:


> Larry -
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Agree with you 'in the specific' that a neutral stance is the best beginning, and that an open stance ain't for many (most?) mere mortals (it's certainly true that my 61year old ribcage and lower back won't tolerate extended twisting and taut holding over a period of several hours). I was just taking the OP's kind of general theoretical question at face value and giving a broad view of the why's (and some anecdotal examples).


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Larry - 

Can't argue with anything you just said. 
The only exception I had was using "elites" as examples. 

Sure, anything is possible, just a lot of it isn't practical for most of us weekend warriors. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## JB33 (Sep 5, 2017)

I was told the open stance gives you better balance in windy conditions. If you only shoot indoors that would not be an issue. Staying consistent is very important so if you plan to shoot outdoors, you might as well start shooting with an open stance.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

JB33 said:


> I was told the open stance gives you better balance in windy conditions. If you only shoot indoors that would not be an issue. Staying consistent is very important so if you plan to shoot outdoors, you might as well start shooting with an open stance.


Open stance does, I agree, seem to give a theoretical more robust foundation. But, of course, the Koreans (square stance) would disagree, and their outdoor track record is pretty good. Again, for some pitchers their out pitch is a fastball, and for others it's their curve (or change up, or slider, or forkball, or ...)


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Square stance is easier to stay steady for a beginner as its keeping the draw forces in a line to target. And it is easier to learn to get in alignment from a square stance. 

Open stance for a beginner guarantees they will not be anywhere close to alignment. 

Of course alignment matters less for a beginner than just having fun and flinging arrows. But once they want to get serious, they have a huge hurdle trying to get into alignment with the open stance. 

Some never do. 

Some open stances are slight, some open stances are extreme. The more open, the harder to get into alignment, even for an elite archer. There are some Korean archers that have a slight open stance, and others have a closed stance. 

I would recommend you start with a stance that is square or slightly open and feels natural. I would avoid a lot of twisting of the body with the stance in the beginning years. 


Chris


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

JB33 said:


> I was told the open stance gives you better balance in windy conditions. If you only shoot indoors that would not be an issue. Staying consistent is very important so if you plan to shoot outdoors, you might as well start shooting with an open stance.


Yes an open stance is better in the wind than a square stance in a CROSS wind in theory. But if the wind is blowing either with or against you on the shooting line, then a square stance will be better than an open stance. But what if the wind is blowing diagonally? Then a square stance would be better than an open. But to be honest with you, I've shot in some pretty heavy cross wind using a square stance, and I did get push around somewhat, but so did the three archers shooting with an open stance.


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

When it comes to stance, I don't think that there is a "best" foot position. The most important things in the stance is balance and weight distribution. It don't matter whether or not its open, square or closed, which one figures out very quickly when you shoot on uneven ground, such as in field or 3D.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

chrstphr said:


> Square stance is easier to stay steady for a beginner as its keeping the draw forces in a line to target. And it is easier to learn to get in alignment from a square stance.
> 
> Open stance for a beginner guarantees they will not be anywhere close to alignment.
> 
> ...


Agree with Chris' emphasis on the primacy of alignment ... zero angle (or as close as each archer can get it) skeletal alignment, and vertical/horizontal force alignment/balance is the lion's share of good results. Whatever stance or draw that enables that good alignment/form most often is what each of us should be after. Brady's elbow is behind the line, and Park Sung Hyun's isn't, but I'm pretty sure that in each of them their internal forces (bowhand, alignment at hold, force expansion, ..) are aligned into near perfect balance ... different folks different strokes


----------

