As far as I can tell for many guns the artillery hold is complete bunk. I've tried it on a couple springers now and it makes horrible results. I've had much better accuracy with the traditional hold.One thing intrigues me about the artillery hold though, and that is giving it "some" freedom to recoil. I tested many different holds in a fairly scientific manner and I did find some benefit to leaving some "looseness" in how tight it fits on your shoulder. This little bit of air, or looseness, between your shoulder and the butt gave it a small pocket to recoil back into. Notice I did NOT say the gun is free to move around and do whatever it wants (this is what TOm Gaylord says to do with the artillery hold). I mean looseness so that it can slide backwards ONLY. Like a gun on a railroad track, it can go backwards only, not a bit up and down or , side to side, etc.In my test, when the gun was free to do whatever it wants, ala TOm Gaylord's instructions, it was a total mess. No consistency at all. But when I limited movement in all directions except backwards (and even that was limited somewhat) there was a night-and-day improvement.So I would suggest trying this modified "rail gun" hold and see what happens. Also try a regular rifle hold. you are not alone in finding the artillery hold creates horrible results. There were many people who chimed in on my old thread that said the same thing. But to be fair there are many who report good luck with the artillery hold, so it may depend on the individual gun.The graph below is from that old test. It was from one gun with one pellet so take with a grain of salt but I was butally consistent in all the tests. If you did this enough times, you would really know what is best for your gun. Anyway I basically used three levels of "tightness" on the hold at the back (butt meets shoulder), middle (rtigger hand) and front (forearm hand). You can see that the looser the front and middle hold, the worse it was. The gun could do whatever it wanted, and it wanted to go all over the place! I did a similar quick test -though without the thorough consistency- on my Beeman and I got the same results. Although for the beeman the looseness in the back doesn't seem to be needed, a regular rifle hold seems to work just fine. But what I'm saying about the beeman is based more on impressions instead of rigorous testing like on the nitro venom. I may do the same rigorous test on the beeman to see if my impressions were correct.
artillery hold for me and my gun is trash as far ans the shoulder/butt connection what i do is i put the butt on the front deltoid (front part of my shoulder muscle firmly but not stiff and that tens to hold it and give adequate room to recoil back into unlike hard bone in the shoulder (Clavicle) . But the artillery hold on the front side of the gun hold true for me a semi open loose grip griping slightly on the stock seems to hold true. It is truly your experimentation with your gun and your body that will yield the best results. Everyone gun/body hold is different.