# Posting scores and a reality check.



## gun (Apr 26, 2005)

Great post Viper.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Great post, I like to shoot a 300 round every now and then all year around. Sure lets you know where your shooting is at in a big hurry! I also like to mix in one or two at 30 yards - little things you get away with at 20 really start to show at 30 and beyond.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Center - 

A shooter with decent form an a little experience, will learn more from 2 hours at 40 yds than two weeks at 20. 
And you can substitute any two distances you like based on the shooter's comfort zone.

That's another thread... 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

Think I'd like to shoot a 300 round too, just as a guage. I'm one of those "bowhunters" AND a novice. I just shot my 3rd 3D traditional class tournament this morning and averaged 9.5 on a 20 target round. Target placement seemed more forgiving than usual and averaged between 18-25 yards with a couple at 30. I'd like to know how that score would translate in a 300 round.....


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Long -



> I'd like to know how that score would translate in a 300 round.....


It doesn't, that's the problem. If you go around the country, or even locally, odds are slim you'll kind two 3D courses that are similar, forget identical - they are supposed to be that way. There's not real benchmark. If you were to shoot the same course every weekend, it kinda throws the "unmarked distance" thing out the window. 

For bowhunters, I usually suggest they hone their SHOOTING skills on the 300 round, since it's a constant and THEN work on their hunting with 3D or roving.

Viper1 out.


----------



## Thin Man (Feb 18, 2012)

Post-toddler humans over-think. 

I held an interesting conversation with a family some years ago. The father was Czechoslovakian, the mother was Spanish, and their four year old child was born in America. As we talked, the child would speak to me in flawless, accent-free English. When addressing his father, the child spoke Czech. When addressing his mother he would speak in Spanish. This went on for about ten minutes. 

The child hadn't even begun his formal education yet.

My revelation (and shame) was that I had been engaged in the "formal" study of foreign languages for a period of time longer than that child had been alive ... yet still couldn't casually sing a nursery rhyme in another tongue, much less hold fluent court with three adults from differing nationalities. 

My paradigm shift? You don't "study" a language (or anything) and expect to become fluent. You speak one - a lot, all the time, and over several years - in order to become fluent. Studying syntax (and for that matter, writing) is a complete waste of time until you have mastered the majority of a language. At that point, the syntax study serves to refine and embellish the existing foundation (writing allows you to communicate in code).

Archery is not much different than learning a language. Shooting fluency will come with much repetition over a significant period of time. As pointed out in the initial post of this thread, "need to know" instruction and its application will maximize the learning curve.

Since we are intellectual, we will certainly study, analyze, and discuss every facet of archery that crosses our path, and there's nothing wrong with this (we can't help it, anyway!). But this intellectual pursuit should be ever-trumped by the fluency requirements of aggressive, studied repetition. 

I want it all ... now ... as badly as anyone. But nothing happens "now". I often think back to the tri-lingual child when I'm stumped and ponder, "Hmmm, what would he do here?" 

He'd simply keep shooting. A lot. Every day. For years.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Long Rifle said:


> Think I'd like to shoot a 300 round too, just as a guage. I'm one of those "bowhunters" AND a novice. I just shot my 3rd 3D traditional class tournament this morning and averaged 9.5 on a 20 target round. Target placement seemed more forgiving than usual and averaged between 18-25 yards with a couple at 30. I'd like to know how that score would translate in a 300 round.....


It won't have a translation except a limited one in 3D comparison, say, over the course of many other courses, which is hard to compare even at that. We have one course here that is almost bowling alley set, straight flat lanes, unobstructed view on every shot, and then one that's all hills and trees and shrubbery to shoot through. 

BUT, I will say that for any standard 3D setup at those ranges, averaging 9.5 is exceptional and above par enough that it can translate to being better than what most can do on any 3D course. Congrats!


----------



## jkm97 (Jul 8, 2004)

Good read, thanks for posting.


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

Viper, 
I just looked up a 300 round and I have the scoring and shot sequence down. When I do this should I be shooting from 20 yards? I have been shooting for 5 months and don't think I am doing to bad for my time frame but like you said a good check on how you are truly progressing. Thank for posting this suggestion I feel it could be highly beneficial for my shooting skills.


----------



## Str8 Shooter (Oct 15, 2005)

So, basically, when someone asks for info on form or tuning they need to post a 300 round score to qualify for advice?

I agree with some points about information overload but usually when people ask about form or tuning it's because they recognize a need for improvement. Witholding information because a score isn't high enough seems a touch impractical. Just because it may not pertain at that point doesn't mean it isn't useful information that will manifest results for that shooter at a later time. 

Maybe I'm reading this wrong...


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Arron -

That's a really good question. 

As a standardized benchmark, yes, it's a 20 yds deal, but ... 

For new(er) shooters we use the 6" rule. 
That's means there's going to a distance that you're holding around a 6" group. That should be the distance you start scoring. 
A 6" group, btw should put you in the 260 range give or take. 

If you're new to this, start at 10 yds and see how you do.
(60 arrows can be a lot for some folks.)
If you're in the 260 - 270 range, move back to 15, ditto at 15, move back to 20.

Here's a rough score break down:
270 @ 10 yds = 240 at 15 yds and about 200 at 20 yds (approximations of course). 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Big Country (Apr 25, 2003)

Long Rifle said:


> Think I'd like to shoot a 300 round too, just as a guage. I'm one of those "bowhunters" AND a novice. I just shot my 3rd 3D traditional class tournament this morning and averaged 9.5 on a 20 target round. Target placement seemed more forgiving than usual and averaged between 18-25 yards with a couple at 30. I'd like to know how that score would translate in a 300 round.....


Even if the targets were placed inside a climate controlled building with a nice level tile floor and the yardage of each target was marked, you are doing better than 95% of traditional archers will do with decades of practice.

Whatever you are doing, keep it up.


----------



## Str8 Shooter (Oct 15, 2005)

btw, LongRifle, if you consider your average 10 ring on a deer (the most common 3D target) is about 5-6" in diameter and your average shot is app. 20 yards you should be able to hit a 240 without too much trouble. I'm sure you have some smaller targets at close range and larger ones further out so it should avg. out to some degree. If you can hit a 10 ring on a turkey at 20 on every shot I'd say you're probably gonna be able to push a 270 on the NFAA 300 round. Of course, this is just an estimate. 3D introduces a lot more variables than shooting a 300 round and things like judging the distance, angles, lighting, footing, etc can make a course much harder or easier as others have pointed out. 

Either way, averaging 9.5 on a course like you've described is excellent shooting.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Str8 Shooter said:


> So, basically, when someone asks for info on form or tuning they need to post a 300 round score to qualify for advice?
> 
> I agree with some points about information overload but usually when people ask about form or tuning it's because they recognize a need for improvement. Witholding information because a score isn't high enough seems a touch impractical. Just because it may not pertain at that point doesn't mean it isn't useful information that will manifest results for that shooter at a later time.
> 
> Maybe I'm reading this wrong...


I don't think you're reading it wrong Str8...and i was with'im for a paragraph or three but got turned off by terms like newbies, new students, weeding out, in real life (like mine ain't LOL), lucky shots, sub-200 shooters, his new olympic shooters closely followed by nationally ranked ones..and then the "fur shooters" comment at the end?..pretty much killed it for me as while i definantly got his point?..it was so narrowly focused that it seems in his world "Trad Hunters" & "Recreational Archers" are somehow "less thans" while i've always felt that as archers?..we should be promoting ALL FORMS/DISCIPLINES/VENUES & SKILL LEVELS...not just ourselves..or having a chest pounding contest over 20yd paper scores.

The Bad News?: heck...i might be a Sub 200 Level Shooter

The Great News?: I'll NEVER Know! :laugh:

Truth be known?..these days?...i almost feel sorry for folks who are infered into an almost immediate obligation to push themselves towards becoming a world champ..just to feel "part of" and i think they miss a lot as they get pushed right past the doors of enjoyment and happyness that is..

The simple act of completely relaxing while shooting ones bow. 

And this is where the wannabe pro drills one in the x-ring exclaiming "I NAILED IT!" as the wise old more experienced archer gets to say...

No son...you missed....alot..and often.


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

Thanks guys, I wasn't fishing for compliments but feedback helps, that's my interest in shooting a 300 round. I've been shooting traditional only for a little over a year and since the bug hit me I've pretty much immersed myself into it. It's not uncommon for me to shoot 300-400 arrows a week. I was pretty much in the "zone" today and focused on besting the top documented score (long story) for the past two years in our coalition. I missed a tie by one point.....


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

There is definitely a difference between the advice I'd give to someone who is a sub-200 shooter and who is a 270-280 shooter.

The advice for the sub-200 guy might let him increase score by 20-30 points in a week or two, the 270 shooter it might get him another 5 over the course of the season.

Different advice still between the recreational and competitive shooter.

In most cases it's better to assume that a poster is new or shooting at a low level until they can offer some sort of substantiation with regards to their shooting ability. 3D doesn't cut it for this and few people here shoot Field or outdoor target.

-Grant


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

I can't think of a better way to turn off people new to the game who have questions. Post a question and a score...then maybe someone will help you.

You can usually get a read on where a poster is coming from just by a careful reading the original post and any follow up posts. Most top-flight competitive archers aren't going to be posting form or tuning questions anyway. I'd prefer to assume the most of any poster and their experience level. 

In my opinion anything else just sounds like condescension.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Easy, you are reading this wrong. As grant said, different advice for different levels. People at the 200 level have way different needs than those at 260-270. They never said they wouldn't give advice to those shooting low scores. Giving fine tuning advice to those shooting 180-200 will give them next to no help. They most likely need basic form advice. Things get accomplished much quicker when you know where they are at in their game.


----------



## Thin Man (Feb 18, 2012)

From the original post:



> The problems come in when we can't actually see the poster shooting, which is most often the case.





> While this probably won't happen, it might be nice to have a frame of reference, knowing who we're talking to.





> ... that does make things a little harder to decipher. Sometimes getting useful information will take a little bit of work.


Polite caveats throughout the original post ... didn't even need to read between the lines to find them.




> ... it might be nice to have a frame of reference ...


The crux of the original post.




> ... it might be nice ...


Speculation and wishful thinking ... neither of which are dogmatic nor arrogant.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Long Rifle said:


> Think I'd like to shoot a 300 round too, just as a guage. I'm one of those "bowhunters" AND a novice. I just shot my 3rd 3D traditional class tournament this morning and averaged 9.5 on a 20 target round. Target placement seemed more forgiving than usual and averaged between 18-25 yards with a couple at 30. I'd like to know how that score would translate in a 300 round.....


9.5 is world top 3 standard so well done.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Great thread Viper! I completely agree, I think the 300 round should be the standard for measuring progress and skill. Shot one the other day and the very notion of scoring threw me off. Predictably I was shooting better near the middle when I stopped caring about score (I realized it was going to be poor).

Regarding two points, namely technicality and the arrow selection anecdote you mentioned:
-when it comes to discussing physics, or really technical points, I think some here, myself included, are fascinated by the intellectual components of this sport. Do they necessarily translate for anyone but the absolute top shooters? Not necessarily, and often not at all, but often times it's interesting to discuss and through said discussion, people learn about other topics such as physics. I think as long as that is kept in perspective and opinions don't get emotionally charged, it isn't harmful, as long as newbies are aware of the nature of the discussion. Little cues I've picked up in some of these have actually made a big difference to my shooting on occasion.

-Regarding arrow selection - I'm not sure what the context of the conversation was but for myself, I'm a) frugal and b) technical. I know it's not nearly the same game as rifle shooting as you aren't splitting hairs over a quarter inch at 200 yards, but I like to know that the equipment I'm paying for is at least in the right ballpark. When I posted a tuning thread a few weeks ago, I really appreciated all the tuning advice I got, but also the advice to not worry about it and shoot - being provided with information that let me know I was on the right track but not ready to fine tune was huge for my peace of mind. I know now that the arrows/points I have are in the right ballpark, and tuned at least well enough for my current shooting ability. Bottom line is I really appreciate the well-rounded advice - not "it doesn't matter" (probably true for many newbies), but "not that important right now so don't sweat it, but here's how". Even if it's not useful to me at the moment, I learned about it, and that has immense value to me.

I do agree that having a baseline to work off of for shooters would be fantastic. It would also help weigh the advice new guys are getting from others - i.e. "this guy is new like me and telling me which direction to head" vs "this guy is a world class shot/instructor".


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

I agree Viper. While a 300 round score isn't the be all and end all of archery, it gives that datum level to be used for giving the correct level of advice.
I'm not sure why some got so bent out of shape with this, it's simple really.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Good points, but I've only done that once, with a compound. I can look up my western IBO score if you have a converter app ; )


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

One comment. Fixed distance repetitive shooting is very relevant to shot execution, which is entirely valid for the point of discussing arrow and bow tuning. Shooting farther distances, in My,opinion would be even more relevant, though probably more impractical. However, for those who want to excel taking unmarked, nonstandard shots, while shooting fixed distance to work on form can certainly be of great benefit, in my opinion, shooting the same shots that are those that matter to them most are indespensible. I think every dropped arrowI've had in the last year was becauseI muffed the yardageestimates. So, while stressing form is important, it can't replace experience in the specific venue.


----------



## Mo0se (Sep 24, 2002)

You forgot to add a 300 round at a public place..the more crowded the better.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

CF, Barney and BigJ -

The 300 round certainly isn't the be all and end all of anything. It is a decent benchmark, and given the fact that it's pretty hard to see what a shooter is doing over the net, it will get you in the ball park. In person, we can tailor practice sessions to fit a specific need, or treat a specific flaw. Shooting several sets of 60+ arrows and then asking appropriate questions may not guarantee anything, but it should at least get you closer. 

There can be a world of things going on with a guy barely in the 200 range, and there are some fairly simple things that can be checked. A guy in the 280 range bare bow or 290 range with a sight and all bets may be off for two reasons. First, the flaws will be minor and harder to detect and second, what might be a flaw for a 200 level shooter, may be something that works for the guy in the 280's. IOWs, it might be a necessary fix for one guy and mistake to try and correct for another. 

The issue I was trying to point out was that a lot of times we don't know who the guy typing is on the other end. Putting a standardized number to him, "might" help. 

BTW - it wouldn't be the first time a guy showed up asking a fairly simplistic question and a dozen or so posts later, he gets around to telling us that he's won x. y, z titles and really needed to know how to stop getting those pesky left flyers a whole 1/4" out the the bull. Likewise, I'm always amazed at how many people here are world class shooters with soft ball sized groups, snap shooting at 50 yds. Then you have the opposite types, trying to defend mediocrity. I just don't get it sometimes. 

I will say this though. There have been more than a few people I've worked with on a long term basis over the net and most will tell you, I ask for scores and a picture of the completed targets pretty early on.

Viper1 out.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

An interesting idea, but I'd be more interested in the seeing the people *giving* advice posting their scores. While it's nice knowing one's skill level before giving them advice, it's equally important to know the ones giving that advice have a leg of their own to stand on.


----------



## scmike (Oct 29, 2012)

I found it very helpful after shooting longbow for a few months to start shooting 300 rounds on the blue target. I shoot it at 20 yards outside. It has helped me measure my progress. I currently shoot 205-215. And I can easily see how this info. would be helpful when I ask more experienced archers for advice. Sometimes that advice may be to not worry about a certain aspect, that it doesn't matter at my level. That would be helpful advice. 

Speaking of which, I do have a question: What in the world is FOC?


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

I do like the idea of shooting a 300 round from time to time to help me set some bench marks or goals. As a person still relatively new to the sport it could also help me ask better informed questions for the more experienced archers here. I may not post a whole lot but I sure enjoy learning through this forum. I am not a huge hunter and I do this more for fun with my family but that still doesn't mean that I don't want to get better and I believe this is one more tool I can use to do that.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

sc - 

As I tried to explain, those scores aren't bad for a relatively new shooter.

If I were working with you, the follow ups, would be:
1. A picture of a completed target - that could show a pure scatter pattern, a shift in one direction or another, a tight group with a specific area for fliers.
2. An end by end list of scores. That would indicate if you needed a greater warm up time. got sloppy half way through or burned out at the end.
3. Your thoughts or perceptions of what worked and what didn't. 

The problem is a coach generally can't trust what a new shooter says. Not that he's lying, just that perception can play a bigger role.
A more experienced shooter should (hopefully) be more in tune with what's happening from end to end and should recognize patterns more easily. 

OK - Off topic:

FOC - Front Of Center (Mass), EFOC is Extreme Front of center mass. 

In spear ballistics, the projectile needs more weight or mas towards the front to well, keep the front in front. 
(Think balsa wood glider with the metal clip on the nose) 

It can be calculated by: (BPL - OAL/2)/OAL 

Where: 

BPL = Balance Point Length (measured from nock groove to balance point of complete shaft)
OAL = Overall Arrow Length measured from nock groove to back of head or point (BOP)

Example: 28” arrow with a balance point 18” from the nock groove.

(BPL – OAL/2)/OAL = FOC
(18” – 28”/2)/28” = FOC
(18” – 14”)/28 = FOC
FOC = 4”/28” = 14% (approximately)

The other meaning is Freakin' Over Complicated (and no, I wasn't the one who coined that). 

I tend to go with the latter.

More to the point. Can this be of any use? 
Some people think so (see the other tread). 
Is it something a new shooter should worry about?
IMHO - not usually.

Viper1 out.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> An interesting idea, but I'd be more interested in the seeing the people giving advice posting their scores. While it's nice knowing one's skill level before giving them advice, it's equally important to know the ones giving that advice have a leg of their own to stand on.


That's what I was thinking, along with a few other things. For example...



> In real life, the things I focus on with a new Olympic shooter will (usually) be very different from what I do with a nationally ranked one.


How many nationally ranked shooters have you ever worked with, and who are they?



> Likewise, if some one is throwing legit 3" groups at 20 yds (basically a 290 level shooter), I might a little more tolerant of a personal form "quirk" than I will be with a sub-200 level shooter.


How many archers at this level have you worked with, and who are they?



> Before the "bowhunters" jump in claiming that they don't shoot paper, only fur, well yeah, that does make things a little harder to decipher.


How much "fur" have you ever shot (at)? 

Also, have you ever been a nationally ranked competitor, and if so, when? What titles have you held? Who have you coached that has held a title?

These are serious questions that I'd ask anyone who was promoting themselves as a high level coach. Then I'd want to contact those high level/nationally ranked archers you have worked with, and get their opinions. Naming off this stuff is great for a resume'--it should have been included in the preface of your book. Nothing at all wrong with listing credentials--IMO it's crazy not to.


----------



## Big Country (Apr 25, 2003)

As with all things in life, different people have different idea`s/goals when it comes to shooting a bow.

That said, for someone seeking help, tips, coaching, etc., an honest 300 round score can be very beneficial.

For some of us, me included, punching paper gets boring in a hurry, but there is not a top ranked 3-D archer in the country, regardless of bow type or class, that cannot knock a hole in the center of a paper target all day long. Whether you want to excel in 3-D`s, or just be the best you can be for hunting, there is no substitute for pounding paper.


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

J. Wesbrock said:


> An interesting idea, but I'd be more interested in the seeing the people *giving* advice posting their scores. While it's nice knowing one's skill level before giving them advice, it's equally important to know the ones giving that advice have a leg of their own to stand on.


But I thought we had beaten that dead horse long enough to get everybody to submit to the idea that credentials don't matter. 

Resistance is futile.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

J. Wesbrock said:


> An interesting idea, but I'd be more interested in the seeing the people *giving* advice posting their scores. While it's nice knowing one's skill level before giving them advice, it's equally important to know the ones giving that advice have a leg of their own to stand on.


Well said .


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

J. Wesbrock said:


> An interesting idea, but I'd be more interested in the seeing the people *giving* advice posting their scores. While it's nice knowing one's skill level before giving them advice, it's equally important to know the ones giving that advice have a leg of their own to stand on.


LOL - what's the fun in that


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> LOL - what's the fun in that


Lol--true--but part of the thread title is "reality check".


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Had the first 3D of the season around here last weekend, just a fun shoot with 1 stake for everyone. I averaged 6 points per target (5-8-10-11) mixing in the misses and 11's. This sucker was set long. The average shot at a bit over 30 yards longest shot just under 50 and shortest was 2 targets just under 20, lots of shots in the 35-45yd range. Pretty difficult to compare that shoot with a 3D shoot that has a 30yd max...........with my outdoor bow (dryad longbow 45#@28) I shoot in the 240-250 range on the NFAA 300.


----------



## jusoldave (Apr 28, 2012)

Actually, although I haven't shot a FITA target face since 1972, I got quite a chuckle out of the "fur" description. Apt; very apt.

As soon as I can trust myself to get out of an online archery catalog for less than $100, I'll be ordering some. I find I have a line disability: if a target has no lines delineating the more desirable impact points, I can't seem to stay inside 'em, or even in the neighborhood; if, on the other hand, I'm shooting at a blank block, I can pick a point and hit it with a fair degree of repetition... which really piques my curiosity.

Gotta give 'er a try. It'll be awhile; the oncologist is getting all the money right now. I'll let you all know how it goes when we get around to it.

Good thread, Viper; I do agree with the spirit of the original post. And I'm one of those fur-shooters, a mouthy sunnagun, and awfully free with poor advice, to boot!


----------



## 4nolz (Aug 17, 2011)

I currently am coaching 2 Olympic hopefuls.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> I currently am coaching 2 Olympic hopefuls.


Rotf.....

Btw, isn't the Olympic coaching facillity in CO?


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

I think a standardized number would be helpful. Perhaps a sticky on relativity of 300 scores (i.e. 260-270 is excellent for a longbow, 280-290 for recurve, etc), as well as a "here's how to test yourself". I think it would be helpful for instructors and advice givers to post similar things as well. I seem to be able to pick up on who's respected and experienced but that's not always the case for many, myself included.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Not sure what scores Coach Kisik Lee could shoot anymore, but I'd sure listen to what he has to say. Not even sure if was ever a top ranked shooter. I think one should keep an open mind - if not you may miss out on a lot of useful information.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

centershot said:


> Not sure what scores Coach Kisik Lee could shoot anymore, but I'd sure listen to what he has to say. Not even sure if was ever a top ranked shooter. I think one should keep an open mind - if not you may miss out on a lot of useful information.


And that's perhaps the downside. I find that guys who may not be nationally ranked shooters have some very profound or useful things to say, and I wouldn't want qualification to come in the way of learning. I think if you spend some time on this forum you start to glean what kind of advice is good and bad, and what to pay attention to. I think getting bad advice can be helpful at times too because it makes you more aware of what good advice entails and contributes to your overall knowledge base. In any case I'd be happy to post a score myself.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

CF, that's a good post! I think at various times, all, including the OP, have posted their scores - there's threads here devoted strictly to it. Some never have, but that's OK, too. But like you imply, the advice is what you take to the bank in the end. Everyone brings something to the table, everyone. If one is just here to complain of who brought what, makes you wonder why they hang so much at the dinner table  Seems we would all get better served if what was brought to discuss was more the topic than who brought it. If someone needs their cred craving satisfied in that regard, go visit the man and shoot some or post your own scores. AFAIK, that invitation has always been open.


----------



## dan in mi (Dec 17, 2009)

centershot said:


> Not sure what scores Coach Kisik Lee could shoot anymore, but I'd sure listen to what he has to say. Not even sure if was ever a top ranked shooter. I think one should keep an open mind - if not you may miss out on a lot of useful information.


That may be true, but Coach Lee has a grocery list of people he has coached into medals that says he knows of what he speaks.


----------



## Bowmania (Jan 3, 2003)

Very interesting discussion. Great point(s) Viper. BUT from the perspective of a bowhunter who shoots paper and has some physical ailments I'm not so sure they pertain. Well, that's not totally correct. When I see the "average" trad hunter shooting he would benefit from any structured shooting and especially a 300 round. They shoot arrow after arrow with no thought in mind, no recovery time, and certainly no sequence. Any compound shooter seeing the results of that kind of shooting is not too interested in trying our sport and that hurts me. I might add I'm SURELY not referring to newbies here. When I say they might not pertain, that's really not what I mean. For the hunter I think they'd be best served by a bridge program. Yea, the 300 will help any one, but the bridge program is going to give shot confidence at other ranges than 20 yards even if they're not working at 20. The hunter is concerned with the first shot (in most cases) and the other 59... well not so much.

Archery has made a mess of my shoulders. At this time of the year I'm good for about 10 shots a day. So my "40 nothing less than perfect shots" would take 4 days at a minimum. If I'm honest doubling the minimum isn't much of a possibility even at the close yardage. Partly because on the next day I'm starting anew. The first shot is harder than the 9th or 10th. Warming up is an issue. Learning about the bridge program and my physical problems has probably made me a better shooter than when I was shooting 100 to 200 shots a day.

The real thing about the bridge program now is that by fall one should be out to 15 to 20 yards. And in fall (Viper what do you think) I think a person that worked on the bridge program would have more confidence in his shot and would out shoot someone at 300 who worked on the "6 inch rule". I would add that my supporting evidence is that the 6 inch rule is aiming and scored, where the bridge program is for form and form is 90% of the shot.

Hope I'm not being too picky. After all the whole discussion is to help and any improvement (if this is) in ideas can/should help someone. Sure would like to know the percentage of hunter vs target here. 

Actually, after rereading this I feel like hitting the delete. The 300 is a gauge (reference as Viper suggests) and not as much a form of practice as a bridge program.


Bowmania


----------



## dan in mi (Dec 17, 2009)

It's good to mention the bridge as a lot of people don't know about it.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Sanford - Good point. It would be nice to see instructor scores sometimes, or relative level of experience, but I think it would likely be more useful in the end to have scores of people asking questions, once they get to a point where they're comfortable doing that. An instructor's relative level of knowledge and expertise is hard to quantify in years or scores sometimes, but if one of them is looking to help someone out, it can be helpful to know if they're shooting 4" groupings at 20y or 10", and how consistently.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

What does Rick Welch shoot on the 300 round?


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

When this or any other forum gets to "Hello, my username is Long Rifle, I'm a 210 shooter, and I have an archery question!" I'm outta here. I'll leave the elitists who think they have all the answers already to argue semantics amongst themselves.......


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

well?...i know this..i don't need anyone to post their 20yd 300rd scores to know that whenever (in no particular order?)...

1. Itbeso

2. Rsarns

3. Matt Potter

4. EasyKeeper

5. Grantmac

6. ForestGump

7. Steve Morley

8. Jimmy Blackmon

9. BarneySlayer

10. Sanford

11. Moebow

12. Old Sarge

13. Centershot

14. Jparanee

15. Str8 Shooter

16. Blackwolf

17. MAC11700

18. Kegan

19. Rattus

20. Bigjono

21. 2413Gary

22. benofthehood

23. Fatzboys

24. UrbanDeerSlayer

25. Larry Yein

26. 4Nolz

27. GEREP

28. Fotoguy

(and a bunch of others i can't think of right now?)...take their time to post anything?..i read every word of it and?..

I don't need any of them to post their current 20yd score averages to know they are in fact "ALL Credible Archers"..wether it be thoughts, opines, suggestions or advice..doesn't mean i'll agree with it all..and no promises that i'll try the advice or take the suggestions (even when i ask) but..i'm quite capable of sorting out the pearls of wisdom from the stuff that don't work for me.

That said?..i read a little blurb earlier on in this thread where the OP stated he couldn't understand folks who would defend mediocrity and that he "just simply doesn't get it"..well?...maybe some here could better understand by me saying this..

Not everybody who swings a leg over a bicycle or laces on a pair of skates or slips into some running shoes does so because they have aspirations of becoming an olympic superstar or attempting to blaze a career path out of their fondest activity..some do it for the sheer pleasure and simple enjoyment or maybe even because they just love the activity itself.

I have 10 NFAA 20yd indoor targets..fatzboys brought them over for me months ago...and i may shoot them someday but no time soon...and why?..because i know myself...and like many other archers worth the arrows in their quivers?...i'm OCD as heck and have a competitive monster in me that can consume my life if i let it..and i know..if i start shooting those targets?.."THE PUSH" is on...next thing i know?..the new superK will magically turn into a Luxor or a Formula and my beman classics will turn into ACE's with $250 a dozen tungsten points..in less than a year..which is why i struggle so hard (and trust me here cause at times it's extremely difficult) to keep that beast at bay and work the K.I.S.S. system into my program..it keeps me relaxed and so far?..also keeps the TP demons at bay.

There's a F.I.T.A. forum above this one...this is a Trad Forum...and i'd hate to see it turned into a 20yd sub-fita forum cause then?...

where would all us "fur shooters" and "defenders of mediocrity" go?..LW? :laugh:

There...said my final piece on the matter and L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Long Rifle said:


> When this or any other forum gets to "Hello, my username is Long Rifle, I'm a 210 shooter, and I have an archery question!" I'm outta here. I'll leave the elitists who think they have all the answers already to argue semantics amongst themselves.......


Bingo - we all started some where and someone was kind enough to answer our - shall we say "less than smart questions"


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Matt_Potter said:


> Bingo - we all started some where and someone was kind enough to answer our - shall we say "less than smart questions"


Huge part of the reason I stayed here - the fact that newbies get helped out by very experienced and credible archers on a regular basis. A real sense of community here.

I don't think it's necessarily a "standard" thing, or a "you need to post your score". If it becomes necessary to post scores I'll lose interest too, but I think that as a baseline, or a "I'm not sure how to answer your questions - what's your shooting like?" I think it can be very helpful. Saying "I shoot good" (meaning "I've shot for a month and I selectively remember my one 3" grouping but 90% of the time I'm lucky if I hit anything past 15 yards") isn't terribly helpful to most, and questions often get repeated on here but at varying levels of understanding. Some may post a question about tuning and think it just means whether you should buy carbon or aluminium arrows, whereas others may ask specifics about interpreting bareshaft results out to 30 yards.
I've found that knowing what people shoot on a 300 was helpful to gauging where they are at relative to their teaching and level of experience. For instance, when Jimmy Blackmon has a sticky about what good form looks like, there's context for me as I know he shoots very well. Similarly with others on the forum, and even if I haven't seen 300 scores from some, their level of respect on the forum from other good shooters is enough for me.
All said and done, I didn't interpret it to mean "Everyone needs to post 300 scores" as much as "Hey if you could post scores now and then it might be helpful to gauge where you're at".


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

I agree with you CF. Sometimes things get lost in translation. The whole point is trying to figure out what is the best answer to help the person out.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

centershot said:


> Not sure what scores Coach Kisik Lee could shoot anymore, but I'd sure listen to what he has to say. Not even sure if was ever a top ranked shooter. I think one should keep an open mind - if not you may miss out on a lot of useful information.


I don't disagree in the least. One of the best coaches I ever knew was probably 20 years past his competitive prime before I ever met him. My point was, and I apologize if I wasn't clear (I try to be as brief as possible when posting from a phone) is that the internet has made for an endlesss list of keyboard experts. I've lost track of all the self-proclaimed bowhunting gurus I've seen on forums over the past decade and a half that ended up either never having killed anything, or maybe one of two deer in their entire lives. I remember rolling my eyes at one in particular for the better part of ten years, and then one day a friend of his posted that he wasn't a "bowhunting virgin" anymore because he finally killed something. That's the kind of thing I'd like to see a way of avoiding.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Can't post a 20 yard score never shot one. maybe I should to see where I fall into place:shade:
Gary


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> ...the internet has made for an endlesss list of keyboard experts.


Exactly...as it also has an endless supply of gullible people to follow and defend them.

When you imply you are coaching nationally ranked Olympic archers, or you are good enough that archers that shoot in the 290's seek your advise...you really should be prepared to back it up. Actually if you are that good and sought after, it should be common knowledge who you have worked with, or at least something that could be researched.



> Can't post a 20 yard score never shot one.


Me either--at least not a "300 round".


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

And for every expert, there are at least 3 critics that seldom have anything positive to add..........

I believe the intent of this thread was for the shooter to shoot a 300 round and have that for a base line to judge his or her proficiency and or improvement. It is a simple game that is the same for everyone - everywhere. No need to make it more than that and if your don't want to find out where your really at, well I find that to be kind of a sad deal because your the only one that knows or needs to know. If you roll out and shoot a 280 on your first try, then there's not much anyone on this board will be able to help you with. But, if your having trouble reaching 200 then there are folks that can help. The score is only a gauge, a gauge that is very difficult to quantify for someone else trying to help if you just stump shoot or shoot at a paint spot, etc. If your on this site spending time reading these threads your probably already hooked on Trad and want to get better - this is just a simple way to know what level your at, what level you would like to be at and what is real. Share your score or not, that is totally up to you - just remember everyone starts out shooting sub 200's and nobody is here to give you a hard time. We are all (aside from a few trolls) here to help each other get better - simple as that.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

centershot said:


> And for every expert, there are at least 3 critics that seldom have anything positive to add..........
> 
> I believe the intent of this thread was for the shooter to shoot a 300 round and have that for a base line to judge his or her proficiency and or improvement. It is a simple game that is the same for everyone - everywhere. No need to make it more than that and if your don't want to find out where your really at, well I find that to be kind of a sad deal because your the only one that knows or needs to know. If you roll out and shoot a 280 on your first try, then there's not much anyone on this board will be able to help you with. But, if your having trouble reaching 200 then there are folks that can help. The score is only a gauge, a gauge that is very difficult to quantify for someone else trying to help if you just stump shoot or shoot at a paint spot, etc. If your on this site spending time reading these threads your probably already hooked on Trad and want to get better - this is just a simple way to know what level your at, what level you would like to be at and what is real. Share your score or not, that is totally up to you - just remember everyone starts out shooting sub 200's and nobody is here to give you a hard time. We are all (aside from a few trolls) here to help each other get better - simple as that.


Great post!


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

What's positive about making unsubstantiated, self aggrandizing statements and trying to make people uncomfortable about asking the "wrong" questions? What's positive about defending such? The way I see it, exposing it is positive and can help folks that don't know any better make informed decisions.



> Bingo - we all started some where and someone was kind enough to answer our - shall we say "less than smart questions"


Exactly! At least the beginners have a good excuse for making statements and asking questions that are...less than informed. 

Some of the goofiest, most off the wall, and flat-out wrong statements I've seen came from people that claim to know what they are talking about--even put into a "glossary".


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> ... if your don't want to find out where your really at, well I find that to be kind of a sad deal because your the only one that knows or needs to know.


Why is it sad because someone doesn't care to punch paper? 

How about folks that actually get out in the world and compete to see how they match up against their peers under tournament pressure, or actually get out and hunt to see how well they match up against their quarry?

Nothing wrong with shooting paper, but it's not everyone's goal. Implying that those who don't care to do it are "sad" is anything but positive.

My focus for the last two years has been on local kids and the NASP program. I've barely competed myself, and certainly haven't had the time or desire to shoot at paper. I am proud to say I was involved with one school that took first place at the state championship last year, and only missed it by 2 points this year. The school I am most involved with took 3rd in state this year--only 20 points separated them from 1st. 

Best of all, I have no problem saying exactly who they are--Fairview Attendance Center and Tremont Attendance Center in Itawamba County, MS. Scores can be viewed here: http://www.mdwfp.com/applications/aims/mobile/scores.aspx

Guess I'm just happy to be "sad".


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

Yeah LBR, remember when you were "moderator", you locked that "glossary" thread almost immediately. 

So much for "exposing" anything.



> flat-out wrong statements


I remember you stating that Angel string material only came in black and white. And that moose are smaller in Maine than anywhere else. Whatever.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

No idea what you are talking about. I'm sure you have a link.

AM comes in lots of colors. BCY only offers it in black and white. I don't know of anyone in the U.S. that sells colors, but you can order it from Japan if you want to pay for it.

I haven't researched moose in years, don't recally posting about them in years since I haven't hunted them in a long time and have no immediate plans for a moose hunt in the future.. If I made an incorrect statement, my apologies. Looks like you are going to some amazing stretches to try and discredit me, and for what reason? (Rhetorical question) 

Oh well...good luck with that. If you come to the ETAR look me up--I'll be at the BCY booth.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Yes, sad. This is just a simple way to know where your shooting is at. With records it is easy to compare with where you were several years ago or yesterday. You are making too much of a simple score. For me getting out and shooting with 'people' and competing with my 'peers' amounts to 2 or 3 3D shoots and 2 or 3 indoor shoots per year. I like to shoot more than that and being how the pool of Trad shooters is so small in my area, that is not much of a gauge. A 300 round makes for a very simple way to know where I'm at with my shooting. As for hunting, well that amounts to a couple shots per year.........the ones that I spend 1000's of shots practicing for. I think where people really get bent out of shape is when they actually do shoot and score a round and realize they are not quite what they thought they were.............the paper don't lie and can be very humbling.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> Yes, sad.


Oh well. You are entitled to your opinion. I know tons of archers who are very skilled and love the sport as much as anyone who don't shoot 300 rounds. And you have been shooting how long? Just curious to know what makes you feel qualified to make such a statement.



> You are making too much of a simple score.


What am I making of it? If that's what you want to do, more power to you. I haven't called you "sad" for liking it...but I'm the one making too much of it?



> For me getting out and shooting with 'people' and competing with my 'peers' amounts to 2 or 3 3D shoots and 2 or 3 indoor shoots per year.


It's not just about you. Some of us like to travel and get out and shoot in tournaments. Shooting against your peers will give you an idea of where you stand, numbers notwithstanding. It's quite different than being the "champion" of your back yard or local range.



> A 300 round makes for a very simple way to know where I'm at with my shooting.


No argument here. Like I said, more power to you. Have fun with it.



> As for hunting, well that amounts to a couple shots per year.


Again, it's not just about you. Some folks hunt more than one or two game animals with a bow, some get a LOT more shots than one or two. I love to rabbit hunt with my bow--usually you get lots of shots every hunt. 

My point was the same as the one Jason made, about people who make statements about hunting as if they have actually participated regularly and killed something when they haven't. Like implying you coach nationally ranked Olympic archers and being sought out by people who shoot in the 290's when it's not happening.



> I think where people really get bent out of shape is when they actually do shoot and score a round and realize they are not quite what they thought they were.............the paper don't lie and can be very humbling.


I think you are right--hard to fudge or make "guesstimates" if you actually keep an accurate score and records. Kinda' like getting all bent out of shape when getting called out on a ridiculous claim that you can in no way verify. People who have a habit of "embellishing" normally get quite perturbed when forced back to reality.

I hope to find the time and discipline to give the 300 a whirl one of these days. Actually bought some targets some time ago, but haven't used them. Figure if I tried it today, my score would be embarrassing because I haven't practiced on a regular basis in a long time. 

However, just because I haven't taken the time to do that because of higher priorities, I'm in no way "sad" . I've gotten tons more satisfaction from seeing these kids improve and compete. We have one young lady who started the season shooting in the 80's, and she ended shooting in the 240's. THAT, to me at least, is more satisfying than anything I'd ever do for myself with a bow and arrow. Calling it sad is just plain ignorant.

Now, what does all this have to do with asking someone to back up claims that THEY brought up? It's not like I'm asking for anything I'm not happy to do myself.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

I think there are two different topics going here - one about backing claims (which I agree with and support, although I don't feel like I need to call out certain long time members on this forum because their reputation amongst others is very respectable and it would be somewhat unnecessary to have to repeat yourself every time a new member joins the board), and the other about the 300 round.
Regarding qualifications, again I think that credentials (by standard definition) are something that I most often don't care about. They're more of a "foot in the door" or a gateway at best. Pertaining to this sport, I'm more interested in a) who you've taught b) who you shoot with and how you compare, but far more than that, how your advice adds up to what the best are doing or have done. Just because you haven't won nationals doesn't mean that you're wrong, and to compare advice to achievements is, I believe, rather narrow minded. What matters is whether or not it works, or is in any way helpful. I'd personally love to see shooting history, credentials, etc, as I feel it can add to a reputation, but it shouldn't make it up entirely. If someone who hasn't won worlds or taught Oly kids gives advice that works for someone and is not refutable by better advice, is it null because they aren't "qualified"? I do agree with backing up claims though - big difference between that and credentials.

Regarding the 300 round, again I think as a suggested baseline, there's no real problem with that. No one has said it should be mandatory, and quite frankly, if a hunter comes here looking for advice on how to shoot better and is so offended by the idea of shooting at paper, then maybe giving that guy advice would have been futile in the first place. I think once someone has spent some time on here and has a decent idea of the basics, it would be great to see where they're at and what they specifically need to work on. If you're shot tournaments, are well known on here and have shot with others, etc, then this probably doesn't apply to you anyways. The point is information.


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

LBR, I take it back about the thread being locked "almost immediately", but yes, I can post the links if you want. 

Do you see any irony here? :



> ...going to some amazing stretches to try and discredit [ ], and for what reason?



My point was it wasn't worth your time to improve or correct the glossary, but you still talk about it almost two years later. Why not just be concerned with the info and not who's posting it? It's getting old.

(I might have gone to ETAR last year, but I was "punching paper" at the NFAA outdoor nationals that week instead. BCY was there too; they gave me an arrow puller.)


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

CF, fully agree. The fact that someone has not shot against or known the scores of the OP for real or that of his students speaks volumes for the one who doesn't know, not the ones who do. I'm way down here in Texas and have been beaten sorely by the OPs students, met the ones shooting at Olympic score levels, and know he does the same first hand. That aspect of the conversation, that someone needs to prove their info, is a no starter for me. Look, archers don't travel with coaches in entourage unless that's their line of work, archer and coach, or need adult supervision, kids. Archers travel the country and shoot on their own merit. This notion of celebrity-archery/celebrity-coach relationship is something stuck in the minds of some folks. It's fantasy land stuff that some folks on here try to use to muddy the conversation over their own lacking.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Fellas, the score is not for me it is for YOU! Don't be embarrassed, or whatever - it is only a reference for you. Post it, don't post it - nobody really cares. It is only there to help you. Shooting a 300 round is just a tool.

LBR - I think we have more in common than not, no doubt we would not agree on everything - but for the most part we are headed in the same direction. I think the medium we are using gets in the way. 

"However, just because I haven't taken the time to do that because of higher priorities, I'm in no way "sad" . I've gotten tons more satisfaction from seeing these kids improve and compete. We have one young lady who started the season shooting in the 80's, and she ended shooting in the 240's. THAT, to me at least, is more satisfying than anything I'd ever do for myself with a bow and arrow. Calling it sad is just plain ignorant."

Started an 80 ended up at 240 - tells me quite a story, which is the point of the thread in the first place. Ignorant? That's not sad that is awesome and I can tell from the scores she really progressed.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> My point was it wasn't worth your time to improve or correct the glossary,


As a moderator, it wasn't my job to correct it. It was (is?) against the rules for a non-sponsor to blatently advertise a product (freeload) on the board, which is as best I can recall what that thread was doing. I didn't make the rules, I did what I was asked to do.

There is no irony. If I say something, I can back it up. I won't run and hide from a statement I've made.

Tell me, what is wrong with the questions I asked? If the implications were factual, then they should be easy to answer. 



> Why not just be concerned with the info...


What's wrong with trying to verify the source? You have no problem trying to call me out (based on an incorrect assumption), and I have no problem answering. Why is it ok for one, but taboo for another?

Any and everyone is entitled to an opinion. However, if someone says or implies they are a world champion or a world class coach, their opinion will carry more weight--a LOT more--EXCEPT when they making statements they can't back up. When you are talking about archers in the top 1-2%, it's easy to verify a statement if you can only give a few specifics. You can't hide that kind of talent even if you tried. Coaches on that level are highly sought after, and well known amongst their peers.

So, again, just what have I said or asked that is so wrong? I wouldn't object to it being turned around on me--I'll be happy to answer to any claim or implication I've made.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> LBR - I think we have more in common than not, no doubt we would not agree on everything - but for the most part we are headed in the same direction. I think the medium we are using gets in the way.


I agree.



> That's not sad that is awesome and I can tell from the scores she really progressed.


That's not half the story--if you could have seen how that young lady and her parents just lit up as she progressed...words can't do it justice. But the implication was that, because I choose to do this rather than shoot a 300 round, I was "sad". 

I don't talk about this stuff a lot because I feel a need to be approved of and admired by the board. I will say that, if you can, get involved with the NASP--the pay isn't great for a volunteer (although it did double from last year...what's zero doubled?), but the rewards are massive.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

My point is that shooting the Target gave her the bench mark and she could see improvement. - It's not about you or me, it's about seeing improvement by using a standard reference. It's is sad when you don't have a reference to see improvement and enjoy what that young lady and her parents achieved. And in the words of Forrest Gump "That's all I got to say about that".


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

centershot said:


> My point is that shooting the Target gave her the bench mark and she could see improvement. - It's not about you or me, it's about seeing improvement by using a standard reference. It's is sad when you don't have a reference to see improvement and enjoy what that young lady and her parents achieved.


That's actually getting to why archery is not such a good spectator sport, as well. A spectator can watch arrows going into the bull and not into the bull on a 300 Round or other target faces, and to them, it's either a good shot or a bad shot- or, in the end, someone wins or loses or does better than last time. The real aspect of what all went on, from up rounds to down rounds, the whole challenge of the whole shoot is better known to those who regularly shoot the spot and score it daily. Unfortunately for archery as a spectator sport, that's also the participants.


----------



## wseward (Mar 7, 2013)

WOW!!
I look forward to posting a 300 score, shooting from approx. 10 yards, soon.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

"Fellas, the score is not for me it is for YOU! Don't be embarrassed, or whatever - it is only a reference for you. Post it, don't post it - nobody really cares. It is only there to help you. Shooting a 300 round is just a tool."

Basically sums up the original post for me.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

It always causes me to shake my head on how some people are soooo caught up in the little boxes they have put themselves in that they completely ignore the fact or make very little effort to try and understand others with different goals, abilities, personalities, opinions, beliefs and experiences. It's as if their egos are so big that only they can be right...and in some cases they can be.

I just hate seeing someone making judgemental and belittling comments to others because they don't share the exact same goals, abilities or personality that they have.

This is an awesome sport with many different aspects to it...and just because an archer doesn't choose to participate in a specific aspect of it...really isn't sad or wrong.

Some people need to try and stop being so judgemental and more accepting that there are more than one or a couple of ways to enjoy this sport and be successful at it.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

love you guys. Try to get along


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> well?...i know this..i don't need anyone to post their 20yd 300rd scores to know that whenever (in no particular order?)...
> 
> 1. Itbeso
> 
> ...


Bill, 

I was a little upset to ranked way down at #24, but I somehow landed above Larry Yien and that made me feel better, LOL!


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

CFGuy said:


> "Fellas, the score is not for me it is for YOU! Don't be embarrassed, or whatever - it is only a reference for you. Post it, don't post it - nobody really cares. It is only there to help you. Shooting a 300 round is just a tool."
> 
> Basically sums up the original post for me.


Well then you read it quite differently than I did..and here's a few excerpts from the original poster...verbatim...

*"While this probably won't happen, it might be nice to have a frame of reference, knowing who we're talking to. Easiest way of doing that is knowing how they shoot, and that would require posting scores"*

and another...

*"The issue I was trying to point out was that a lot of times we don't know who the guy typing is on the other end. Putting a standardized number to him, "might" help."*

I think his "intent" was quite clear...but no matter...I wasn't exactly "on-board" right after reading the..

*"Before the "bowhunters" jump in claiming that they don't shoot paper, only fur, well yeah, that does make things a little harder to decipher. Sometimes getting useful information will take a little bit of work."*

part. :laugh:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BLACK WOLF said:


> It always causes me to shake my head on how some people are soooo caught up in the little boxes they have put themselves in that they completely ignore the fact or make very little effort to try and understand others with different goals, abilities, personalities, opinions, beliefs and experiences. It's as if their egos are so big that only they can be right...and in some cases they can be.
> 
> I just hate seeing someone making judgemental and belittling comments to others because they don't share the exact same goals, abilities or personality that they have.
> 
> ...


And imho?..this is right where the deep fried, lightly breaded :spam1: factor comes into play Ray but..

we won't go there. :laugh:


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Urban you are right and how in the world itbeso got to be ranked #1
is beyond me
Gary:teeth:


UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> Bill,
> 
> I was a little upset to ranked way down at #24, but I somehow landed above Larry Yien and that made me feel better, LOL!


----------



## scmike (Oct 29, 2012)

It seems we've lost track of Viper's original suggestion, which was it helps to know how someone is shooting when they ask for advice. He suggested the 300 round as a common vehicle to gain that reference point. As someone who's been shooting trad about six or seven months, I will be happy to provide that reference point. I know my situation and my needs were different a few months ago when I was shooting 150s than today (when I shot a 225, BTW). When I have a question, I want an answer that will help me get better. I can easily see why experienced coaches would want to know where I am in my training in order to provide a useful answer. I think that's all Viper was saying. 

As far as qualifications go, I just assume everyone else on this forum knows more than I do. Still, I take most suggestions, keep what works, discard what doesn't. But I appreciate them all.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Arrowwood said:


> My point was it wasn't worth your time to improve or correct the glossary, but you still talk about it almost two years later. Why not just be concerned with the info and not who's posting it? It's getting old.


Actually, it was a linked .pdf file that was done that way to so as to not give the appearance of linking to any site, same info then cut and past here.  But now, two years later, we were saved from the marketing spam? Man, the time has added to the truth - amazing stretches of imagination, I'd say. Anyways, we all know the outcome of that whole experience back then.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Keep on trying there sanford--just can't get over getting caught in your own lies, can you? Let's see...in spite of the whining and crying, administration stood behind me--but of course you don't have a clue what went on behind the scenes, regardless of your claim of "everyone" knowing what went on--too funny. You are right though--you keep on trying to add to the truth.

Stick to trying to "educate" people about companies using thier own websites--rotf...that is still hilarious...wish I could have seen your face....


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

JINKSTER said:


> And imho?..this is right where the deep fried, lightly breaded :spam1: factor comes into play Ray but..
> 
> we won't go there. :laugh:


Don't be picking on "pork product" spam is good stuff.

Matt


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> Well then you read it quite differently than I did..and here's a few excerpts from the original poster...verbatim...
> 
> *"While this probably won't happen, it might be nice to have a frame of reference, knowing who we're talking to. Easiest way of doing that is knowing how they shoot, and that would require posting scores"*
> 
> ...


What's wrong with this?

Knowing how someone actually shoots *does* require posting scores - if they are already known well then it is likely known how they shoot in competitions, etc, and likely don't need to provide extra information anyways. If a highly experienced individual on this board wants to help a newbie who doesn't have a track record then it's one of the easiest ways to find out what their shooting is actually like. Posting a single grouping and saying "this is how I shoot" doesn't really fly in terms of knowing how truly consistent someone is.

And I think he's absolutely right about bowhunters. If they so badly want to change their shooting for the better that they're asking enough questions and working (online) enough with the experienced guys on here that the guys are actually asking for scores, then being offended by asking for a score is ridiculous. If they want to simply shoot at animals then have at it and take tips from here, but progress won't necessarily be as easily trackable.

I think scmike has it nailed down.


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

CFGuy, not that I'm extremely opposed but kindly explain to me why I need to shoot a 300 round and post a score to ask, "why am I consistently shooting left?" or "what can I do to help both obtain and maintain back tension?". Why does it matter if it's a 10 zone on a foam target or a round white spot with an X in it? We keep separating target archers from hunting archers and then wonder why there is dissention among the ranks....not a positive step IMO...


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

CFGuy said:


> What's wrong with this?


it would be easier to list "what's right with it"...ready?..okay...here goes....





and that's about it. :laugh:



CFGuy said:


> Knowing how someone actually shoots *does* require posting scores - if they are already known well then it is likely known how they shoot in competitions, etc, and likely don't need to provide extra information anyways. If a highly experienced individual on this board wants to help a newbie who doesn't have a track record then it's one of the easiest ways to find out what their shooting is actually like. Posting a single grouping and saying "this is how I shoot" doesn't really fly in terms of knowing how truly consistent someone is.


Okay...so here's my questions..

1. As it pertains to the newbie/200 and under crowd...What if their bows outta tune?

2. What about folks "like" Rod Jenkins, Whitewolf or Moebow..where some have had several shoulder surgeries and/or admittedly wrestle with TP from time too time and yes...that's the cream of the crop examples but there are many "coach level archers" out there that wouldn't score high these days for any number of reasons..and just because a nascar mechanic can't turn a world class lap time doesn't mean he doesn't know his pooh when it comes to tuning, advice and the fastest way to get around the track.

3. Okay...so we post 20yd/300rd scores..here's mine...ready?.."294...average..with 298 all time high"...think i'm lying? :laugh:

I'm not..and it was done with fingers but not with a stickbow. :laugh: 



CFGuy said:


> And I think he's absolutely right about bowhunters.


Then good news...we have nothing further to discuss regarding this topic.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

I think some of the angst in this thread comes from a condescending first post , somewhat dismissing at many archers who don't pursue the discipline in the same way that others may . 

Again , it is somewhat absurd not to question credentials when there are continued references to "my students" etc when it is glaringly apparent that many here do not know who these students are , nor of their success in any archery field . 
Every post is not to be examined as such lest the whole forum fall into a tutorial by those who can from the pulpit of archery excellence to those of us lesser mortals who approach the sport differently ... but surely we can ask questions to those who invite such by there very standing in the archery world ... coaches , top competitors , successful hunters ... authors 

Nor should we either be to cynical of each others posting nor results , training techniques , student success' etc , unless said students and the coaching they are receiving is continually used as benchmark for comparison . Such comparison is hard against invisible competitors .

The original post has some merit in its general narrative towards everyone improving their archery [ and I love the 18 metres indoor ] , however its written execution, whether intentional or not , comes across as condescending and dismissive. And given that Viper is the author of a relatively well known [to many here] book on archery , asking for credentials is not necessary , but surely merited .


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

benofthehood said:


> I think some of the angst in this thread comes from a condescending first post , somewhat dismissing at many archers who don't pursue the discipline in the same way that others may .
> 
> Again , it is somewhat absurd not to question credentials when there are continued references to "my students" etc when it is glaringly apparent that many here do not know who these students are , nor of their success in any archery field .
> Every post is not to be examined as such lest the whole forum fall into a tutorial by those who can from the pulpit of archery excellence to those of us lesser mortals who approach the sport differently ... but surely we can ask questions to those who invite such by there very standing in the archery world ... coaches , top competitors , successful hunters ... authors
> ...


EXCELLENT summarization ben! and Very well said!:thumbs_up


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> it would be easier to list "what's right with it"...ready?..okay...here goes....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


See above!

If others are offended by Viper's idea, then don't bother posting. Myself, I don't want to attach my skill (or lack thereof) to my identity, so I'll take advantage of this learning opportunity.


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

Viper has proved himself over and over to me in posting and private pms. As well as a great book. If not the greatest for someone starting out. So the proof for me is in the advice that I know works not posting pics of trophies or name dropping.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

ozzypop said:


> Viper has proved himself over and over to me in posting and private pms. As well as a great book. If not the greatest for someone starting out. So the proof for me is in the advice that I know works not posting pics of trophies or name dropping.


Did you just mention Viper and private PM's in one sentence and then bash name dropping in the next?...

uh...yeah..okay. :slice:


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

I am not getting into this with people playing their little word games. I will get my advice from a source I trust you will have to do the same.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> Did you just mention Viper and private PM's in one sentence and then bash name dropping in the next?...
> 
> uh...yeah..okay. :slice:


How are the two related? Taking things out of context isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

I understand if some have other issues with members but I still don't understand being offended about posting objective measurements. If you don't like the suggestion then simply don't post a score? This is getting silly.


----------



## Double S (Mar 30, 2008)

Gents...Please stay on topic. I see a few posts that are going off topic and hashing up old issues. For the most part I think this section has been doing very well. Lets keep the off topic-arguing off the board please.

Good evening,
Simon


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

Matt_Potter said:


> Don't be picking on "pork product" spam is good stuff.
> 
> Matt


I like Spam too.


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

After reading the initial post I stopped at my local archery shop and picked myself up some 5 ring targets and shot a 300 round, my first. I have only been shooting for 4 months so I set up just at 10 yards and gave it a whirl. I ended up with a 230 total. I found it very insightful for myself. What it told me was that I am not quite as good as I had thought. I have made strides from my first month tell now and I will continue to make strides as I progress. 
This might not be the tool that some people will choose for there goals but I believe it will help me in mine. Just like this forum board I have picked up many different tools and tidbits of very good advice along the way. Thanks


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

That is great Arron after only four months.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Arron

You would be surprised how many experts can't shoot a 230 without "Internet Inflation"

Matt


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Arron said:


> After reading the initial post I stopped at my local archery shop and picked myself up some 5 ring targets and shot a 300 round, my first. I have only been shooting for 4 months so I set up just at 10 yards and gave it a whirl. I ended up with a 230 total. I found it very insightful for myself. What it told me was that I am not quite as good as I had thought. I have made strides from my first month tell now and I will continue to make strides as I progress.
> This might not be the tool that some people will choose for there goals but I believe it will help me in mine. Just like this forum board I have picked up many different tools and tidbits of very good advice along the way. Thanks


Arron, what a 230 after shooting only 4 months told you is that you are doing dang great! Just keep measuring your progress and don't worry about any score other than yours and what it's doing over many sessions.


----------



## dan in mi (Dec 17, 2009)

I am not knocking Aaron at all, but do note he shot at 10yds. 

That is still great for 4 months and puts a solid stake in the ground for future comparisons.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Thanks Double S for keeping it sane .

Great Arron! Free knowledge/help is very valuable, especially if someone is willing to invest their time, so good on ya for taking advantage of that.

Dan - Good point, that's why it's useful to have a "translation" chart. A newbie shooting at 20 can get discouraging fast which easily disrupts shooting.

Jinks:


> For bowhunters, I usually suggest they hone their SHOOTING skills on the 300 round, since it's a constant and THEN work on their hunting with 3D or roving.Viper1 out.


You didn't address the other points I brought up so how about this one. Do you not think it's helpful? Again in no way mandatory but if someone is strivingto get better isn't this logical? I primarily got into this for hunting and roving, bear in mind.


----------



## MrSinister (Jan 23, 2003)

I don't think shooting a 300 round has value to me. It has been asked so I will answer. I have shot compounds for years and developed there without ever having any desire to shoot a 300 round and I am sure I can manage to learn this form or archery without it as well. I judge my improvements on the 3D range and shooting in the yard. I will shoot groups at different distances to see if I have that distance yet or not. I do these things often and shoot often just have not a single paper puncher bone in my body.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> I think some of the angst in this thread comes from a condescending first post , somewhat dismissing at many archers who don't pursue the discipline in the same way that others may .
> 
> Again , it is somewhat absurd not to question credentials when there are continued references to "my students" etc when it is glaringly apparent that many here do not know who these students are , nor of their success in any archery field .
> Every post is not to be examined as such lest the whole forum fall into a tutorial by those who can from the pulpit of archery excellence to those of us lesser mortals who approach the sport differently ... but surely we can ask questions to those who invite such by there very standing in the archery world ... coaches , top competitors , successful hunters ... authors
> ...


Right on the money Ben. I could add a lot more to the plain and simple logic of asking questions, but I have work to do.


----------



## jocala (Jan 26, 2013)

scmike said:


> Speaking of which, I do have a question: What in the world is FOC?


Front of Center – The ratio of the balance point of an arrow to its overall length.

From Shooting the Stickbow, by A. Camera (viper1)

(oops...already answered)


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Since it was brought up....



> Fast Flight – Bowstring or bowstring material made from Vectran. Very lightweight and stretch resistant. Fast flight may also be considered a generic term for any lightweight and stretch resistant string material.


That one is completely and totally wrong. Didn't bother looking for more.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

CFGuy said:


> Jinks:
> You didn't address the other points I brought up so how about this one. Do you not think it's helpful? Again in no way mandatory but if someone is strivingto get better isn't this logical? I primarily got into this for hunting and roving, bear in mind.


I didn't address the other points because "A" I can tell our mindsets on the matter are so far departed that we would most likely not agree on much (if anything) and "B" because of your agreement with Vipers thoughts and opines regarding "fur shooting bowhunters"..where I just felt as I posted..we have nothing further to discuss..but it seems you're asking the above in earnest so there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to communicate in a civil fashion so here goes..

No..I don't think it's helpful..as a matter of fact?..I know that it can be very detrimental..reasons?...are the same as why we do things such as "Form Training"..which include Blank Bale and Bridge-Back with walk-back and let-down drills...now follow this..

Blank Bale: Requires that you have no visual spot to even aim for.

Bridge-Back Training?: Requires that "the spot" you put up be HUGE...like an 8-10" paper plate.

and why?..so we can learn to relax at the shot and place all or most of our focus on "FORM" and the only thing you are required to NOT do?..is keep score...let alone obsess about it..which most will...some to the point that they will start inducing "Body English" into their form to do whatever it takes to get the arrow in the 5 ring just to hopefully increase their score by a few points..also?...the psychological rollercoaster one can experience between shooting a good round and shooting a poor round can wreak havoc on an archers mental game as "FORM" rapidly begins to take a backseat to "SCORE".

Over-shooting (due to obsessing about score) can become a problem as well..as if the archer isn't content with the first round?...they may decide to shoot a second and if that doesn't pan out?..maybe even a desperate 3rd round..and now you have a fatigued new archer that's just shot 180 arrows and compromised the heck out of their form only to be left wrestling with the anxiety and depression poor scores can and do bring about.

Now that said?..I know not everyone is like me..nor am I like everyone else..so I would be a fool to say that this suggestion wouldn't help anyone...but for me?..I take "Score-Keeping" seriously...sometimes too seriously...as it is "A TEST OF SKILLS"...and not..

"A Honing Of Skills"

Also?...these are two very different games we play here...where the target based archers shoot lighter weights from full blown BB target rigs and think nothing of executing 200-300 shots a day?..some of the top 3D'ers and Bowhunters shoot heavier weights to give themselves and edge with the flattest trajectories they can muster up for about...40-50 shots max..how often do you think they would enjoy executing 60 muscle memory shots from 20yds one after the other?..they wouldn't..nor would they do very well for the last 10-20 shots as fatigue sets in..also?..that many shots in a row from one single known distance?..I won't even get into what consequences that could present to those who aim intuitively but...does this mean they aren't credible accomplished archers capable of sharing experience and giving some great advice and suggestions?

And for anyone who wrestles with TP?..i would liken keeping score on a 20yd Indoor round with handing a depressed person a loaded pistol and a bottle of whiskey...nuff said there..so no..imnsho?...it most definantly wouldn't "Help Everyone". 

And this is where my mind starts drifting to MAC11700 and his attempt to keep the AT Traditional Forum open to all..and not become overwhelmed by just one venue of classic archery...as there are in fact others...myself?..I find myself becoming more and more attracted to the mentality behind Kyudo..where they live life one arrow at a time..as I know with every arrow I shoot wether i shot it well or not and i don't need the scored results of 60 in a row from one known distance to figure out if it was a good session or?..if i need to move up front and start blank baling again and working on Form...not Score.

So there ya have it..and all i got and all i'm willing to type imho?...this thread started out ridiculously condescending and dis-unifying and just went downhill from there. L8R, Bill.


----------



## scmike (Oct 29, 2012)

Jinkster,

I shoot mostly intuitively and have been shooting from 20 yards at the 20-yard NFAA target, in other words, "many shots in a row from one single known distance." What consequences might I be incurring for my shooting? I'm not challenging anyone or trying to be snide, I just want to know. If this is not good training, I want to adjust.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

scmike said:


> Jinkster,
> 
> I shoot mostly intuitively and have been shooting from 20 yards at the 20-yard NFAA target, in other words, "many shots in a row from one single known distance." What consequences might I be incurring for my shooting? I'm not challenging anyone or trying to be snide, I just want to know. If this is not good training, I want to adjust.


It's been the experience of many others (self included) that in doing so?..you get "grooved into" that one given distance to where it becomes almost a "sight-picture/muscle memory" kinda deal and then when you do move?..

Out further?: You'll have a tendency to under-compensate and miss low.

In closer?: Over-compensate and miss high.

and is why you'll hear many who aim intuitively claim that the best practice comes from "moving around".

and i find that to be true for me.

and this is where much can get lost by focusing on just one persons idea/form of archery (that is already shared by the vast majority) in this forum..if everyone gets corralled into one standardized progression?..and even i'll admit...overall?..especially beyond 30yds or so?..."gappers" will score higher...when target shooting at known distances..but what they'll miss?..is that oh so magical experience of stuffing arrow after arrow into one plum sized group just by looking at a spot...with highly controlled form and "ingrained" execution...and once one unlocks and experiences that subconscious ability?..i know i woud never trade one for the other. 

But once ya get it?...you must also move around and shoot from unknowns to keep it...i'm still training (to break TP) so it happens to me all the time..last night after shooting many form groups from 12yds?...i moved back to 18yds and it took me about 3-4 groups to stop hitting about 4-6"s low...and if i'm warming up first thing in the morning for a 3D?...the worst thing i can do is stand an shoot all my warm-up/practice shots from one known distance on the front range...cause if i stood there pounding all my practice shots at 20 and that first morning target is set at 25yds?..guess what i'm most likely gonna do. :laugh:


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I don't think there was anything unreasonable about Viper's post. I think he was just suggesting that having some common frame of reference would make it easier to help the archer asking a question.


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

I can agree with Bill on the moving around and shooting at unknown distances as well. I still will go out with my daughter stump shooting and off to the 3D range with my father. But once a week I will throw in a 300 round as well. I might be starting at 10 yards and working towards my goal of 270 and once I do that I will go to 15 yards and work towards 270 again. This I how I plan to get better for myself.

Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## jusoldave (Apr 28, 2012)

MGF, that's what I too derived from the OP.


----------



## scmike (Oct 29, 2012)

Thanks Jinkster. That makes a lot of sense. I think I'll want to shoot a 300 round now and then, but I think I'll start mixing it up and throwing in other ranges.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Arron said:


> I can agree with Bill on the moving around and shooting at unknown distances as well. I still will go out with my daughter stump shooting and off to the 3D range with my father. But once a week I will throw in a 300 round as well. I might be starting at 10 yards and working towards my goal of 270 and once I do that I will go to 15 yards and work towards 270 again. This I how I plan to get better for myself.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2


Man Arron...i gotta admit...that sounds pretty solid as far as plans go...and not real different from bridging back...iow's?..

"Great Plan" 



scmike said:


> Thanks Jinkster. That makes a lot of sense. I think I'll want to shoot a 300 round now and then, but I think I'll start mixing it up and throwing in other ranges.


Cool...and if you're truly aiming intuitively?..you'll notice what i speak of in short order...you can easily get away with shooting a group here and then there but stand in on place and pound about 20-30 arrows?...then make a major move?..and you should see what it is i speak of.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Arron: Good call. Viper did mention that stumping/roving and 3D is good practice for hunting, so long as form comes first. Not necessarily the most productive way to add in more variables such as unknown distances and accuracy that's difficult to measure if form basics aren't down first. I can attest to this firsthand.

Jinks: Thanks for the reply - I have no desire to become uncivil, as it happens way too easily on the net (and is unnecessary).

I actually don't disagree with you - I think those are valid points. However, I would say that regardless of tone in this example, Viper's suggestion was a very reasonable one that would be beneficial for most. I think people with severe, long lasting TP have different mental-game issues (not to be confused with mental disability ) but are likely the exception, not the rule. The issue then becomes the obsession with scoring.
However, I think this is part of the mental game that an archer will have to overcome if they want to keep moving forward - target panic can easily turn into buck fever or target panic for more variable matches such as 3D - it's not exclusive to score shooting. Again, if someone is content flinging arrows or hitting big stumps and doesn't care about constantly improving accuracy, no problem - this was a suggestion, not a rule. However, I think to be able to truly and objectively evaluate yourself and your progress requires objective measurement, which has to be some form of scoring.

Obviously if this isn't working for someone it's likely time to go back to basics on focus on that. Bottom line is, it's based on the individual. If a resident expert has coached and helped someone online and is curious about progress, I think it's a fine idea unless things come up that would hinder the archer (i.e. TP), in which case it's indicative of poor timing for such an event. In any case, it's about helping the guy on the other end - if scoring a round won't help, then you simply put that tool away and use another.
What I disagreed with and found somewhat closed minded wasn't so much your points above (and this isn't directed at you), but when people get offended by such an idea. Perhaps some don't appreciate the tone, but I don't disagree with it - I think too often in the trad world people do defend mediocrity instead of being honest about and admitting limitations, struggles, effort, etc. People tack their identity onto their skill and are offended if someone questions or critiques, or suggests a new idea they aren't open to. The problem is too is that this is all in writing and it's *very* easy to misinterpret that, so people often react rather than respond. Personally being a hunter I didn't find his statement about fur shooters offensive - if a hunter truly wants to get better at shooting and improve, using hunting kills as your only measurement won't be super productive. Same goes with hunters in the rifle shooting world - the issue is the closed-mindedness. If a hunter is shooting deer fine and doesn't feel the need to improve then this isn't applicable to him anyway. Simply a tool for helping people out; people can choose to take it or leave it.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Shooting organized and recognized scores is only really for people who choose to become as good as they possibly can be. There really isn't any other way to know exactly where on the skills progression ladder you are. 3D, group size and roving don't provide meaningful feedback.

Winning a 3D is mostly about who doesn't show-up. Averaging a certain score is about who set-up the course.
I haven't lost a 3D in something like 18 months now but I wouldn't have a hope of placing top 10 in RU at the IBO worlds. Personal achievement at the local level isn't a useful metric.

Kind of like someone becoming a runner but never measuring their distance or time. They could be the fastest man alive, or just breaking out of a walk.

I know this much: if ASA 3D was my game I'd be shooting the NFAA 300 round daily. Then I'd run my shot identically for every target which wasn't obviously within 15yds. Its no coincidence that the winners of the larger 3D shoots also happen to lay down excellent indoor scores.

-Grant


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

grantmac said:


> Winning a 3D is mostly about who doesn't show-up. Averaging a certain score is about who set-up the course.
> 
> -Grant


I'll go and get the coffee , someone else get the popcorn ....... :shade:


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

grantmac said:


> Shooting organized and recognized scores is only really for people who choose to become as good as they possibly can be. There really isn't any other way to know exactly where on the skills progression ladder you are. 3D, group size and roving don't provide meaningful feedback.
> 
> Winning a 3D is mostly about who doesn't show-up. Averaging a certain score is about who set-up the course.
> I haven't lost a 3D in something like 18 months now but I wouldn't have a hope of placing top 10 in RU at the IBO worlds. Personal achievement at the local level isn't a useful metric.
> ...


Great post!

"Winning a 3D is mostly about who doesn't show-up."
I won a VI F-Class rifle competition like that a month after learning to shoot longer range actually - me vs 2 other guys, one guy's rifle crapped out and I shot better than the other. Still technically won it, but not much to go off of.

ben: I think he was referring mostly to local 3D shoots like the ones that happen around here.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Winning any competition will always be based on who does and doesn't show up whether its 3D, NFAA 300 rounds or whatever....LOL :wink:

Becoming the best archer a person can become does NOT mean they have to shoot 300 rounds...otherwise shooting aspirins out if the air or shooting from horseback would be just as important for all archers to do to become the best they can be.

Whatever route an archer chooses to pursue....the one aspect that is important in this discussion is that an archer find some way to gauge their ability and progress.

Ray :shade:

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Ray, I would add that they need to find a way to gauge it back to the person they are seeking help from. If one carpenter measures metric and the other measures non-metric, the two better find a common measure or what they build together will not work out right. That's been the whole misconstrued point to this discussion.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

CF ... I know , just pokin fun at all of us ...


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Ray: True, but that's far more likely to happen locally than at nationals :wink:.

Totally agree Sanford. I think not understanding that and interpreting it as a requirement is why this thread is 5 pages long.

ben: We wouldn't be here for this long if we didn't enjoy the drama at least a bit .


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Whatever route an archer chooses to pursue....the one aspect that is important in this discussion is that an archer find some way to gauge their ability and progress.


How, precisely, does an archer do this without some form of controlled shoot? One which involves enough arrows to be statistically significant and able to be referenced to other archers?


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Winning any competition will always be based on who does and doesn't show up whether its 3D, NFAA 300 rounds or whatever....LOL :wink:
> 
> Becoming the best archer a person can become does NOT mean they have to shoot 300 rounds...otherwise shooting aspirins out if the air or shooting from horseback would be just as important for all archers to do to become the best they can be.
> 
> ...



One of the reasons I enjoy IFAA, you know because of some locations i.e. Argentina last year, means you wont always get all the best available shooters turning up but those WRs if you shoot close or even beat them, that World title is still means something special, my goals have always been to shoot as close to or beat the ER or WR scores, win or lose I can walk away pleased with my shooting. 

I know IFAA changed their rules a couple of years back where if you win World champs and dont shoot within a percentage score of the WR then you cant take the World champion title.

I know I had some snide comments on LW and POA a few years ago that I only won my titles because nobody else had showed up, pretty obvious they didnt shoot or bothered to look at the results, I didnt even see any point correcting them as with these kind of shooters, their opinion is already set in stone.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> Winning a 3D is mostly about who doesn't show-up.


That could be said of any competition. I understand that some places have a very low turn-out. Try shooting at the Howard Hill, the TN Classic, Cloverdale, the IBO World's, the Southern Triple Crown, etc. You won't win just by showing up.

Shooting the 300 round has merit--but is it the be-all-end-all? Nope. You can shoot great in your back yard or at your local range, but when you add the pressure of competition and shooting in front of your peers, that separates the real competitors from the rest of the pack. I've seen it too many times, and had it happen to me personally. 

The same with hunting. You may be able to go "stumping" and be roving death to pine cones and such, but when your target is breathing it's a totally different ballgame. Like Jason pointed out earlier in the thread, some people bloviate as if they are the great white hunter when they have never done more than take a nature walk with a bow in their hand. Shooting at an animal is something you have to experience to truly understand, regardless of who your mentors were.

I have won some big tournaments--the Howard Hill (twice), the TN Classic, GA State Shoot, MS State, Jerry Pierce, etc. I've killed a variety of game with bow and arrow, from grouse, rabbits, squirrel, and fox to hog and deer. The rush is amazing and unlike anything I've experienced, even on small game.

I've done this without ever shooting a 300 round. Telling me that I don't have a way to gauge my success is silly. I'll take the fun I've had at 3-D and hunting over shooting paper any day. I do plan to try the 300...eventually, when I get more time. For me, there are bigger and better priorities at this time.

But anyway...I never said shooting the 300 and posting your score (or not) was a bad thing. I'm just curious to know the qualifications of anyone to critique someone else "professionally". Credentials aren't required to have an opinion, but if you are going to assume a lofty perch you should be wiling and able to verify why you belong there--or be willing to stand with the rest of us mere mortals. 

Are you a certified coach? What level? If you have nationally ranked Olympic shooters seeking your advice, who are they and where are they ranked? If you have archers that average in the 290's on the 300 round that you mentor, who are they? I'd ask that of anyone who make such claims or implications.


----------



## dan in mi (Dec 17, 2009)

I am a bowhunter. All of my archery persuits are pointed to that end. That said, I like to shoot in general. Stumping and 3-d are fun BUT, as in everything we tend to forget the bad and remeber the good. As in "I whacked that pine cone at 45 yds" but completely forgot the 15 other shots out of the 100 shot that day that were 9" high, low, right or left.

I started shooting the 300 as a real world gauge. I was winning local leagues, killing game and generally feeling good about my archery.....til I shot a 300. That first 160-170 range score, maybe lower I don't remember, was humbling. Now I use it as another tool in my archery toolbox, and I use it a lot. From about now to late September I shoot it 3 or 4 times a week if not more. It helps me work on form, aiming, test new parameters (be it form, tab, arrows, whatever) and see what works, what has merit but needs work, and what's just plain bad. It TELLS me what is working and what isn't.

After starting to use this tool regularly I have come to expect by mid summer to be in the 240+avg barebow 260+ w/ sights ranges. I now have a good gauge with recorded history of what I can do. I've shot four rounds this year so far and have a couple 250's. I'm still continually working out form bugs but that's what it's for. 

What has all this done? made me much more consistant and put more blood on the ground. It made shorter bloodtrails. It has also helped diagnose misses in the field quickly, so they don't repeat. A big reason why I took a nice 9pt last fall. Missed a doe due to metal brain fart. Within five minutes the buck was in the EXACT same spot. I knew what went wrong, knew how to correct it, took the shot and he ran 60 yards and dropped.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> Stumping and 3-d are fun BUT, as in everything we tend to forget the bad and remeber the good. As in "I whacked that pine cone at 45 yds" but completely forgot the 15 other shots out of the 100 shot that day that were 9" high, low, right or left.


You are either honest with yourself, or not. You either keep notes/records, or you don't. Again, not knocking the 300 as a tool, and evidently a good one if done properly, but not foolproof or a be-all-end-all; and not the only way to enjoy archery or become accurate.


----------



## Dano50 (Dec 12, 2012)

Been following this thread for a few days now. Mr Viper, I fully understand where you are coming from. As an absolute new shooter (maybe less than one year), the advise is extremely valuable. For us new people struggling with identifying where and how we can improve in all aspects, a standard which can readily identify approximately where we stand (sans physically being in the presence of a trained coach) helps us ask appropriate questions and get appropriate answers.

Mr Viper is struggling with, as we do as apprentice archers, in identifying a series of standards and applying those standards to gain the most beneficial response. Since he is not charging us for his time and input, it is purely gratis on his part to lead us in a direction to which we can improve. Gots to love that about him. 

In my example, a CPA for 30+ years, Masters, Law School, working at very highly rated firms, within 5 minutes I can identify the knowledge base of an employee, their background and experience. Based on that knowledge, I can identify how to approach training and mentoring to bring out the best in that persons capabilities. Some people are numbers people, plain and simple, for them pure compliance work is best. Others, highly intuitive, for them, helping identify issues, resolve and execute solutions is best. Is one better than the other, no, both personalities contribute equally. Contrast this with target (Oly, barebow, other), hunters, backyard recreationists, stump shooters, all contribute and all stand equally. 

As a trained coach and teacher (and, I am neither), the application is the same for Mr Viper and myself: where is that trainee at the moment in terms of experience; what is his capabilities based on his/her current knowledge and physical capabilites, and; what is the best approach to enhance the experience. From what I have read here on AT, many of you all, including Mr Viper, are extremely insightful AND charitable with your time and effort in helping us (all) out.

Say, what about a sticky regarding helpful information from those of us posing a question (which is what I think the opening post was supposed to be)? The NFAA 18 meter standard, just one diagnostic element. Physical size, age, time in and equipment choices, are other helpful hints which can readily be used by an experienced coach to help new archers fully enjoy this sport (lifestyle, zen experience, what have you).

As always, thanks so much for all of your input to us struggling to improve to the best of our capabilities


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

It's clear that Viper's posts have a way of ruffling feathers or raising the hairs on the back of some folk's neck, I see his point but his presentation can be construed as a bit rough perhaps clumsy. That said, it just may be his style, and his current concerns. But we don't have to re-create the wheel here, and this whole thing doesn't have to be about egos and other manly contests.

IFAA has a tidy system of classifications "A, B, and C" with corresponding score ranges for various events like Field, Hunter, 300 indoor. Let's use that.

When asking for advice or information it might be recommended protocol to give some information background. For Example: Hi I'm Bebe, I'd like to get some suggestions on how to get a cleaner release and follow through. I shoot "C" class field scores and "B" class indoor scores. Been shooting for 10 years, I shoot a tab, Howard Hill Longbow, with wood arrows. It's not like Bebe had to bare his underside or say how good or bad he is. Yet it provides some information to help with some "online coaching".

We might want to have a sticky that lists the classifications and maybe come up with similar classifications for marked 3D, unmarked 3D etc. Or just have the poster say I don't shoot organized shoots or keep score. But there is not value judgement here, since I'm sure there are plenty of us that would gladly help out folks from any walk of life.

From the OP I think we are dissecting a "pet peeve" of Viper's. I find that the advice I give is very similar whether it's expert, intermediate, or beginner. The key is that at any given level different things are learned. Ever read a book or hear some bit of instruction and then read that same thing a year later and get something completely different from it. It's because you are in a different place in your archery. Although I may focus on different points if an archer is a beginner vs expert.

Furthermore in asking for the questioner to give background why shouldn't we ask the coaches? These posts beg for transparency, I think we would all like to know where a lot of this information is coming from, who is giving the information, maybe for some they would like to know the motivation. I'd just like to see good sound information and coaching given. Misinformation egressed into the archery world is what concerns me.

But what's the point? Do we all need to carry our "stinkin" badges in this forum? Most of us know when we are reading good advice vs bad advice. The only loser here is someone that doesn't know the difference and ends up unknowingly drinking some tainted koolaid.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

Outstanding post Larry, and hits on several excellent points.

Posting style notwithstanding (I have a tendency to be blunt and/or sarcastic, and folks don't see me grinning when I type), if you are going to post as if you are an authority, you should be willing to back it up. I'm not going to take my mother to a heart surgeon just because he can talk a good game or parrot accomplished surgeons--I want to know what he/she has actually done in their career. If they dissapear every time I try to ask for their credentials, well...to me, that's an answer in and of itself.



> ...in asking for the questioner to give background why shouldn't we ask the coaches? These posts beg for transparency, I think we would all like to know where a lot of this information is coming from, who is giving the information, maybe for some they would like to know the motivation. I'd just like to see good sound information and coaching given.* Misinformation egressed into the archery world is what concerns me.*


A-MEN! I'm not trying to sell myself or a product here. I want the sport to grow and flourish, and help people avoid making a lot of the same stupid mistakes I did. I want to emphasize using common sense and logic--that alone will help tons.



> Most of us know when we are reading good advice vs bad advice. The only loser here is someone that doesn't know the difference and ends up unknowingly drinking some tainted koolaid.


Therein lies the rub. The folks that need the most help generally know the least, so they have a tendency to go with what sounds best--it's just human nature. It's also human nature to be lazy and not do your homework.

I think you summed it up with one simple word--transparency. It's either there, or it's not. If it's not, it appears there is something to hide.


----------



## dan in mi (Dec 17, 2009)

LBR said:


> You are either honest with yourself, or not. You either keep notes/records, or you don't. Again, not knocking the 300 as a tool, and evidently a good one if done properly, but not foolproof or a be-all-end-all; and not the only way to enjoy archery or become accurate.


Agreed, but how many of us are honest about our shooting? (rhetorical)


I'm sure you noted this "......Now I use it as another tool in my archery toolbox....." It ain't the only tool in the box.


----------



## jcs-bowhunter (Jul 7, 2007)

Some of the best 3D shooters I know from the compound world focus only on spot shooting during the winter. It gives them the opportunity to work on their form and fine tuning skills without the variables of distance estimation, elevation and scoring ring locations in the equation. I have not shot a spot league since the late ‘90s as it bores me to tears. There is usually a 3D indoor league somewhere during the winter.
I’ve shot a handful of 300 rounds 20 yards over my short 4 year stickbow career and end up in the 240s. Not so bad but could definitely be improved on.

I agree that is an excellent way to develop form and compare the relative capabilities of a shooter and I always intend to get serious with it at some point. But just like losing 20 pounds, eating better, drinking less soda and running a marathon it’s more of a good intention then a reality for me at this point in my life. 

As far as being champion by default I have some experience on that topic too. I won the Michigan ASA last summer as I was the only stickbow guy at the championship tournament. This was due to the serious shooters being at the IBO Traditional Nationals that weekend and a Traditional rendezvous event being held several miles away. Every time I put on that brass belt buckle I’m reminded of how I paid my entry fee and managed not disqualify myself ;-). I’m hoping to be at the IBO Traditional Worlds this summer to get an accurate reading on how much I have to improve to be somewhat competitive at that level.

Maybe after getting taken to the figurative woodshed I’ll get serious about spot shooting…


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Great post Larry.

I second the idea for a sticky regarding a logical, measurable system (whichever you'd like to use) that interested members can try in order to give coaches a better idea of how to help. Again, not as a measuring stick against everyone else, but against themselves.

I can understand (in a way) Viper's pet peeve, (if I'm not mistaken as to what it is in the first place). Any coaching, consulting or teaching job on a serious level probably experiences it to a degree - wanting to genuinely help others do better and meet their potential (and offering help for free at times), where instead certain people decide to be stubborn, close-minded and arrogant, making the whole process painful, leaving the coach shaking their head at why the person asked for help in the first place (not aimed at anyone specific at all). Having a measuring stick can help someone be realistic about their current abilities, as well as help them decide where they want to go, and help the more experienced determine how to help them there.
I don't think it's a bad idea for instructors to post info about themselves though either (I agree with you guys above). I respect Viper's reputation from what I've heard from others who I respect as archers, but quite honestly I have a hard time finding some sort of list or information that I can say "here, read this if you're curious/doubtful".


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

ics-bowhunter,

I know exactly what you mean, although around here it’s usually the spot shoots where attendance is very poor. If you shoot NFAA Traditional or Barebow, you can pretty much show up, shoot one arrow, and go home a winner. And that goes for everything up to and including the five-state Sectionals. Attendance just isn’t what it was 20 years ago, although it’s starting to come back a little bit. As more and more clubs host field rounds, I think things will start improve. But for now, it would feel a bit like buying an award, and that’s just not something I’ll do.

At the prodding of some friends, I did get back into indoor spot shooting this past winter—mostly Vegas 3-spot faces and either Vegas rounds (10 ends of 3 arrows), 450 rounds (15 ends), or FITA 600 rounds (20 ends). Even though my clicker puts me in the Recurve class (think Olympic recurves) instead of Barebow, I had a good time, especially at our state championship. It was fun, but I haven’t shot one of those rounds since outdoor 3Ds started, and I doubt I’ll return to it until after hunting season has ended. Although, our state outdoor championship is a 900 metric rounds, so I may have to play around with that a little bit too.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

CFGuy said:


> Ray: True, but that's far more likely to happen locally than at nationals :wink:


Each circumstance can be unique. I've been to local shoots where there has been close to 500 traditional shooters and others where there may only be 5 that show up.

I believe my statement still stands. 

Competitions are won based who does and does not show up.

I've met some amazing archers that just have no interest in traveling around the country to compete.

Ray :shade:



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Each circumstance can be unique. I've been to local shoots where there has been close to 500 traditional shooters and others where there may only be 5 that show up.
> 
> I believe my statement still stands.
> 
> ...


I think it does too. As some others mentioned they have been at relatively renowned shoots with a lack of competition. I think knowing which shoot it was and who was shot against is highly relevant in this scenario, for sure. The only time this likely isn't an issue is at the Olympic finals, but even then, depends how well the others prepared that year.


----------



## Str8 Shooter (Oct 15, 2005)

Sometimes people get to caught up in there own version of archery to recognize and respect the other styles. Each style has a skill set that needs to be mastered to perform at a high level. That's why you don't see a lot of people crossing the lines and shooting every different style. It's difficult to acquire the skills to really excel at everything. Sometimes it's better to focus on one and get good at it. As my buddy puts it, "You can be a jack of all trades and master of none." 

The trouble with simply assigning a value via the 300 round to a persons skill is it doesn't factor in the persons style and equipment. To make a comparison lets assume we have two shooters. One focuses on shooting 300 rounds with the oddball stuff outside. The shooter has a specific indoor setup (ILF rig with rest/plunger) with a 20 yard point on and everything is geared to that. Let's say this guy shoots a 270 average. The next guy shoots a one-piece bow (recurve or longbow... don't matter) off the shelf and shoots 3D. His equipment is setup for his game. Let's say on the average 30 yard and under course he averages 9.5 pts. per target. Would one shooter be considered better than another? Would the scores one person puts up be more worthy of respect?


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Each circumstance can be unique. I've been to local shoots where there has been close to 500 traditional shooters and others where there may only be 5 that show up.
> 
> I believe my statement still stands.
> 
> ...


*Yep.*

and i'll take that comment a step further by eliminating the words "in traveling around the country" to read...

_"I've met some amazing archers that just have no interest to compete."_

One in particular was my first coach/mentor at treasure coast archers in the mid 80's...first time I met him he was standing at the 80yd stake and oh so slowly stuffed 5 outta 5 in the bull..stopping between every shot to check his last with the bino's hanging on his chest..as he chuckled getting a kick out of himself exclaiming to another more noteable archer...

"How do ya like that Jack!...34#s and Holding 8!" :laugh:

as he loved tinkering with ultra-light wheelbow rigs...i was shooting the same front range target from the 60yd marker and walked down with him to see his plum sized group of 1614 knitt'in needles packed in the center..his mechanical release?..was a thumb-loop...a piece of parachord laced through a short length of tubing and as we walked back i said..

"Man...i wish i could shoot like that."

He smiled and said..

"You can."

And the rest was history as that was the day he took me under his wing...but here's the thing..

I can't recall that Joe EVER shot a club shoot..or any other shoot for that matter...oh he'd always show up with his coffee thermos, a smile and his fav project bow of the moment..and he'd waltz around intently watching others get in some pre-shoot practice...offering up pointers here and there and sometimes?..even talk someone (or three)...that may be encountering a particular shooting issue out of participating in the shoot and just stay up on the front range with him as he'd help them work through whatever issues they might be having or sometimes?..just waive bye to everyone headed to the back ranges for the shoot wishing them well and stay up front shooting by himself.

One day i finally got the nads up to ask him why he never shoots the shoots with us and he just muttered something about saving the trophies for the newer archers.

And due to age and health issues he rarely if ever shoots anymore but it doesn't stop him from still showing up at our club shoots with his thermos, smile and words of wisdom...and to this day folks still very much appreciate him for that...here he is at our clubs "Indian River Archers" 25th Club Anniversary (about 6 months back) where he and two others just like him were awarded plaques for their many years of service and tutelage they gave to countless others...

Left To Right: Joe Hall, Jack Ward & Willis Hicks...










Ironically?..that 25th Club Anniversary Shoot I attended?..i wound up the one and only Traditional Class Archer to show up...and those two guys to the right of Joe there?...Jack and Willis?..they never shot a wheelbow in their lives..refused to..and were happy to see in me that at least one showed up...and again ironically?..i chose to forgo that shoot since i was the only one there with a stickbow...in a mob scene of other types..and even though i paid my fees and signed up for the shoot?..for some strange reason i felt compelled to stay up on the front range that beautiful morning...










with this..










my excel, a club shirt i won in the drawing and Joe with his smile, stories and coffee thermos..which made for a very special morning for me.

and it goes right back to the oh-so-true words you constantly preach Ray..

"It depends on what your goals are!"

Mine are to relax, enjoy archery and have fun hanging out with other like minded archers...preferably in a place where aggressive superstars need not apply! :laugh: BTDT... 

L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Sanford said:


> Ray, I would add that they need to find a way to gauge it back to the person they are seeking help from.


There definitely needs to be an understanding. Assumptions suck! Asking questions and communicating properly Rocks!

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

grantmac said:


> How, precisely, does an archer do this without some form of controlled shoot?


In most cases...it is beneficial if an archer shoots at targets that are more standardized...but it does NOT have to be a NFAA 300 type target.

The target/targets should be based on the particular archer's goals.

The NFAA target is a great target for this...but some people need to stop claiming or implying that every archer needs to shoot that particular target to become a good archer.

Ray :shade:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

I'm not gonna lie...i'm curious how good or bad i might do...and A.T. Member Arron has peaked my interest here by doing a 300rd at 10yds..and here's what i'm thinking...while it would be utterly stupid for me to attempt a 300rd at 20yds (at my current level of intense TP recovery) i think i could handle a 10yd'er...but with a twist.."Bareshafts Only"...for three reasons...

1. So i don't tear up fletchings (in case it's a stellar session for me)

and?..

2. They would help me define my mistakes more clearly.

and finally?..

3. I got an excuse if i shoot really bad! :laugh:

yep...might just try that tomorrow evening.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

BLACK WOLF said:


> In most cases...it is beneficial if an archer shoots at targets that are more standardized...but it does NOT have to be a NFAA 300 type target.
> 
> The target/targets should be based on the particular archer's goals.
> 
> ...


And that would be.....


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

grantmac said:


> And that would be.....


Apples off your head :wink:

Ray :shade:

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

I still don't see where anyone wrote that a 300 be mandatory. I honestly don't really see the point of an "anything goes" system based on who feels what that day. Again, if a newbie wants objective, honest help and is at a point where shooting a full round would be beneficial and not detrimental, communicating with an instructor and finding an objective measurement would be good. In this case, the 300 round seems relevant, and as Larry said there are other measures dependant on shooting style and organization. I don't see the need for constantly clarifying that other means are available and that not everyone has to shoot a 300 round when it was simply a suggestion/solution (not at all in regards to what you said Larry, I agree with you).


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

If you don't want to do it don't do it. As far as demanding someones credentials that is fine IF you are paying for the training.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

CFGuy said:


> I still don't see where anyone wrote that a 300 be mandatory.


I don't believe ANYONE claimed it was mandatory...but the implications that some people feel it's 'sad' if someone doesn't shoot it or it 'bugs' them that people don't....does imply that some people do feel it's very important to shoot a NFAA 300 target for clarification of their ability as an archer or a means to guage their progress.

I...and a few others are only stating that the NFAA 300 target is NOT the only way to guage an archer's ability.

Some people refuse to look outside of their box and realize NOT everyone shares the exact same goals or needs to pursue their goals the exact same way.

When the implication that the NFAA 300 target is the 'only' valuable target to test this...that opinion comes across as just another 'elitists target archer's' opinion.

The fact is...there are other targets and other ways to guage an archer's ability besides using only the NFAA 300 target.

Ray :shade:


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

BLACK WOLF said:


> I don't believe ANYONE claimed it was mandatory...but the implications that some people feel it's 'sad' if someone doesn't shoot it or it 'bugs' them that people don't....does imply that some people do feel it's very important to shoot a NFAA 300 target for clarification of their ability as an archer or a means to guage their progress.
> 
> I...and a few others are only stating that the NFAA 300 target is NOT the only way to guage an archer's ability.
> 
> ...



Well said


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> As far as demanding someones credentials that is fine IF you are paying for the training.


Why? Either credentials matter, or they don't. I don't see any "demands", but rather requests.

Someone can get on a message board, and if they posess the talent, can present an opinion based on nothing more than what they have read and/or an over-active imagination and make some people believe it's cold hard fact based on years of experience.

When someone has the common courtesy to tell a bit about themselves, it puts their opinions in perspective. I know of a fellow who used to post a lot on a couple of boards. Whenever someone asked for an opinion on this or that bow, he'd chime in about owning one and give his opinions. He did this on countless bows.

Just based on that, you'd think the guy had been in the sport a long time. What he left out was he'd only been in it maybe a year, and most of the bows he spoke of had spent little time in his hands--some he kept only for days. He was constantly buying/selling/trading.

Now, with his opinion in perspective, how much weight would you give to his thoughts on a particular bow? Shooting for a year or so, shooting a particular bow only for days, maybe just a few arrows.

It also gives insight to how honest (or not) some people are.


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

We all give advice on here and nobody knows if we know what we are talking about or not.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

ozzypop said:


> We all give advice on here and nobody knows if we know what we are talking about or not.


As any good coach will tell you, "the proof of what you are being told is held in your hands. Your bow!" IOW, if you are shooting your bow regular, practicing, learning.... you don't need credentials to take advice, just proper results. So, since a 300 or others are proper target face references for all coaches in target archery, it's easy prove out your lessons there.

New archers are way smarter than most folks are giving credit for, or at least, they better be, and the Internet is NOT the place they will get the worst advice, just hang around a few archery lanes and hear the hodgepodge of nonsense info.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

ozzypop said:


> If you don't want to do it don't do it. As far as demanding someones credentials that is fine IF you are paying for the training.


Well said. 

The 300 round is kind of like a test in school - tends to create anxiety beforehand, but once it has been taken it's pretty easy to tell if you need to study more or not.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Sanford said:


> New archers are way smarter than most folks are giving credit for, or at least, they better be, and the Internet is NOT the place they will get the worst advice, just hang around a few archery lanes and hear the hodgepodge of nonsense info.


I agree, but here's the difference. At the lanes it's easy to see whether the person doling out advice has a leg to stand on; watch him shoot. We don't have that luxury behind a computer screen.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

J. Wesbrock said:


> I agree, but here's the difference. At the lanes it's easy to see whether the person doling out advice has a leg to stand on; watch him shoot. We don't have that luxury behind a computer screen.


You still have the luxury to ignore or test for yourself. You also have the luxury of many other sources and books. You also have the luxury to go on an open invite to shoot with the man for fun or not or buy his book and read it. That's what I did - the whole gambit. You have all that for yourself if you want.

I guess I don't see the need of some to require of one person proof of what they won't or wouldn't take from him in the first place. Those that have and do take the advice seem to have no complaints and have nothing but praise, so what's the beef unless you think you are saving the world of Trad archery from Tony Camera and his book. If so, would it not be better call 3-Rivers and Lancasters and have them pull that best seller off the shelf first? That's the elephant in the room on all this.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Sanford said:


> ...New archers are way smarter than most folks are giving credit for, or at least, they better be...


Shoot with a square stance, shoot with an open stance.

Grip the bow firmly, grip the bow loosely.

set fingers 3 fingers under, set fingers split.

Shoot with your elbow bent, shoot with your elbow locked.

Aim with one eye closed, aim with both eyes open.

Anchor at the corner of your mouth, anchor under your chin.

Cant your bow, bow is straight up and down.

Use your arm to draw the bow, use your back to draw the bow.

Elbow high, elbow low.

Dead release, dynamic release.

Wood aluminum or carbon arrows.

recurve or longbow.

Sight or no sight or out-a sight.

Gap or instinctive.

Dynaflight or Dacron.

Sanford, I'd agree that new archers are bright folks that can find their way through archery. 

Ultimately the truth is in the shot. 

But as a newbie I searched out teachers, mentors, more experienced archers. That said, they didn't flash any credentials, and they didn't ask me any of my scores. I just had a flea market bow and some red easton arrows that seemed to bend just by pulling them out of the bale (  ). The one thing I was certain of was we all had an intense passion for archery!


----------



## BassinBowhunter (May 6, 2011)

This has been addressed already in this thread, but the idea needs re-referenced. Simply because you are being coached well, and practicing, does not mean you will shoot a 280. There are plenty of people in all aspects of sports, not just archery, who know the game whatever it may be. Know the mechanics. Know innately it seems how things work. Yet, once they are on the field look like they haven't a clue. Just because you may not be able to shoot to the level of others doesn't necessarily mean you don't know what you are talking about. Some are flat out coaches not players.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Larry, every new archer I tell similar. Get out and shoot and have a passion for archery and everything will follow accordingly. Source from everywhere and anywhere, keeping what is good. Many new shooters will tell me, "I read (heard) this but I know it can't be right or doesn't sound right". 99.9% of the time, they are right in their concern for the info! Meaning, they knew before they even knew to know.

What I find of most new archers is they are "grouping" oriented anytime before they are "scoring" oriented. Keeping score for progress is actually more something you have to teach folks or drill them to want - it doesn't seem second nature to want score measure. Heck, I find this of myself - grouping is fun, scoring is boring and sometimes a wet blanket.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Just went to the IFAA and NFAA site to get their criteria for A,B, and C classifications and I misspoke earlier. It appears that they don't have a score range for all events, but classification is determined by official outdoor field/hunter rounds shot at official shoots. Someone correct me if I am wrong. Therefore if I shoot A class scores on field and or hunter rounds I am an A class shooter. Sorry for the miss que. Below I've copied and pasted info from IFAA site, for bowhunter (didn't see one for bowhunter recurve, this is for compound. The longbow scores are relevant for sure.

2. In the Bowhunter Divisions for Men, Women and Junior Boys and Girls, there shall be the following classes based on a 28 target round:
Class

Bowhunter
A 375 - plus
B 225 – 374
C 0 - 224

3. In the Longbow Division for Men, Women and Junior Boys and Girls there shall be the following classes based on a 28 target round: -
Class
Longbow
A 250 - plus
B 150 - 249
C 0 - 149


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

So, what if there is no Field range within 250 miles of where I live (maybe more I don't even know if one exists in Idaho)? That's why I think the 300 round is a good gauge - it's simple, its available, its the same for everyone-everywhere. If I know what a guy scores, then I have a good gauge of where he or she is at. I think that a shooter in control of his shot can shoot most any archery game and be in about the same area of proficiency. Obviously if you spend most of your time at one aspect, then you should be better at that one - but a well rounded archer should be able to cross over. After all, it is all about shooting arrows as accurately as possible no matter the game.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

centershot said:


> So, what if there is no Field range within 250 miles of where I live (maybe more I don't even know if one exists in Idaho)? That's why I think the 300 round is a good gauge - it's simple, its available, its the same for everyone-everywhere. If I know what a guy scores, then I have a good gauge of where he or she is at. I think that a shooter in control of his shot can shoot most any archery game and be in about the same area of proficiency. Obviously if you spend most of your time at one aspect, then you should be better at that one - but a well rounded archer should be able to cross over. After all, it is all about shooting arrows as accurately as possible no matter the game.


Center, assuming we are talking a universal form requirement, which is reasonable enough to assume, I would say that every 70-meter FITA average has a corresponding 18-meter average, BUT, every 18-meter average does not have a corresponding 70-meter average.

An Olympic Gold Medalist at Vegas can shoot a score that is not out of range for some league shooter that never ventures out of his hometown, BUT I doubt any hometown, homegrown shooter can average with the GM shooter at 70-meters (or all in between).

Similar can also be assumed for switching styles. The Olympian switching from Oly to Trad would easily find that his 18-meter average is not on par with some hometown, homegrown shooters. 

But, some differences can and do change with practice, and some cannot and doe not change with practice.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

True, I'm talking generalities - if a guy can put up a 270 on the 300 round, I think he could go shoot at 70m and figure it out. I think that the good form and aiming system that it takes to shoot well would carry over. Now if the same guy was shooting sub 200's then 70m would likely be very discouraging. There are very likely exceptions, but for the majority I think this would hold true. This is the kind of information that I believe the original post was about/for. The 300 round is not perfect, just the best gauge I know of that is simple, available, widely used and consistent for everyone no matter what age, skill level or location in the world you are.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Center, agree! Any standard is best when not a measure at the extremes, at the stress point, but where at the most relevant point under the curve. The overall test of skill of the archer involves where he fits under the curve and to the tail of the curve, but that's not in the test of average to most or all shooters, it's a test of the opposite.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

That's actually a good point Sanford - often times the internet can be very misleading, but I think I've found some worse advice in person. My first trad-shooter experience told me to cant the bow with the hand, not anchor, not focus on form, etc.
It seems like most of the guys that come on here are actually older than younger (by older I mean not teens). Not sure what the other forums are like but this one in particular seems to have more experienced older guys which I find very refreshing. It might end up being more misleading as a youngster when you don't really know how to research or critically think, but I found even at a young age, spending some time on a forum told me who and what to listen to. After a while you get an idea of who people respect, and who the respected people respect. I only learned about a few well-known guys' experience on here (i.e. Viper's, Grant's, itbeso's, Steve's, Jimmy's, etc; Larry would be in here if he posted more :wink a long while after I started listening to them. Not to say I didn't put my foot in my mouth (particularly with itbeso), but after a while it becomes evident who knows their stuff, based on being able to try things out, but also seeing how others react to the advice given, as well as how people write. I don't know anything about Thin Man's, Easykeeper's, Sanford's, centershot's, MGF's, etc "credentials", but know they're worth listening to (sorry if I forgot people, it's more than just these fellows).
Long-winded, poorly worded elaboration aside, I'm basically trying to say that I would love to hear about experience and qualification but it's not entirely necessary, even for relatively bright new guys, to see everyone's paper if they simply spend some time reading. I don't think it's fair for new people to demand credentials before listening (not say people are suggesting that) - far too much instant gratification nowadays. Discerning bad advice from good, the respected from the inexperienced, is part of the learning process.

Larry: I went through all of those questions myself not that long ago, but I realize that learning about that is a fun process so long as you get good advice in the end. I'm a very "look at all the information and weigh it out" kind of guy, so it took me a while to figure out what my goals were and how to get there (hitting what I shoot at takes priority over previous perceptions [like I need to shoot split finger, I need to cant my bow, I need to snap shoot, etc]), but through that learning experience I'm able to make it my own. Not to say I won't listen to advice, I absolutely will, but I have a better gauge of what to listen to now.
Regarding the A,B,C scoring - those categories are somewhat broad aren't they? Would you recommend posting a score or two as well as class?


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Sanford,

I’ve been very clear that I’m not singling anyone out here. As a matter of fact, I used examples from other web sites just for that very reason. It would be helpful in this discussion if you wouldn’t hang other people's personal issues with Tony around my neck. Thanks.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

J. Wesbrock said:


> Sanford,
> 
> I’ve been very clear that I’m not singling anyone out here. As a matter of fact, I used examples from other web sites just for that very reason. It would be helpful in this discussion if you wouldn’t hang other people's personal issues with Tony around my neck. Thanks.


JW, I fully apologize for making that reference toward your points made.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Sanford,

No sweat. It's easy to get things mixed up on these threads. I've done it a time or two myself.


----------



## jocala (Jan 26, 2013)

Sanford said:


> What I find of most new archers is they are "grouping" oriented anytime before they are "scoring" oriented.


That's absolutely true in my case. The idea of shooting a 300 as part of a training regimen was a revelation; It's something quantifiable that's easily tracked. I'm coachless, (I bet like many who read these boards), and Tony's book, along with videos from various sources, are all I've got, so a new tool to track progress is great.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

jocala said:


> That's absolutely true in my case. The idea of shooting a 300 as part of a training regimen was a revelation; It's something quantifiable that's easily tracked. I'm coachless, (I bet like many who read these boards), and Tony's book, along with videos from various sources, are all I've got, so a new tool to track progress is great.


Not sure how much you've looked into the "back tension" idea (very difficult to actually do without coaching), put try putting a rubber band around your elbow and try getting that feeling of "elbow pulling" - huge change for me. Aside from having the privilege of getting some coaching myself, I couldn't agree more.


----------



## jocala (Jan 26, 2013)

CFGuy said:


> Not sure how much you've looked into the "back tension" idea (very difficult to actually do without coaching), put try putting a rubber band around your elbow and try getting that feeling of "elbow pulling" - huge change for me. Aside from having the privilege of getting some coaching myself, I couldn't agree more.


 My wife and I have been using these resistance band things to simulate the draw of a bow, I'll try that with the elbow, thanks.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

CFGuy said:


> Not sure how much you've looked into the "back tension" idea (very difficult to actually do without coaching), put try putting a rubber band around your elbow and try getting that feeling of "elbow pulling" - huge change for me. Aside from having the privilege of getting some coaching myself, I couldn't agree more.


I wouldn't call it coaching


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

grantmac said:


> I wouldn't call it coaching


Close enough . Coaching is just teaching movement/physical skills.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

I'd suggest that we are talking about different goals for many . I personally , although crap at it , happen to like a FITA Indoor round and use it as gauge for improvement and from work . And in essence , I would agree with much of what the OP alluded to ... for some ...

However , I also think one can make an argument that being coached or taught by archers such as John Schulz, Byron Ferguson , Simon Stanley, Horace Ford , Larry Yien , Rod Jenkins , Kassoi Lajos or Paul Schaefer[?] would give great results in terms of improved archery and confidence , and may well lead to being a better archer . Sure doesn't mean I would necessarily mean I would shoot a better 300 round though .....

However the actual definable outcome would be very different depending upon who one was coached by ... does this make their coaching any less valid ? Does it make the archery student's improvement any less regardless of our improvements definition ? No it doesn't , but to even embrace coaching with one of these gents would could be taken with some degree of confidence as they have results on the board , in the field or across the paddock for all to see .

there is huge elephant in the room here on this thread , and perhaps the OP could clarify the murky waters by identifying some of the issues that have been addressed here .

One can't start a cricket match , define the way the game should be played by others , then take the bat, ball and stumps home when people question the rules .

I have no puppy in this brawl ... but it would be nice to see it finished .


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

benofthehood said:


> I'd suggest that we are talking about different goals for many . I personally , although crap at it , happen to like a FITA Indoor round and use it as gauge for improvement and from work . And in essence , I would agree with much of what the OP alluded to ... for some ...
> 
> However , I also think one can make an argument that being coached or taught by archers such as John Schulz, Byron Ferguson , Simon Stanley, Horace Ford , Larry Yien , Rod Jenkins , Kassoi Lajos or Paul Schaefer[?] would give great results in terms of improved archery and confidence , and may well lead to being a better archer . Sure doesn't mean I would necessarily mean I would shoot a better 300 round though .....
> 
> ...


I agree Ben...and what I find comical about this entire thread is this..

all this tall talk about "should we" and to date?..i see one member who's had the yarbles to post their score...

"Arron" from 10yds...thusfar outside of that?...it's 6 pages of folks blowing opines into cyberspace (including myself) meanwhile?..

the OP is pretty much MIA.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

People come from differing experiences and each can contribute something of value. I try to make it clear that my perspective is as someone who made the decision to start over from scratch and relearn a very formal way of shooting. I expected this to take one year; I am starting my fourth. My experience is in what it takes to make a change. That is why I continue to repeat that you have to be willing to get worse in order to get better, and that you have to burn the ships so that you cannot go back. It seems like every time I add the next step my scores plummet -- for awhile anyway. What I have learned during this journey could be helpful to others embarking on a similar path, especially for those who are not so naturally gifted that it comes easy to them. It has been struggle for me, but the challenge is why I keep shooting. I am not in this sport because I thought it would be easy.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Wow, I check out for a little while, this thread is still going, but WAIT. It has not degraded into a downward spiral, but has brought out some great points and perspectives! THANK YOU!


----------



## wseward (Mar 7, 2013)

Shot 242 from 36'/12 yards this afternoon. Used a new Hoyt Excel 21" riser with W&W/SF Axiom+ 30# limbs. Third day I have shot this new rig.
Shooting off a wood shelf instinctive. 

I noticed as I started I was a little nervous. Silly eh...oh well?? Was more aware of my form errors while doing this exercise. Also noticed
I shot much better when I really tried rather than just shooting.

Break down: Quarter one: 60. Quarter two: 61. Quarter three: 58. Quarter 4: 63
Half 1: 121. Half 2: 121.

Cost me two targets, 80 minutes and a little ego. It was also fun.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

Me ? 
a few months back I broke 250 ... which for me was an uber milestone ... since then , well its all downhill eh !

recently ..... well , lets just say that it ain't pretty ... at all ..... 220+ on average , high 230's on a really good day ....

on a bad day ...
I put the bow down lest the embarrassment consume me ... target panic riddled little urchin that I am ..........


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

Cost me two targets, 80 minutes and a little ego. It was also fun.[/QUOTE]

A little ego loss myself  But I had fun with it as well and learned which was the most important thing for me.


Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> I agree Ben...and what I find comical about this entire thread is this..
> 
> all this tall talk about "should we" and to date?..i see one member who's had the yarbles to post their score...
> 
> ...


I thought the whole point of posting scores is for those looking for some sound advice? I don't see many people asking for advice on this thread. It seams as though people are trying to stay on topic.


----------



## Demmer (Dec 1, 2012)

Arron said:


> Cost me two targets, 80 minutes and a little ego. It was also fun.


A little ego loss myself  But I had fun with it as well and learned which was the most important thing for me.


Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2[/QUOTE]

An ego will get you in trouble.


----------



## dan in mi (Dec 17, 2009)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> ...... That is why I continue to repeat that you have to be willing to get worse in order to get better, and that you have to burn the ships so that you cannot go back. It seems like every time I add the next step my scores plummet -- for awhile anyway.......


Ain't that the truth. A few years ago I was averaging 240's barebow and 260's with a sight, but my form was crap. Obviously it was repeatable, but it wasn't right. To get that repeatable form I was contorted to about a 26-1/2" draw. I got some coaching from Rod and learned my draw should be an even 29 if I draw properly. Two deer seasons later I still wasn't back into the 40's and still hadn't resolved my form to what it needed to be. Last July I got a little help from a friend and something clicked and it all started coming together. Last deer season went well. I have shot 4 rounds in the past week after not shooting at all since Nov. With sights, in order, 225, 235, 250, 254. It feels good and I see nowhere to go but up. I will see about ditching the sight mid summer if things continue to improve.


----------



## wseward (Mar 7, 2013)

I imagine my ego will take a real thrashing when I try this from 20 meters!!


----------



## takefive (Aug 19, 2012)

Wow, this is some entertaining reading for this noob. I don't know if I have much to add to it, but I just realized that I do have a dog in this fight because I plunked down $20 for Mr. Carera's book some months ago. And I'm glad I did. I've been shooting stick bows for less than a year, barebow for about four months, so admittedly I'm still pretty green. The information in his book on form, arrow tuning, and shooting w/o sights have been a great help for me and I didn't need to see his resume first before my shooting improved. I do have some doubts about the validity of posting 300 round scores and the point has been well made that not everyone shoots them. On the other hand, if you do shoot them and use them to gauge your progress go ahead and post them. Should it be mandatory in order to post a question? No.

















.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

takefive said:


> I do have some doubts about the validity of posting 300 round scores and the point has been well made that not everyone shoots them. On the other hand, if you do shoot them and use them to gauge your progress go ahead and post them. Should it be mandatory in order to post a question? No.


What are your doubts about validity out of curiosity? The concern that people might not be honest?
I think the last sentence is why this thread is so long - no one originally said that it should be mandatory but many seemed to take it as such.


----------



## takefive (Aug 19, 2012)

Well, yeah, obviously there is the possibility that someone would fudge their scores a bit, even though I like to think of everyone on this forum as my stand up brother or sister in archery. I posted mine from a few months ago on another thread, but do you know for sure that I didn't add 30 points my real scores? But that isn't my real concern. Just saying that more than one poster had no interest in shooting the 300 round and if you're going to make that the standard for asking a question, those people will be excluded. Glad to hear that I misunderstood that.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Wow, this is some entertaining reading for this noob. I don't know if I have much to add to it, but I just realized that I do have a dog in this fight because I plunked down $20 for Mr. Carera's book some months ago. And I'm glad I did. I've been shooting stick bows for less than a year, barebow for about four months, so admittedly I'm still pretty green. The information in his book on form, arrow tuning, and shooting w/o sights have been a great help for me and I didn't need to see his resume first before my shooting improved. I do have some doubts about the validity of posting 300 round scores and the point has been well made that not everyone shoots them. On the other hand, if you do shoot them and use them to gauge your progress go ahead and post them. Should it be mandatory in order to post a question? No

Nope it sure isn't necessary, but it make is easier to get the information that could help you...........if you inflate your scores then you're only hurting yourself by getting information and tips that could be above your current skill level and could really mess you up instead of helping. I think most guys are honest and don't really care about the score but are concerned with getting better - this is just another tool in the quiver and it can be fun.


----------



## LBR (Jan 1, 2004)

> ...if you inflate your scores then you're only hurting yourself by getting information and tips that could be above your current skill level and could really mess you up instead of helping.


The other side of that equation touches on the point I tried to make early on. Of course you don't need credentials to offer up an opinion, or even a solution to a problem. However, if you are vaguely referring to having archers in the top 2 or 3 percent seeking your help, that is going to get some attention--much moreso that the guy that volunteers to help scouts or, like me, just has a NASP certification. IMO such a claim is made for the sole purpose of garnering some attention and trying to establish credibility.

If you volunteer to say you are at that level, why is it unreasonable to ask for a little verification? When you bring that kind of attention to yourself, you should expect a little scrutiny and be ready and able to verify by answering a few simple questions.

If it matters, I don't ask anything that I wouldnt' be happy to answer myself, if it were asked of me. I'm also not asking anything that I wouldn't ask of anyone that made a similar claim. This simply gives people an idea of how much faith to put in a given opinion. For instance......

You have someone asking for advice on hunting whitetails. Someone chimes in with their opinion, but you learn they really never killed anything with a bow and arrow. The Wensel brothers post a totally different opinion. Which one would you be more apt to listen to? Which one is likely to give better, more accurate advice? It's not rocket science.


----------



## BigCnyn (Nov 5, 2008)

My best 300 round in indoor leagues.. 283 18x
my best 3oo FITA Utah Open tournament 277 9x followed by a 274 8x ( I think ) 
Averaged 274 for indoor leagues..

I wanted to get a better shot sequence, that was accomplished by using the information I gathered from this and other sites.. Vipers book has been beat up ,, Thanks Anthony, 
I have been to 2 of Rods classes, class act, Thanks, Rod
No where else have I been able to pm folks, VIPER, Rod Jenkins, and get information. Matter of fact I have called both those men, and they helped me on the way to tournaments.. There are many men on here that get KUDOs and get disrespected, shame on us !

I bowhunt also , and the complete trust in my shot makes me a better hunter, PERIOD ! 

I have seen the name calling , lack of respect, disgraceful, So I lurk , listen and dont get drawn into the crud.. A Wise man said, Listen and use what you can..


----------



## Mbmadness (May 19, 2009)

My best 300 round is my first and only score , never shoot standing so close to someone before . 1st round score was 289 & 25 x's , 2nd round I got a 298 26 x's . I was shooting pile drivers , it was a heck of a learning experience . But fun 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

takefive said:


> Well, yeah, obviously there is the possibility that someone would fudge their scores a bit, even though I like to think of everyone on this forum as my stand up brother or sister in archery. I posted mine from a few months ago on another thread, but do you know for sure that I didn't add 30 points my real scores? But that isn't my real concern. Just saying that more than one poster had no interest in shooting the 300 round and if you're going to make that the standard for asking a question, those people will be excluded. *Glad to hear that I misunderstood that.*


Still can't find any notion of mandatory being implied by Viper or otherwise, not sure why it started in the first place.


----------



## jocala (Jan 26, 2013)

*First 300x10y*

Beautiful Florida day, first try at a half-pint 300. I've been shooting daily since 2/13, shot regularly in my mid-20s 40 years ago for about 2 years. Thanks again to Tony for the great book and this wonderful idea for practicing.


```
x  9  9
9  9  8
9  9  8
9  9  5
10 10 9
10 10 9 
x  10 10
9  9  9 
x  10 9
x  x  x
```
Score: 277
Avg: 9.23


I'm using an app called Archery Companion on my Galaxy S2 to keep track of scores. My plan is to stay at 10y this week and see if this 277 was a fluke, then move back to 12y. Rinse & repeat until I feel comfortable at 20y.


----------



## takefive (Aug 19, 2012)

Still can't find any notion of mandatory being implied by Viper or otherwise, not sure why it started in the first place.

Love beating that dead horse don't you CFGuy?
I'm out and really wishing I wouldn't have gotten in to begin with.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

takefive said:


> Still can't find any notion of mandatory being implied by Viper or otherwise, not sure why it started in the first place.
> 
> Love beating that dead horse don't you CFGuy?
> I'm out and really wishing I wouldn't have gotten in to begin with.


Didn't mean my post to come off snidely, so sarcasm isn't necessary. I'm glad you decided to post a score and join in, but the reason this thread became a ridiculous 7 pages long is because of posts and posts of "but you don't HAVE to do it" when nobody said that to begin with. Glad to hear you understand it though.


----------



## takefive (Aug 19, 2012)

At the risk of disagreeing and reopening what is really an insignificant (to me at least) can of worms, Viper1 said in his original post: "that would REQUIRE posting scores." I'll leave it up to the semantics experts, of which there seem to be an unusually large number of on this forum, to quibble over whether a requirement is the same thing as making it mandatory. Maybe I had it right to begin with. Either way it's just another divisive issue with opposing camps already hunkering down. And I don't want to be a part of a forum like that. Best wishes and good luck in your enjoyment of archery, CFGuy, and I hope you'll wish me the same. If I need a question answered, I'll look it up in Tony's terrific book.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

takefive said:


> At the risk of disagreeing and reopening what is really an insignificant (to me at least) can of worms, Viper1 said in his original post: "that would REQUIRE posting scores." I'll leave it up to the semantics experts, of which there seem to be an unusually large number of on this forum, to quibble over whether a requirement is the same thing as making it mandatory. Maybe I had it right to begin with. Either way it's just another divisive issue with opposing camps already hunkering down. And I don't want to be a part of a forum like that. Best wishes and good luck in your enjoyment of archery, CFGuy, and I hope you'll wish me the same. If I need a question answered, I'll look it up in Tony's terrific book.


My mistake, I stand corrected, thanks for that clarification. Unfortunately, as with many things on the internet, it does seem somewhat based on interpretation. Out of "While this probably won't happen, it might be nice to have a frame of reference, knowing who we're talking to. Easiest way of doing that is knowing how they shoot, and that would require posting scores", I took it to mean that if someone is looking for specific help and would like to provide a frame of reference, the easiest way of doing so is knowing exactly how they shoot (which would require posting scores in this context), if that makes sense. In context, I don't think he meant it is mandatory to all questions by all shooters on the forum. In any case, I've posted a score and am digging through a gold mine of solid, constructive info that I've already noticed to make a difference. If others aren't interested in doing that, that's fine, and I don't think Viper or anyone else on here is going to care - the purpose is to help the shooters that want help. I wouldn't be worried about the forum being divisive in such a way, though it's known for drama around here now and then .
Thank you, and indeed, happy shooting! Looking forward to hearing about your experiences.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Jocala -

Based on the way you scored that, looks like you used the FITA or Vegas style target, since the blue target is scored x, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. Regardless, that's pretty impressive shooting. BigCryin's scores shows a typical split between the blue and 4 color (FITA) target (and also great shooting, btw). At that level, there's usually about a 10 point drop going from the blue NFAA to the 4 color FITA, due the the scoring differences. 

Guys - 

Things get misinterpreted or misrepresented for any number of reasons. To be clear, most of my students are into target work and scores are mandatory early on, no way around that, but that wasn't the purpose of the thread. I've also worked with a number of people "one-on-one" over the Internet, and yes, in those cases, I do require scores and request pictures of their targets, for record keeping and diagnostic purposes. Don't think that's a lot to ask. 

I do think it would help those of us offering advice to have a better understanding of the shooting level the guy or gal we're trying to help is at? Yes, do I think it's "required"? No, but still it would be helpful. It's really easy for someone to post time and time again about his theories or experiences, only to find out later on they can't break a 200 at 10 yds after years of shooting. 

As far as my scores, kinda funny, we had a thread last year (+/-) were a bunch of us shot on a weekly basis and we posted our scores, mine included. Fact of the matter is, I have talked about my scores in the past, and really don't see a need to recount them every week or two. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## jocala (Jan 26, 2013)

Viper1 said:


> Jocala -
> 
> Based on the way you scored that, looks like you used the FITA or Vegas style target, since the blue target is scored x, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.


Yes, I'm using a Morrell Supreme Range Target. On a side-note, I must say I'm not real happy with it. It's been in daily use since mid-Feb and the center of the FITA side is like "hollowed-out" behind the face. Stomping the target to redistribute the stuffing per website directions doesn't seem to make much difference. OTOH, my $40.00 Black Hole foam target takes almost as much abuse and is still going strong.


----------

