# Assessment of the Olympic archery event



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

I read some of the comments on this board about the wind and how it was more luck than skill to work your way through the elimination process. I disagree with that assessment. After watching several rounds during these Games I have come to the conclusion that archery still picks it’s best. Although it is not a marathon archer like what I used to specialize in, it truly is a battle of expertise and nerves. Yes, the wind can play a factor and yes there is a bit of luck involved, but I believe that is the case in all events at these Games. I believe we do an injustice in stating that it is a game of luck when there is no doubt in my mind that the people who won and medaled deserved to be on that podium. 

There are many really excellent archers at these Games and some showed some amazing brilliance at times while other times they faltered. This is not due to the wind but due to the mental aspect of the game. The wind was blowing equally on both archers during the match. There was no advantage on one side or the other. The gusting that occurred appeared to be felt by both. Over 90% of the shots that were made by truly the hot shooters during this time were in the 8 ring or better. The 7’s were very infrequent. The 6’s were rare and anything less than that was a matter of poor shot execution during the windy periods. 

I watched Miranda, Jenny, Khatuna, Jacob, Jake and Brady shoot their rounds and at times there is no question they could be the best. However, their mental approach is weak. This is not to criticize but to show where they could excel and be far better than anyone if they so choose. When Miranda shot her first round, there was nobody who could have beaten her. Unfortunately, what happens next is an education in dealing with the mind. The doubt, the tension created, the lack of fluid motion, the timing change thus the wind magnified those issues and what normally could have been either a 10 or 9 during a calm event was turned into 8’s, 7’s and less. Jacob proved a similar action as to Miranda. Starting out exceptionally well and then started to tighten up. Please do not misunderstand what I am saying. I believe in these archers and think they can be a dominant force in 4 years if they choose to learn from what they experienced at these Games. Their form and equipment is fine, but the mental aspect is still weak. I watched Jake shoot some excellent shots and he had the round without question, then all of a sudden things changed on a dime - mental. Brady shot unbelievable but could not shoot the 10’s he usually shoots. As a matter of fact, I found Brady to be the most capable of all, but when he tightened up just a little his shots became 9’s instead of 10’s, his 8’s instead of 9’s. Although it could have been a lot worse, he really shot well. He just needs to work a bit more on that mental game. Jenny struggled on the first round and I thought just maybe that would be in her favor for the next round, but she could not get going on the second round either. I read some of her comments before the Games started and thought maybe she would be able to break out of her lack of confidence but it is still there. Khatuna proved to be the strongest mentally. Her years of slowly working herself up the ladder is amazing and if she continues to work on the mental game and her drive and health is still there, she will be a challenge in 2016.

We all agree that the mental game is extremely important. But before it can be perfected the physical form and equipment must be in top shape as well. The mental game is not a cookie cutter system but a system that requires to be a match for the archer. There are archers who need stern and somber approaches while others need a happy relaxed state of mind. The perfect example was to watch the Gold medal match between the Ki Bo Bae and Roman and their coaches. Ki Bo Bae and her coach were all serious and virtually no time did you see much “happiness” going on, it was all determination but more of an attitude and it worked very well for her. Notice the other side where the Korean coach and the Mexican archer Roman. It also was noticeable during the bronze medal match between Khatuna and Avitia. These two Mexican archers turned around to see a smiling coach and one who got them to smile and laugh. This is a form of mental exercise and it worked exceptionally well for them. After all, who would have thought that Mexico would take the Silver and Bronze? Finding the right mental approach requires a sport psychologist and then a program that will require the diligence like physical training. The mind is no different than the body. It requires training. It is not developed over night. It takes time and patience. Some are born with it, but most are not. You have to develop the mind just like the body and then you will really see some results. You are only as strong as your weakest link. There are three links in archery; form, equipment and mental. You need all three to be at their best to be a Gold Medal winner.

The Mexican Archery Federation can be proud of what they accomplished and will probably become a stronger force in the future. The US can do the same but the mental game has to become more important for these archers to step up to the level of champions. The form is there and the equipment is there. 

Again, I want to emphasize that I am not criticizing the US archers. I see so much talent and potential greatness in them, but it still must come from them, not from us. They have the tools to be the best. They just need to find a good strong mental program that works for them as individuals. America is not a culture that is simple, thus a mental program for each individual archer must be found to fit that particular archer’s personality.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Rick, thanks for having the guts to post this. 

I could not possibly agree with you more. I've long said that greatest difference between Brady and everyone else is that he has the best mental game in the U.S. right now. That's almost always what it comes down to. In 2004, I was certainly not the best of the "rest" of the archers trying out for the team, but mentally I had many advantages which is why I was able to do what I did. 

And as someone who has "stood in their shoes" and experienced the same things, you are spot on. Fortunately, this men's team had the training, talent and skill to overcome the mental demons one match further than we did in 2004. We very nearly did, but our collective archery skill was not on their level, which is why we came up just short. 

Since you 'put yourself out there' by offering a candid and personal assessment of these archers Rick, I'd like to ask you this question. How do you feel you would have done in head-to-head single elimination matchplay? Perhaps you did have that opportunity, but I don't recall. I believe most of your Olympic experience was fita, grand fita, or the like, right? Do you believe you would have had the mental game to make it through all the matches? (not trying to "call you out, mind you. Just askin'...)

I'll take this opportunity to note this - that when you look at what Vic Wunderle, and to some extent Jenny Nichols have accomplished in matchplay, it's nothing short of amazing. Vic has ALWAYS far exceeded his ranking in matchplay, toppling archers who should have easily beaten him, and finishing in the top 10 of every Olympic individual event he entered. To me, that is what made him so special.

This should be a "WAKE UP" call to our high performance program, that it's not enough to have a great archery coach. We must also make sure we have the best mental coaches and mental training programs too. Archery is a three legged stool. Technique (coaching), 
Physical preparation, and Mental strength. They all three must be equally strong.

Last night, at my JOAD practice, we all talked about the Olympic coverage. Every single one of my archers had followed the matches. I stressed to them that the single thing that seperated the winners from the losers was mental strength. I told them they would be hearing this from me over, and over, and over again. And we regularly shoot head to head matchplay in my club as well as other "games" to raise the stress level. I also have a "traveling award" I hand out to the winner of the matchplay or games to make it mean something. Last night, the final 3 arrows that each archer shot were shot with the entire club and parents on either side of them cheering and yelling as loud as they could. The archer had to stand there alone and shoot three good shots, while I stood behind them and counted down from 10. The archers loved it. Coaches that are only teaching technique are IMO failing their students.

John


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

Rick,

Your message above is spot on. When you see a shooter who normally executes in under 5 seconds from "go" take up to 18 seconds, 12 or more of which is spent at full draw, that's not the wind. It's the mind.

I hope your observations help dispel this nonsense about this having been some sort of "wind lottery". Cream rises to the top.


----------



## Scott.Barrett (Oct 26, 2008)

Subscribed....


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Watching the Mexican team, it made me wonder what kind of mental training they received. Or if it's just yet another example of how soft Americans have become compared to the developing nations...

Also makes me wonder if the Korean women have always been mentally tougher than the men because they come from a male-dominated society. 

The pattern being, the easier you have it growing up, the weaker your mental game.

On a side note - you gotta love AT. Rick can post that here and it is respected and read objectively for what it is.

I can't even imagine how roasted a newbie would be if they wrote the exact same words... ha, ha. 

John


----------



## Scott.Barrett (Oct 26, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> On a side note - you gotta love AT. Rick can post that here and it is respected and read objectively for what it is.
> 
> I can't even imagine how roasted a newbie would be if they wrote the exact same words... ha, ha.
> 
> John


The respect for "been there, done that"....heck, I still think the wind had something to do with it, but he and George were there....kinda knocks any of my doubts out of the park!


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

Scott.Barrett said:


> The respect for "been there, done that"....heck, I still think the wind had something to do with it, but he and George were there....kinda knocks any of my doubts out of the park!


Well, actually, only one of was was there- the other was in a studio in NYC. But the points are just as valid.


----------



## Scott.Barrett (Oct 26, 2008)

>--gt--> said:


> Well, actually, only one of was was there- the other was in a studio in NYC. But the points are just as valid.



Close enough for me!


----------



## Scott.Barrett (Oct 26, 2008)

Gents,

Given all the comments on the wind, would the events have been better or worse if held indoors? 

And, did you think that the US Team practicing indoors while the other teams practiced outside had an effect on the outcome?


----------



## edgerat (Dec 14, 2011)

As I understand it, the US team only practiced indoors a few times during the run-up to the Games, most of the time they were outside. My gut tells me the US archers have shot outside just as much as any other country but, it plainly came down to the mental game. From my competitive experience in other sports, it is "easy" to blame the wind and not yourself. The problem here, when other people are shooting gold and you are not and you are shooting the same condition, you just aren't reading the conditions as well as your competitors. I watched both Jacob and Jake with big yips in on of the team matches and when that kind of stuff is happening it gets into your head. Brady is an exceptional archer, no doubt about that for me but, I feel like he peaked last fall during the World Cups. Peaked in a cyclic sense, not in terms of his career. He has had the pressure of being world #1 for a long time and that has to wear on you. You have all the pressure of the sport on your back every single time you are behind the string. It is easy for me to couch speculate, this is just something i picked up on watching the World Cup, I may be completely off but, I think the mental pressure of it all got to Brady and the rest of the team. I was too chicken to post this prior to the Games, I am glad that Mr. McKinney had the guts to post this so I could look like I knew this all along  
Great post!


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Since you 'put yourself out there' by offering a candid and personal assessment of these archers Rick, I'd like to ask you this question. How do you feel you would have done in head-to-head single elimination matchplay? Perhaps you did have that opportunity, but I don't recall. I believe most of your Olympic experience was fita, grand fita, or the like, right? Do you believe you would have had the mental game to make it through all the matches? (not trying to "call you out, mind you. Just askin'...)
> John


John. 

That’s a good question. I can only speculate but it really depends. For 15 years, all I ever focused on were double FITA’s. They changed the game on us in 1986 right after I had won my 3rd World Individual Title. Learning the Grand FITA took time and I felt I was progressing well and finished 6th at the 1988 Olympics in the Grand Fita. I figured that in 1992 I should or at least be capable of medaling. Unfortunately, FITA changed the round again. Recognize I was used to winning and used to pacing myself over 288 arrows. During the Grand Fita era, we shot 36 arrows total with 9 arrows at each distance. All of a sudden I had to be a different person again shooting either 18 arrows or 12 arrows at one distance to determine who moved on. The new archery generation focuses on what it takes to win and that is the set-match play, now. IF, I only knew the set-match play I feel I could have been competitive. I felt that my mental game was above most archers and had the mental strength to take on anything during my glory years. After all, at the 1979 World Championships, Darrell and I were only separated by 3 points for 1st and 2nd (we were tied with 3 arrows to go). In 1981, 2 points for 1st through 4th separated Kyosti Lassonnen, Darrel, Vladimir Escheev and myself. In 1983, Darrell and I tied and I won by x count. Thus, I believe I would have had the mental toughness that it required if the round were different. Darrell would have been just as difficult to beat as well. He had a mental gift that was truly amazing to watch. It wasn’t fun going against him but he sure set the bar to a much higher level, which helped me grow to a higher level as well. I am not saying we could be competitive today, we can’t but if the rounds were different yesterday I am very confident that the results would have been similar. 

John, you can ask Vic how I shot the elimination rounds. ☺ 

A note on the Mexican team. Their form was the best on the field from what I like in technique. Not saying it fits everyone, but their technique fits the most classic and bone structured form you can ever ask for, men and women.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

If it was held indoors, I think it would take a lot away from the event. As a fan, I would lose interest. I think most fans would. Archery is an outdoor event in most people's minds. 

As for the other, I think Rick summed it up.

John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Thanks Rick. 



> A note on the Mexican team. Their form was the best on the field from what I like in technique. Not saying it fits everyone, but their technique fits the most classic and bone structured form you can ever ask for, men and women.


And agreed. I also don't recall seeing the Mexican team memebers ever seem to struggle with their draw weight. Mighta been form, mighta been nerves, or mighta been they were just shooting the weight they could easily control under pressure.

John


----------



## TheOldNewbie (Mar 31, 2012)

limbwalker said:


> And agreed. I also don't recall seeing the Mexican team memebers ever seem to struggle with their draw weight. Mighta been form, mighta been nerves, or mighta been they were just shooting the weight they could easily control under pressure.
> 
> John


So do you think that the USA archers might have been overbowed, as a couple of people speculated in another thread? Could they have increased their normal DW to try to compensate for the wind?


----------



## Moebow (Jul 8, 2010)

John and Rick, Thank you for posting this discussion!! I am an absolute rookie to the higher levels of coaching and have no experience at these (rarefied) levels. But even for my very low experience level, I could see the slow loss of concentration and confidence in our shooters. I think I could see it not only in their faces but in a slow (and slight) break down in form. Longer and longer hold times, inconsistent rhythm, loss of release smoothness,etc.

I have all the respect in the world for our 6 archers and am NOT criticizing, rather, I am using what I saw as a graphic learning experience for me and as a motivator to learn more about the "mental game." I for one have "talked" the game but this was the first time I really saw the effects of it. Perhaps my recent study of archery coaching made it more visible to me and I actually comprehended what I had been seeing all along and just didn't recognize.

thanks again!

Arne


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Hey, don't thank me. Rick's the one with the cajones to post his "unedited" assessment. 



> Perhaps my recent study of archery coaching made it more visible to me and I actually comprehended what I had been seeing all along and just didn't recognize.


Probably so.



> So do you think that the USA archers might have been overbowed


Some of them. Not all of them. And I say this not because of what I saw on the Olympic coverage, but because of what I saw in person, shooting against me in matches at the trials, in a much, much less stressful situation.

John


----------



## HikerDave (Jan 1, 2011)

limbwalker said:


> Watching the Mexican team, it made me wonder what kind of mental training they received. Or if it's just yet another example of how soft Americans have become compared to the developing nations...
> 
> Also makes me wonder if the Korean women have always been mentally tougher than the men because they come from a male-dominated society.
> 
> ...


I think that in general Mexicans are mentally tough.

I learned this while playing soccer for many years with several of these guys. And I remember going on a wilderness rafting trip down the Selway river with my Brother and his Mexican wife. About halfway through the trip, she almost fell out of their raft in Wolf Creek Rapids. My brother let go of his oar and hauled her in and then kept right on paddling. Talking about that afterwards, I learned that horror of horrors, she couldn't swim. Her comment was that "If God wants me, I die."

I think that mental toughness comes from their fatalistic culture. They don't take it so personally when they win or lose.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

You mean, it's not "all about them" then?


----------



## Old Newbie (Apr 14, 2011)

No matter what, Rick McKinney and John Magera just posted some stuff that would have cost me lots in dollars and time. Thank you both 'cause I gotta tell ya, shooting today was really hard and this dialogue was right on time.

All the best!


----------



## Old Newbie (Apr 14, 2011)

I'm a newbie and REALLY darn near 50. You can roast me if you want but... Hiker Dave, while I appreciate where you were going with that post, that was a weird comment. Kinda Archie Bunkerish, actually. I don't mean to be rude but it's a disservice to the athletes and the coach that worked on the Mexican team's mental game to get them to as far as they've gone, not their sometimes turbulent history.

Larry Bird can beat me in basketball and I can kick his butt shooting at 90 meters and playing speed metal. I'm just sayin'.


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

The entire Mexican team spent a few weeks training at the indoor and outdoor range that Matt trains at in Long beach California. They were preparing for the last world cup. We witnessed their training program, at least what they do to prepair for a big event. We were both very impressed. Matt has spent a lot of time at the OTC and he said he had never seen our shooters train like the mexican team. They looked like a team. Everyone, even the coaches exercised together. From what I have seen from both programs, they make our program look easy. Matt said they made the RA's look Lazy.

The mexican team would train from 7:30am until about 1pm. Only short breaks for snacks. It wasn't so much the time but what they did. After an afternoon break they would arrive at our indoor range and blank bale for hours. All standing side by side. Matt had become friends with Juan Rene Serano traveling and competing in south America. I got to chat with him over these couple weeks, what a awesome young man. Every time we talked I asked how many arrows today. He would show me his counter and it was always near or over 800 and he was still shooting. One day he said they had to shoot 1000. This was not a 1000 arrow challenge, it was just a matter of fact and seemed like no big deal. 

The Mexican team impressed every person at our range. All of them were so nice and polite, and very hard workers. They all showed a great appreciation to be able to use our facility. I am glad I got to meet and talk with these young people. 

They did well because they work hard. Talk about sacrifice, we still have some things to learn. 

Gary


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Everyone, even the coaches exercised together


What a concept...



> From what I have seen from both programs, they make our program look easy


Our program makes our program look easy.

If you shoot full time, and that is your job, 1000 arrows in a day should not be a big deal. That's only 100 arrows/hour, for 10 hours. If you're not scoring, that's 2-3x easier than if you are. I used to shoot 250-300 arrows in an evening. After I had gotten up to go to work at 7:30 in the morning, come home, taken my kids to soccer and baseball practice, I'd shoot 100-150 arrows while they were at practice, then I'd pick them up and we'd eat supper and I'd shoot another 100-150. And those were scored arrows, not 10' blank bale. Again, big difference. 

Still had time for a beer and an episode of "Millionaire" afterwards IIRC. 



> Talk about sacrifice


Oh no he di'ant... ha, ha


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Oh no he di'ant... ha, ha


John, I laughed out loud. 

The Mexican team, ran to the target, did burpies, or pushups, or sitt ups between ends. I got tired just watching. 

I watched an RA ride a bike down to the target to get arrows when I was there to pick up Matt one time. A different mindset I guess. 

Whatever works for you. Just sayin. 

Gary


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Gary, although their shooting did the talking for them, any chance they were putting on a show for the Americans?


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Gary, although their shooting did the talking for them, any chance they were putting on a show for the Americans?


I didn't get that. I was only there a couple of times. Janet Dykmen was there every day and she said what I saw was every day. She told me she was very impressed with how hard they work and how they treated each other. Very respectful. Especially how the men treated the women.

Matt spent more time with them shooting blank than at the park. It was great having them around. I don't know why, it was just different. It was good. 

Gary


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Getting back to Rick's observations, as one who's been in the situation, I will have to say that sometimes a bad result is nothing more than a well shot arrow that was aimed poorly. And nobody, not even someone behind them watching arrows, can know that. So, like the Koreans said in their interview regarding their match vs. the U.S., sometimes your opponent just figures out the wind sooner than you. 

I can tell you that in Athens, during the afternoon of the team round, it was pretty hard to know exactly where to aim. We had the "two wind socks pointing at one another" situation there as well. It's not like a ranking round or fita round where you get 20 or 30 shots to figure it out either. 

So while I saw more severe double-clutches in London than I ever recall in Athens, there are other reasons an arrow doesn't find the 10 ring. So long as we're shooting outdoors, there will always be "guessed right, read it right, or got lucky" 10's, and perfectly executed, poorly aimed 8's.

John


----------



## dramnara (Aug 26, 2008)

John, I'd like to chime in here in the Mexican team in terms of attitude and preparation. I saw them at the qualifier in Medellin in April and their approach as well as their coaches approach was one of building confidence under pressure. I saw a lot of tears and not just from the girls and I also saw teammates and Korean coaches rallying around each other in support. Their fitness levels were not to be questioned. Every shot made by the participants had others around them saying "fuerte!" or "strong" with other words of encouragement. 

I have not been around the American team so I can't comment on their camaraderie. 

I can also say that Aida Roman and Mariana Avitia were not considered the number one int the Team. I saw Alejandra Valencia beat both of them at the qualifier and saw them both reduced to tears and virtually inconsolable. Alejandra did not place in London, but the other two did. I will share some video of Aida at practice in Medellin with you when I come by next. 

The desire to win when you're the underdog is strong. You know my goals, and I know there are a lot of challenges to overcome in order to achieve them and still be a good father, husband and employee. I just think that Mexico is a force because that desire is there to make something better for themselves. Growing up on a little island, all I ever wanted was a different life and opportunities that I saw Americans have. Now I am here ar relishing every moment. 

My pennies added....


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

...after just finishing reading all of the posts here i am again amazed at the uncanny resemblances in discipline and recent results between the sports of archery and golf----my 2 favorite sports!!

in the past several weeks we have seen more "chokes" in golf from the leaders in the closing stages of a tournament than i can remember for a long time..

...ALL the golf losers have been gracious and showed a lot of class when interviewed right after their sorry endings...

....i can only presume the archery guys and gals also were as i haven't seen any of the post event interviews..


----------



## rossing6 (Jun 7, 2008)

Thanks for sharing once again...great insights. Myself, I'm the guy who has to work twice as hard to be half as good a shooter as everybody else, and I've probably mentally choked more times than all of you put together, but I'll always keep trying and working towards a good solution. This is a great sport and you guys keep it all in perspective. 

Hats off to you...Ryan


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

So, mental toughness, the mental game, so what is it? I'd like to hear exactly what Rick and John are talking about. Is it just the ability not to choke? The ability to stay focused regardless of what is happening around you? The ability to make yourself hit the practice butts daily? The ability to focus on the next shot and forget the last errant shot? 

With those questions in mind, just how does one train for "mental toughness". You can't do pushup to get mentally tough, pull ups won't work, is it just putting yourself in tons of competitive situations...."I think Brady said from 2008 on Coach Lee and him planned on doing just that...shoot everything possible for four years".

Is there a book to teach mental toughness. Or is it just something all the champions have naturally along with a strong desire to win?

Did the US mens team choke? 

It's a good thing to be respectfully critical, but another to actually offer solutions for the criticism. I'd like to hear from "those that have been there" what their perception of mental toughness is. 

Excellent post up above. It's always the best to hear from those who have faced the fire. Thank you, Rick, especially for stepping up. 

Art


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Art, for me it's the ability to not let the moment overwhelm you. To keep things in perspective.

When I went through federal law enforcement training, we spent a lot of time training to avoid "tunnel vision" and not let the moment get to us. In other words, "detach" yourself from what's going on around you - even if everone else is going nuts - and just do your job. Nothing more, nothing less.

Perspective can come from many places. As you say - putting yourself in tons of competitive situations - that will help. But what is it you're learning from that? That no matter what happens, the sun will rise in the morning, and you'll still be able to string up your bow and shoot again. 

Perspective for me came in the form of a troubled childhood, working my way through college, having been married and raising 3 kids for years before I started competing in the sport of archery. In other words, "real life." Many of our young athletes lack this "real life" experience (although some are more than willing to tell you how much "life experience" they think they have!). I think Rick can relate to that as well. And probably Darrell too. No silver spoons, daddy's credit cards, or cushy training centers there.

Finally, it just simply cannot mean that much to you whether you win or lose. If you build it up in your mind that it's who you are, then you're headed for a fall. Your self-image cannot get in the middle of your competitive goals.

Books? There are several out there and Lanny Bassham's book is probably the most often applied to archery. 

Did the men's team choke? I don't think so. I think they just had an emotional dump after beating the Koreans (who wouldn't in that situation?) and didn't have much left for the Gold medal match. We've all seen that many times before in other sports. It's hard to stay up for the next match after you just won the "big one." Makes me wonder what would have happened in '96 if the U.S. team had faced Korea in the Semi-finals instead of the gold medal match. But then, this is why you don't rank 4th - so you don't have to deal with that question...

Anyway, it's a tough one to be sure. Archery is such a mental game. And yet, talented archers generally avoid situations that would help them develop some mental toughness. I'm not sure why this is.

John


----------



## [W.S.Z] (Aug 6, 2012)

_I use rather vague terms in this post, I'm aware of that, but I wanted to keep it as readable as possible. If you are the scientific type and want a more scientific framework of what I call doing things without thinking or with thinking, please look up this great paper by Bernhard Hommel called "Action control according to TEC (theory of event coding), published in 2009 in the journal Psychological Research (volume 73, page 512-526). You can find the pdf on his website, which I'm sure you can find (I can't mention it due to the 'spam rating' on this board). Action control without thinking vaguely refers to 'online processing', with thinking refers to 'offline processing'._

Mental toughness seems to be a popular term in the USA, observing the development of this thread. However, it's an empty term unless you define it properly. It's one of those terms of which everyone caries a vague idea of meaning, but almost no one can explain exactly what it means and how it impacts action control. For me, the term is rather vague and useless, the only thing that matters is our ability to execute a certain set of movements at the appropriate time, in this case shooting an arrow at the Olympic shooting line.

At the end of the day, the only thing that really matters in archery is the vector (direction and velocity) in which your arrow leaves your bow, no matter how you achieve that within the boundary of the Olympic rules. To do so, we need a brain trained on certain (high) level to work with a specific piece of equipment, a body holding an Olympic recurve bow. Let us call the product of such a training an action program stored somewhere in our brain. So, why is so hard to perform (i.e. execute) such a heavily trained program in the moment of truth, at the shooting line of the Olympic event (or any other important tournament, for that matter)?

I think part of it lies within two beautiful features of our cognitive system: flexibility and ingenuity. Flexibility, in this case, is our remarkable ability to perform actions in different circumstances. We never perform actions in exactly the same situation and our system is flexible enough to deal with it, without giving us reason to pause and think. Imagine drinking a glass of beer at your favorite spot in your favorite bar: The glass is never exactly in the same spot, the weight varies heavily as you drink and your body position in relation to the glass is different almost every time you want to take a sip. Yet, remarkably, our brain almost always computes a fail-proof way to get the glass to our lips, unless we're drunk and mess-up, that is. We do not really have to think about it, most of our actions are automatically tailored to situational demands at hand. 

It's an incredible feat, if you come to think of it. Much of the early robotic machinery in plants had great difficulty in dealing with slight variations, resulting, for instance, in bad welding at the wrong spots. These days they have a powerful sensory system and a powerful CPU to compute and guide the robotic arms to the appropriate positions. Within archery, this ability is very important: Even shooting from a different lane on the same range causes (slightly) different situational factors. Imagine the floor being slightly irregular, crowding at the adjacent lanes causing you to get your arrows differently out of your quiver, a minute difference in the angle of your stabilization requiring slightly different muscle coordination. These variations can be dealt with easily when the action is well-trained. 

But every now and then something extraordinary happens that cannot be handled automatically on-line, delayless. The robotics in the plant can handle variation, but if they encounter something very different, a mishap from an earlier step for instance, it might not be doable within their current workflow. Most machines now do something different: They sound an alarm to get an employee to come and see, using the employee's ingenuity to find a solution to the variation. They break up the online processing so that the system (the factory in total) can do some off-line processing. Our brains also do something like that. Most of us can drive pretty automatically, barely noticing what we are doing and often amazed by the lack of attention we gave to it the minutes prior (I sometimes have those A-ha!-moments in which it amazes me with the amount of apparent non-attention you can drive down a road), until something unexpected happens. It might be police siren, some driver doing something stupid or dangerous, a kid running along the road, but whatever it is, it gets your attention and you can modify the actions you're taking. 

However, that attention may hamper performance. If you've never driven a stick car and try it for the first time, by giving attention to previously unattentive actions, you may actually do it slightly worse as you're breaking up they well-learned movement pattern or action program. (This happens a lot in cornering: When driving stick, you have to shift just before cornering a tight corner and again coming out of it, while you are able to corner perfectly, trying to insert these extra actions in the normal cornering routine may cause mishaps like wide cornering or hitting the curves on the inside. Another common thing for inexperienced highway drivers is releasing the speed pedal while going to overtake lane, causing a dangerous slowdown on the otherwise fastest lane.)

During archery at the olympics, nothing should be different. The same action pattern as always, aiming the arrow calculation the winds, performing a good release, etc., should be performed, but due to the exceptional situation, YOU'RE AT THE OLYMPICS, your normal pattern is disrupted by offline processing. I should remember this, oh, man! Clear your head!, I really have to nail this next shot, so I better focus on all the important parts of my shooting (causing the normal automatic program to be interrupted), etc. Your cognitive system is invoking its off-line ingenuity recourse while they are not required, actually hampering performance! Some people are more susceptible to this, having a lower threshold to invoke those off-line resources during stressful moments (stress might just be a reaction to get the body ready to react to the current situation). Some, including maybe Rick van der Ven, have higher thresholds, helping them to maintain their normal shot routine, even in an Olympic quarter-finale. (The semi-finale seemed to be a little too much pressure, although he still shot brilliantly, like in the whole tournament except the first qualifying arrows.)

So, how can you train this? A lot of mental training focuses on clearing your mind. You're at the Olympics, standing at the waiting line, your head is exploding with thoughts and focus points, but luckily you've been trained in trying to get it out of your head. To just regress to doing what you always do, without much thought. This can be very helpful, if employed correctly (that's why some Asian trainers are so focused on meditation and/or spirituality [prayer might just be a form of mediation]). But often, it's even better to not have these disrupting cognitions/thoughts in the first place, to leave your off-line system at home and just do what you always do. A lot of people claim this requires 'experience'. And I think it does, but not in the sense of being old.

You have to try and make the Olympics stage a less different place to what you're used to, including the unique tension atmosphere, thus less likely to invoke off-line processing normally used for very different situations. This means getting used to the knock-out system, the great archer posting above also mentioned the switch from being a fully double FITA-trained archer to suddenly shooting knock-outs, the stress, the environment (two archers up in an Olympic set-up), etc. Ideally, shooting at the Olympics should just be 'another day at the office'. _The situation in which you're shooting at an Olympic-style tournament should be a situation frequently employed during training sessions_. Just shooting arrows and fine-tuning your technique is not good enough, as some people claim (they say, at the Olympics you just have to shoot like during training, it's the same action), but you have the get the whole routine, including stressful knock-out rounds, into one big action plan. And a good trainer has to know how to design a training program to do that (so it has to include regular tournament style matches). And, still then, not everyone is as talented to learn that, as not everyone is as talented to learn an archery shooting routine.


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

easier said---or "read" referring to the previous post--than done!!


----------



## [W.S.Z] (Aug 6, 2012)

jmvargas said:


> easier said---or "read" referring to the previous post--than done!!


Oh, that's so true. But, some people just seem to think: Just clear your head, just snap out of it. But that takes training, and that training is a form of art. And you'd be amazed how often these things are overlooked in training programs everywhere, not just in sports. Imagine controllers in large industries not trained to work under pressure, like during an emergency. Or, getting out of a stall during flight while actually experiencing stall (massive g-forces on the pilots). It's quite saddening to see trained pilots make wrong decisions (like attempting a pull up during stall) they would not make in a more peaceful simulator. That's why they developed a new simulator that more closely simulates the conditions and g-forces during stall.

A good trainer in archery needs to find a way to get his training as close as possible to the actual tournament situation, and that's hard as hell. This counts for all levels of competition, even beginner's level, where the situation is a lot different from a knock-out Olympic round. The Dutch Olympic swimmers, like the female 50m and 100m freestyle winner Ranomi Kromowidjojo, tried to simulate the actual Olympic event, with race sequences and break durations, at a large tournament in the Netherlands a year ago to get used the situational factors. But that is just once, imagine how often they tried the routine during training! You'll never get it to the level of Olympic pressure, 4 years of training!, but you should employ any trick you've got up your sleeve as a trainer to get as close as possible.


----------



## DrSveegy (Feb 15, 2009)

*Peaking, Expectations & Distractions*

Another great thread with many excellent posts/points.

I can't help but wonder, at least in the Men's case, if perhaps they just peaked too early. Or maybe more accurately, that their collective emotional energy was spent in the team semi-finals against Korea. As much as we might try to take emotions out of the equation, in the end, we're not machines, thankfully. I think rather than removing emotions, successful athletes seem to harness that energy and use it to better focus on the task at hand. Many times, once that energy is spent, it's hard to get it back; or at least it's hard to focus it in the right direction. Gabby Douglas is a good case in point. After winning gold in the team and all-around events, her performances in the individual events appeared very unfocused. Certainly there was more pressure in the earlier events, so I don't think it was a matter of choking. She just lost her edge in my opinion. Did the archers lose theirs in the individual matches? Maybe.

I also think that representing the US, especially when there's some expectation of success, is a whole 'nother level of pressure. One goes from relative obscurity to the spotlight virtually overnight. At times I suspect that spotlight feels more like the heat of a sun driven magnigying glass and you're the ant. It burns.

And finally, with expected success comes distractions. Whether they be from Kellogs, promo videos or endless interviews. I have to believe that not only messes up your routine, but it can play tricks on your mind, too.

I think we have this idealized notion of mental toughness. But it's extremely rare, if it really exists at all (at that idealized level). Even athletes at the very highest level, like Tiger, Kobe, Brady, etc, have crashed and burned at various times. Afterall, there is another person/team lined up against you. And sometimes, you just get beat.

-Dave


----------



## [W.S.Z] (Aug 6, 2012)

DrSveegy said:


> Another great thread with many excellent posts/points.
> 
> I can't help but wonder, at least in the Men's case, if perhaps they just peaked too early. Or maybe more accurately, that their collective emotional energy was spent in the team semi-finals against Korea. As much as we might try to take emotions out of the equation, in the end, we're not machines, thankfully.


I think one of the biggest mistakes to make is letting emotions stay out of the equation. But acknowledging we have emotions does not say we're not machines, just that emotion play a very important role in our cognitive system. One of the flaws of some earlier materialists in cognitive science is to ignore emotion while trying to focus 'pure' things like 'higher intelligence' and 'logical decision-making'. Humans are not logical decision makers: More often than not, decisions are based on emotions and the current cognitive state (which might constitute an emotion, we don't know) of the cognitive system. There are some great theories out that try to explain the role of emotion, and the working of emotions, as part of our cognitive system. Emotion is not unexplainable or impossible to place in a cognitive system and certainly not negligible in something like action control.


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

Thanks for that W.S.Z. There's a lot to digest there. Both your post and Limbwalkers preceding it are completely 'in-line' () with what I've been reading of Sports Psychology. 

Each author has points they focus on and explain particularly well. There's so many different facets of the mental game to conquer. 

Sometimes it's hard to combine what you're reading from two/three different expert authors into one volume of truth that doesn't contradict itself.

The more points of view I read, the more the main points are made clarified. The emphasis of those points as being important is useful for a student as it highlights which ones to prioritise for practice. 

My thanks to the those with expertise who are contributing to this thread, it's already a great one.


----------



## DrSveegy (Feb 15, 2009)

[W.S.Z] said:


> ...Emotion is not unexplainable or impossible to place in a cognitive system and certainly not negligible in something like action control.


Agreed. However, I would argue that given our current level of understanding, coupled with the uber complexity of an almost infinite number of variables, it's easier said than done. And does it become similar to quantum physics where simply the fact that you're observing something changes the outcome? In other words, does emotional management change the dynamic such that you then need to manage the fact that you're managing... which becomes an infinite loop.

In the interest of full disclosure, despite my username, I am not a doctor of any kind. So, I claim no expertise in this (or any other) area, other than the fact that I've competed, coached, managed and observed all manner of people on this planet for a very long time. <creak>


----------



## gpb (Feb 14, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> Getting back to Rick's observations, as one who's been in the situation, I will have to say that sometimes a bad result is nothing more than a well shot arrow that was aimed poorly. And nobody, not even someone behind them watching arrows, can know that. So, like the Koreans said in their interview regarding their match vs. the U.S., sometimes your opponent just figures out the wind sooner than you.
> 
> I can tell you that in Athens, during the afternoon of the team round, it was pretty hard to know exactly where to aim. We had the "two wind socks pointing at one another" situation there as well. It's not like a ranking round or fita round where you get 20 or 30 shots to figure it out either.
> 
> ...


John this is the point I was trying get some answers to in another thread. With that difficult a wind situation, no matter how good your head was screwed on and no matter how well you shot if you didn't quickly figure out where to aim you lost. I think a good example of that was both Im and Brady shooting below their levels in the team round as well as the individual. They just didn't get it figured out. Brady's bewildered look at the end of his individual match said it all. My hat goes off to Jacob Wukie for mental toughness. During the team match against Italy while at full draw Jacobs arm apparently gets pushed by a gust just as his clicker goes off. He flinched slightly, recovered, re-aimed and turned it loose without the clicker. The shot struck a 4 oclock 8. That could have easily ended explosively in a much lower score. My hats off to Jacob for a very cool recovery under a lot of pressure.


----------



## BobCo19-65 (Sep 4, 2009)

Thanks a bunch for your insight Rick!


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

I am enjoying learning from this thread. Wasn't going to say anything and just read but I thought this article by Malcolm Gladwell, "The Art of Failure" was additive to the discussion. He talks about the difference between panic and choking. The solution seems to be train real hard and just before the event, get a lobotomy.

http://www.gladwell.com/2000/2000_08_21_a_choking.htm


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

I have thoroughly enjoyed this discussion, and the erudite theory and analysis of what constitutes mental toughness.

But, as the backdrop of this thread is 'an assessment of the American team in London', it seems to me that the thread's narrative is wandering from some of the existing elements, and insinuating a scenario that doesn't really jibe with reality (at least some facets of it, anyway). To wit: I think it's worth mentioning/reminding that Brady is the #1 ranked archer in the world, in his second Olympics (also Khatuna and Jenny's multiple Olympics). It's not like he's been training in an isolated pasture for 4 years and never seen cameramen before. He's been in a zillion high level, high profile tournaments that also employ the 'knock out format', and more often than not has stared down the opposition and the pressure and emerged victorious (as has Jenny and Khatuna in many years of high level competition). 

I don't intend the above to be some kind of 'end all' point or an 'answer' to the questions discussed here, but think it's a relevant factor, while wondering why the result in this scenario was not the same result experienced in many other very similar scenarios.


----------



## [W.S.Z] (Aug 6, 2012)

lksseven said:


> I have thoroughly enjoyed this discussion, and the erudite theory and analysis of what constitutes mental toughness.
> 
> I don't intend the above to be some kind of 'end all' point or an 'answer' to the questions discussed here, but think it's a relevant factor, while wondering why the result in this scenario was not the same result experienced in many other very similar scenarios.


First of all, I agree with you there. I was mainly talking about the general idea of 'mental toughness' that seems to float around in people's mind. Why he did not perform right here, right now might a really hard question that might not be answerable with the information we have here (unless someone has enough inside information). Even then, it might just have been a random factor. He did shoot a decent first round (1/32) with 29, 28, 25, 29, and his second round started good (29). Then he shot 9 arrows with a lower mean per arrow, 8.444 (25, 25, 26). It might be to much to draw any conclusion from as little as nine arrows. (In his ranking round he scored a 9.39 average.)


----------



## BobCo19-65 (Sep 4, 2009)

Excuse my ignorance, but were the double FITA shot over two days?
Are Grand FITA’s the same as double FITA’s?


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Grand FITA

In World Championships the competition starts with a two-day Single FITA of 144 arrows, see above. The top 24 men and 24 women archers from the Single FITA go on to a third day of competition, with their score going back to zero. The competitors scores are dropped back to zero at each of the Grand FITA rounds so any one archer can't get an insurmountable lead going into the finals. They will shoot 36 arrows with 9 arrows being shot from each of the 4 distances. So the Grand FITA requires each archer to adjust, every 9 arrows, to a new distance and archers will be eliminated during each round of the Grand FITA. 

The top 18 men and women will then move on to what is called the quarter finals and will again shoot a total of 36 arrows. The archers will start with the shortest distance ending with the longest distance. Next will be the semi-finals, which will have the top 12 archers from the quarter-finals competing. The archers will start with the longest distance and end with the shortest distance. Then it is on to the grand finals, which will have the top 8 archers from each sex competing and they will start with the shortest distance, ending with the longest distance.


----------



## hockeyref (Jun 2, 2006)

gpb said:


> limbwalker said:
> 
> 
> > Getting back to Rick's observations, as one who's been in the situation, I will have to say that sometimes a bad result is nothing more than a well shot arrow that was aimed poorly. And nobody, not even someone behind them watching arrows, can know that. So, like the Koreans said in their interview regarding their match vs. the U.S., sometimes your opponent just figures out the wind sooner than you.
> ...


Since we are talking about the wind a bit I don't think I'm hi-jacking the thread too far. I have to ask ... is the coach reading and calling the wind, or is the archer making their own calls based on experience and senses? Since I have a bit of background shooting rifles at distances from 100 to 1000 yards, I have to say that the trajectory of the arrows really resembles the bullet shot at 1000 yards. I see that the coach has a spotting scope, are any of the wind reading techniques crossed over or is this just to look at the target?


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

There are some really good comments and explanations on this thread. W.S.Z. has added a richer flavor to the discussion and hits home in many ways. A couple of things to digest. First: Mental toughness is a similar word or phrase as sacrifice. I think we all have our own definitions to them. Second: finding out what works for each individual archer is something that has to be explored. There are ways to find what will help you but developing a program is key to staying focused on the right things at the right time. Although I can agree that there are times that there are so many variables that it is impossible to figure them all out but yet, the top shooters seem to do this very thing. Did anybody notice the difference in the look on Oh’s face during the Gold Medal match? It was his best focus I had seen compared to all of his other matches. There was no stopping him. His timing and rhythm was superb. The eye contact to the target was excellent. In other words it appeared to me that he was finally in the “zone” and his results were what I would expect from someone who figured out what makes him stay focused during this extremely stressful moment. 

There are several mental training exercises one can learn in order to stay focused. Jay Barrs used reaffirmation techniques, which worked very well for him. He studied it for over two years as if his life depended on it and treated it like his physical training routine. I have always used imagery with lots of self-talk. I spent years working on my mental game so that when it came to pressure I actually thrived on it. Another technique, which I practiced over and over again, is relaxation moments. These techniques took years to master. I practiced on them during my morning runs (30-45 minutes). I worked on them during my shooting sessions (1-3 hours per day). I worked on them when I was waiting in line for business or other times I had to wait. I practiced every night before I went to sleep. It sounds like a lot of time, but if you noticed it was always during a period of time used for something else. The biggest challenge is to figure out what will help you. That is why I have always recommended for people to read Terry Orlick’s “In Pursuit of Excellence”. It doesn’t go into great detail of the different mental programs, it only gives you examples of them and how the athlete used them. There should be something that perks your interest in the book and then you go out and find more information on that particular subject. Or better yet, find a sport psychologist and have them run some tests on you. They should be able to tell you where your weakness’ and strengths are. They can guide you through all of the possibilities of mental training. 

Another thing that has not been discussed yet is strategy. You just can’t get up on the line and shoot a shot time and time again without some sort of strategy. Yes, we all want to put the arrow in the middle but if A happens then use plan B. If B happens use plan C. Each plan needs to be thought out and each possibility needs to be thought out and understood so you know what to do. Someone mentioned Brady’s shrug at the end of the round. That to me was a sign that he was flustered and could not figure out what happened. Also, there is a possibility that when you want something so bad and things do not go your way, your mind becomes vague and you almost go into like a catatonic state or “deer in the headlights” moment. You have to know, you have to correct and attack. I know it sounds easy but yet it isn’t and again, this comes with experience and planned expectations on all possibilities. Your mind should not be focused on the results, it should be focused on feedback and what you plan to do about it for a correction. Once the reason has been decided on of why the arrow went to that place then a plan is formulated on how to correct it. Then you focus on the issue but need to know that at any moment this could change. 

The biggest fault I saw was the slowing down of the archer's shot. Although the wind might have been gusty, it appeared that some archers were able to still keep their timing and shot more consistently than those who fought against the winds and held longer. This creates doubt and the chances for a good clean shot decreases the longer an archer holds from their normal time. It doesn’t mean they can’t shoot a 10 but the chances become less. I have always felt that it’s too bad we get lucky when we hold too long and get away with it, it encourages us to do it again. Then we get the intermittent reward system (sort of like the slots in Vegas). The intermittent rewards system is one of the most dangerous reward systems out there. That is why the archer holds longer than they should. They know it is risky but they got away with it before so why not again. You saw the results. 

DrSveegy-I have a hard time thinking that the archers peaked too soon. They are used to tournaments almost every month and sometimes twice per month. With the US representation as a pressure point, I struggle with that. The athlete may be proud to represent their country but try taking that medal away from them and see how “we” quickly turns to “I” earned that! :angry: There is a possibility that Brady put way too much pressure on himself. The interviews and statements he made upped the level of expectations from those around him and himself. This added a bit of unnecessary pressure on top of the other pressures he was experiencing.

Wind. They all had to face it and deal with it. Yes, there was a possibility that the gust of wind might have caused them to shoot an arrow in the wrong area, but realistically it was rare. The moment of the shot will tell you all you need to know where the archer was aiming. If they aimed correctly, the form was fairly smooth. If their aim was off, their form exploded trying to compensate for the aim. If they aimed good and the drift occurred, most of the time the other archer had a similar shot placement within a point. 

Iksseven. :wink: Just because you are on top of the rankings does not mean you are the best. It just means you went to all the events. Winning the World Championships or the Olympics is preparation completely, not just partly. Winning a world cup match is a good start but still the World and the Olympics requires a bit more mental work.


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

Crossing the fine line between constructive general observation and personal criticism here...


----------



## HikerDave (Jan 1, 2011)

>--gt--> said:


> Crossing the fine line between constructive general observation and personal criticism here...


I am sure that our athletes can maintain their positive self-images in spite of the criticism. Because of the fair and open nature of the trials process, I'm confident that we sent our very best and hope that they feel likewise.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Rick,

I get (and agree with) your point about '#1 ranking' not necessarily being synonymous with 'the best'. And especially if you're referring to the fact that some archers (Koreans, for example) don't attend all of the World/International events (or don't always send their 'A' team), and so the 'best' archers aren't always visible for much of the time.

But I was really thinking less about his #1 ranking and more about my recollection of Brady's high visibility wins in 2011 - Back to back World Cup Final wins. Three in a row World Cup wins. He won all USAA National titles. Bronze at Outdoor Worlds. Gold at Pan Am Games.

My notion was that Brady's body of work at high level/high pressure events and high finishes in those events argues that he isn't unschooled or incapable of 'bringing it' when the pressure comes down. 

Anyway, as I with fascination was reading this thread and the many viewpoints and theories on mental prep, I found myself thinking "yeah, that's what the young Americans need to do" and then stopped and realized that the thread's direction had somehow begun to describe a strawman archer that can drive tacks at the range but is unprepared for cutthroat competition formats and high pressure of visibility/attention - said strawman not being a very accurate representation of the American mens team's experience (certainly not Brady's), and thought if I had to remind myself of that, then maybe it would be worth a comment here.

Please don't take from this comment that I'm arguing with you - that's certainly not the case. Just trying to make clear what prompted me to comment on this subject :darkbeer:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> My hat goes off to Jacob Wukie for mental toughness. During the team match against Italy while at full draw Jacobs arm apparently gets pushed by a gust just as his clicker goes off. He flinched slightly, recovered, re-aimed and turned it loose without the clicker. The shot struck a 4 oclock 8. That could have easily ended explosively in a much lower score. My hats off to Jacob for a very cool recovery under a lot of pressure.


abso-freakin'-loutely. I saw that and was so proud of him. As someone who shot barebow for years, I actually practiced making shots without the clicker at 70M just in case I had to no other choice but to shoot RIGHT NOW. It's not a bad thing to know how to handle, in case you only have 4-5 seconds to shoot an arrow. For me, I just aimed at 1 O'clock in the 8 ring to compensate for the inevitable tiny collapse that comes (for me at least) from not using the clicker. I'm sure Jacob and the other guys have practiced this too. A great lesson for up-and-coming Olympic style archers. Great tool to have in the toolbox, you might say.



> Crossing the fine line between constructive general observation and personal criticism here...


Yea, probably so. I've been careful to watch what I say on this topic, because Lord knows I was the "goat" in Athens. So I know the sting of reading about one shot, out of tens of thousands, and reliving that shot for years. 

The men's team did a fantastic job. They beat - what most people would consider - the #1 ranked team in the world to ensure a medal and I'm so proud and happy for them. They set a goal of medaling in the Olympics, and achieved that goal. The U.S. archers just had - for better or worse - the best result since Sydney, and we should be very, very proud of them all. We sent arguably the best two teams ever (when you combine their talents) to these games. 

I can't wait to congratulate them in person.

John


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Iksseven. Since it appears I have stepped over a line, I can only say that there is more to being a World Champion or Olympic Champion than winning major events. 

As for the archers I have speculated on individually, my intentions were to point out ways to improve their performance and how not to fall into traps with the media. As I have said before, I feel the US archers have great talent. It’s in the above notes. I have said enough.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Rick, you have resume to make those assessments. Those who have only watched from the sidelines, do not.

John


----------



## Jim Colgate (Jun 12, 2012)

Rick, sir thank you so much for your very informative insight, i feel like we just got a ticket to a free olympic world class coaching seminar and the comments and information very interesting. Further, it was so cool to hear you make the calls during the archery events on tv, your commentary brought us into the minds of the archer, and you sounded awesome! 
Thanks,
Jim
:aero:


----------



## davemmevad (Apr 11, 2012)

Jim Colgate said:


> thank you so much for your very informative insight, i feel like we just got a ticket to a free olympic world class coaching seminar :


+1 !!!!!

Rick and John - I learn more reading your insights than I'll ever be able to put into words. Thank you. Dave.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Rick and John - I learn more reading your insights than I'll ever be able to put into words. Thank you. Dave.


Dave, thanks. But when it comes to competitive archery, I hardly deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as Rick. It's just an honor to help. Rick set a great example of "giving back" to the archery community with his book "The Simple Art of Winning." That book was my "coach" and in many ways, still is. If every Olympic archer gave as much back to the sport as Rick has, well, the sport would be far better off for it. 

John


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

....IMHO rick and john are the most respected members here and i hope they will both continue to provide us with their valuable insights, advise and wisdom....

i for one eagerly look forward to all their posts and have not only learned from them but have also been inspired by some...

thank you to you both and may we see you here for many more years to come!!


----------



## Acehero (Nov 2, 2007)

Just out of curiosity, what was different about the Mexicans form compared to say, the US, or the Koreans? I was quite impressed by how relaxed Alverez was shooting with that huge weight on his fingers.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ace, the first time I saw Alvarez shoot, I immediately thought "Brady." Very, very similar form although Alvarez may have a slightly better release. There is no question that he and Serrano shot pretty relaxed too. Not sure if their coach was keeping them loose or what, but it was pretty obvious they were relaxed. 

Serrano has a more traditional form than Alvarez, and his anchor is not something you'll find taught in the NTS at all. But he just plain out-works most other archers.

The Mexican women reminded me of watching the Korean women. Very solid, traditional and repeatable form.

John


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

This may be my silliest post yet, but here it goes.
First, a gold medalist world champion may very well not be the best archer, they were the best archer that chose to compete. There may be some awesome undiscovered grassroot archers that could train and compete and win at that level. Just need to find them.

Secondly, being a military veteran and now a military contractor, the military has a way of training the mental discipline into you. This aslo includes law enforcement people. You learn how to accomplish your goal and stay focused and committed to it, without being distracted. You believe you can defeat your enemy, you train and you do it. No excuses.

Maybe we should send our team members through military boot camp, to toughen them up and improve their mental skills?

Told you it would be................silly.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

First, that kind of applies to every sport, doesn't it?  We don't need to qualify by calling someone the "Champion of all those who chose to show up".

Second, well, forced military training might help a few, but it would certainly scare off more than it helps.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Nope, not silly at all. I can think of plenty of training I received that applies directly to archery. Shooting in stressful situations is a critical skill that LEO's and Military personnel train for, all. the. time. And it is absolutely benficial to archers. I can vouch for that personally.

BY FAR the most important shots I did or did not make were ones that involved the lives of other human beings. Archery, by comparison, is child's play.

Stash, if a challenging training regimen scares them off, then they probably aren't what we're looking for in the first place. There are plenty of events available for recreational archers. I suspect if you looked into the training for the Korean or Chinese women, you'd probably see things that were taken from military exercises.

People quickly forget, or fail to realize, that military science has done some of the foremost studies on human behavior under stressful situations. Why wouldn't we want to use what has been learned there to train athletes? If we need to make it more "P.C." we can just tell them the techniques were developed by a "sports science" organization. What difference would it make?
We're not asking them to go shoot anyone. Just a paper target.

John


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

The silly part is what those that have not been there, done that would think. I work at a Navy base just a couple of miles from the OTC. We train helecopter pilots and SEALS for the SEAL delivery Teams. I guarantee that these guys, trained in archery would be world class shooters. They already are. They have what it takes to take down any opponent.

I can see it now, SEAL archers filling up the podiums.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

Stash said:


> First, that kind of applies to every sport, doesn't it?  We don't need to qualify by calling someone the "Champion of all those who chose to show up".
> 
> Second, well, forced military training might help a few, but it would certainly scare off more than it helps.


The ones that are scared off are part of the wussification of our culture. If your commited to something, than commit. There is a line that is used here by the Marines. "Win your personal battles".


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

target1 said:


> The silly part is what those that have not been there, done that would think. I work at a Navy base just a couple of miles from the OTC. We train helecopter pilots and SEALS for the SEAL delivery Teams. I guarantee that these guys, trained in archery would be world class shooters. They already are. They have what it takes to take down any opponent.
> 
> I can see it now, SEAL archers filling up the podiums.


Sounds reasonable to me. 

I don't know whether the IOC / USOC has created rules against active duty military competing in the Olympic games - IIRC we had some shooters in Athens who were active duty - but it makes perfect sense. Sounds like - if nothing else - part of our OTC schedule should be training alongside the SEALS. If we're going to foot their bill, then I don't think it's unreasonable to ask them to add that to their schedule. Heck, I think most of them would enjoy the opportunity. 

I hate to use Tiger Woods as an example, but many of the "mental game" lessons he learned were through is father, who was retired special forces, and he spent some time training with our military special forces. He had (pre self-induced collapse) the toughest mental game in the sport for a long time.

John


----------



## tkaap (Nov 30, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> Sounds reasonable to me.
> 
> I don't know whether the IOC / USOC has created rules against active duty military competing in the Olympic games - IIRC we had some shooters in Athens who were active duty - but it makes perfect sense. Sounds like - if nothing else - part of our OTC schedule should be training alongside the SEALS.


I know we sent 11 military athletes, I have no idea of their active status.

Vincent Hancock has been particularly successful.

-T


----------



## oldreliable67 (Mar 24, 2003)

What a great thread! 

Many thanks to Rick, John, gt, and all who have contributed! Lots and lots to consider and think about. 

BTW, I vaguely recall reading about the Korean training program: IIRC, it includes physical and mental training with the Korean military.


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

I know USA Shooting uses some current members of the Army Marksmanship Unit as National Team members. So having active duty status is not an issue.

Look up Army World Class Athlete Program and you'll see other Olympians there as well.


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

I do have to bring something up regarding the difference between military and law enforcement mentalities versus mere archery. 

As a former law enforcement trainer, there is a HUGE difference in street level (or even over the wire, outside the Green Zone level) thought processes in mental management versus target archery. There are a lot of things going on that you could draw parallels to, but ultimately, there are differences. 

One of the biggest mantras in law enforcement that is still taught in training across the nation is - make sure to go home to your family at the end of your shift. Like John, I've drawn my service sidearm before. I've run towards gunfire, into burning buildings, and dealt with my share of oddities. At the end of shift, you do what you do to go home, hug your spouse and kids, and move on to the next day.

In both military and law enforcement, you may be put into a situation where your life is lost in an attempt to achieve a (hopefully) higher goal. You do what you can with proper training and preparation (read: wear your ballistic vest! Even in 115 degree heat in Arizona), but ultimately, what you do can be overridden by the deity above. 

Mental training for archery is far different. It's even different than shooting lead flinging devices. Picking on Lanny Bassham's books, you cannot dry fire practice with archery. You can't sit in a dark room with your bow to perfect muscle memory - there are enough differences to where the overall imagery is valid, the method to achieve it is different.

How that difference is achieved - I don't know. But I do know that the fight to win mentality sometimes has to be trained into people. Military and Law Enforcement has this saying: the more you bleed in training, the less you bleed in combat. Training helps. Ultimately it's live or die when you're on the line. 

But.....We're not in traditional, lose your life type of combat in target archery. It will be interesting to see how the mental management evolves over the next 4 years.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I guess I didn't quite follow your argument. You say there are huge differences. There are surely differences. Archery is much safer and easier!  But the "fight to survive" training and learning to keep calm when all hell is breaking loose around you, can apply to both, I think.



> you cannot dry fire practice with archery. You can't sit in a dark room with your bow to perfect muscle memory -


I'm not sure I agree. I can "blank bale" (even in a dark room if I want) and use a formaster to create good muscle memory, which is really no different than dry fire practice. 

I believe our athletes - in every sport - could benefit from the type of training our military and L.E. programs provide.

John


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

limbwalker said:


> Stash, if a challenging training regimen scares them off, then they probably aren't what we're looking for in the first place.


I have no objection to making something like boot camp a strongly suggested option, but to make it mandatory for athletes would in our culture not be received well.

Smacks of the infamous East German training, or if you believe the media, current PRC training.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Mandatory? Only for those that "sign on the dotted line" to be supported by the USOC. Otherwise, they can self-fund and train however they please. At some point, every sponsored program - by definition - must have mandatory training requirements. Not much difference between asking someone to shoot 4 hours / day or asking them to show up at the Navy base and work out with the SEALs. So long as their life is not at risk, I don't see the problem. They agree to a training schedule in exchange for free room and board and a living stipend. Otherwise, train how you please on your own dime and your own time...

When we start allowing funded athletes to choose their own training schedule, we're on a slippery slope to nowhere.

I've reached a point where I really don't worry too much about how things play in popular culture. Our society has become so full of whiners that a swift kick in the pants would do most people a lot of good.

John


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> I guess I didn't quite follow your argument. You say there are huge differences. There are surely differences. Archery is much safer and easier!  But the "fight to survive" training and learning to keep calm when all hell is breaking loose around you, can apply to both, I think.


It can. But ultimately, you're not fighting for your life. I'm sure that in your law enforcement career, you've had some close calls where a lapse or brain fart meant you're on a gurney with docs and nurses hovering over you instead of being at home. I know I have. 



> I'm not sure I agree. I can "blank bale" (even in a dark room if I want) and use a formaster to create good muscle memory, which is really no different than dry fire practice.
> 
> I believe our athletes - in every sport - could benefit from the type of training our military and L.E. programs provide.
> 
> John


Formmaster is nice. Blank bale is nice. I think one of the differences is that you can get more subtle feedback from dry fire trigger practice than you can from a formmaster. Blank bale is likely the closest thing, but some archers can't do that in where they live.

I do agree....putting some people through boot is a mind changer.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Can't blank bale? Where? I can blank bale in a hotel room. Vic has done this for many years. Blank baling is one of the easiest ways to train.



> I'm sure that in your law enforcement career, you've had some close calls where a lapse or brain fart meant you're on a gurney with docs and nurses hovering over you instead of being at home


Uh huh. Worst one I had was a situation where I did have a brain fart and fortunately for me, the perp did too - at the same time. God was watching out for me that day, and I was lucky to make it home... Taught me a lesson, for sure.

In L.E., and in the military, we train, not until we get it right, but until we can't get it wrong. The most stressful situation I was ever in, my mind and body went straight back to my training and I had the situation under control before I really even thought about it. Like autopilot for the brain. 

I think a person can shoot and shoot and shoot all they want. They can even shoot in "big" events over and over again. But unless they are able to train (not necessarily shoot, but train) in a situation that's at LEAST as stressful as the Olympic games, they are subject to the same fate as anyone else... I know you probably do too, but our trainers worked their butts off to wind us up as hot as they could before we took the first step or fired the first shot. The only time we trained under completely calm conditions was when we were learning a new technique. Then it was step, by step, 1000 times to become automatic.

John


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

I'll agree with you on the autopilot. There was one time where I had to override autopilot and in turn, saved me and some other guys from injury.

In a small, unincorporated area, we got a call for a tweaked guy high on something. 

Myself and 3 others show up. Tweaker is throwing people around and evading the deputies. We catch up, and surround the guy.

I take a gamble, and I say to the tweaker that if he could do this with my stun gun, I'd let him go. 

My body armor has a kevlar plate plus stainless steel trauma plate. As a training guy, the steel plate will dissipate the stun gun charge....I've done it many times before.

Everyone else are throwing complaints...I tell them to calm down and pull out my stun gun, and then discharge it into my chest...with the body armor and strike plate underneath the uniform shirt.

The tweaker just sits on the ground, puts his hands behind his head, and we have a zero injury call. ( and yes....this dates the incident a bit. This is before Taser existed)

I will agree with you though. You do train until you don't get it wrong. But there are so many opportunities for LE and Military to do that with a wide variety of simulations. 

On a side note. Coach Lee and I talked about doing simulations of crowd conditions, wind, and announcer simulations to see how the archers would handle things after stage 3 trials. We talked about it as recent as Outdoor Nationals, but never got approval of it for whatever reason, mainly because another female announcer was to be used for certain things. I even have a contact at Port-A-Cool (high flow portable evap coolers for outdoor events) where we could introduce oddball random windflow with "free" rental units. But...I guess I have 4 years to discuss all that with Coach Lee.


----------



## ArcherFletch (Jul 8, 2012)

OK the only thing I didn't like about it was that they never showed the target and the archer in the same shot - they showed the person setting up and shooting from a front-on view, then they showed a close-up view of the target. Why didn't they ever show the archer releasing and the arrow going and hitting the target at once, i don't know. Maybe its because the target would look pretty close in the shot?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Archerfletch, they showed, multiple times, the archer shooting the arrow (from behind) and tracked the arrow all the way to the target. It was great camera work. Sorry you missed it.

And no, the target didn't look close at all. I don't think there is a good way to make a target 70 meters away look "close."

John


----------



## hdracer (Aug 8, 2007)

I don't have anything to add to this discussion but I would like to thank Rick McKinney for his commetary during the shooting. Outstanding job!!!

One question, though. Who picked th music played between shots and did some of the choices seem to affect the archers?? (Under Pressure)


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Probably the guy on the microphone, who obviously has a cryptic, but funny sense of humor...

Yes, Rick did a superb job. 

One thing I like about Rick's commentary is that he was SO positive, all the time. Congratulating archers for reaching that point and describing how hard it was to do what they were doing. His generosity is something we need a lot more of in broadcasting. 

Rowdy Gaines in swimming is the same way. It's a joy to listen to him, just as it is to listen to Rick. They are celebrating the effort, regardless of the outcome - as it should be.

The "analysts" for diving and gymastics can go pack sand as far as I'm concerned. Always so negative, pessimistic and cynical. It drives me nuts. Leads me to believe they are still "wishing" for something they never achieved.

John


----------



## hdracer (Aug 8, 2007)

limbwalker said:


> Probably the guy on the microphone, who obviously has a cryptic, but funny sense of humor...
> 
> Yes, Rick did a superb job.
> 
> ...


Yes, I agree. One that stands out was Brandy Chastain with soccer. Saying something to the effect that the US players were not what the country needed was not called for. I was surprised to hear that. Hope Solo got in trouble for calling her out on it (but appraently that was not something new to her). But it is all moot now that the US women won gold.

BTW, sorry for jakking this in a different direction.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

"The "analysts" for diving and gymastics can go pack sand as far as I'm concerned. Always so negative, pessimistic and cynical."

Totally agree. The announcers should always make part of their mission to help the audience understand how difficult these sports/skills are to execute, and that something done 'well' but not perfectly still merits praise. The announcers do a disservice when they make the merely excellent a 'ho hum' moment.

Heck, the average viewer has no clue how actually difficult it is to even just cleanly fielding a routine grounder at third base and making that long throw across the infield to nab the baserunner. You couldn't pull any random 100 normal people out of the stands at a baseball park and have 4 of them be able to do that more than 2 out of 10 times.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Yes, Rick did a superb job. One thing I like about Rick's commentary is that he was SO positive, all the time. Congratulating archers for reaching that point and describing how hard it was to do what they were doing. His generosity is something we need a lot more of in broadcasting.


I so totally agree. Rick often took the time to explain what was going on from the archer's perspective instead of mindlessly babbling about medal count. As an aspiring competitive archer who needs to remain focused on the process instead of the results, I appreciated this fresh departure from the norm. Thank you, Rick, for your commentary. And thanks to everyone who has contributed to this insightful thread thus far. It has been quite educational and timely.


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

John said, "Finally, it just simply cannot mean that much to you whether you win or lose. If you build it up in your mind that it's who you are, then you're headed for a fall. Your self-image cannot get in the middle of your competitive goals."

Think that's what happened to Brady??


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

Art,
Im not elite in archery but i have a lot of experience in other sports and training high level athletes so im going to comment on your question above.

It MIGHT be what happened to brady but having watched him over the years id say it is very obvious that he has a mental game that is wayyyy up there.

competing is just that; sometimes you win sometimes you lose. everyone gets laid out sometimes. anyone can be beaten. everyone has a chance to win. 

i do think its possible to have a mental attitude that is set at " i am the best. i will not lose. i can not be defeated" and you can still take a loss and move along. lying to yourself is one thing and can be detrimental but im all in favor of blowing some sunshine up your butt especially if you really are on top of things. positive self talk is good if it helps you win. brady has not come in first in every event hes competed in so i doubt its anything new to him. he will probably come back stronger than ever.


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

oh yeah, and AWESOME THREAD by the way. thanks to all!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

ArtV said:


> John said, "Finally, it just simply cannot mean that much to you whether you win or lose. If you build it up in your mind that it's who you are, then you're headed for a fall. Your self-image cannot get in the middle of your competitive goals."
> 
> Think that's what happened to Brady??


Only one person knows the real answer to that. I doesn't really matter what we think because we could only guess. Of the three men who represented us in Archery, Brady easily had the strongest mental game. But both Jake and Jacob came through in clutch moments too. We should be proud of them all. Finishing above your ranking, whether by 2 positions, or 7, is an accomplishment.

Frankly, I'd be more interested in what happened with our women's team. We still have a ways to go on that side of the field as they ranked higher than the men in the ranking round.

John


----------



## Bebe (Mar 18, 2006)

Rick McKinney said:


> ...I believe we do an injustice in stating that it is a game of luck when there is no doubt in my mind that the people who won and medaled deserved to be on that podium...


Rick thanks for your insights into the Olympics I see you observations and comments as beneficial to our USA archery program as well as to us individuals as we set our sights on future goals and competitions.


----------

