# Draw Weight and the Minimalist Attitude



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

I'm fairly new to traditional archery and have been shooting trad bows for 4yrs and have hunted only with a recurve or longbow for 3yrs. I've harvested deer every year just like I did with my compound. I've bowhunted for the last 15yrs so I wouldn't consider myself a newbie. I don't post much but over the past couple years I've seen thread after thread of people just trying to "get by with the minimum" draw weight they can shoot. 
Are most traditional archers elderly?
Are they not in good physical condition?
Do most just shoot paper?


I think people should hunt with what ever poundage they can comfortably shoot but I rarely ever hear of anyone trying to go up in draw weight. Just seems like a minimalist attitude has infected the trad world as opposed to striving for more. I say strive for more cause live animals aren't paper and they move, and arrows don't always go where we are exactly looking. Any chance at getting two holes to one is always better so why not strive or challenge yourself to shoot more weight? Yeah 40lbs will kill a deer but what If???? There's a lot "What Ifs," when shooting at live game.

If your old and can't shoot with much weight or have physical limitations who cares get out there and hunt, but to those that have the ability to shoot a higher draw weight why not challenge yourself?

I'm not trying to be an a** or anything I just want to know why?


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

How much draw weight do you shoot / can comfortably handle?
Just curious.

Rick


----------



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

Hey Rick I shoot about 56lbs at my draw length of 28" real comfortable. My next bow purchase will be of the ilf type so I can get a couple of sets of heavier limbs to work my way up in weight without spending too much money. I would like to be able to comfortably shoot 65lbs which I think should be feasible without sacrificing form and accuracy.

Guess I just think a lot of people sell there self short.
Heck 65lbs is probably light to you and I've seen your videos and you shoot really well.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

What do you consider accurate?

-Grant


----------



## Mo0se (Sep 24, 2002)

Honestly.. in my experiences which include my own, and my own only, I started off with too much draw weight. Why was it too much? It was too much for me because (I was taught that it was a sign of a controlled shot) I hold at anchor for x amount of time. My arms started to quiver and and overwhelming urge to let go of the string soon took control of my shooting. Why do I hold at anchor? because I have to give myself time to get my shot lined up and settled in. I had two things against me..too much draw weight in too short of a bow. I developed snap shooting, a form of target panic in my case. I had to learn the hard way that if you don't control your bow it will dominate you. I would get to my anchor and let go before the shot was even ready. I wondered why I was never consistent. Fortunately I had a good friend, who placed 5th at IBO Traditional World championship last year to help me along. (We've been friends for 10 years) I replaced that heavy draw weight bow with something I could control. Lower weight...it's not a challenge or exciting to miss. 

What if's are not what matter in my world. It's what I can do consistently that matters. Back to bows...some people don't know that a 40# doesn't feel the same at your full draw length on every bow. For example..I started with a [email protected] Herb Meland Pronghorn 62" bow. I traded that for a 21st Century [email protected] 68" Longbow that felt considerably lighter even though there was only 5# difference. There also bows/limbs that stack considerably ramping up the weight near the end of the draw. Fast forward...I switched down to a 45# 64" Martin bamboo viper. Then I went to a 66" 40# 21st. Then I went to a 37# set of limbs for 3D on A 21" DAS riser for a 66" bow. It's my thought that if you can't kill a whitetail cleanly with a 40# bow, you might want to reconsider the shot in the first place. Adding draw weight doesn't help accuracy..it never has and never will in my experience. 

I can control my shots, I can hold for an extended period of time, (which is helpful in hunting situations) I decide when to shoot I am in complete control..anything less is not acceptable to me. There are so many bows out there that perform roughly the same with 10# less draw weight..why on earth would anyone want to work harder instead of smarter? I'm referring to my experiences only. I've seen pride ruin many would be great archers..I chose not to be one of those. After all, hitting what you are aiming at is everyone's goal. Am I saying anyone who shoots heavy weight is terrible at it? No..but I am saying in my experiences that in the world of competitive 3D archery, you will rarely find anything over 45# on the podium and with a minimum of 40 in *some* states it just makes sense to me to take every advantage I can get.

I use the IBO as hunting practice...not everyone is into that kind of thing but I can tell you this..you meet the nicest people and learn things that can take years off your learning curve and develop consistency which is the only thing that matters.


----------



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

grantmac said:


> What do you consider accurate?
> 
> -Grant


I'd consider 6" groups at 20yds accurate with a stickbow.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Thanks for the answer J.
I really was just curious.

We're all different. Tiz what makes life interesting. 

Rick


----------



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

Mo0se said:


> Honestly.. in my experiences which include my own, and my own only, I started off with too much draw weight. Why was it too much? It was too much for me because (I was taught that it was a sign of a controlled shot) I hold at anchor for x amount of time. My arms started to quiver and and overwhelming urge to let go of the string soon took control of my shooting. Why do I hold at anchor? because I have to give myself time to get my shot lined up and settled in. I had two things against me..too much draw weight in too short of a bow. I developed snap shooting, a form of target panic in my case. I had to learn the hard way that if you don't control your bow it will dominate you. I would get to my anchor and let go before the shot was even ready. I wondered why I was never consistent. Fortunately I had a good friend, who placed 5th at IBO Traditional World championship last year to help me along. (We've been friends for 10 years) I replaced that heavy draw weight bow with something I could control. Lower weight...it's not a challenge or exciting to miss.
> 
> What if's are not what matter in my world. It's what I can do consistently that matters. Back to bows...some people don't know that a 40# doesn't feel the same at your full draw length on every bow. For example..I started with a [email protected] Herb Meland Pronghorn 62" bow. I traded that for a 21st Century [email protected] 68" Longbow that felt considerably lighter even though there was only 5# difference. There also bows/limbs that stack considerably ramping up the weight near the end of the draw. Fast forward...I switched down to a 45# 64" Martin bamboo viper. Then I went to a 66" 40# 21st. Then I went to a 37# set of limbs for 3D on A 21" DAS riser for a 66" bow. It's my thought that if you can't kill a whitetail cleanly with a 40# bow, you might want to reconsider the shot in the first place. Adding draw weight doesn't help accuracy..it never has and never will in my experience.
> 
> ...


Great Reply! 
Do you think an average guy can't shoot well or have total control at weights above 45lbs?


----------



## Mo0se (Sep 24, 2002)

jshperdue said:


> Great Reply!
> Do you think an average guy can't shoot well or have total control at weights above 45lbs?


Nope I said there are some that shoot well...and I'm sure there are people out there that can control 50+ I'm just not one of them and neither are top ranked Traditional shooters in IBO 3D last I knew..but there are exceptions to everything..we are all different. (Don't forget what I mentioned about the bow being used and it's length) For example, you stated a 6" group @ 20 is accurate, that's your definition...mine is different. A typical 6" group at 20 yards increases in diameter as the distance gets farther out. With 33 yards being the maximum distance, what do you suppose that group would be then? The 3D game I love dearly won't allow that level of accuracy to be competitive. You see, that is my challenge..to be shooting groups at least half that size out to 33. In my case, increasing draw weight doesn't help my odds. Are there people out there capable of that with heavy weight? Sure...I just have never witnessed it done consistently. That is why I'm into 3D so much..it's a win win for me..and the animals I pursue in the fall.


----------



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

Thanks moose that's good stuff. 
I've been to a few trad shoots but not what most people would consider a big event and I'd bet 90% of the shooters couldn't hold 6 inch groups at 20yds consistently. Yes my groups do open up too much to be competitive at 30yds but 90% of my shots are probably 15yds or less. Guess it can be chalked up as different strokes for different folks, basically what Rick said.


----------



## longbowguy (Nov 14, 2004)

If you can handle heavy bows and take satisfaction in it go ahead. In my prime I could shoot 100 pounds and could shoot 70 really well. I took pride in it and enjoyed the physical workout. But there is no need. 45 pounds is ample for deer sized game and most men shoot 45 pounds more accurately than 50 or more. 35 pounds is better for form development and sufficient for all target purposes. - lbg


----------



## Bill 2311 (Jun 24, 2005)

Building up bow weight takes work. Some folks don't have the time or ability to do so. Same for compounds. On the General Forum, I get pounded for shooting a 72# compound. Seems many there think that if you shoot more than 60#, it is an ego thing. 
I wish I could shoot more recurve draw weight, and I am working on it. I started at 40# and am now at 54#. I would like to go higher but not sure I can afford another set of limbs.
My goal was to get to 45# for deer hunting. Now it is to shoot as much poundage as I can do effectively so as to propel a correspondingly heavy arrow, pushing a big broadhead.

I think a lot of folks on here are also target and 3-D shooters. For them, an extra bit of accuracy acquired by lighter bows is more of an issue. Hunters need to be accurate, but a deer taken with a bow is just as dead if it was a "8" or a "10" ring shot. My target and 3-D shooting is solely a function of preparing for deer season.

Archery is a wide field with many varied applications. It is not strictly target or hunting. Many hunters also want to shoot target rounds and don't have two bows or sets of limbs. As a result, many shooters will try to find a common ground so far as poundage.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

If you can hold a 6 inch group over 60 arrows at 20 yards, you should be able to knockoff a 280 or so on an NFAA 300 round, right? A 270 if only half of them end up in the 5 spot.

I'm averaging about 265 and broke 270 a couple of times with a 42 pound bow. My 265 is not holding a 6 inch group. I shoot a three here and there along with the occasional 2. 

How many can really hold a 6" group at 20 yards? Oh, we all shoot some real tight groups right in the center. I put 3 in a row in the 'x' the other day but maybe we won't talk about where the next three went. LOL

Lets post our 6 inch groups (270+ scores) shot with hunting bows of say...50 pounds or more. I know there's a few guys here who can do it but I think it's only a few. Since we're talking about hunting, forget the time limits and take all the time you need to shoot the 60 arrows. Just put 60 consecutive shots inside the 4-ring (about a 6.25" group) 

Now lets talk about how much weight you need to get a clean kill with one of those 3-ring or 2-ring shots which could be all the way off the lungs.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

A few years back I shot the biggest buck that I've ever seen in person with a 55 pound Howatt hunter (a pretty fast hard shooting bow) and the arrow just about bounced off...just a little blood on the end of the broadhead and it fell out after the deer had only traveled a few feet.

The buck was standing broadside at just a hair over 20 of my paces (about 20 yards). When I saw the arrow hit, I thought it was a perfect shot. I just couldn't figure out why I could still see so much of the arrow. The reality is that the shot was just a touch to the left and I must have hit the shoulder bone and got NO penetration. The buck trotted off like nothing had happened.

I spent all day on my hands and knees following sparse tiny spots of blood out across a cut corn field. I finally spotted the buck way across the field chasing does. He might have had a slight limp but seemed pretty healthy.

Do you think more weight would have helped? 

We don't have any elk or moose around here so the biggest thing I'm going to shoot at is a white tail and most of them are really pretty small. In my experience (some of it not so good), accuracy and precision are what's needed most.

I have a 55 pound bow, a 60 pound bow and a 65 pound bow but they don't see much use anymore.


----------



## Joe Hohmann (Oct 24, 2013)

I read a LOT of archery "How to" books when I got back into the sport. The vast majority of them seemed to assume everyone hunted, and that a bow under 45# did not exist. I don't hunt anymore, (since 1957) and the 60-90 arrows I shoot on most days is done with my 30# bow. I would advise anyone who wants to primarily shoot targets to get "Shooting the Stickbow" and forget all the Macho books out there.


----------



## Chris Segina (May 2, 2012)

I guess I am more of the if it aint broke don't fix it mentality. I use a 45lb Martin Mamba and draw 27 1/2 inches and once I got my arrows tuned I feel I get all the penetration I need. I have been using it to hunt for the past three years and had complete pass through hits on all three deer. For me the most difficult part of getting my hunting set up was arrow tune and that made the most difference to me personally. Playing with different shafts and point weights I saw as much as 2 1/2 inches in penetration with field points on foam targets (unscientific I know) but once I had a set up that was quiet and hit nice and hard I felt I had the equipment part done and turned my attention to getting me better at putting them where they need to go. I don't shoot 280's my scores average between 230 and 240 @ 20 yards my ultimate goal would be to shoot 250 to 260 @ 35 yards because then I feel I could make any hunting shot my equipment is reasonably capable of making with me behind it. when and if I reach that point I may go up in weight but probably not before. I know there are a lot of archers that are bigger and stronger than me that can pull 60+ pounds as comfortably as I pull 45 and if you can do it the extra speed and power is never a bad thing but for me personally 45 seems to do everything I need it to.

just my random thoughts on the matter.

chris


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I don't get out as much as some of you but I know what I've seen...lots of really short draws with fairly heavy bows launching arrows really slow (because of the short drawing).

A lot of those archers are going to get more arrow speed by stretching their draw out with good form. That's also going to get them more consistent arrow flight with a fighting chance at real tuning so they'll get better penetration too.

I just haven't seen many (some but not many) people do it with a "heavy" bow.

I tend to look at what guys like Jimmy Blackmon are doing. I use him for an example because he's got a bunch of videos out there and he's been very successful at hunting and target shooting. I think he usually hunts with bows between 40 and 50 pounds (including self bows) and kills more game in a single season than I'll get a chance at in the next ten.

He's a young fit military guy. Why do you suppose he isn't trying to muscle up to a 65 pound bow? Those 42 pound self bows are not real fast but he kills a bunch of deer with them. He can also shoot a 250 or so on an NFAA 300 round with that same bow.

I'm all for using "enough" bow. However, if we have a problem, I think it's more likely that the problem is poor shooting with too much weight as one probable contributor.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Chris Segina said:


> I guess I am more of the if it aint broke don't fix it mentality. I use a 45lb Martin Mamba and draw 27 1/2 inches and once I got my arrows tuned I feel I get all the penetration I need. I have been using it to hunt for the past three years and had complete pass through hits on all three deer. For me the most difficult part of getting my hunting set up was arrow tune and that made the most difference to me personally. Playing with different shafts and point weights I saw as much as 2 1/2 inches in penetration with field points on foam targets (unscientific I know) but once I had a set up that was quiet and hit nice and hard I felt I had the equipment part done and turned my attention to getting me better at putting them where they need to go. I don't shoot 280's my scores average between 230 and 240 @ 20 yards my ultimate goal would be to shoot 250 to 260 @ 35 yards because then I feel I could make any hunting shot my equipment is reasonably capable of making with me behind it. when and if I reach that point I may go up in weight but probably not before. I know there are a lot of archers that are bigger and stronger than me that can pull 60+ pounds as comfortably as I pull 45 and if you can do it the extra speed and power is never a bad thing but for me personally 45 seems to do everything I need it to.
> 
> just my random thoughts on the matter.
> 
> chris


Of course "pulling" it and shooting it well are too different things. I'm not big (or young) but I shoe horses for a living and I'm pretty strong. I can pull a 65 pound bow. Hell, I could probably tear it in half. I'm just not all that good at hitting the target with it. LOL

Then too, there could be a difference between what you can shoot well standing on the range wearing a t-shirt in warm weather and what you can shoot well in heavy clothes from an elevated stand after hours of sitting in cold weather.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

If power was really the issue, why use a traditional bow at all? A compound will produce a lot more power, period. 

It's all about where your focus is. Some folks want as much power as possible for that "what if" scenario. Others want as much accuracy as possible to avoid that "what if" scenario. Use the heaviest you can shoot accurately. Some people are happier with more poundage and less accuracy. Some people are happier with less poundage and more accuracy. Some are capable of more of both, but they're the minority.


----------



## Chris Segina (May 2, 2012)

[Then too, there could be a difference between what you can shoot well standing on the range wearing a t-shirt in warm weather and what you can shoot well in heavy clothes from an elevated stand after hours of sitting in cold weather.[/QUOTE]

gotta second that after sitting perfectly still for 4 hours in sub zero temps with 15 layers on 45 pounds can feel like 145--LOL.

chris


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I don't think you can get enough "power" out of a bow to bail you out of a poor shot. I don't think a gut shot shot with 60 pounds is going to stop the deer any quicker than a gut shot with 40 pounds. I tried the shoulder shot thing with 55 pounds (I didn't try but that's what happened) and it didn't work. A rifle with the right ammo would have plastered that deer to the ground but I don't know what kind of bow you'd need to do it. 

As they say, "Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades".


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

jshperdue said:


> I'm not trying to be an a** or anything I just want to know why?


In all honesty, (and I'm not trying to be an a** either) I think it all boils down to the way different individuals think. Some people think (for a variety of reasons) that if "A" is good, "AA" must be better, and "AAA" must really be awesome.

It's the same mentality that has people hunting 150lb deer with a .300 Winchester mag, have tires on their daily drivers that were designed for mudder competitions, and use gutting knives that are better suited for trimming Christmas trees and blazing trail in the Congo.

KPC


----------



## j.conner (Nov 12, 2009)

jshperdue, what you are missing is folks who want to anchor/hold for precise aiming and those who shoot many arrows in a session. Shoot a 300 round and you will understand.


----------



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

MGF said:


> If you can hold a 6 inch group over 60 arrows at 20 yards, you should be able to knockoff a 280 or so on an NFAA 300 round, right? A 270 if only half of them end up in the 5 spot.
> 
> I'm averaging about 265 and broke 270 a couple of times with a 42 pound bow. My 265 is not holding a 6 inch group. I shoot a three here and there along with the occasional 2.
> 
> ...


Good post. I've never shot a 300 round and really don't care to even try. If I was to shoot a round of 60 consecutive arrows I know all 60 arrows wouldn't be in the 6" range, but the first few shots would about everytime. Like you said very few could do it for 60 consecutive arrows. 

Back when I was in college I hunted with a hoyt aspen compound I think it was 46" ata. I was shooting 82lbs at 28.5" with a 2317 shaft and a 125 grain thunderhead. I remember shooting a pretty good sized doe right in the shoulder and got probably 6-8" of penetration. The doe dropped in its tracks but I can remember being shocked I only got 6-8" of penetration. A quick follow up shot in the goodies sealed the deal. 
So I guess I can't really answer your question. I don't know how much weight it would take to bust a shoulder with a tradbow but probably more than I would want to shoot.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

That's the other part. Some folks only care about their first shots, as if they were hunting. Others care about every shot.

Different personalities.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

I find this thread interesting as it's just one of many topic discussions that often times turn into debates....then heated debates....and yes...sometimes even heated arguments...and IMHO what it all stems from is the apparent reluctance of this forum to recognize that it's host too TWO very different classifications of archers as follows...

Hunter Class: And in my observation?...This is by far the largest of the two as it encompasses everyone from those who would love to rule the roost at the 3D events too those who would just like to extend their hunting season with a stick bow in hand and everything in between including stumpers and backyard hacks such as myself who simply shoot for pleasure, relaxation and exercise....and for the most part?...these are the same archers who are far more interested in commanding as much kinetic energy as their physical strength will allow whether it be for a few dozen well executed practice shots in the backyard or?...40-60 at the local 3D or?...that (1) oh so important kill shot...where they consider 6" groups at 20yds as plenty accurate enough but also know that such accuracy may result in encountering clavicle or rib bone and that a 35# Excel with 300gr arrows just isn't going to get the job done...they also know that the only shot opportunity they can get may be one of a highly compromised shooting position so?...they want all the draw weight they can handle while still maintaining practical and ethical hunting accuracy.

which brings us to the...

Target Archer Class: Where accuracy holds the high hand over power at every turn...and defining the word "accurate" is daunting for them as even great is never good enough...where pristine form and consistency is their everything...and make no mistake...these archers are the best of the best and doing everything from driving X-country to taking international flights to compete in various field tournament venues where shots taken are measured in the hundreds and can extend out to 80yds/90meters and beyond....and these are the archers who will champion light draw weights that can be mastered and commanded from sun up to sundown...and yes...due to their highly elevated description of "what accurate is" can and do effectively take game cleanly with very well placed, uncompromised shots, with lightweight bows.

Two extremely different classes of archers...and?...Two very different worlds...where one may own a rig costing thousands of dollars including $600 arrows w/ $250 per dozen tungsten field points to win a major competition while the other may be perfectly content with a used $200 Recurve and the least expensive arrows they can find that works just for a pleasurable past-time and maybe put some meat on the table...some fairly vast differences there yet?...

Get these two together and start discussing what an appropriate draw weight is or isn't? :laugh:

All I got...have a blessed day...I'm still trying to decide if I want to go ride my cruiser or shoot...maybe both. L8R, Bill.


----------



## Bowmania (Jan 3, 2003)

Coming from a 66 year old, I'd say as you grow older you'll find out that just because you do it, doesn't mean it's right for everyone else.

Bowmania


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

The reason I mention the 300 round and the 60 arrows is that there are a couple of separate things to consider regarding being able to hit the target. Those are "accuracy", which is how close the center of your group is to the target center and "precision" which is how repeatable it is or the size of the group.

More shots makes for a more representative estimate. 3 or 4 arrows can be deceiving. I often shoot 3 or 4 arrows from 20 yards that are literally touching. Over a large number of arrows, you tend to see some other stuff that's not nearly as good. If I could shoot groups like that all day, I would probably hold most of the worlds titles. LOL

We have a few guys on here who pretty much do shoot that good (with their target bows) but I don't think any of them are hunting with much more than about 55#. They can jump in and correct me as they see fit.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Jinks, maybe I'm wrong but I don't think there are very many guys shooting "heavy" bows who can consistently hold 6 inch groups from 20 yards. By all means, somebody show me some 60 or 100 arrow 6" groups from 20 yards...maybe while wearing heavy clothes and shooting from a tree stand.

I think there's only a few guys around that can consistently hold that 6" group with their indoor target bow.

There might be two distinct classes of archer but it doesn't really ring true with me. My primary interest is hunting but hunting season is short so most of my shooting is some sort of non-living target. Personally, I want to be able to hit whatever I shoot at whenever and why ever I shoot at it. That goal has led me to drop weight.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

It should be common knowledge that we are NOT all the same.

Every archer has a specific GOAL, ABILITIES and PERSONALITY (G.A.P. profile) that shapes their shooting style and the equipment they choose to use.

Even though many of us share a similar G.A.P. profile there can still be differences.

PERSONALITY can play a huge roll in what draw weight a person chooses to use.

Some people have a minimalist attitude. Others prefer a little more than minimal and others prefer what some people may consider 'overkill'.

Ultimately...a bowhunter or archer just needs to be honest with themselves and ask...do I have the ABILITIES to achieve my GOALS with a particular draw weight?

If they can answer Yes to that...than it shouldn't really matter what draw weight a person uses.

I like to shoot heavy bows accurately because I can :wink:

By the way...my average for NFAA 300 rounds is in the 260's and I've won more 3D competitions with my 70 and 80lbs. recurves than I can remember.

Ray :shade:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

MGF said:


> Jinks, maybe I'm wrong but I don't think there are very many guys shooting "heavy" bows who can consistently hold 6 inch groups from 20 yards. By all means, somebody show me some 60 or 100 arrow 6" groups from 20 yards...maybe while wearing heavy clothes and shooting from a tree stand.
> 
> I think there's only a few guys around that can consistently hold that 6" group with their indoor target bow.


MGF...where did I mention any hunters who shoot 6" groups consistently at 20yds with heavier rigs?...I didn't...(not that there aren't quite a few out there...I've seen them)...that description came from right here in this thread made by the OP when Grant asked what he considers accurate...I tend to agree...and yes...a 6" group with a heavier bow at 20yds is "A Happy Group" for such an archer...but most likely not the consistent result...definitely not for 60-100 arrows (which wasn't mentioned either)...let alone from a treestand with winter clothing...sometimes I think you like to spin things just for the sake or argument rather than just..."get the point".



MGF said:


> There might be two distinct classes of archer but it doesn't really ring true with me. My primary interest is hunting but hunting season is short so most of my shooting is some sort of non-living target. Personally, I want to be able to hit whatever I shoot at whenever and why ever I shoot at it. That goal has led me to drop weight.


I went down that road...going lighter and lighter for the sake of consistent form and accuracy and for me?...it was a bad road...as not only did it bore me to death?....but it also made me a weaker archer...oh I could hold and shoot my 30# Bear Polar w/ ultra-light VAP target arrows all day long alright...and yes...after a full day of shooting I would wake up sore and a bit achy...but the low 30# weight just wasn't challenging me physically enough to actually build upper body strength and become a better, stronger archer...it was more like doing a whole lot of reps with real light weights...more like physical abuse rather than physical training...and did I mention "Boring"? :laugh:

I have 3 bows....my 30# Bear Polar, My 37# Bushmen Longbow and my 44# Herters Perfection Magnum...I've been shooting the 44# Herters exclusively lately and for a while now...and I'm becoming a stronger archer for my efforts....it also seems I tend to place more value on each shot taken with that 44# Herters as I know I only have so many in me per session...as a result?...I can now hold that 44# Herters for 10-15 seconds with good form now (for a few shots anyways) but I primarily snap-shoot it...it's how I love to shoot...and the point here is...I couldn't do that a few months back and now my 44# Herters makes my 30# Bear Polar feel like a kiddy bow.

But to each their own and I have an acronym I conjured up about a year ago...

*Neil M.*

*N*ot *E*verybody *I*s *L*ike *M*e.

and I'm okay with that...L8R, Bill.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

BLACK WOLF said:


> PERSONALITY can play a huge roll in what draw weight a person chooses to use.
> 
> Some people have a minimalist attitude. Others prefer a little more than minimal and others prefer what some people may consider 'overkill'.Ray :shade:


Ray, with the exception of you, Rick, and a few others, many people show minimalism elsewhere in their decision to shoot more than the minimal poundage, and that would be in their accuracy. There is NOTHING wrong with that if that's what works for you or you enjoy it, but it should be understood that there is a lesser degree of accuracy with that weapon selection if your accuracy or scores are lower.

It's the same idea behind saying that a certain tecnique is "more accurate" for hunting, but with no way to quantify that on any sort of graduated target, it becomes heresay. In such an instance it's not actually "more accurate" it's simply your preference, and that's _fine_. Heck, if we only did and used what was "best" our bows would have wheels on them!

It just needs to be understood that there is a compromise in every decision, and "more" of one typically comes with "less" of the other.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

kegan said:


> It just needs to be understood that there is a compromise in every decision, and "more" of one typically comes with "less" of the other.


You are wise beyond your years young man.
I often find myself envious when reading your posts. 

Rick


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

hhmmm... another hunting thread with 20yrds as a measuring stick... nobody here gets under 20yrds? Nobody here ever have to back off of an animal to be able to get a shot off? You can get that close you know. 

Kegan... we all care about all of our shots... hunters just care more about all of their first shots since since well.... do I really gotta explain that?


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> MGF...where did I mention any hunters who shoot 6" groups consistently at 20yds with heavier rigs?...I didn't...(not that there aren't quite a few out there...I've seen them)...that description came from right here in this thread made by the OP when Grant asked what he considers accurate...I tend to agree...and yes...a 6" group with a heavier bow at 20yds is "A Happy Group" for such an archer...but most likely not the consistent result...definitely not for 60-100 arrows (which wasn't mentioned either)...let alone from a treestand with winter clothing...sometimes I think you like to spin things just for the sake or argument rather than just..."get the point".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I didn't really go down the road of lighter and lighter weights. I'm a hunter so I'm not really interested in how well I can shoot a bow that's "too light" to hunt with.

Where I live the legal minimum is 35 pounds but that seems a little on the light side to me. But there's nothing bigger than white tailed deer around here and I shoot more rabbits than deer. I went looking for a weight that can reliably kill the game that I'm likely to have the chance to hunt and still be able to shoot it well. I think any more weight is just going to do more harm than good.

I'm going to keep one or more 50# or 55# bows around in case I ever get the chance to shot at something bigger. The lightest bow I shoot is an old all glass bow marked 40# that I got for knocking around in the canoe, frogging and bow fishing.

When I ordered the bow I'm shooting now I ordered 45#. It came in at 42 which is close enough. When I make a wood bow (limited success so far), I shoot for about 45#.

I think that's enough for deer sized game at 20 yards or so but, if I thought I could kill better with more, I'd shoot more.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

kegan said:


> Ray, with the exception of you, Rick, and a few others, many people show minimalism elsewhere in their decision to shoot more than the minimal poundage, and that would be in their accuracy. There is NOTHING wrong with that if that's what works for you or you enjoy it, but it should be understood that there is a lesser degree of accuracy with that weapon selection if your accuracy or scores are lower.
> 
> It's the same idea behind saying that a certain tecnique is "more accurate" for hunting, but with no way to quantify that on any sort of graduated target, it becomes heresay. In such an instance it's not actually "more accurate" it's simply your preference, and that's _fine_. Heck, if we only did and used what was "best" our bows would have wheels on them!
> 
> It just needs to be understood that there is a compromise in every decision, and "more" of one typically comes with "less" of the other.


And here's where we stray into the realm of "Subjectivity"...for instance...my 44# Herters is a heavy bow for my 56 year old diabetic butt...where Rick or Ray would consider it a twig bow! :laugh:

Which takes us right into *"The Goldy-Locks Syndrome"*...where we maximize our appropriate selections based on preferences which involve the elements outlined in Rays G.A.P. profile...with an emphasis on any given archers physical abilities which are very much in keeping with the topic at hand.

For instance....so....yes...my 44# Herters represents to me what a heavy bow is...and initially?...I loved the smooth feel of the shot when using my 12.2GPP arrows...however...it occurred to me that if I wanted to push the limits of my highly preferred instinctive/snap-shooting ways?...that I could ease the calculation burden of my lower level of consciousness if I was only willing to shoot a lighter arrow with a flatter trajectory...enter my 8.8GPP Bemans...and well tuned?..the bow really isn't all that much "higher strung" at the shot...and my groupings did in fact tighten up a bit....not to mention spitting out a much snappier arrow! :laugh:

And yes...it took me a few sessions to "Dial Into" them...many of the first shots from different distances struck a few inches...sometimes several inches higher....but it's extending my effective range where I'm beginning to pile them in there pretty good at 30yds...which I think is great for instinctive/snap...but I'm sure others will disagree. 

L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

kegan said:


> many people show minimalism elsewhere in their decision to *shoot more than the minimal poundage*, and that would be in their accuracy.


If I'm comprehending you correctly...if a person is shooting more than what is considered 'minimal' poundage...I personally wouldn't consider that person as having a 'minimalist attitude'. 



kegan said:


> It's the same idea behind saying that a certain tecnique is "more accurate" for hunting, but with no way to quantify that on any sort of graduated target, it becomes heresay.


I personally can careless if it's 'heresay'. If a person says they are more accurate with their bow and shooting style under a specific circumstance...I don't need them to prove it to me. I'll take them at their word first...unless their claims are outlandish or really uncommon. Than I'll have my doubts. Either way...it's 'they' who have to live with their claims...not me. 

Based on my experience and research...it becomes very apparent that certain techniques are more accurate under specific circumstances. It becomes obvious when you start researching those circumstances and see what the majority of archers are doing to be successful at what they are doing.



kegan said:


> It just needs to be understood that there is a compromise in every decision, and "more" of one typically comes with "less" of the other.


I agree. There are compromises usually in every decision. It's up to the archer to ultimately determine how well those decisions fit their G.A.P. profile.

Ray :shade:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

grapplemonkey said:


> hhmmm... another hunting thread with 20yrds as a measuring stick... nobody here gets under 20yrds? Nobody here ever have to back off of an animal to be able to get a shot off? You can get that close you know.
> 
> Kegan... we all care about all of our shots... hunters just care more about all of their first shots since since well.... do I really gotta explain that?


Great post Grapple...which again points out another vast difference in our individual goals...mine are very humble as compare to a target base archer...but I do have a firm grasp on my personal limitations...and if there ever comes a time I get the opportunity to hunt again?...and the chance to loose a kill shot arrow?...it will be just as deadly serious as a world class target archer sealing the deal with his last arrow shot for a world championship title...but it will be my first.

Which reminds me....we need a "First Shot" called for today...don't we?...okay....you talked me into it! :laugh:

I'M ON IT! 

'Bout time we put and end to all this talk and start shooting anyways! :laugh:

L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

grapplemonkey said:


> hhmmm... another hunting thread with 20yrds as a measuring stick... nobody here gets under 20yrds? Nobody here ever have to back off of an animal to be able to get a shot off? You can get that close you know.
> 
> Kegan... we all care about all of our shots... hunters just care more about all of their first shots since since well.... do I really gotta explain that?


I've had more trouble getting a shot off because they were too close than I have because they were too far. Obviously I see deer that are just too far for me to shoot at but 5 yards can be a real pain. If you're in a tree, it's straight down and if you're that close on the ground it can be pretty hard to move without getting busted.

I've had deer walk right up and sniff me but I never had a chance to draw my bow. Just last season, I had a little buck come in from down wind. Instead of running, he came looking for me. I was on the ground but in some brush. At one point his head was at about arms reach but he never saw me.

The one deer that I did shoot at last year (and missed) came in right under my tri-pod. I had to wait until she got further out to even draw.

I was in my loc-on tree stand and had a buck almost at the base of the tree. Between the tree and the stand itself, I just couldn't find clearance enough for the limbs to try a shot.

I guess I could go on and on with accounts of deer that were "too close".


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I think 20 yards gets treated as the "measuring stick" because it's close to where a lot of us set our maximum.

I can sometimes shoot a decent group at longer distances but when the shots get out past 25 yards or so, the arrow starts dropping pretty fast (with my setups). Distance estimation starts to get really critical. By contrast, at 20 or so and under, I don't need to worry too much about what the exact distance is.


----------



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

Well said MFG, most of my shots are under 20yds but those straight down shots are difficult at times. I took those shots when I first started bowhunting and I figured out real quick they weren't real high percentage shots for me. It seemed I either spined them and they would drop on the spot or I got only one lung and about everyone knows how far a deer can travel with one lung.

I haven't shot those straight down shots for years now. They are difficult.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

kegan said:


> That's the other part. Some folks only care about their first shots, as if they were hunting. Others care about every shot.
> 
> Different personalities.


That's why I came down in draw weight for everyday shooting. I can shoot my 70# recurve well, for awhile, but shooting all day, it eventually breaks me down, and it happens before I notice getting tired, in the form of flyers.

I was fairly competitive with 54#. I just tried my 46# bow, and I think it spoiled me


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

I agree with your premise of using as much bow as you can shoot accurately, but I think it's a mistake for people to judge their accuracy by how they shoot in a non-hunting scenario; i.e., in the back yard or at the target range. 

It doesn't apply to everyone (location and climate) but sitting in a tree for a few hours, bundled up in wool and fleece and _still_ stiff and cold, will really limit your shooting ability and the amount of draw weight you can handle. I'm shooting 50# now and it's really the limit for me for stand/blind hunting conditions. In fact, there are times I wish my favorite bows were 45# instead of the 50# I use now. I would have no trouble with my heavier bows if I hunted in conditions where I was moving and warm, but then my heaviest bow is still only 59#. For me, the bows that feel borderline too heavy in a hunting situation are a piece of cake to shoot in the back yard.

I think most people eventually come to the conclusion that accuracy is the key and they are more accurate with lighter bows. More accurate in all _possible_ conditions, not the relatively ideal conditions we are usually shooting in. Of course there is a lower limit to the lighter bow idea but for deer sized game I think any generic 40#-45# bow and a well tuned arrow with a sharp broadhead is plenty adequate.

In my opinion it's easier to settle on too heavy than too light for a hunting bow.


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

MGF said:


> I've had more trouble getting a shot off because they were too close than I have because they were too far. Obviously I see deer that are just too far for me to shoot at but 5 yards can be a real pain. If you're in a tree, it's straight down and if you're that close on the ground it can be pretty hard to move without getting busted.
> 
> I've had deer walk right up and sniff me but I never had a chance to draw my bow. Just last season, I had a little buck come in from down wind. Instead of running, he came looking for me. I was on the ground but in some brush. At one point his head was at about arms reach but he never saw me.
> 
> ...


I could go on and on about situational awareness but I'd rather not.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Every archer has a specific GOAL, ABILITIES and PERSONALITY (G.A.P. profile) that shapes their shooting style and the equipment they choose to use.
> Ray :shade:


Not only is that always true, but I think you should just put it in your signature.... 

I think that there is a bias among experienced target shooters towards shooting 'lower' weight bows. I say 'lower', because it is often between 40-50 pounds of draw weight, which qualifies as 'hunting'. Some may be using as little as 30, which is fine, but I spiral out...

The reason is, because from an accuracy standpoint, there is an optimal draw weight, or at least a range that is most optimal, and for _most_ people, it isn't all that heavy. _Some_ people, who would often qualify for the superlative description as a 'beast', may have that range in what most would consider 'higher' weight bows. 

However, I think that most people who think they can dominate a higher weight bow don't qualify, don't understand what dominate means in this context, and don't realize how exceptionally strong a 'beast' person of sorts really is. Most people think that they are smarter, stronger, whatever, than average. In psychology, they call it the False Uniqueness Effect, if my brain serves me. I am stronger than average (or so I believe  ), but I am also certain that I am nowhere near the strength of these exceptional individuals. I've wrestled with one, and I could feel how much the very nice guy was trying to not use his muscle, but rather rely on technique. It's a humbling experience. Size does matter with many things 

In the end, I think we really need to be honest with ourselves. Shooting a heavy bow well is, in itself, satisfying. If you can shoot it well enough for what you want, consistently enough for what you want, great. I like hauling my bazooka out from time to time, and marveling how well it can be shot given the correct technique. Still, I'm never taking it to a tournament again. Hunting? Sure, if I'm going for a Bison or what not. When deer are legal again, the 46# is the first choice.


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

No offense to the guys ranting about "accuracy" and what contributes to it but hunting is hunting. Accuracy is one of the major components to being a successful hunter but for those that think it's the key factor I'd wager most of you did not start out as a hunter. Every single thing I can do to help my drag-um-out ratio I do just like every thing a target shooter can do to help his scores he does. People shouldn't say all those things can achieve the same goal... because they don't


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

kegan said:


> If power was really the issue, why use a traditional bow at all? A compound will produce a lot more power, period.
> 
> It's all about where your focus is. Some folks want as much power as possible for that "what if" scenario. Others want as much accuracy as possible to avoid that "what if" scenario. Use the heaviest you can shoot accurately. Some people are happier with more poundage and less accuracy. Some people are happier with less poundage and more accuracy. Some are capable of more of both, but they're the minority.


I am with you on this accuracy.
When I started hunting I did it with a large caliber gun. Why, it had a big bang. I started to realize most of the big bang shooters, not all, most could not or would not shoot those guns standing. I did. After all day shooting I got tried and my shooting became poor. Why I am pretty strong. I sold that gun. Bought me a 30-30 open sights, never looked back. Well I do have 30-06, I hate to carry it around here out west. First deer 40 yards. I didn't think I hit him, but tracked back too the road and die there. Luck me.

So I challenge myself bought a compound, was told by the pro shop you needed 80 plus pound's to kill a elk. None of those bow felt like was very good at 40 plus yards. Yes, I said 40 yard and that if you get lucky.
I settled with a 60 pound Black knight, 540 grain at 260fps. It was fast for then. I shot my first elk at 47 yards, double lung her. The arrow passed thru and ended up 15 are so yards off to a angle from were I shot her. She run 50 yards are so, played down, we could here her cough a few times until my 30 min wait was up. She was huge being the lead cow. When I had her processed her weight as much as a bull.

Well, I am getting to my point. Over the years as the bow designs got better and faster l stayed with my same goals. The distance of 40 yards shots and 260 fps with a recurve may not be in my future for hunting, but it is a bunch more fun to do..... see I still owe it to the animal I hunt to be as accurate as possible. Don't sell yourself short on bigger is better. If I do hunt with a recurve it will be at 40 pounds and as fast as possible at 9-10 gpp. I am still waiting Sid.......
Dan


----------



## jmvaughn06 (Jan 10, 2009)

OP, I hope those knuckles don't hurt to bad from the lashing that's been given! I've found that on this site as well as others you just don't mention the lbs. that you shoot, especially if you are new to the sport, as you can see many "experts" will give you their advice based on what "they" do, kind of like a "how's my form" post, lol.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

grapplemonkey said:


> I could go on and on about situational awareness but I'd rather not.


Please do.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

grapplemonkey said:


> No offense to the guys ranting about "accuracy" and what contributes to it but hunting is hunting. Accuracy is one of the major components to being a successful hunter but for those that think it's the key factor I'd wager most of you did not start out as a hunter. Every single thing I can do to help my drag-um-out ratio I do just like every thing a target shooter can do to help his scores he does. People shouldn't say all those things can achieve the same goal... because they don't


I think it's a key factor (not the only factor) and I started as a hunter. In fact the ONLY reason I purchased my first bow was to get in on bow season in my state.

I'd wager that most folks who down play the importance of accuracy and precision just don't shoot very well.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

jmvaughn06 said:


> OP, I hope those knuckles don't hurt to bad from the lashing that's been given! I've found that on this site as well as others you just don't mention the lbs. that you shoot, especially if you are new to the sport, as you can see many "experts" will give you their advice based on what "they" do, kind of like a "how's my form" post, lol.


I won't claim to be an expert but I didn't really intend anything I wrote as advice. It's more like just relating my own experience. I guess your mileage may vary.

I find that form is hard for a lot of us to analyze by just looking at a picture or video. The core principles are easy enough to understand but it looks different on different shooters...I guess, at least in part, because of a difference in physical build not to mention the possibility of pathologies. I usually put a disclaimer on my comments regarding some one's form.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

MGF said:


> I'd wager that most folks who down play the importance of accuracy and precision just don't shoot very well.


I don't think it's as much anybody "downplaying" accuracy as it is folks who obsess over accuracy...to the point that only one form/style of wielding a bow exists to them when the truth is there is so much more to archery than just target competitions...because their focus is solely on acutely precise levels of accuracy...and since we're gambling here?...I'd be willing to wager that under the right tactical conditions?....one skilled Saracen Archer could put 1/2 dozen target archers on the ground with their quivers still full...so the bow is not a "snipers only" weapon....some seem to forget that....I'm here to remind others an prove there's more than one way to shoot a bow....effectively....matter fact?...extremely effective.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

grapplemonkey said:


> No offense to the guys ranting about "accuracy" and what contributes to it but hunting is hunting. Accuracy is one of the major components to being a successful hunter but for those that think it's the key factor I'd wager most of you did not start out as a hunter. Every single thing I can do to help my drag-um-out ratio I do just like every thing a target shooter can do to help his scores he does. People shouldn't say all those things can achieve the same goal... because they don't


certainly true. as a reasonable shot, and a really poor hunter, i can attest to the shot itself being a really small fraction of what it takes


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BarneySlayer said:


> certainly true. as a reasonable shot, and a really poor hunter, i can attest to the shot itself being a really small fraction of what it takes


Very true Barney...sitting here thinking about it and even right down to the skill and experience it takes just to learn how to move silently through the woods...without breaking twigs under foot or clanking shafts or even wearing noisy clothing....understanding the scents and senses...reading the sign....and other things...

Like fueling up your vehicle the night before so you're not gassing up your hunting clothes...including the bottom of your hunting boots...and using unscented deodorant, soap and detergents without color brighteners...little things that can mean the difference between seeing game and not seeing game even when there's plenty of game there.

And even the most accurate archer in the world won't meet success with no seen target to shoot at...and here we are in the "Traditional Forum"....a place where one might suspect these sort of topics might come up...but how often do they?

How often is any other of the many other forms of shooting discussed?....and God forbid they are?...folks will quickly be reminded of how inaccurate and inconsistent they are.

Dang...just made my own self sad! :laugh:

L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> I don't think it's as much anybody "downplaying" accuracy as it is folks who obsess over accuracy...to the point that only one form/style of wielding a bow exists to them when the truth is there is so much more to archery than just target competitions...because their focus is solely on acutely precise levels of accuracy...and since we're gambling here?...I'd be willing to wager that under the right tactical conditions?....one skilled Saracen Archer could put 1/2 dozen target archers on the ground with their quivers still full...so the bow is not a "snipers only" weapon....some seem to forget that....I'm here to remind others an prove there's more than one way to shoot a bow....effectively....matter fact?...extremely effective.


Jinks, I would agree that there's more than one way to shot a bow...though, there may be far fewer ways that tend to yield the best results for the highest number of people.

Not to be rude but I don't care to talk on the internet about what it might take to put people down. For the sake of this conversation I would just consider it irrelevant.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> Very true Barney...sitting here thinking about it and even right down to the skill and experience it takes just to learn how to move silently through the woods...without breaking twigs under foot or clanking shafts or even wearing noisy clothing....understanding the scents and senses...reading the sign....and other things...
> 
> Like fueling up your vehicle the night before so you're not gassing up your hunting clothes...including the bottom of your hunting boots...and using unscented deodorant, soap and detergents without color brighteners...little things that can mean the difference between seeing game and not seeing game even when there's plenty of game there.
> 
> ...


Those topics come up all the time on the bowhunting forum of this site and they have come up here too. For example, a while back we had a couple of threads dealing with ground hunting.

BTW, you're not going to move "silently" through the fall woods (at least not the "eastern woods"). That's not a deal breaker because no other animal is silent. Some are downright noisy. It's more about when you make noise and not sounding like a person.


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

BarneySlayer said:


> certainly true. as a reasonable shot, and a really poor hunter, i can attest to the shot itself being a really small fraction of what it takes


God I must be you evil twin brother.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

MGF said:


> Jinks, I would agree that there's more than one way to shot a bow...though, there may be far fewer ways that tend to yield the best results for the highest number of people.
> 
> Not to be rude but I don't care to talk on the internet about what it might take to put people down. For the sake of this conversation I would just consider it irrelevant.


My interpretation of the above?...

_"This conversation isn't going my way so I'll just play the stats and irrelevance card."_

and this is the very type of single minded mentality that's effectively erasing the history of the bow...did you hear the part in the video where Lars had to research and "RE-DISCOVER" the lost art of the Saracen Archers?....and how such knowledge, styles and archery skill sets are being lost forever by modern day archers?

Every culture known to man has used the bow and arrow as a strategic weapon of war...and whether it was to win a battle or put meat on the table at the end of the day it was a tool of survival...in a time where an archers skill level was often times quite literally a matter of life and death...do you think some of these folks could teach the modern day archer a thing or two about becoming an effective archer and handling a bow and arrow?...because much of that knowledge has been lost...and for what?...folks obsessing over numbers on a scorecard?....I find that sad.

F1 Racing is the fastest way around a technical track....does this mean we should eliminate NHRA drag Racing?...NASCAR?...Sprint Car Racing?....Sportsmen Class Racing?

Yet that is exactly what is happening to modern day traditional archery...where the longbow class can now sport a 3 piece bow with high end machined aluminum Olympic risers....as long as they shoot wood arrows? :laugh:

And for these folks?....there's only one way...which demands the archer use a step-by-step shot sequence with their arrow points used as a crude sight pin and form has to be perfect because if not?...their arrow/sight pin is off...and if you don't wanna pay for coaching there are numerous books you can purchase from amazon so that you too can look just like all the other robots on the florescent lit 20yd firing line to shoot your 60 arrows. :laugh:

Sorry...just had to vent...going to church now to ask forgiveness...L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

If you want to hunt you will shoot fewer arrows and need more penetration. Higher draw weight makes more sense, or put differently, the minimum draw weight for your purpose needs to be higher.

The more arrows you plan on shooting, though, the poundage needs to go down for control and health reasons. If I shoot too high a poundage for 100s of arrows my bow elbow and draw shoulder will say hi, and if you're shooting too much weight it will impact stamina and performance in a multiarrow target situation.

Where I tend to speak up on DW is when I hear someone who sounds like they practice target but are using what would be a hunting weight. You get form from dozens of arrows at a shot and it's not going to be relaxed and sharp if you're struggling and tiring with too much weight. Particularly when you're just learning, you want to take the struggle out of the equation and do training at a reasonable, sustainable weight. If you learn that, you can then pick up a hunting weight and expect to hit the quarry with a minimum of arrows.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

I do olympic also and even I tend to think the 300/600 rounds are our least inspired offerings. I like knockout stuff, I like outdoors like 900, I like 3d with my trad bow.

But

While a 300/600 is a dull contest it is also men from boys and if you go to a nationals or other serious tournament you see people who can really shoot a bow. Something akin to 300 is also basic practice........we put up a target and shoot at it. You don't pop up hitting deer without having shot at something else first. And usually a lot if you want to be accurate.

A lot of the serious people mix it up, field, 3d, trad/ compound/ olympic. I'd be bored to tears if ALL I did was 20 indoors. But it does have its place and is its own season/test. And I think it's cardboard cutout that olympic people sit there and shoot 20 all year. I had my trad bow out practicing this morning. Tomorrow it will be olympic outdoors at distance with carbons......


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

Also, hunting and target may be different pressures but if you want pressure try competing at state or nationals in your first year shooting when you're still learning and they put you on a bale with some guy who's been in the Olympics a few times. After that shooting your local 300 league is a walk in the park in terms of stress.

But to me the discussion is Coke and Pepsi, target practice and hunting are complimentary aspects of the same sport. Some of the slings and stuff in Olympic are a bit OCD and divorced from what you could do hunting, but trying to shoot a perfect score or keep up with some former Olympian on targets it its own sort of intense experience.


----------



## Paul68 (Jul 20, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> I don't think it's as much anybody "downplaying" accuracy as it is folks who obsess over accuracy...to the point that only one form/style of wielding a bow exists to them when the truth is there is so much more to archery than just target competitions...because their focus is solely on acutely precise levels of accuracy...and since we're gambling here?...I'd be willing to wager that under the right tactical conditions?....one skilled Saracen Archer could put 1/2 dozen target archers on the ground with their quivers still full...so the bow is not a "snipers only" weapon....some seem to forget that....I'm here to remind others an prove there's more than one way to shoot a bow....effectively....matter fact?...extremely effective.


Obviously, this guy has a lot more time to practice than me.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> My interpretation of the above?...
> 
> _"This conversation isn't going my way so I'll just play the stats and irrelevance card."_
> 
> ...


Do you do much fighting with a bow? I don't. Do you even do any hunting? You're always talking about what it takes to hunt with a bow but I don't think you've ever mentioned actually doing any hunting.

Aside from that, I'm not sure what you're talking about.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Paul68 said:


> Obviously, this guy has a lot more time to practice than me.


I have the time. The problem is that if I ran around shooting all those arrows up into the air my neighbors would have to take cover.

Aside from that, don't most of us target shoot (indoor, 3-d, field or whatever) and/or hunt? How does this guy do on game? Wasn't this thread started with hunting in mind? Are we suggesting that this is a good "style" for the aspiring hunters and target shooters that dominate these forums? How much weight do you think he's shooting? It looks very light to me.

Shoot how you want but, as somebody who's interested in hunting or maybe participating in some local competition, I have to just write this off as a curiosity or an interesting distraction. Maybe it has some historical value...experimental archeology kind of a thing but I'm not a historian or an archeologist.


----------



## Paul68 (Jul 20, 2012)

MGF said:


> I have the time. The problem is that if I ran around shooting all those arrows up into the air my neighbors would have to take cover.
> 
> Aside from that, don't most of us target shoot (indoor, 3-d, field or whatever) and/or hunt? How does this guy do on game? Wasn't this thread started with hunting in mind? Are we suggesting that this is a good "style" for the aspiring hunters and target shooters that dominate these forums? How much weight do you think he's shooting? It looks very light to me.
> 
> Shoot how you want but, as somebody who's interested in hunting or maybe participating in some local competition, I have to just write this off as a curiosity or an interesting distraction. Maybe it has some historical value...experimental archeology kind of a thing but I'm not a historian or an archeologist.


I understand your point, and see this type of shooting as novelty. It's fun to watch, and I can respect the guy's work ethic and motor control to get to this point, but similar to watching a guy juggle running chainsaws - fun, but not really practical for stocking up winter firewood. For me, the best shots I've ever seen or made have all been in the woods, but life has a lot going on for most of us, so we have to feed our toxophile addictions with backyard adventures or indoor shoots or see if we can shoot three arrows while doing a back flip off the neighbor's Ford Taurus. 

We are always going to have this debate on the modern bow: is it a weapon? A tool? A sport? All? None? Personally, I'm always a bit disappointed when the archery-tourists show up after the bow has been romanticized in a movie or popular book (ie Hunger Games, Lord of the Rings, Rambo, etc). I'm sure its good for the archery shops (which serves all of us), but the surges in interest usually result in only a few who are earnestly looking to become part of the archery culture, be it hunting, indoor, 3D, whatever. The remainder are dreaming themselves Elvens, and when no Orcs appear on the 3D ranges, they wander away and we can buy their used gear in the classifieds. 

Apologies for hijacking the thread a bit. I need more coffee this morning.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

I love these discussions and often wonder how many of these key board warriors actually hunt. I stopped worrying about draw weight when I realized that a 72lb modern compound shooting a 625 grain arrow would not penetrate an elks shoulder at 15 yards. I learned this on my knees in the woods. Not reading some guy (who doesn't hunt) pontificating on the net. 

I hunt some part of over 100 days a year my experience has taught me you can never be too accurate - where you hit an animal is much more important than what you hit it with. 

There are guys who say "I don't need to be accurate I'm a great hunter". I've found that once you get an animal inside of 15 or so yards your odds of getting a good shot at a relaxed animal are poor at best. "It jumped the string and I shot it in the ass - wasn't my fault" sound familiar???

I've got 15 tree stands up in the valley and they are all set for shots between 18 and 23 yards. 

Funny thing is the successful target guys I know are also successful hunters. 

Matt


----------



## Roger Savor Sr (Feb 16, 2014)

jshperdue said:


> I'd consider 6" groups at 20yds accurate with a stickbow.


Quite frankly, that level of accuracy is inadequate for my standards and adding 10# or more draw weight is only going to exacerbate that problem(your problem...?). I can shoot 6" groups at 20 yards with a 60# bow - been there done that. That said, I want better and that's why I shoot 45#-50# hunting bows. There is only several thousand years worth of proof that what I'm currently using is already overkill to begin with, so I wouldn't understand the mindset that might suggest I'm a "draw weight minimalist". I think your entire problem revolves around a simplistic outlook of the sport that says more must be better...........Again, "been there done that" before and I'm not going back.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

MGF said:


> Do you do much fighting with a bow? I don't. Do you even do any hunting? You're always talking about what it takes to hunt with a bow but I don't think you've ever mentioned actually doing any hunting.
> 
> Aside from that, I'm not sure what you're talking about.


I've bow hunted North Webster with Steve White...a young man I coached into becoming a FL state champion archer for several years running...as a result his family invited me up to hunt their farm...is that close enough for you?...MGF...if memory serves?...I believe it was you who broke some bows awhile back....I felt bad for you and was very close to offering you my 68"/42# American elm self bow...and when I skirted doing such?...you were just as toxic and undermining as you are now.

Now let me lower myself for a moment here to play your game...but in a little nicer way...with an invitation...we always hear you talk about how you slam arrows together at 20yds...I believe it was you who said you normally keep them all in a beer can at 20yds...yet in this very thread you question the ability of others to hold 6" groups?...so...I invite you sir to video your great shooting skills and participate in our next "First Shot" event held regularly on this forum.

and you've already used...

*"Not to be rude but I don't care to talk on the internet about what it might take to put people down. For the sake of this conversation I would just consider it irrelevant."*

and...

*"Aside from that, I'm not sure what you're talking about."*

so let's see what you come up with this time...welcome to first shot.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Matt_Potter said:


> I love these discussions and often wonder how many of these key board warriors actually hunt. I stopped worrying about draw weight when I realized that a 72lb modern compound shooting a 625 grain arrow would not penetrate an elks shoulder at 15 yards. I learned this on my knees in the woods. Not reading some guy (who doesn't hunt) pontificating on the net.
> 
> I hunt some part of over 100 days a year my experience has taught me you can never be too accurate - where you hit an animal is much more important than what you hit it with.
> 
> ...


ah...the puppet master arrives...well played Matt.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

JINKSTER said:


> F1 Racing is the fastest way around a technical track....does this mean we should eliminate NHRA drag Racing?...NASCAR?...Sprint Car Racing?....Sportsmen Class Racing?
> *
> Yet that is exactly what is happening to modern day traditional archery*...where the longbow class can now sport a 3 piece bow with high end machined aluminum Olympic risers....as long as they shoot wood arrows? :laugh:
> 
> ...


How so? 

Lars Anderson is welcome to participate with his bow and style of choice. 

Modern archers (both traditional and compound) use the equipment and shooting style they do because at the end of the day, the goal is *accuracy*, not speed. He would come in dead last in pretty much every competition that required accuracy over speed.

If all you are trying to do is get 10 arrows off of a bowstring as fast as you can for a demonstration at a few paces, Lars in your man. However, If I were putting together an army, it would be filled with as many Brady Ellisons as I could find. I'd rather kill my enemy long before they were close enough to perform a speed shooting exhibition for me. 

One thing that video *does* illustrate though is the lethality of very light poundage. Lars is able to easily penetrate chainmail armor using field tips from a 30 lb bow drawn to about 18". If yow watch the attached video closely (from about :55 to 1:17), he never really draws his bow past about 18" or so. 






Imagine what the same bow would do, drawn to 28" and using a razor sharp broadhead, on hide and tissue.

KPC


----------



## j.conner (Nov 12, 2009)

Please note that this discussion began with the following statement:

"Are most traditional archers elderly?
Are they not in good physical condition?
Do most just shoot paper?"

This was potentially rude and insulting. I would say that, yes, many "trad" shooters are mature archers who have decided to move away from the gadgets and focus more on growing their own skills. Many "trad" shooters are outdoorsmen in very good physical condition. Finally, even the most ardent hunter shoots far more paper than game - each arrow launched at game probably has hundreds or thousands of practice shots behind it.

There are also recurve and longbow disciplines within the target archery realm. The general idea in target archery is to shoot many arrows such that luck is washed away as the lucky and unlucky arrows statically cancel each other out. What remains in the score is the archers true, inherent, measurable, reliable, consistent accuracy. The holes in the paper and the resulting score does not lie. LOL, that is the theory, anyway, we all know there is more to it than that. In any case, since the game is to shoot many arrows in a contest, it is important to be in complete control of the bow for all of the shots - a lower draw weight. Note that the elite level of target archery is the Olympics, which shoots recurve at 70m. Thus, shooting "trad" is at the top of the target archery world, considered to be the most rigorous and challenging. Olympic shooters are not weak or elderly, and some do bowhunt too.

In contrast, 3D archery is very popular and is usually 42 targets and one arrow each. It is more of a "take one shot and you hit it or you don't" discipline, which is like hunting. Some of us "trad" shooters find the target archery lessons learned to be instructive for this and hunting.

For example, I prefer a steady anchor/hold/aim technique for bow hunting, where I know my repeatable, reliable, measured, works-under-pressure X% accuracy at the given distance. I find this technique gives me much more confidence, extends my effective hunting range, and allows for more flexibility in the shot conditions. I am not forced into snap shooting at close distance. I am trading accuracy for power. Definitely not old or weak.

I suggest having some respect for all disciplines and remembering that some day you will be old and weak, and will appreciate the young whippersnappers showing some respect and not looking down their nose at you because you selected a discipline out of a great deal of experience.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

j.conner said:


> Please note that this discussion began with the following statement:
> 
> "Are most traditional archers elderly?
> Are they not in good physical condition?
> ...


LOL, I'm getting pretty long in the tooth, and forgot what it was like to be in good physical condition probably 25 or 30 years ago. 
I wasn't insulted nor offended by the questions at all. 

I started shooting heavy bows purely by accident very early in my archery career, and have been doing it ever since.
No working up to it, no thought put into it at all. I just picked it up & shot it. I once made the jump from 77# to 98#
without even knowing it for a couple of weeks when a buddy of mine said - no way this bow is 75#, lets weigh it.
Heck, I didn't care what the draw weight was, I just liked how it shot. 

Now, I must admit I have had to drop down in bow weight over the past 5 years or so due to a work related shoulder injury.
I dropped down to 65#, but I am pretty much healed up now, and can shoot my heavy bows no problem. Thing is, I don't
see a need for them anymore, and the light weight 65#er works just fine.

Matt - just like you, most of the successful target archers I know are very successful hunters as well. 

Rick


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

one of the major reasons I got into building bows was that I couldn't find decent heavy stickbows to shoot, heck a lot of bowyers won't even build one over 70#, and some who can can't shoot them, so what I found was adequate at best, well adequate, for me, sucks. yep I like heavy bows, always have, and it's never been a macho thing, it's just what I was comfortable with shooting, I'm also primarily a hunter, but I shoot far more targets than critters, I also shoot targets with the same setups as I hunt with minus the broadheads of course, and in all the years I've been shooting not once has anyone ever said I was overbowed after seeing or shooting with me,, most of them never knew what weight I was shooting anyway so it was never a problem like I see here on the net, and that has me wondering......Why has shooting heavy bows become a problem for some?.......not shooting the heavy bows, but hearing about others shooting them. why is it that some get a case of the azz when someone else shoots a heavy bow? it is no reflection on them, they aren't putting out the effort to do it, I just don't understand. I like shooting heavy because it's been good to me, I have never had even one adverse effect from shooting them, on the contrary, had I not been shooting them I would not have made it through my first broken neck, let alone the next two, or the paralysis that left me bedridden part of last year, heavy bows have always been the stick I have measured MYSELF by and no one else, shoot what you want and feel comfortable with, and so will I, just because they may be different doesn't mean we are more or less of a man......


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Rick Barbee said:


> LOL, I'm getting pretty long in the tooth, and forgot what it was like to be in good physical condition probably 25 or 30 years ago.
> I wasn't insulted nor offended by the questions at all.
> 
> I started shooting heavy bows purely by accident very early in my archery career, and have been doing it ever since.
> ...


Rick

You have to admit your ability to shoot at the level you do with the pounds you pull is pretty darn rare. 

I'm also not advocating super light bows for hunting - I hunt with 55 on the fingers and a 520 grain arrow. But I wouldn't hesitate to hunt elk at 45 and a well tuned arrow. 

Matt


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

GEREP said:


> How so?
> 
> Lars Anderson is welcome to participate with his bow and style of choice.
> 
> ...


Kev...Lars is a student of Saracen Archery...their skills are not limited to any one form in any way shape or form...they train to be as accurate as possible while also placing great value on speed of execution and adaptability...including shooting from any position with a floating anchor....their bows were made of composite horn and their arrow shafts made of bone...on horseback they were just as deadly accurate in retreat as full charge...and could take successful wing shots at birds from a galloping horse.

Lars has merely penetrated the tip of the iceberg by proving the world of modern archery wrong and that it is possible for an archer to execute a practical/tactical level of effective accuracy under the same time constraints as placed upon the qualified Saracen Archer.

You yourself just admitted to gleaning and learning just how lethal a bow can be via Lars Chain mail illustration/demonstration. 

Speed of execution obviously held a much higher value to these Saracen Archers than did obsessing over excruciating levels of accuracy yet they regularly did put flying birds on the ground with their skills.

Is Lars a world class marksmen with a bow?....probably not....but this doesn't make his achievements any less remarkable and I highly respect and commend his success in bringing back what was believed to be a lost art and impossible feat...who here has added such a contribution to modern archery?

Kev...you're a smart man...so I thought you might appreciate breezing through the following article on Saracen Archery from "The Holland Press/London"...

http://pgmagirlscouts.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/saracen_archery.pdf

Ya'll be cool..this thread has strayed far and away from the topic of draw weights and j.Conner?...Great post man! :thumbs_up

L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Matt_Potter said:


> Rick
> 
> You have to admit your ability to shoot at the level you do with the pounds you pull is pretty darn rare.
> 
> ...


Matt, I'm right there with you. I'll advocate accuracy over power always, but I've also always been an advocate of shooting as much as you comfortably & accurately can.
You never know when that little bit of extra umph might come in handy.

As far as my ability with the heavier draw weights being rare is concerned. Yes, I would have to agree it is rare now days, but it isn't due to anything special on my part.
I just simply never paid that much attention to it, and never told myself I couldn't.

I didn't choose to shoot heavy bows. Like I said, it just kinda happened by accident. If we had weighed the draw weight of that first heavy bow, and someone had said
*"man you will never be able to shoot that accurately"*, then it very possibly may have never happened.
Point is - *The power of suggestion is VERY POWERFUL*, both positive & negative.

My whole attitude is - *Folks should shoot the bow that makes them smile, and shoot it in a way that also makes them smile.*

Rick


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

JINKSTER said:


> You yourself just admitted to gleaning and learning just how lethal a bow can be via Lars Chain mail illustration/demonstration.


Actually, I didn't. I've known for decades that it takes very little draw weight to kill an animal. This is not something I'm just now "gleaning and learning." 

I brought it back to that because that is what the original discussion was about.

I think another thing the video and the linked information also *proves* is that while there is no doubt that these things happened, they also fell by the wayside, and were ultimately discontinued as better, more effective processes and techniques were developed and perfected. 

KPC


----------



## xxxJakkxxx (Apr 17, 2014)

GEREP said:


> Actually, I didn't. I've known for decades that it takes very little draw weight to kill an animal. This is not something I'm just now "gleaning and learning."
> 
> I brought it back to that because that is what the original discussion was about.
> 
> ...


 Pretty much all archery fell to the wayside for better alternatives and we've had to relearn it. By having to relearn it, we're having to repeat the discovery process of what's best but our society generally focuses on the equipment over the shooter for developing things so we have a long way to go. If we're just wanting to use what's survived, proven itself and destroyed it's competitors, we would all be talking about firearms. If you look at any culture that has kept their bows through the age of firearms or that has a documented history of their archery, the archers don't look anything like our target archers but they used their bows for food, war and just about everything else every day of their lives.


----------



## MotherLode (Dec 9, 2005)

Wouldn't a WT. that allows you to shoot many arrows with control day in and day out allow you to make the best shot possible even if you need only one shot ?


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

It should be very obvious by now that draw weight is VERY G.A.P. related and as is all other mysteries of the universe :wink:

Soooo what if someone is shooting more or less weight than you.

All that should matter is the archer effectively meets their G.A.P. profile and enjoys the rewards of pursuing archery as they personally want and need to.

Just don't fall into an 'elitist' attitude where you put yourself and your peers who share your personal opinion on a pedestal regarding your chosen level of accuracy, chosen draw weight or form choices.

It's really just a matter of simply understanding we're NOT all the same nor do we need to be :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> I love these discussions and often wonder how many of these key board warriors actually hunt. I stopped worrying about draw weight when I realized that a 72lb modern compound shooting a 625 grain arrow would not penetrate an elks shoulder at 15 yards. I learned this on my knees in the woods. Not reading some guy (who doesn't hunt) pontificating on the net.
> 
> I hunt some part of over 100 days a year my experience has taught me you can never be too accurate - where you hit an animal is much more important than what you hit it with.
> 
> ...


So... warriors hunt? Is this like a "come at me bro" kind of post? "Jumped the string and shot in ass"... how do the animals in that part of the world jump? If a person hits an animal in the ass while holding on it's vitals... they should not be hunting period... because I highly doubt his accuracy was his problem.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Rick, thanks, I really appreciate that.

Ray, I'm simply saying that there is either minimalism on both sides, or neither side. You either want more power, or more accuracy. It's never about "how little can you get away with" unless that's also the case for both sides. The example of claiming something is better without support can, and is, an issue when you try to offer it to a new shooter with no foundation of their own. I'm not the only one who struggled early on because of misinformation like that. 

Grapplemonkey, your posts seem to support my point rather than contend it. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with not being as accurate if your range is shorter if that's what's more effective for you. However, if you're unable to shoot a decent score on a 20 yard piece of paper or a realistic 3D course, then it IS less accurate. Simple as that. Less accurate and less effective are not the same thing.

I'm having a tough time following the debate here. If you're shooting a 6" group at 15 or 20 yards with a 60# bow while another fellow is shooting a 6" group at 30 yards with a 45# bow, then you're less accurate. Simple. You also have a lot more power. Simple. Use whatever is more effective for you, and as Rick says, you enjoy more. Just accept it for what it is. If you're not as accurate, then you're not as accurate. If you're bow isn't as powerful, it isn't as powerful. 

Can someone please explain what the big deal is?


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

Just so you know Matt... while I respect you and the thoughtfulness you put into your postings... hunting is hunting. Like I stated being earlier accuracy lends to a persons success as a hunter but it's not the end all be all trait. I know of a bunch of hunters that progressed into being good target shooters... some good enough to compete at Vegas... and some that'd probably never see a 290 but could put meat down on demand. It's nice that as humans we can hold off our primal urges and take a shot we know to be successful... or even refrain from taking one we think won't be.


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

Kegan I am all for accuracy... the more the better. I'm all for being smart too.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

grapplemonkey said:


> Kegan I am all for accuracy... the more the better. I'm all for being smart too.


Then I'm not sure what the arguement is about? What's wrong with shooting at an NFAA face for a score? What's wrong with shooting 3D for score?

Being more accurate with a less powerful weapon is no different than being less accurate with a more powerful weapon. Most of us are just normal folks and either pick one or find a happy medium. The fellows shooting at the top end of the IBO longbow class were doing so with 50-55# bows. I don't think that's all that light, but it's not as heavy as what others shoot. IBO did away with the heavy hunter class, but I don't know of any of those shooters who moved on to compete in the regular Trad class. It's the same distances, same equipment. If the heavier draw weight WASN'T a hindrance, why aren't they competing/winning still? Because a stronger bow is harder to shoot accurately. 

It's not a big deal. We make the decisions we do based on our situation, location, interests, GAP, whatever you want. It's usually just a compromise of two traits and it's not a bad thing.


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

kegan said:


> Then I'm not sure what the arguement is about? What's wrong with shooting at an NFAA face for a score? What's wrong with shooting 3D for score?


Umm... not a damn thing? My replies were about hunting and where I found accuracy to lie in regards in being successful... which is high up there but not above being a smart hunter or seasoned woodsman. I wasn't arguing about anything, lol. I feel like someone just yelled squirrel and now I'm lost.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

grapplemonkey said:


> Umm... not a damn thing? My replies were about hunting and where I found accuracy to lie in regards in being successful... which is high up there but not above being a smart hunter or seasoned woodsman. I wasn't arguing about anything, lol. I feel like someone just yelled squirrel and now I'm lost.


Ahh, my apologies. I thought your original post was a rebuttle to my comment. My misunderstanding


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

grapplemonkey said:


> So... warriors hunt? Is this like a "come at me bro" kind of post? "Jumped the string and shot in ass"... how do the animals in that part of the world jump? If a person hits an animal in the ass while holding on it's vitals... they should not be hunting period... because I highly doubt his accuracy was his problem.


I once hit a deer with perfect lung shot entered behind the right shoulder an exited behind the left. Problem was I was aiming behind the left shoulder when I released ;-)

Stuff happens


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> It should be very obvious by now that draw weight is VERY G.A.P. related and as is all other mysteries of the universe :wink:
> 
> Soooo what if someone is shooting more or less weight than you.
> 
> ...


I think you just did. How else would you answer the OP questions? Let's here your personal views to see how they differ or agree. Let's say you agree? Then that make what? How does that relate too your profile? I don't get it Ray? I get the first part but then blame them for being a elitist attitude. 
Dan


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

grapplemonkey said:


> So... warriors hunt? Is this like a "come at me bro" kind of post? "Jumped the string and shot in ass"... how do the animals in that part of the world jump? If a person hits an animal in the ass while holding on it's vitals... they should not be hunting period... because I highly doubt his accuracy was his problem.


Actually, it's true. I had a very good friend shoot a elk there also. Killed her too. The shot was close and the compound bow string made a noise when it hit his jacket sleeve. See most hunters know a good kill shot is when the elk is quartering away. 
Dan


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

DDSHOOTER said:


> I think you just did. How else would answer the OP questions? Let's here your personal views to see how they differ or agree. Let's say you agree? Then that make what? How does that relate too your profile?
> Dan


I'm sorry...I'm really at a loss at what you're asking???

Maybe if you reworded it or asked a more specific more detailed question...I could give you an answer.

Ray :shade:


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> I'm sorry...I'm really at a loss at what you're asking???
> 
> Maybe if you reworded it or asked a more specific more detailed question...I could give you an answer.
> 
> Ray :shade:


Sorry, I just reread it to and edited it. I just like to know your profile on the subject. I always sense that when people post a question it is for knowledge to improve on their profile, as you say. I am by no means a master at this. This why I love this sport. I seek the knowledge to improve on. If shooting higher poundage does that then I am all for it. But since I have already be there then to don't usually go back.
Dan
Dan


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Sorry, I just reread it to and edited it.


No problem :thumbs_up



DDSHOOTER said:


> I just like to know your profile on the subject.


My GOAL is basically to be the BEST all around archer I can be from shooting aerial targets, moving targets, trick shooting, NFAA 300 rounds, 3D, bowhunting, American Rounds, Clout and Field Rounds with just one bow that I could some day hunt cape buffalo with.

Does that help answer your question?

Ray :shade:


----------



## mhlbdonny (Jul 15, 2008)

jshperdue said:


> I'd consider 6" groups at 20yds accurate with a stickbow.


6 inches at 20 wont do it. That's not even good on paper indoors let alone in a hunting situation where you have low light, wind, cold etc. Find a new hobby or don't hunt.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> No problem :thumbs_up
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Then your agreements with the OP.
Dan


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

mhlbdonny said:


> 6 inches at 20 wont do it. That's not even good on paper indoors let alone in a hunting situation where you have low light, wind, cold etc. Find a new hobby or don't hunt.


Consistent 6" [email protected] is actually pretty good... on both fur and paper.


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

kegan said:


> Ahh, my apologies. I thought your original post was a rebuttle to my comment. My misunderstanding


No worries kegan.


Matt_Potter said:


> I once hit a deer with perfect lung shot entered behind the right shoulder an exited behind the left. Problem was I was aiming behind the left shoulder when I released ;-)
> 
> Stuff happens


I believe you... I've seen the axis deer here breakdancing a few times though most just hit the dirt and do a burpee.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Then your agreements with the OP.
> Dan


Hmmmm....how did you come to that conclusion???

Do you believe that just because I shoot a heavy bow that I must agree with everything the OP said???

What exactly is it that you think I'm agreeing with???

Ray :shade:


----------



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

There's been a lot of good info shared on the topic and I've learned a thing or two. Thanks to all who posted in a positive manner.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Hmmmm....how did you come to that conclusion???
> 
> Do you believe that just because I shoot a heavy bow that I must agree with everything the OP said???
> 
> ...


Nope, your striving to be the best you can be. Which is in OP last statement. I would think most trad shooter are doing the same, regardless of bow weight.
Dan


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

DDSHOOTER said:


> ...your striving to be the best you can be. I would think most trad shooter are doing the same, regardless of bow weight.


I agree...within the parameters of an archer's specific G.A.P. profile.

The level of accuracy I'm trying to achieve is not necessarily the same as someone else who is satisfied with paper plate accuracy. My choice in draw weight is also not common. All this has helped create my specific style of shooting and the techniques I've ended up using.

I just wanna make sure know one thinks I look down on anyone for shooting lighter bows than I do or who don't share similar accuracy goals.

Ray :shade:


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> I've bow hunted North Webster with Steve White...a young man I coached into becoming a FL state champion archer for several years running...as a result his family invited me up to hunt their farm...is that close enough for you?...MGF...if memory serves?...I believe it was you who broke some bows awhile back....I felt bad for you and was very close to offering you my 68"/42# American elm self bow...and when I skirted doing such?...you were just as toxic and undermining as you are now.
> 
> Now let me lower myself for a moment here to play your game...but in a little nicer way...with an invitation...we always hear you talk about how you slam arrows together at 20yds...I believe it was you who said you normally keep them all in a beer can at 20yds...yet in this very thread you question the ability of others to hold 6" groups?...so...I invite you sir to video your great shooting skills and participate in our next "First Shot" event held regularly on this forum.
> 
> and you've already used…


I'll skip over your latest round of insults here.

You must not be reading carefully because I did NOT claim to hold 6 inch groups at 20 yards. I'm averaging about 265 on an NFAA 300 round and a 265 takes more than 6 inches of target space.

Sorry, no video digital video capability but a 265 isn't all that much fun to watch anyway.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

mhlbdonny said:


> 6 inches at 20 wont do it. That's not even good on paper indoors let alone in a hunting situation where you have low light, wind, cold etc. Find a new hobby or don't hunt.


If that's the case, 95% of the barebow shooters out there (including me) shouldn't be hunting.

KPC


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

By definition, all who shoot a Trad bow are practicing minimalists (getting more from less). Shooting a draw weight that accomplishes your goal with the least amount of work is just being "smart". Being over-insured by being over-bowed with a bow you think will cover your mistakes with more power is not being smart or efficient.


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

Minimalist??..... Well that sure isn't me, if I truly wanted more from less I'd go back to shooting a compound, or a crossbow, or a gun.....now those killing machines are more results for less work, I shoot stick bows because I enjoy them and they are way more challenging than the machines above, at least for me they are, and I make my own bows too, which is not an easy task, if I wanted less there are sure as heck easier ways to do it.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

voodoofire1 said:


> Minimalist??..... Well that sure isn't me, if I truly wanted more from less I'd go back to shooting a compound, or a crossbow, or a gun.....now those killing machines are more results for less work, I shoot stick bows because I enjoy them and they are way more challenging than the machines above, at least for me they are, and I make my own bows too, which is not an easy task, if I wanted less there are sure as heck easier ways to do it.


Exactly! It had nothing to do with easy or hard. It has to do with doing more with less, e.g., less technology, appurtenances, flair, enhancement, fad....


----------



## gr4vitas (May 25, 2013)

Simply, as Kegan mentioned.

If your not shooting the heaviest bow you're accurate with then you should be.

What is accuracy? What ever your comfortable with.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

gr4vitas said:


> Simply, as Kegan mentioned.
> 
> If your not shooting the heaviest bow you're accurate with then you should be.
> 
> What is accuracy? What ever your comfortable with.


I fully agree except to the point I personally see many new folks approach the sport. They take the second criteria, self-defined accuracy, and then apply that to the first criteria, the heaviest bow they are accurate with. With these, they can easily rationalize a perfect match.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

If you punch paper for a ton of arrows, particularly in competition, you don't want to be too tired to execute at the end. I also tend to get sharper the more I shoot so the last thing I want is to be tired when the rust is coming off. I did a 900 round a few weeks back and arrows 86-90 were my best. If I had a cannon to draw 90 times no way it works out like that.

In terms of min or max, I have upped poundage over time but the basic criteria for punching paper is making sure it's pullable for a long time with the same basic stroke. I have multiple sets of limbs and I'm not about to test what the max version is in competition because it would stink to have over-estimated and to be trying to finish a round over-bowed for the ends you have remaining. I go low. You won't know if you over-guessed the max until too late. But you will never go wrong low, at least in a paper target situation.

If you approach archery different, 20-30 arrows a day practicing, few arrows on some hunt, different criteria. Then you might want as much as you can accurately stand. I can see that. But I'm usually just finished warming up at 20 arrows.

My trad bow is several pounds higher than my olympic, but again, I'm not going real high. When I use it 3d or target I want every arrow pretty similar whole round through.


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

Shot Farmland over memorial weekend, practice butts for a bit then did the big game course first, 2- 40 target rounds for 80 shots, then had about 30 min rest, and did the small game course 2 rounds of 20 targets for 40 more shots, which is 120 shots + practice...... ended up winning the small game with a 368 out of 440, and shot a 740 out of 880 on the big game, using my [email protected] recurve.........shooting was not a problem......... but standing and "walking" the course was, I was in major pain throughout the courses, just had an mri this morning and consultation with my neurosurgeon this afternoon.......they're going to try a nerve block first, then another to make sure, then hopefully going in to burn the nerve instead of any further fusions, but no matter what they do I will still have permanent nerve damage in my left leg and hip.........


----------



## MrSinister (Jan 23, 2003)

jshperdue said:


> I'm fairly new to traditional archery and have been shooting trad bows for 4yrs and have hunted only with a recurve or longbow for 3yrs. I've harvested deer every year just like I did with my compound. I've bowhunted for the last 15yrs so I wouldn't consider myself a newbie. I don't post much but over the past couple years I've seen thread after thread of people just trying to "get by with the minimum" draw weight they can shoot.
> Are most traditional archers elderly?
> Are they not in good physical condition?
> Do most just shoot paper?
> ...


Simple really. Want to hit something not just fling an arrow due to being over bowed as most are. Next there is nothing in that "more" you preach that will overcome a bad shot. Accuracy is what wins in archery not "more". If you think you will take it right through those shoulders you are likely wrong simple as that.


----------



## SS7777 (Mar 17, 2012)

So what is the relevance of the bow as a weapon of medieval warfare, in comparison to ethical hunting in the twenty first century? I am not baiting you; I just want to better understand your argument.



JINKSTER said:


> My interpretation of the above?...
> 
> _"This conversation isn't going my way so I'll just play the stats and irrelevance card."_
> 
> ...


----------



## patrick2cents (Jan 26, 2014)

MrSinister said:


> Simple really. Want to hit something not just fling an arrow due to being over bowed as most are. Next there is nothing in that "more" you preach that will overcome a bad shot. Accuracy is what wins in archery not "more". If you think you will take it right through those shoulders you are likely wrong simple as that.


I think this is exactly the attitude the op is addressing. How do you know most are overbowed? Why do you assume that hitting something and higher weight are mutually exclusive? At my draw length, I have about 70lbs on my fingers, and I've got no problems hitting what I aim for at hunting distances....


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

SS7777 said:


> So what is the relevance of the bow as a weapon of medieval warfare, in comparison to ethical hunting in the twenty first century? I am not baiting you; I just want to better understand your argument.


I'm pretty sure Jinks will agree with most of this but here is my personal opinion.

This forum is the Traditional Archery forum.

It's NOT the Traditional Bowhunting ONLY forum.

It's NOT the Traditional Classic Archery Competition ONLY forum.

It involves ALL styles of Traditional Archery...which can include archers who pursue horseback archery, warfare style archery, Kyudo, English warbow, Clout Competition, Aerial Shooting, Trick Shooting, Field Archery, F.I.T.A. etc. etc.

There are a few here who seem to want to promote and push a one style is 'best' which is simply not the case.

So when it comes to draw weight...not every archer needs to fit into a specific box.

The simplist most accurate answer is that every archer should shoot the draw weight they feel most confident in that will help them attain their personal G.A.P. profile.

It shouldn't matter what Joe down the street is drawing...unless he is wounding animals left and right because his equipment and or abilities aren't up to snuff.

Ray :shade:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

SS7777 said:


> So what is the relevance of the bow as a weapon of medieval warfare, in comparison to ethical hunting in the twenty first century?


Exactly....great question....how much has been forgotten that could be of great value today?....I think it was Gene Wensel who went hunting Turkey (I think) and wound up killing a mountain lion that charged him...I hear wolf populations are exploding as well...so wouldn't it behoove the modern archer (alone in the woods) to know how to use their bow as a weapon?...I could see some great value there...and a Saracen Archer would come in real handy! :laugh: 




SS7777 said:


> So I am not baiting you; I just want to better understand your argument.


No argument...just blown away that so much has been forgotten that it takes folks like Lars to step out of our tight little boxes to re-discover it.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

patrick2cents said:


> I think this is exactly the attitude the op is addressing. How do you know most are overbowed? Why do you assume that hitting something and higher weight are mutually exclusive? At my draw length, I have about 70lbs on my fingers, and I've got no problems hitting what I aim for at hunting distances....


Just the degree of accuracy is all. Best I ever managed was a 220 on an NFAA with my 70# bow, and the highest I ever scored was a 245 or so on the 3D course where 25 yards was a long shot. I felt I could "hit" well, but my shooting was poor and I missed a lot of deer. I had to drop weight to relearn. Some folks obviously don't need that, but many folks will need less to get more. Not all, of course, but many.

As an aside, how are your NFAA scores doing, Patrick?


----------



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

MrSinister said:


> Simple really. Want to hit something not just fling an arrow due to being over bowed as most are. Next there is nothing in that "more" you preach that will overcome a bad shot. Accuracy is what wins in archery not "more". If you think you will take it right through those shoulders you are likely wrong simple as that.


Some of you act as if nobody can hit anything if they shoot more than 45lbs. Yes the "more" I preach will sometimes turn a non lethal poor shot into a kill shot or a non recovered animal into a recovered one and thats FACT. The more thats cut the more they bleed. Sometimes you dont get that perfect broadside shot and yes animals do move and not every target archer shoots a 10 on every live animal whether they shoot 40lbs or 80lbs. Stuff just happens sometimes and theres nothing wrong with trying to up your odds. Im not talking that everyone should try to work themselves up to shooting 70+ pounds but I do think an average man can shoot 50lbs+ well if they practice. I dont mean shooting a 100 arrows in succession at stationary targets.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

JINKSTER said:


> Exactly....great question....how much has been forgotten that could be of great value today?....I think it was Gene Wensel who went hunting Turkey (I think) and wound up killing a mountain lion that charged him...I hear wolf populations are exploding as well...so wouldn't it behoove the modern archer (alone in the woods) to know how to use their bow as a weapon?...I could see some great value there...and a Saracen Archer would come in real handy! :laugh:
> 
> Jinkster, I not sure why you think Saracens Archer is a dead art? My daughter's friend and herself is into it. http://mountedarchery.net/
> I read your posted book and there I believed they truly had the split vision sight picture correct. But it's not nothing like Howard's Hill version that Ray posted about. Go figure. Here again if your run down a target on the back of a horse you probably not going to shoot a bow at your mad weight. So that mean you most have a minimalist attitude or what like like to tell my daughter be safe. By the way she doesn't what to kill anything, but I would bet that she could if she had to, well at lease put some hurt on them like her bothers. Lol.
> Dan


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

jshperdue said:


> Some of you act as if nobody can hit anything if they shoot more than 45lbs. Yes the "more" I preach will sometimes turn a non lethal poor shot into a kill shot or a non recovered animal into a recovered one and thats FACT. The more thats cut the more they bleed. Sometimes you dont get that perfect broadside shot and yes animals do move and not every target archer shoots a 10 on every live animal whether they shoot 40lbs or 80lbs. Stuff just happens sometimes and theres nothing wrong with trying to up your odds. Im not talking that everyone should try to work themselves up to shooting 70+ pounds but I do think an average man can shoot 50lbs+ well if they practice. I dont mean shooting a 100 arrows in succession at stationary targets.


JS, your right. I have been to several traditional 3ds and their is usually one or two guys that show up with and new bow. 50 pounds or more. one such guy was friendly and so are we. He states he been reading this and that and ready to step from compounds into traditional. So he went to the local bow shop and bought this bow. The whole shoot he is struggling to hold and he miss the target. We help him find the big heavy shaft that over spined for that bow and even a 70 pounder. Now most of the time you won't see them again but we did have this one guy keep coming back. He started to get better, he only missed half. I could not say anything because I did too but my problem was for a different reason....TP kick in went I saw him miss the target. Well let's just say I finished second.......to last. He we not at the last shoot because he was having shoulder problems. I did talk to his girlfriend and by the way she win every thing. She told me she had a bow customized just for her. She also told me that she thought her boyfriend was overbowed. I told her she was right. So the point I am making is you have to work up or down to whatever you think will do the job that you can accurately perform when that time counts. Mine is still with a compound or gun. But I am getting there with a recurve but still have to prove to myself as well as others that I am accurate at putting the shot in the 12 ring when a win is on the line. If I work hard at it I will. I can put up so good shooting in the back yard, but at a target with everyone watching my be a difference. I know I have it in me, but this point I am a minimalist.
Dan


----------



## patrick2cents (Jan 26, 2014)

kegan said:


> Just the degree of accuracy is all. Best I ever managed was a 220 on an NFAA with my 70# bow, and the highest I ever scored was a 245 or so on the 3D course where 25 yards was a long shot. I felt I could "hit" well, but my shooting was poor and I missed a lot of deer. I had to drop weight to relearn. Some folks obviously don't need that, but many folks will need less to get more. Not all, of course, but many.
> 
> As an aside, how are your NFAA scores doing, Patrick?


Thanks for asking... I've switched to a slightly different target for hunting prep, but I've made a lot of progress after switching to 3 under and a more definite anchor point. 

I have a target with a 4" circle inside an 8" square. If I can consistently hit the circle, with no shot going outside of the square, that is my max hunting range (I'm starting my scouting now, so I wanted an idea of where I was). I'll have to shoot a round to see where I am, but I'm a lot better than a few months ago.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

patrick2cents said:


> Thanks for asking... I've switched to a slightly different target for hunting prep, but I've made a lot of progress after switching to 3 under and a more definite anchor point.
> 
> I have a target with a 4" circle inside an 8" square. If I can consistently hit the circle, with no shot going outside of the square, that is my max hunting range (I'm starting my scouting now, so I wanted an idea of where I was). I'll have to shoot a round to see where I am, but I'm a lot better than a few months ago.


Ahh, three under... the dark side:wink:

Looking forward to seeing how well you do!


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

jshperdue said:


> Some of you act as if nobody can hit anything if they shoot more than 45lbs. Yes the "more" I preach will sometimes turn a non lethal poor shot into a kill shot or a non recovered animal into a recovered one and thats FACT. The more thats cut the more they bleed. Sometimes you dont get that perfect broadside shot and yes animals do move and not every target archer shoots a 10 on every live animal whether they shoot 40lbs or 80lbs. Stuff just happens sometimes and theres nothing wrong with trying to up your odds. Im not talking that everyone should try to work themselves up to shooting 70+ pounds but I do think an average man can shoot 50lbs+ well if they practice. I dont mean shooting a 100 arrows in succession at stationary targets.


As I've said more than once, it's just a matter of priorities.

Folks lose game shooting really heavy compounds. You hit it in the stomach, no amount of power if going to kill it any faster. 

Some folks, like yourself, want that extra power in case something goes wrong. I did that for a long while too. Others feel that the best bet for a clean kill is a perfectly placed arrow, working to make sure nothing goes wrong. It's a compromise one way or another. If you can't be accurate for 100 shots, then you are less accurate. It's not a bad thing, it just means you have different priorities. Just as someone shooting a lighter bow is more accurate, but simply does not have as much power. Things do go wrong, and a lighter bow won't get the penetration in that instance. It's as simple as that.

The issue comes up when we try to make justifications one way or another, rather than simply conceding we are, in fact, making a compromise based on our priorities. I've seen more than a few people show up at a local 3D shoot with bows in the 50-60+# range only to miss targets completely under twenty yards. They all hunt, all kill deer, but no, they aren't as accurate. On the other hand, my brother is a big fellow who can shoot a 50-55# bow without issue even though he picks it up maybe once or twice a month. On the 3D course, his scores aren't great but frankly, that's probably because he refuses to try three under 

The only deer I hit and not killed was with a 56# bow. I got the jitters after stalking to eighteen yards of a young bedded doe and I shot low and the arrow crumpled on her elbow joint. She had a nasty cut, but I followed up and found her calmly browsing an hour later. A few weeks after that I saw her again. She was perfectly fine, but a heck of a lot more cautious. A bad shot is a bad shot. If I had had more power, that might have turned into a permanently crippling injury. I don't hunt with more than 55# anymore because that's the heaviest I can still shoot accurately. I shot my highest indoor score with a 54# bow. I dropped to 50# on my latest because I'm working on my form a little more, and because my new Safari broadheads are more penetration oriented than the Tree Sharks I used last year. It also seems be the about the average weight used by the top IBO longbow shooters, probably because the heavier wooden arrows need a little more "oomph" behind them.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Man, Kegan can sum it up!

There's a tool for every need.

Target rigs tend to be longer and lighter in draw. Hunting rigs tend to be shorter and heavier in draw.

Depending on the archer's needs, he could be moving to degrees either way in equipment choice and still "maximizing" on his choice of tool.

In deciding, in the end, I would rather always be known and judged as an archer by my ability to remain accurate over being known by the draw weight I pull. Accuracy "is" infectious. 

Choose accordingly.

Edit to add: Has anyone notice that first it was sights and now draw weight that is underlined - taking one to an offer for a crossbow?


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

kegan said:


> As I've said more than once, it's just a matter of priorities.





Sanford said:


> There's a tool for every need.
> 
> Depending on the archer's needs, he could be moving to degrees either way in equipment choice and still "maximizing" on his choice of tool.


Both good examples of the G.A.P. profile in action :thumbs_up :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Paul68 (Jul 20, 2012)

kegan said:


> Ahh, three under... the dark side:wink:


I must say I'm curious about this aspect of Trad culture. I've been shooting compounds with fingers/instinctive for decades with a split three finger glove. Maybe out of boredom or reading too much on AT, I decided to switch up to a three under/tab along with picking up Trad bows. Finding a consistent anchor is MUCH easier, and the release is a lot cleaner. At first I felt like I was cheating on my wife, but now just want to re-train my eye on the new sight picture. 

I know archers/bowhunters are a quirky bunch, but am surprised at how emotionally attached some are to the split option, vice three under... or goodness forbid, dropping something along the way.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Paul68 said:


> I must say I'm curious about this aspect of Trad culture. I've been shooting compounds with fingers/instinctive for decades with a split three finger glove. Maybe out of boredom or reading too much on AT, I decided to switch up to a three under/tab along with picking up Trad bows. Finding a consistent anchor is MUCH easier, and the release is a lot cleaner. At first I felt like I was cheating on my wife, but now just want to re-train my eye on the new sight picture.
> 
> I know archers/bowhunters are a quirky bunch, but am surprised at how emotionally attached some are to the split option, vice three under... or goodness forbid, dropping something along the way.


The problem with three under is it can lead to all sorts of degenerate behaviors. If you aren't carful it can lead to string walking, conscious aiming systems, and band-aids on your nose. Just be aware of the slippery slope you're on.

:dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing:​


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Paul68 said:


> I know archers/bowhunters are a quirky bunch, but am surprised at how emotionally attached some are to the split option, vice three under... or goodness forbid, dropping something along the way.


It's human nature to want to fit in or create a group of people who are like minded.

What's great about this website is that it's not run on a gang mentality even though there are some who might like to change that.

For the most part...the forum is very acceptive of different styles and techniques....which it should be.

Most here are supportive of other archers no matter what their shooting preferences may be and many here are more than willing to help guide an archer in changing aspects of their form or aiming technique that best suits the archer's G.A.P. profile.

Trying new techniques is just part of the journey to finding what works best for an individual archer.

Prejudices do exist but it's not what moderates this forum...thank God.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Paul68 (Jul 20, 2012)

Easykeeper said:


> The problem with three under is it can lead to all sorts of degenerate behaviors. If you aren't carful it can lead to string walking, conscious aiming systems, and band-aids on your nose. Just be aware of the slippery slope you're on.
> 
> :dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing:​


Understood, I'll try and stay on the straight and narrow! Ha!


----------



## patrick2cents (Jan 26, 2014)

I felt dirty the first time I tried 3 under... but once you go down that path, it's impossible to be restored again to split finger. You'll suddenly stop trying to rationalize an absurdly long point on and seem to be able to judge distance far better ;-)


----------



## bwd (Dec 6, 2013)

My bow arm elbow dictates how much weight I can shoot, which is the mid forties. But, I do know some people who shoot fairly heavy bows, well, that struggle with lighter weight bows simply because it is easier to get off the string with a heavy bow. Like Kegan said, we are mostly concerned with the first few shots.


----------



## SS7777 (Mar 17, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> I'm pretty sure Jinks will agree with most of this but here is my personal opinion.
> 
> This forum is the Traditional Archery forum.
> 
> ...


I agree with you. There are many different avenues of archery I would like to explore, but I would rather get as good I can get with one style, versus being a generalist. Unfortunately, time does not allow me to practice other disciplines.

I thought the original post was about higher draw weights for hunting, so perhaps I didn't read it closely enough.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

SS7777 said:


> I thought the original post was about higher draw weights for hunting, so perhaps I didn't read it closely enough.


It was...which is why I originally had these statements in the post you quoted me from.

"The simplist most accurate answer is that every archer should shoot the draw weight they feel most confident in that will help them attain their personal G.A.P. profile.

It shouldn't matter what Joe down the street is drawing...unless he is wounding animals left and right because his equipment and or abilities aren't up to snuff."

Ray :shade:


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Easykeeper said:


> The problem with three under is it can lead to all sorts of degenerate behaviors. If you aren't carful it can lead to string walking, conscious aiming systems, and band-aids on your nose. Just be aware of the slippery slope you're on.
> 
> :dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing:​


Easy, I must of slid all the way down the mountain. I started one finger over two under. Switched to pull with one over two under and drop the top at full draw with two under. Then switched to one under. Then two top fingers under. Then three under with slight pressure on the finger tips depending on distance. Wow, did I just say that. Lol.
Dan


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Paul68, I was trying to be light hearted considering the nature of much of this thread. There was a rather heated discussion about it on a Facebook group as well.

I'm not saying that split can't be accurate... but three under is _more_ accurate, and also makes you appear more desireable to people of the opposite gender


----------



## High Plains (Feb 29, 2008)

Easykeeper said:


> The problem with three under is it can lead to all sorts of degenerate behaviors. If you aren't carful it can lead to string walking, conscious aiming systems, and band-aids on your nose. Just be aware of the slippery slope you're on.
> 
> :dancing::dancing::dancing::dancing:​


I'm all for degenerate behaviors. :wink:


----------



## patrick2cents (Jan 26, 2014)

kegan said:


> Paul68, I was trying to be light hearted considering the nature of much of this thread. There was a rather heated discussion about it on a Facebook group as well.
> 
> I'm not saying that split can't be accurate... but three under is _more_ accurate, and also makes you appear more desireable to people of the opposite gender


I felt it made me a little taller with broader shoulders. The attractiveness was just a side benefit of that.


----------



## xxxJakkxxx (Apr 17, 2014)

BLACK WOLF said:


> It's human nature to want to fit in or create a group of people who are like minded.
> 
> What's great about this website is that it's not run on a gang mentality even though there are some who might like to change that.
> 
> ...


 They openly accept different styles and techniques unless you call them G.A.P.s.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

xxxJakkxxx said:


> They openly accept different styles and techniques unless you call them G.A.P.s.


LOL :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## jshperdue (Feb 1, 2010)

kegan said:


> Paul68, I was trying to be light hearted considering the nature of much of this thread. There was a rather heated discussion about it on a Facebook group as well.
> 
> I'm not saying that split can't be accurate... but three under is _more_ accurate, and also makes you appear more desireable to people of the opposite gender


That's awesome man. I guess I'm gonna have to try three under. I love the ladies!!!
Keegan thanks for all your input, I think you and black wolf have pretty much summed up this thread. There was some negativity in the thread but also a lot of good. I learned a few things and hope a few others have :darkbeer:as well.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

kegan said:


> Paul68, I was trying to be light hearted considering the nature of much of this thread. There was a rather heated discussion about it on a Facebook group as well.
> 
> I'm not saying that split can't be accurate... *but three under is more accurate, and also makes you appear more desireable to people of the opposite gender *


I knew there was a reason I don't have a girlfriend, it must the way I grip the string. Dang, so simple. 

I thought is was my pear shaped body, lack of teeth, and obnoxious personality...:doh:


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Easykeeper said:


> I knew there was a reason I don't have a girlfriend, it must the way I grip the string. Dang, so simple.
> 
> I thought is was my pear shaped body, lack of teeth, and obnoxious personality...:doh:


I don't have a girl friend because my wife won't let me have one.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

MGF said:


> I don't have a girl friend because my wife won't let me have one.


My girlfriend thinks I'm a stalker...when the truth of the matter is...

she's just so naive she doesn't realize she's my girlfriend yet. :laugh:


----------



## Stub (Aug 13, 2013)

JINKSTER said:


> My girlfriend thinks I'm a stalker...when the truth of the matter is...
> 
> she's just so naive she doesn't realize she's my girlfriend yet. :laugh:


I don't have a girlfriend because my lil girl is a nark...


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Stub said:


> I don't have a girlfriend because my lil girl is a nark...


Stub?....I know I'm dealing with a straight up guy when he's from Kansas..into trad archery and?....miss-spells "narC"! :laugh:

Stay Golden Pony Boy! :thumbs_up


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

No need for a girlfriend on my end. My wife and I have an agreement. I don't speak a word about her 100+ balls of knitting yarn and she just looks at my archery stuff and say's "that's nice". Its a win win for both of us


----------



## Paul68 (Jul 20, 2012)

kegan said:


> Paul68, I was trying to be light hearted considering the nature of much of this thread. There was a rather heated discussion about it on a Facebook group as well.
> 
> I'm not saying that split can't be accurate... but three under is _more_ accurate, and *also makes you appear more desireable to people of the opposite gender *


, 
Very nice! No issues. Perhaps we should start a highly lucrative mutal fund, and name it "Three Under." Then we'll have accuracy, get the girls, and get rich. Win. Win. Win.


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

All this talk of girls makes wonder... if 3under gets he girls I must've been shooting compounds when I met my ex.


----------



## Stub (Aug 13, 2013)

JINKSTER said:


> Stub?....I know I'm dealing with a straight up guy when he's from Kansas..into trad archery and?....miss-spells "narC"! :laugh:
> 
> Stay Golden Pony Boy! :thumbs_up


I was always that kid in school that was nervous when called on to spell a word. But hey I just Googled "nark", its on Google its fair game in my books! lol (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Nark)


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Stub said:


> I don't have a girlfriend because my lil girl is a nark...


My little Girl will be 28 this year...and has two kids of her own. She would still tell on me though. LOL


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Stub said:


> I was always that kid in school that was nervous when called on to spell a word. But hey I just Googled "nark", its on Google its fair game in my books! lol (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Nark)


“Anyone who can only think of one way to spell a word obviously lacks imagination.” 
― Mark Twain


----------

