# Aimimg, Dot or Spot?



## MiniJCW (Apr 27, 2014)

Have you tried using no dot? just a plain old clear lens. would be easier to burn the X without anything on your lens as a distraction


----------



## kballer1 (Aug 31, 2010)

Dot & pin always got in the way so went to the true Spot lens & #1 clarifier & has taken the pressure of the aiming process & has slowed down my float. Like the OP have been playing & fighting with this since the late 60's & this has been the most bennifical .


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

MiniJCW said:


> Have you tried using no dot? just a plain old clear lens. would be easier to burn the X without anything on your lens as a distraction





kballer1 said:


> Dot & pin always got in the way so went to the true Spot lens & #1 clarifier & has taken the pressure of the aiming process & has slowed down my float. Like the OP have been playing & fighting with this since the late 60's & this has been the most bennifical .


As mentioned I've tried most everything, including the True Spot and variations of that concept. None of these options take into consideration that while you are placing full focus on the X you are not concentrating on the bow which is the only thing that can be under your control. By focusing on the dot I'm finding much tighter groups along with the knowledge of where my dot is at all times. I have also found that I "can" put my dot in the middle and with a little concentration keep it there. 

I've also had the problem of not seeing any changes/improvements in my movement when making changes that should have had an impact such as DL, etc. when placing full focus on the X. By focusing on the dot/pin I can not only see what it is doing, I can also see the effect my equipment changes have on it. Prior to this discovery I never noticed any marked differences no matter what I did. I'm currently working on finding the dot size that is most comfortable and produces the least amount of perceivable movement. Currently I'm using a very small (1/16") bright orange dot on a 4X lens and no clarifier. I'm about to try a very large dot (5/16") with a 1/16" hole in it... My how I love a science project!


----------



## WhitBri (Jan 30, 2007)

Not sure how you focus on a x that is behind my dot. I'm mentally looking for the correct sight picture that dot in the center with the yellow or white ring around it. Dot floating but not touching red or blue. And not revealing the x.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

WhitBri said:


> Not sure how you focus on a x that is behind my dot. I'm mentally looking for the correct sight picture that dot in the center with the yellow or white ring around it. Dot floating but not touching red or blue. And not revealing the x.


I think that's my point. I don't think it can be done, yet there are hordes of advisers/experts that will say this is what must be done. I believe the act of staring at the X while using a dot or pin will only serve to encourage excessive movement. Unless you have x-ray vision that is... Now all I have to do is retrain 18 years of wrong thinking.


----------



## WhitBri (Jan 30, 2007)

EPLC said:


> I think that's my point. I don't think it can be done, yet there are hordes of advisers/experts that will say this is what must be done. I believe the act of staring at the X while using a dot or pin will only serve to encourage excessive movement. Unless you have x-ray vision that is... Now all I have to do is retrain 18 years of wrong thinking.


Agreed. One of those archery catch phrases that has a good reason behind it trying to solve a common problem. In this case over aiming. If I say stare at the x don't look at the pin it can help over aiming. Just like surprise release instead of what you really want is an unanticipated release. Backtension as defined by the majority of AT. Target panic. The list could go on for a while. It is tough if not impossible to verbalize the perfect shot to someone that has never experienced anything close to it. It's a learning process that takes time. But the majority want the journey in a AT post paragraph


----------



## eclark53520 (Sep 11, 2012)

If you have both eyes open like you're supposed to, the dot or pin should be barely visible. It should be grayed out and honestly you shouldn't even see it.

After I make sure my sight housing is centered, bubble is level, and am settled into my anchor, I simply stare at the x and execute the shot. My best shots are almost always when I don't have any clue where the pin is when the shot breaks because I'm 100% focused on the x. If I'm not fully focused, my accuracy suffers.

I'm not saying this is the only way to shoot x's...but it's not impossible. If it doesn't work for you, that's fine. Do whatever works for you. Don't call another style impossible or wrong because you can't do it.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

eclark53520 said:


> If you have both eyes open like you're supposed to, the dot or pin should be barely visible. It should be grayed out and honestly you shouldn't even see it.
> 
> After I make sure my sight housing is centered, bubble is level, and am settled into my anchor, I simply stare at the x and execute the shot. My best shots are almost always when I don't have any clue where the pin is when the shot breaks because I'm 100% focused on the x. If I'm not fully focused, my accuracy suffers.
> 
> I'm not saying this is the only way to shoot x's...but it's not impossible. If it doesn't work for you, that's fine. Do whatever works for you. Don't call another style impossible or wrong because you can't do it.


I didn't say it didn't work as I've been doing it that way for years and have had some success. What I'm saying is I believe there is a better way for me... and perhaps others. Since this is not an exact science, one of the difficulties in following internet advise is the varied outcome each may experience using various methods. Also, what one may consider success may be different for another as success is a relative term and varies from individual to individual.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

eclark53520 said:


> If you have both eyes open like you're supposed to, the dot or pin should be barely visible. It should be grayed out and honestly you shouldn't even see it.
> 
> After I make sure my sight housing is centered, bubble is level, and am settled into my anchor, I simply stare at the x and execute the shot. My best shots are almost always when I don't have any clue where the pin is when the shot breaks because I'm 100% focused on the x. If I'm not fully focused, my accuracy suffers.
> 
> I'm not saying this is the only way to shoot x's...but it's not impossible. If it doesn't work for you, that's fine. Do whatever works for you. Don't call another style impossible or wrong because you can't do it.


I have to agree with this, but I also shoot with both eyes open. However, I understand it may be difficult to accomplish for those who shoot with an eye closed.


----------



## eclark53520 (Sep 11, 2012)

EPLC said:


> I didn't say it didn't work as I've been doing it that way for years and have had some success. What I'm saying is I believe there is a better way for me... and perhaps others. Since this is not an exact science, one of the difficulties in following internet advise is the varied outcome each may experience using various methods. Also, what one may consider success may be different for another as success is a relative term and varies from individual to individual.


You didn't say it didn't work? You said:



EPLC said:


> I think that's my point. I don't think it can be done, yet there are hordes of advisers/experts that will say this is what must be done.


I don't think it can be done pretty much means it doesn't work....


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

EPLC said:


> For years we've heard over and over you are supposed to burn a hole in the X... I've been sold 100% on this idea so I've tried and tried but that damned dot keeps getting in the way. I've tried different size dots, different power scopes and many different combinations. I've tried circles, holes and various templates. You name it I've probably tried it. Always there are issues.
> 
> I've recently been studying my float in order to reduce it. What I found was that you can't really study something you are not looking at. In order to study my float, I have to look at my dot and in so doing I've come to the conclusion that maybe all of this instruction that insists you must place all of your focus on the X may be just as useful as shooting with BT only with no hand manipulation. Physically, you can only control the bow, not the target. When you focus on the target I find the movement of the pin becomes more apparent. When you focus on the pin the movement slows down and you are in more control of aiming. I don't aim a rifle or crossbow by not looking at the sight reticle. I line it up to the target and squeeze... so why would aiming an archery bow be any different?
> 
> What say you?


All in a way you put something; " For years we've heard over and over you are supposed to burn a hole in the X... " No, I haven't heard this as the most popular. Look all through this forum and it's keeping the pin inside the 10 ring (Vegas) or X ring (5 spot). It's the target the focus and the pin, circle or dot in the middle, becoming part of the "picture." You can't burn a hole in the X if you can't see it. If you're seeing the X then you must be stacking the pin and X, making a figure 8 or however one wants to describe it....Still, you can focus on the X and let the pin come in to make the "picture." Practiced, either can give accuracy.

Iron sights, rifle sights, pistols sight, bow sights, all have to be lined up. Perfect, bullet/arrow goes where the sights are. Now to have the sights on what you want to hit....I am of the opinion if you're concentrating on the sights (focus point) the "target" can become part of the "picture."

Cross eye dominance. It can be a problem, but can be over come. I am cross eye dominant. All left handed, left eye dominant, but shoot a bow right handed. And if by some the older we get the more "equal" our eyes become. (I ain't old, just banged up a bit) 

Mixing up sighting, aiming. Can be a problem. Either one can be accurate, but accurate to it's self. Using the sights and then the target as focus points there can be a slight point of impact difference between the two. What to do? Haul back and shoot. Forget about the sights or the target, quit thinking about either. You haul back and shoot the most natural will come. And then to know which you used and so you can stay with it and never think of the other ever. Not a easy task....

I've read so much in here, tried so much given in here and I've got "lost" more than I like. You're you and I'm me thing.
I get healed up and I'm going back to my Haul Back and Shoot and nothing else.


----------



## Rick! (Aug 10, 2008)




----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

eclark53520 said:


> You didn't say it didn't work? You said:
> I don't think it can be done pretty much means it doesn't work....


What I should have said was: I can't stare at the X if the pin is in the way. The only way this can be achieved is to move the pin. While I do shoot with both eyes open, I have not been able to accomplish the method as you describe it. Compounding my problem is I am right eye dominant shooting left handed.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

We're all different. 
I can shoot and hit a target with duct tape on my pin guard blocking any view of the target (but not the pin). I haven't tried this with a lens though.
With a lens, at the moment, I prefer to shoot a ring instead of a dot so I can always see the X.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Mahly said:


> We're all different.
> I can shoot and hit a target with duct tape on my pin guard blocking any view of the target (but not the pin). I haven't tried this with a lens though.
> With a lens, at the moment, I prefer to shoot a ring instead of a dot so I can always see the X.


I think not so much on "We're all different" with regard to this topic. After doing some searches back to 2002 it's overwhelming the amount of folks that claim to focus mainly on the target, not the dot. While there are many that have the same issue with dots/pins they all seem to have a workaround to deal with this such as rings and the like. While a large percentage of shooters are focusing on the target, I wonder what percentage of these shooters are truly skilled performers? Take 1000 archer poll and you'll get a great majority claiming to shoot with back tension while placing focus on the target. Take the same poll of these archers and ask how many shoot 55X or better on a consistent basis. Now I think we can agree the percentages would do a reversal. Food for thought.


----------



## nochance (Nov 27, 2008)

conspiracy theory?


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

I think EPLC is pointing out the fact that there is another one of the expert topics where everyone just regurgitates the same thing they've heard for years. Most probably even try to do it that way, but to what level of success we don't know for sure. 

I can say I just burn a hole through the X, but what does that mean? Well, to me it means nothing. I can't see the X either. When I shoot indoors, I use a dot that is between 1/8" and 3/16". I can't even see the ten ring. So why would I think I should try to focus on the target instead of the dot? I don't. Focus goes on the dot. 

Now the question is to what level of success. Being fairly new at this game, I don't have wins at nationals shoots or anything to support my claims. I can only go by what I've seen from behind the string. Therefore I won't claim that this should be the best way to look at your sight picture. 

What I will say, is that without a doubt, you can be very accurate shooting this way. Don't be afraid to rethink the status quo. Like EPLC has suggested, don't think just because 90% of everyone you talk to says you should stare at the X, that you should not be willing to try the opposite. You may be surprised. 

You should also remember that trying something new is not something you do in 15 minutes.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Man, I have went through this many times with my training and to me it is amazing how much different I can feel depending on how i approach a shot when it comes to aiming.

1. burn a hole in the x

2. Focus on the pin 100% and let the target blur out

3. Spectator shoot where i take a step back and just supervise

I train with all three of these methods all the time because they all feel so different and that way when I am shooting a competition if I deviate from my competition choice my senses notify me and I can let down and draw back and do it with the correct one. For me right now I compete with spectator shooting, it just seems to produce my best shooting overall and not only do I score well with it but it is very relaxing and easy for me to duplicate a similar feel hundreds of times in a row without being overly stressed out.

But the other two methods to me are very important and I actually prefer training with focusing on the pin, to me it is a great method to use and see if your firing engine is truly independent from your aiming and that is what I use that particular training for. But what i find is that I have a really freaking good float and strong shooting when I do it which is very tempting to me but the problem is that it is a hands on method where you are much more tempted to be in control of the pin and I have more stress attached to it on a long scoring round.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

I think it boils down to this: Even though it doesn't move, I have no control over the target. The only thing that moves and is within my process is the bow. I think I'll stick with what is within my control even though there are risks involved. Like cbrunson mentioned anything new takes time to master.

Another question: If I'm not supposed to pay attention to my pin/dot, how can I possibly study my float? It is this question that pointed me in this direction.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

EPLC said:


> Another question: If I'm not supposed to pay attention to my pin/dot, how can I possibly study my float? It is this question that pointed me in this direction.


I would think that they are two seperate things. When you're studying your float, you are doing just that and not shooting for score; you don't even have to fire an arrow to do it unless you just get tired and need to get it off the string... :embara: 

Shooting for score, I stand by the adage that the arrow will go where the eyes are looking. The term of "burning the hole", I believe, just implants in the shooters mind the concept of not looking away from their intended POI.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

This weekend my buddy was talking about some of the issues that he has been having with aiming, he has read my spectator shooting article in the past but like many things I think it was something he read and didn't really put into use. I gave him another way to think of spectator shooting and then reminded him to go back and read it and see if it was something that he should train with and possibly use. 

I told him to take a mental picture of the spot that he wanted to hit and the pin being on that spot, Then when you come to anchor you just make sure that that mental picture is the same as what you are seeing when you look through the peep.

In fact the more i think about it why not take a mental video of what the float should look like on the spot you are going to hit. Then when you come to anchor and look through the peep you can simply be a spectator of the shot by looking through the peep and just watch the video for real instead of the one that you visualized.


Spectator shooting for me produces my best shooting and shooting at a 3d target where I can't really see the 12 ring is where it is most useful because I look at the 12 ring through the binos and I then look with my naked eye and I can't see the 12 ring so it is hard to then transition to coming to anchor and trying to put the pin on the spot. What i have learned in the last year or so is by mentally visualizing my green pin floating on the 12 ring with my naked eye and taking that picture I am now much better at coming to anchor and making a quality shot at the 12 ring.

Now that is 3d but I also do the same thing indoor, you guys have heard me talk about float many times in general and my personal float. What I am not sure that I convey is that I am aware of my normal float size but I also am aware of my future goal for my float size and I do visualize that goal and then train to try and actually produce it. 

I hadn't talked about this to much lately so it was nice to actually take a step back and let it rattle around in my brain a little, this saturday I had a really good day at my 3d shoot that I wanted to win really bad and I put up a quality score that has a chance. To do so I had a simple goal to take a good mental picture of the target and then come to anchor and float on the 12 ring smoothly with my normal good float and if anything felt weird I was going to let down. I remember during the shoot that some guy with a little kid caught up to my slow 5 man group and we told him he could go ahead and shoot through if he wanted to and he chose to follow us for a while, after a few targets he made a comment to me that you sure are getting your moneys worth today because for some reason the footing was poor on those shots and i let down a few times on them and fixed my footing and posture. One of them was a 44 yard black pig and one was a upper 30 yard shot and both of them I totally pegged the 12 ring. On the first draw attempt each time when I came to anchor my float was simply pathetic and I just floated and felt my system for a few seconds and let down and made the adjustments to my footing and posture and then came to anchor and there it was my natural float so I started my firing engine and sent the arrow on its way. To me the visualization of what my pin should float like and where my pin should float was the key to why I made it through a tough course with a good solid score.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

EPlC, to me there is a difference between watching something, ignoring something, focusing on something. When I am spectator shooting I am totally watching something happen the way I visualized it happening. When I am focusing 100% on something I am zoning everything else out and nothing else matters and during that 100% focus I am ignoring other things and I loose the ability to know what they are doing.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

I don't think anyone says not to pay attention to the pin/dot. It's that you focus on the target and let the pin/dot become part of the sight picture you want.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I seem to shoot best when I focus on the sight picture as though it was all in the same plane. As if there was no way to look "past" the dot because it has simply become part of the target. This produces the least anxiety and also the most stable float, the greatest feeling of being a spectator as Padgett describes. My dot becomes a part of the target.

-Grant


----------



## fanio (Feb 1, 2011)

I like that, Grant


----------



## nochance (Nov 27, 2008)

Do whatever works best for you. Don't wait for Levi to say its ok. 
I still shoot with 1 eye closed. I know its not the recommended way.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

montigre said:


> I would think that they are two seperate things. When you're studying your float, you are doing just that and not shooting for score; you don't even have to fire an arrow to do it unless you just get tired and need to get it off the string... :embara:
> 
> Shooting for score, I stand by the adage that the arrow will go where the eyes are looking. The term of "burning the hole", I believe, just implants in the shooters mind the concept of not looking away from their intended POI.


I try to study it every shot, whether I'm scoring or not. As soon as I let go of focusing on it, it opens up. Why wouldn't you want to watch every shot go off? 

I don't get this concept very well. As soon as I try to just let things happen on their own, they do, and the result is not always what I wanted.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

eclark53520 said:


> If you have both eyes open like you're supposed to, the dot or pin should be barely visible. It should be grayed out and honestly you shouldn't even see it.
> 
> After I make sure my sight housing is centered, bubble is level, and am settled into my anchor, I simply stare at the x and execute the shot. My best shots are almost always when I don't have any clue where the pin is when the shot breaks because I'm 100% focused on the x. If I'm not fully focused, my accuracy suffers.
> 
> I'm not saying this is the only way to shoot x's...but it's not impossible. If it doesn't work for you, that's fine. Do whatever works for you. Don't call another style impossible or wrong because you can't do it.





montigre said:


> I have to agree with this, but I also shoot with both eyes open. However, I understand it may be difficult to accomplish for those who shoot with an eye closed.





SonnyThomas said:


> I don't think anyone says not to pay attention to the pin/dot. It's that you focus on the target and let the pin/dot become part of the sight picture you want.


Actually it's said quite often and supported by more than not. There are several polls addressing this topic and all come out about the same ratio. I'm beginning to believe that whatever the majority recommends may be a good trigger to look elsewhere for a solution. The problem isn't that these methods won't produce some degree of success, depending on your definition of success.


----------



## eclark53520 (Sep 11, 2012)

EPLC said:


> What I should have said was: I can't stare at the X if the pin is in the way. The only way this can be achieved is to move the pin. While I do shoot with both eyes open, I have not been able to accomplish the method as you describe it. Compounding my problem is I am right eye dominant shooting left handed.


That's your problem. You need to shoot right handed. IMO of course.


----------



## eclark53520 (Sep 11, 2012)

EPLC said:


> I think it boils down to this: Even though it doesn't move, I have no control over the target. The only thing that moves and is within my process is the bow. I think I'll stick with what is within my control even though there are risks involved. Like cbrunson mentioned anything new takes time to master.
> 
> Another question: If I'm not supposed to pay attention to my pin/dot, how can I possibly study my float? It is this question that pointed me in this direction.


Studying your float and shooting for score shouldn't be done at the same time IMO. Therfore your techniques for both can be vastly different.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

eclark53520 said:


> That's your problem. You need to shoot right handed. IMO of course.


If you knew anything at all about my history you wouldn't offer this opinion.



eclark53520 said:


> Studying your float and shooting for score shouldn't be done at the same time IMO. Therfore your techniques for both can be vastly different.


I do not agree. Doing something differently for study purposes is a useless endeavor.


----------



## eclark53520 (Sep 11, 2012)

EPLC said:


> If you knew anything at all about my history you wouldn't offer this opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> I do not agree. Doing something differently for study purposes is a useless endeavor.


If you offered any information about your history I would know. Quit asking questions if your going to be condescending when people offer their advice.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

In the recently shot NE Sectionals there were 215 shooters. There were a total of 31 300's shot. Out of that 31 only 8 were 55X or better. There were no 60X games and only 1 59X game. So less than 4% of the shooters shot 55X or better which is probably a good estimate across the board. Let's say 4% or 5%... even 10% are shooting at this level (but doubtful). Unfortunately it's the other 95% that provide most of the opinion with regard to proper shooting methodology.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

EPLC said:


> I'm beginning to believe that whatever the majority recommends may be a good trigger to look elsewhere for a solution. The problem isn't that these methods won't produce some degree of success, depending on your definition of success.


EPLC, you can spend your time going about re-inventing the archery wheel and perhaps some of the changes you choose to make will work out for you. However, just because others choose to use methods that you personally have difficulty with does not provide you with a blanket license to totally discredit the methods or disrespect the users. Not everyone, as you often allude, is committing themselves to archery mediocrity, nor are they stuck in some inescapable plateau because of the methods used to loose an arrow with precision differ from the methods you choose to adopt... In fact, many are actually excelling in the sport and enjoying the process.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

montigre said:


> EPLC, you can spend your time going about re-inventing the archery wheel and perhaps some of the changes you choose to make will work out for you. However, just because others choose to use methods that you personally have difficulty with does not provide you with a blanket license to totally discredit the methods or disrespect the users. Not everyone, as you often allude, is committing themselves to archery mediocrity, nor are they stuck in some inescapable plateau because of the methods used to loose an arrow with precision differ from the methods you choose to adopt... In fact, many are actually excelling in the sport and enjoying the process.


You are free to follow the crowd as you please, I'm just pointing out that archery isn't a majority rules situation. You have about 5% that are actually performing at a high level and a large portion of the other 95% telling us how it is done.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Just like time and time again, denying much of anything someone puts forth when he ask...............


----------



## nochance (Nov 27, 2008)

Just because someone disagrees with you you put them in the group of people that can't shoot and therefore they shouldn't be giving advice? c'mon


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

SonnyThomas said:


> Just like time and time again, denying much of anything someone puts forth when he asks...............


..............................


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

start with 2003 and just the Big Boy class. Chance B has won the Midwest Open 3 times and has never shot perfect. 

https://www.nfaausa.com/results/vegas


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

nochance said:


> Just because someone disagrees with you you put them in the group of people that can't shoot and therefore they shouldn't be giving advice? c'mon


Same picture I get....


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

EPLC, I think you may be over generalizing.
Just because someone in that 95% says something, doesn't mean anyone listens, or repeats it. 
Usually it's someone in the 1% explaining how they do it that gets repeated. Does it lose something in the grapevine? Maybe.
But to look at it with the mindset that everything you hear is most likely wrong is not going to help many. 
If the norm doesn't work for you, fine. That doesn't mean it won't or didn't help anyone else in that top 5%.
One can look at Reo and say " leaning back is the way to go". That would be true for some, but most would do better with less leaning.
You've been around the block, and you have found alternative methods that worked better for you. Those may or may not work for others looking to break into that 5%.
To me, the most disappointing thing here (not just this thread) is that people are told that their way isn't the "right" way, instead of being able to post what works. 
Focusing on the target IS the best way.... For some, not all. 
I'd rather here what did and didn't work for you, than hear what won't work for me.


----------



## nate0404 (Dec 7, 2013)

I stare at the X through my dot, after my float becomes perfectly still I will execute my shot using only the purest and truest back tension the world has ever seen. And really that is the only right way to shoot a bow.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

nate0404 said:


> I stare at the X through my dot, after my float becomes perfectly still I will execute my shot using only the purest and truest back tension the world has ever seen. And really that is the only right way to shoot a bow.....FOR ME


 Fixed


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

EPLC said:


> In the recently shot NE Sectionals there were 215 shooters. There were a total of 31 300's shot. Out of that 31 only 8 were 55X or better. There were no 60X games and only 1 59X game. So less than 4% of the shooters shot 55X or better which is probably a good estimate across the board.


This is not correct. In the recently held Mid-Atlantic Sectionals, there were 320 Adult shooters (I did not include any of the youth divisions in this tally), 110 of the adult shooters shot scores of 300, 9 shot perfect 60x games and out of the lot, there were 52 who scored 55x or better. You should not judge the entire archery world by results that may or may not be found in your little corner.... :wink:


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

montigre said:


> This is not correct. In the recently held Mid-Atlantic Sectionals, there were 320 Adult shooters (I did not include any of the youth divisions in this tally), 110 of the adult shooters shot scores of 300, 9 shot perfect 60x games and out of the lot, there were 52 who scored 55x or better. You should not judge the entire archery world by results that may or may not be found in your little corner.... :wink:


Actually if you counted the total number of archers I'll bet our numbers would be very close. Even if you just count the adults, the total of 55X plus shooters is still only 16% which leaves a great portion of the remaining 84% providing most of the advise and opinions. I'm not trying to pick on anyone, what I'm saying is there is a lot of information passed on by that unknowing 84% that becomes Gospel in the eyes of many... who then in turn continue passing it on without any reference to actual shooting performance. At some point it becomes "like you're supposed to" like everyone seems to know what is "supposed" to be done.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

eclark53520 said:


> If you have both eyes open like you're supposed to, the dot or pin should be barely visible. It should be grayed out and honestly you shouldn't even see it.
> 
> After I make sure my sight housing is centered, bubble is level, and am settled into my anchor, I simply stare at the x and execute the shot. My best shots are almost always when I don't have any clue where the pin is when the shot breaks because I'm 100% focused on the x. If I'm not fully focused, my accuracy suffers.
> 
> I'm not saying this is the only way to shoot x's...but it's not impossible. If it doesn't work for you, that's fine. Do whatever works for you. Don't call another style impossible or wrong because you can't do it.





eclark53520 said:


> That's your problem. You need to shoot right handed. IMO of course.





eclark53520 said:


> Studying your float and shooting for score shouldn't be done at the same time IMO. Therfore your techniques for both can be vastly different.





eclark53520 said:


> If you offered any information about your history I would know. Quit asking questions if your going to be condescending when people offer their advice.





nochance said:


> Just because someone disagrees with you you put them in the group of people that can't shoot and therefore they shouldn't be giving advice? c'mon


Nope, just have a problem with the "my way or the highway" bunch. (See fine example above)


----------



## nate0404 (Dec 7, 2013)

EPLC said:


> Nope, just have a problem with the "my way or the highway" bunch. (See fine example above)


I was just messing around with my post, I guess you are to close to this sub forum to find the humor in it. And by the way, you sort of seem like a my way or the highway guy to me.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

nate0404 said:


> I was just messing around with my post, I guess you are to close to this sub forum to find the humor in it. And by the way, you sort of seem like a my way or the highway guy to me.


Actually I don't care what anyone else does that they may find successful, or not successful for that matter. The reality is anytime you suggest anything that isn't accepted as Gospel by some of the folks within that 84% they attack, insult and somehow think they are obligated to tell you what to do. And then if you have the audacity to not follow their commands... well just use the search engine. 

If you read my posts I never tell anyone what they must do. What I do is share my own findings, experiments and theories. If they help someone then great. I do have a big problem with folks that sell this as an exact science. What works for some may not work for others and on and on... I also didn't come here to be told what to do, I come here for information, not to be coached. I've been around the block with this stuff, tried most of it, and can tell you not everything is always as it seems. Now, as far as this topic goes; I said I was working on placing my main focus on the dot. In the eyes of some this seems to be a capital offence.


----------



## 35WLN (Oct 4, 2014)

While I am somewhat new again to archery, I believe that padgett is on to something important. I come from an action pistol background, where the vast majority of top level competitors use visualization to execute the stage on "auto pilot". In a sense you are prerecordING a movie in your mind of what you want to happen. Then when the time comes you play the movie. Some of my best stages felt like I was just an observer and time seemed to just crawl, although they would be my fastest and most accurate.


----------



## smithte426 (Feb 20, 2012)

tag


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

EPLC said:


> *Actually I don't care what anyone else does that they may find successful, or not successful for that matter*. The reality is anytime you suggest anything that isn't accepted as Gospel by some of the folks within that 84% they attack, insult and somehow think they are obligated to tell you what to do. And then if you have the audacity to not follow their commands... well just use the search engine.
> 
> If you read my posts I never tell anyone what they must do. What I do is share my own findings, experiments and theories. If they help someone then great. I do have a big problem with folks that sell this as an exact science. What works for some may not work for others and on and on...I also didn't come here to be told what to do, I come here for information, not to be coached. *I've been around the block with this stuff, tried most of it, and can tell you not everything is always as it seems*. Now, as far as this topic goes; I said I was working on placing my main focus on the dot. In the eyes of some this seems to be a capital offence.


And here it is "in the nut shell." You asked; "What say you?" People responded and you "denied" them. If you're so damned right, know it all, quit asking....


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> And here it is "in the nut shell." You asked; "What say you?" People responded and you "denied" them. If you're so damned right, know it all, quit asking....


I asked for opinions, not directives. When people start off their comments with, "if you were doing what you are supposed to do", I take exception. 
It would seem my suggestion that the monkeys are running the zoo has upset some folks. Why would that be?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

I started this thread to suggest that perhaps there is a more effective way to aim other than the standard "burn a hole in the X"... It was not a request for help. It was not intended as a platform for the great majority of folks that "burn a hole in the X" to defend their chosen method. It was not an attempt to tell people not to do it that way, but a suggestion to keep an open mind. It was not intended as a debate and certainly not an invitation to slam my suggestion. It was not an attempt to find a method to help me "burn a hole in the X". What it was, was an attempt to hear from those in the minority that are actually shooting this way. For the few that have actually done that, my hat is off to you.

I would like to say my comments were not aimed to offend anyone but with the intent of pointing out some very real inconsistencies between what is put out in the archery instruction world to "help" people. I think we might ask ourselves where most of the information is being directed. My opinion is that most of what is put out there is directed to the beginner, mid-level or recreational archer and very little is intended for the intermediate to advanced archer. AT is no different in this respect. Even in Bernie's book he points this out. He claims that the average Joe can not duplicate the methods of the professionals so they have to seek a different method... (not sure of the exact words but that's the drift). 

I have high hopes that this forum can stay away from the cookie cutter methods and provide some truly innovative ideas, but there seems to be some hurdles to overcome. While there certainly is a lot that can be learned from the little nuggets dropped here, there is still the tendency to push a lot of that information that was probably not intended for the intermediate to advanced shooters. (My opinion and I'm sticking to it)


----------



## redman (Feb 22, 2003)

Burning a hole in the X" is what I use and I have my best shooting using this method for target- 3d - huning


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

EPLC said:


> I started this thread to suggest that perhaps there is a more effective way to aim other than the standard "burn a hole in the X"... It was not a request for help. It was not intended as a platform for the great majority of folks that "burn a hole in the X" to defend their chosen method. It was not an attempt to tell people not to do it that way, but a suggestion to keep an open mind. It was not intended as a debate and certainly not an invitation to slam my suggestion. It was not an attempt to find a method to help me "burn a hole in the X". What it was, was an attempt to hear from those in the minority that are actually shooting this way. For the few that have actually done that, my hat is off to you.
> 
> I would like to say my comments were not aimed to offend anyone but with the intent of pointing out some very real inconsistencies between what is put out in the archery instruction world to "help" people. I think we might ask ourselves where most of the information is being directed. My opinion is that most of what is put out there is directed to the beginner, mid-level or recreational archer and very little is intended for the intermediate to advanced archer. AT is no different in this respect. Even in Bernie's book he points this out. He claims that the average Joe can not duplicate the methods of the professionals so they have to seek a different method... (not sure of the exact words but that's the drift).
> 
> I have high hopes that this forum can stay away from the cookie cutter methods and provide some truly innovative ideas, but there seems to be some hurdles to overcome. While there certainly is a lot that can be learned from the little nuggets dropped here, there is still the tendency to push a lot of that information that was probably not intended for the intermediate to advanced shooters. (My opinion and I'm sticking to it)


One of the problems with this is the limited topics for discussion. Anyone who has been on AT for more than a year has probably seen every topic discussed several times. They will most likely believe whatever the most popular opinion is, and then the next time that topic comes up, they are now qualified to give advice, further propagating the popular opinion. After awhile it becomes "universally accepted standard." I personally doubt a large number of these guys actually see what's going on with their own shooting. They just simply regurgitate what they've read somewhere else. Then if challenged, they will have to defend their statements. Usually it is easier to be condescending than it is to post up some real world experience to validate trial and error results. You have to consider who is *coming here to give advice *rather than participate in a discussion.

You hit the nail on the head with the reference to what results have been afforded to particular methods as a whole. 

It's pretty easy to say you just burn a hole through the X, but how many times does the arrow go there? :dontknow:


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

EPLC said:


> *I started this thread *to suggest that perhaps there is a more effective way to aim other than the standard "burn a hole in the X"... It was not a request for help. It was not intended as a platform for the great majority of folks that "burn a hole in the X" to defend their chosen method. It was not an attempt to tell people not to do it that way, but a suggestion to keep an open mind. It was not intended as a debate and certainly not an invitation to slam my suggestion. It was not an attempt to find a method to help me "burn a hole in the X". What it was, was an attempt to hear from those in the minority that are actually shooting this way. For the few that have actually done that, my hat is off to you.
> 
> *I would like to say my comments were not aimed to offend anyone *but with the intent of pointing out some very real inconsistencies between what is put out in the archery instruction world to "help" people. I think we might ask ourselves where most of the information is being directed. My opinion is that most of what is put out there is directed to the beginner, mid-level or recreational archer and very little is intended for the intermediate to advanced archer. AT is no different in this respect. Even in Bernie's book he points this out. He claims that the average Joe can not duplicate the methods of the professionals so they have to seek a different method... (not sure of the exact words but that's the drift).
> 
> I have high hopes that this forum can stay away from the cookie cutter methods and provide some truly innovative ideas, but there seems to be some hurdles to overcome. While there certainly is a lot that can be learned from the little nuggets dropped here, there is still the tendency to push a lot of that information that was probably not intended for the intermediate to advanced shooters. (My opinion and I'm sticking to it)





SonnyThomas said:


> All in a way you put something; " For years we've heard over and over you are supposed to burn a hole in the X... " No, I haven't heard this as the most popular. Look all through this forum and it's keeping the pin inside the 10 ring (Vegas) or X ring (5 spot). It's the target the focus and the pin, circle or dot in the middle, becoming part of the "picture." You can't burn a hole in the X if you can't see it. If you're seeing the X then you must be stacking the pin and X, making a figure 8 or however one wants to describe it....Still, you can focus on the X and let the pin come in to make the "picture."* Practiced, either can give accuracy.*
> 
> Iron sights, rifle sights, pistols sight, bow sights, all have to be lined up. Perfect, bullet/arrow goes where the sights are. Now to have the sights on what you want to hit....I am of the opinion if you're concentrating on the sights (focus point) the "target" can become part of the "picture."
> 
> ...


Seeing you "denied" virtually everyone that has responded it well seems "I started this thread " was to shove your way of thinking down everyone's throat....... Your reply above does not begin to apologize for striking out at virtually all that responded.....


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> Seeing you "denied" virtually everyone that has responded it well seems "I started this thread " was to shove your way of thinking down everyone's throat....... Your reply above does not begin to apologize for striking out at virtually all that responded.....


At the point where you actually find yourself contributing something maybe we'll actually have something to discuss.


----------



## nate0404 (Dec 7, 2013)

EPLC said:


> What say you?


So you ask for people's opinions, they don't fall in line with yours so you suggest that the majority of the people giving their opinion can't shoot 55x's. I would be interested in why you chose 55x's as the benchmark for credibility? Is this your average? You started a thread to have a discussion about aiming but it is very clear that a discussion was the furthest thing from your mind, and that is fine, you could have just started a thread stating you find your best results when focussing on your dot. 

So I looked at your profile and see that you are 69 years old, and by the way that you write I assume that you have been shooting for quite some time. I also assume that in your lifetime of shooting you have found which methods give you the best results, which is wonderful and I thank you for sharing your experiences. It could be that the way you do things is truly the "best" way or more likely you have been shooting a certain way for so long that your brain has encoded this muscle memory very deeply, and given the vast amount of repetition what may not be the ideal style of shooting for most shooters has become your ideal style of shooting. Just ask Jim Furyk, but if you did ask him he would be the first to tell you that while he has mastered his golf swing he would not recommend it to others.

I think that threads that ask for opinions or thoughts and then call into question the skill level of those willing to give their opinions and thoughts severely limit the participation in this forum. Threads like these certainly intimidate some newer archers that might have some interesting perspectives if given a voice, and I can only assume that best archers find this typical banter very off putting. Most of the time there are under 10 people viewing this forum, and I presume most of those are the handful of regular posters. I have been following this forum for a while and it should be changed to Intermediate-Advanced Bickering.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

nate0404 said:


> So you ask for people's opinions, they don't fall in line with yours so you suggest that the majority of the people giving their opinion can't shoot 55x's. I would be interested in why you chose 55x's as the benchmark for credibility? Is this your average? You started a thread to have a discussion about aiming but it is very clear that a discussion was the furthest thing from your mind, and that is fine, you could have just started a thread stating you find your best results when focussing on your dot.
> 
> So I looked at your profile and see that you are 69 years old, and by the way that you write I assume that you have been shooting for quite some time. I also assume that in your lifetime of shooting you have found which methods give you the best results, which is wonderful and I thank you for sharing your experiences. It could be that the way you do things is truly the "best" way or more likely you have been shooting a certain way for so long that your brain has encoded this muscle memory very deeply, and given the vast amount of repetition what may not be the ideal style of shooting for most shooters has become your ideal style of shooting. Just ask Jim Furyk, but if you did ask him he would be the first to tell you that while he has mastered his golf swing he would not recommend it to others.
> 
> I think that threads that ask for opinions or thoughts and then call into question the skill level of those willing to give their opinions and thoughts severely limit the participation in this forum. Threads like these certainly intimidate some newer archers that might have some interesting perspectives if given a voice, and I can only assume that best archers find this typical banter very off putting. Most of the time there are under 10 people viewing this forum, and I presume most of those are the handful of regular posters. I have been following this forum for a while and *it should be changed to Intermediate-Advanced Bickering*.


Looks like you fit right in then.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

nate0404 said:


> So you ask for people's opinions, they don't fall in line with yours so you suggest that the majority of the people giving their opinion can't shoot 55x's. I would be interested in why you chose 55x's as the benchmark for credibility? Is this your average? You started a thread to have a discussion about aiming but it is very clear that a discussion was the furthest thing from your mind, and that is fine, you could have just started a thread stating you find your best results when focussing on your dot.
> 
> So I looked at your profile and see that you are 69 years old, and by the way that you write I assume that you have been shooting for quite some time. I also assume that in your lifetime of shooting you have found which methods give you the best results, which is wonderful and I thank you for sharing your experiences. It could be that the way you do things is truly the "best" way or more likely you have been shooting a certain way for so long that your brain has encoded this muscle memory very deeply, and given the vast amount of repetition what may not be the ideal style of shooting for most shooters has become your ideal style of shooting. Just ask Jim Furyk, but if you did ask him he would be the first to tell you that while he has mastered his golf swing he would not recommend it to others.
> 
> I think that threads that ask for opinions or thoughts and then call into question the skill level of those willing to give their opinions and thoughts severely limit the participation in this forum. Threads like these certainly intimidate some newer archers that might have some interesting perspectives if given a voice, and I can only assume that best archers find this typical banter very off putting. Most of the time there are under 10 people viewing this forum, and I presume most of those are the handful of regular posters. I have been following this forum for a while and it should be changed to Intermediate-Advanced Bickering.


Actually you are misinterpreting what has actually gone on here, and I might add in several other threads that I have started as well. I posted up an idea that isn't the majority opinion, thinking out of the box so to speak. Within the blink of an eye the hoards descend on the thread proclaiming "you must return to the box!"... As it becomes apparent the OP will not return to the box, egos are hurt, declarations of rejection are posted, insults become the rule of the day, etc., etc.. So here we are.

Once again, and at the risk of bruising more egos... The majority opinion isn't always the best opinion... regardless of X count.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

EPLC said:


> At the point where you actually find yourself contributing something maybe we'll actually have something to discuss.


I did and you went right by it. It's called practice what you want to use....pretty damned simple.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> I did and you went right by it. It's called practice what you want to use....pretty damned simple.


Sorry I just went back and reviewed all 9 of your posts and can't find one positive thing to comment on. I did feel a lot of negativity though...


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Count the ones you "denied" and you got me beat by a mile..........


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

At some point one has to ask "does this post help anyone else, or should this just be a PM?"
Plenty of those to go around here.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> Count the ones you "denied" and you got me beat by a mile..........


Actually, I posted up a method, haven't changed my position on that method. In turn, you and others have done pretty much what you always do.., find fault and condem. So, yes I reject that. &#55357;&#56398;


----------



## Rick! (Aug 10, 2008)

How is staring at a dot that blocks the X "out of the box thinking?" 

There are fundamentally three ways to go about it, right? Line things up and focus on the target, line things up and focus on the dot/pin/ring, or keep switching focus between the target and sight. A shooter has a choice to figure out what's right for them. 

If I'm evaluating my hold in a scoring round, it means I'm stuck and not executing - I call it called spectator aiming.  

I use a ring, I stare the X right in the face, and if I execute cleanly, that is exactly where the arrow hits. For me, the peep, ring and X ring form a tunnel that I look through - the ring kinda gets absorbed into the target and all that's left is a centered X. Sometimes, when the ring isn't perfectly aligned when I stare at the X, the arrow still goes there. I call this "using the Force." When the ring is not lined up on the X but at 1:00 just inside the X ring, and I can see that the arrow will be a liner and I feel confident about my execution, I'll let it go and count the X afterwards. Can I do it 60 times in a row? Nope, I'm still workin' on it. Both eyes open, left eye dominant, right handed shooter. 

I use a pin for hunting, put it where I want to hit, stare at the piece of fur behind the green dot and voila! Venison or pork in the freezer.

I will say one thing after watching a female pro shoot on the bale next to me last weekend, we are all making this way too hard.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Rick! said:


> How is staring at a dot that blocks the X "out of the box thinking?"


It can be considered "out of the box" because it is not the majority opinion. There have been many threads and polls concerning this and hands down it is focus on the spot that is the most popular viewpoint.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Mahly said:


> At some point one has to ask "does this post help anyone else, or should this just be a PM?"
> Plenty of those to go around here.


Beings the vast majority got "denied", including you (Post 15 and 16).....I'd consider deleting the whole thing...

Me; "I don't think anyone says not to pay attention to the pin/dot. It's that you focus on the target and let the pin/dot become part of the sight picture you want."

EPLC's blanket statement; " Actually it's said quite often and supported by more than not." 

Now if you're looking at your target and your pin/dot is over on the next person's target are you going to shoot? No. You focus on your target and let the pin/dot become what you want sight picture to be. IE, you are paying attention to your pin/dot.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> Beings the vast majority got "denied", including you (Post 15 and 16).....I'd consider deleting the whole thing...
> 
> Me; "I don't think anyone says not to pay attention to the pin/dot. It's that you focus on the target and let the pin/dot become part of the sight picture you want."
> 
> ...


Just so we are quite clear on this. I posted an opinion that "you" and some others apparently do not agree with. Since starting this topic there have been posts that actually support the concept and there are those that have posted either objections to, or suggestions as to how I might "fix" my inability to conform. It would seem the latter holds the majority opinion. During this time I have not changed "my" mind on this matter, nor do I believe the majority opinion is always the best path to take. I also fail to see how standing one's ground is a denial of anyone. Isn't it really the other way around? 

Although I will admit it is sometimes difficult to understand where you are coming from based on your posts, it would seem that you have taken exception to just about everything I have ever posted. If I have missed something that we have actually agreed on I apologize but as mentioned it is sometimes difficult to understand your unique style.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

SonnyThomas said:


> All in a way you put something; " For years we've heard over and over you are supposed to burn a hole in the X... " No, I haven't heard this as the most popular. Look all through this forum and it's keeping the pin inside the 10 ring (Vegas) or X ring (5 spot). It's the target the focus and the pin, circle or dot in the middle, becoming part of the "picture." You can't burn a hole in the X if you can't see it. If you're seeing the X then you must be stacking the pin and X, making a figure 8 or however one wants to describe it....Still, you can focus on the X and let the pin come in to make the "picture." *Practiced, either can give accuracy.*
> 
> Iron sights, rifle sights, pistols sight, bow sights, all have to be lined up. Perfect, bullet/arrow goes where the sights are. Now to have the sights on what you want to hit....I am of the opinion if you're concentrating on the sights (focus point) the "target" can become part of the "picture."
> 
> ...


My initial post. Where did I disagree with you?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Actually in your first sentence. Here's one for you: Where did I deny you?


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

I heard is it described differently, big deal. Hell, I agreed in the most part. You just can't help yourself, can you? You lost and you know it.....


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Ok, time out!


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Back to topic. Not who agrees with whom. Further off topic bickering will result in infractions.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Since working on redirecting my main focus to the pin I've noticed I have more awareness of what my sight picture is doing. As a result I've been more able to identify solutions to issues that have come up. All winter I've been shooting my Dominator Max at 45# due to some shoulder issues. My recently purchased Dominator Pro Me maxes out at 51 pounds and I've been shooting it outdoors. Unfortunately my shoulder isn't doing well with that extra 6 pounds so I set up the 45 pounder for outdoors as well. 

The first thing I noticed was that the pin on the 45# bow was breaking out to the left suddenly. I could feel by watching the reaction of the pin that I had an alignment issue. I increased the d-loop by 1/8" and tried it out late this morning. I had to try things out inside due to rain but there was a significant improvement in the stability and hold of the bow. I shot a 20cm (bunny) at 20 yards and a 35cm at 25 & 30 yards. The hold still was not perfect but much improved. The alignment seemed good so I'm going to play with the bars/weights to tighten things up more. 

Put simply, when my main focus is placed on the spot I do not have as good of an awareness of what the bow is doing.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

How's the hold going?


----------



## Matty-NJ (Dec 5, 2003)

We all need to keep in mind that archery is a very individual sport, what works for one person may not work for another. Sure some techniques are more "widely-accepted" but that doesn't make them right for everyone, nor "wrong" if they don't work for you. Just look at the archers that win all the time, they aren't cookie cutter in form and technique. They each use what works for them.

To become the best archer we can be, we need to explore different techniques until we hit upon one that is well suited for us and stick with it. That's not to say stop improving, but instead work towards mastering what works for you. Not what works for someone else. You can use their ideas to feed off of and see if they work for you too, and it may give you confidence in knowing that a big name does something exactly like you. 

Will we likely "waste" some time working towards techniques that won't work for us? Sure, I don't think of it as a negative though, each time you give something a fair shake but it doesn't work for you, you're now one step closer to finding what DOES work for you. Once you find it, embrace it, become confident. 

Keep in mind too that just because one method works for one game, doesn't mean it works well for all games for you. When I shoot spots, I prefer to actually see the X and focus on it. I've used rings and true-spot scopes as well as just open scopes with or without a lens. Once my sight is anchored and all the rings line up, it's time to go to work and focus on the X. That's what works for me.

For hunting, 3d and even Field rounds, I use pins. It might be hard to describe how I do this, but I am still focusing on the spot or the X, it just has a fuzzy pin floating on and around it. When the pin moves I see the X or the spot I'm watching. My focus stays on the spot and I never follow the pin, that leads me to fighting with the pin, tension and then a shaky sight picture. If that happens, I let down. For sure this is a little more difficult for my brain and took more work than just staring at an unimpeded X. However, once you learn that focus on the spot and kind of "ignore" the pin, it works...for me.

One thing I do think is "universal" though is positive imagery and positive thoughts. I used to think positive imagery was a bunch of hippie hooey. It's not. Before every shot I run positive imagery through my mind. I close my eyes and see vivid flashes of my arrows in the X or in the spot. Like a fast movie of all of my best shots. I tell myself "that's me". "Strong shot". "All about the process". This all happens quickly while I'm nocking my arrow and setting my hand into the bow. When I need this most is when nerves start to get jumbled. I try to make sure I really picture a perfect shot and an arrow exactly where I want it. I picture my sight picture exactly as I want it to look. It helps without a doubt. I think that will help EVERY one! You obviously have to "make it your own", but some kind of positive imagery and positive thoughts will surprise you in how much better you will shoot each shot.

If I'm lucky, this will help at least one person.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Matty-NJ said:


> We all need to keep in mind that archery is a very individual sport, what works for one person may not work for another. Sure some techniques are more "widely-accepted" but that doesn't make them right for everyone, nor "wrong" if they don't work for you. Just look at the archers that win all the time, they aren't cookie cutter in form and technique. They each use what works for them.
> 
> To become the best archer we can be, we need to explore different techniques until we hit upon one that is well suited for us and stick with it. That's not to say stop improving, but instead work towards mastering what works for you. Not what works for someone else. You can use their ideas to feed off of and see if they work for you too, and it may give you confidence in knowing that a big name does something exactly like you.
> 
> ...


Great post!

There are many still hung up on the tried and true techniqes from books and some very successful shooters from the past. For some reason deviation from those "universally accepted standards" is a sore subject.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

cbrunson said:


> How's the hold going?


It's been good although my bow shoulder has been acting up which isn't helping. Your suggestion to relax the bow arm and pull into the stops is still working well. This, combined with the focus switch is a very complimentary process. Of course the focus swap is two steps forward and one back, but progress nevertheless.


cbrunson said:


> Great post!
> 
> There are many still hung up on the tried and true techniqes from books and some very successful shooters from the past. For some reason deviation from those "universally accepted standards" is a sore subject.


Yes on both statements.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Matty-NJ said:


> We all need to keep in mind that archery is a very individual sport, what works for one person may not work for another. Sure some techniques are more "widely-accepted" but that doesn't make them right for everyone, nor "wrong" if they don't work for you. Just look at the archers that win all the time, they aren't cookie cutter in form and technique. They each use what works for them.
> 
> To become the best archer we can be, we need to explore different techniques until we hit upon one that is well suited for us and stick with it. That's not to say stop improving, but instead work towards mastering what works for you. Not what works for someone else. You can use their ideas to feed off of and see if they work for you too, and it may give you confidence in knowing that a big name does something exactly like you.
> 
> ...


Of the focal point, a well put together post. As such, all within is what I thought we suppose to do. I've said it many times, what works for you works for you and this across the board, from setting up a bow to shooting the best you can.


----------

