# Are you in control of your shot?



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

It was painfully obvious at a local 3D over the weekend that a majority of Trad shooters do not really have control of their shot. Or maybe varied degrees of control would be a better description. As an example the group I was shooting with was messing around after the shoot and we did a 1, 2, 3 shoot all at once. Well I was calling the 1, 2, 3 but stopped after 2 - all 3 of the other guys let rip within a couple seconds. So I started watching a little closer and most don't look like they are really ready to release when the they do. Made we kind of wonder what percentage of Trad archers really have control of the shot. A good indicator is if you can let down - seems that is one of the toughest things to do in archery. What do you think?


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

center - 

badda bing, badda bang, badda boom ...

(Hey, I'm from brooklyn)

Also will to bet a lot of the guys you described are the same ones (types) giving advice here on a daily basis. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Most I see, the bow is in control, not the archer. Many trad archers want or strive to have the bow an appendage of themselves, but in actual practice, they are the appendage to the bow. The first clue I see is the way they approach the bow, before even drawn. When the archer does the little lean-in, shuffle, shrug of shoulders, and look like they are ready to pounce like a sumo on a piece of bacon, they have lost control. The bow should be easier to operate, and as you say, not operate if you so choose.


----------



## xxxJakkxxx (Apr 17, 2014)

I didn't know it was difficult to have control. I'm extremely new, I think about 3 months, and many times I have come to full draw and just let down the bow to redraw as I wasn't happy with my draw... I thought it was just commonplace and everyone did it...


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

Control of the shot. Are you meaning a controled purposed shot squence?


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

xxxJakkxxx said:


> I didn't know it was difficult to have control. I'm extremely new, I think about 3 months, and many times I have come to full draw and just let down the bow to redraw as I wasn't happy with my draw... I thought it was just commonplace and everyone did it...


No, for many, it's like jumping off a cliff. Once they have psyched up and committed to the shot, they cannot turn it off or turn back. It's what the bow has taught them as how to shoot


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I can let down and I do sometimes. However, I don't always have the discipline. Sometimes I know I'm not really ready (maybe it's just windy and I'm having trouble getting on target) and let it go anyway.

More importantly, I find I don't always have control in those final moments before release. I think my biggest problem right now is that I have to struggle to not anticipate the release. I'll sometimes feel it coming and quit before the arrow is gone. Everything is going great and then I bail out. So I won't say that I'm "in control" but it's something that I' working hard on.

I probably do some things that some of the guys at your shoot aren't doing. I shoot a lot. If anything, I sometimes shoot too much. Since I haven't been working much, I treat shooting the bow much like a job. I often go at it all day. I didn't count but I'll bet that I shot at least a thousand arrows yesterday...easy. LOL, I guess I should be a lot better than I am.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Arron said:


> Control of the shot. Are you meaning a controled purposed shot squence?


Yes, that pretty well describes it. Maybe add to that executed shot sequence.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

I'm in full control of my bow but I'm not sure who is controlling me :wink:


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Guys - 

Everybody muffs a shot, sometimes more than one. That normal, and we deal with it.

I think center was referring to the "grip it and rip it" types who think that's the way to do it, or the ones who really can't control any part of the shot.

Viper1 out.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Viper1 said:


> Guys -
> 
> Everybody muffs a shot, sometimes more than one. That normal, and we deal with it.
> 
> ...


That's the ones - some know better and can't help themselves, others don't even know, and even a few that think that is the way to shoot. At any rate none of them were on the leader board at the end of the day.


----------



## xxxJakkxxx (Apr 17, 2014)

Sanford said:


> No, for many, it's like jumping off a cliff. Once they have psyched up and committed to the shot, they cannot turn it off or turn back. It's what the bow has taught them as how to shoot


 I'm pretty glad I can turn back. My group of shooting buddies love to crack jokes while we're shooting and they'll get me almost rolling right before my release and I'll have to just give up on that draw and try again when I compose myself. I think it's good practice for it since it's almost out of nowhere.


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

I do a little yoga and in that there is very precise moves and each flow into another with a purpose. That is the same mentality I place on my shot sequence.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

I'm trying


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Control is relative to the specific archer and the specific circumstance.

It can apply to both physical and mental aspects of the shot.

Just because an archer struggles with holding anchor longer than he trains for does NOT necessarily mean he has no control over his bow when he shoots normally.

All that test proves is whether an archer is in control under that specific circumstance as well as being an indicator of what COULD be happening...NOT what is happening ALL the time.

Ray :shade:


----------



## wseward (Mar 7, 2013)

Sometimes yes and sometimes no. It sure is nice when you feel/know you have just loosed a near perfect shot!


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Control is relative to the specific archer and the specific circumstance.
> Ray :shade:


I disagree - either you are in control or you are not. Shoot fast, shoot slow, standing on your head it does not matter - either your in control or your not. The archer knows - if he is honest with himself or not, may be the real question.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

centershot said:


> I disagree - either you are in control or you are not. Shoot fast, shoot slow, standing on your head it does not matter - either your in control or your not. The archer knows - if he is honest with himself or not, may be the real question.


So if I ask a target archer to snap shoot accurately and they can't...than are we all to assume he has no control of his shot under any other circumstance?

Ray :shade:


----------



## Yohon (Aug 28, 2003)

I think less than 5%........


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

BLACK WOLF said:


> So if I ask a target archer to snap shoot accurately and they can't...than are we all to assume he has no control of his shot under any other circumstance?
> 
> Ray :shade:


Why do you assume a Target shooter can't snap shoot accurately? I can - and in control. Remember Fast, Slow, Standing on your head? It will likely not be 'as accurate' as taking the time to set up the shot better, but it is also usually closer and does not require that degree of accuracy anyway. Same with trick shots. But wait, that pigeonholes me as a 'Target Shooter' - What do you call someone that enjoys shooting paper, foam, stumps and fur for fun and competitions? I'd say a regular here on the AT Trad forum.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Yohon said:


> I think less than 5%........


I am afraid that you are in the neighborhood..........maybe another thread about why are you 'not' in control of your shot may be appropriate.


----------



## ranchoarcher (Sep 26, 2013)

The percent of control is indicated by the ring number.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

ranchoarcher said:


> The percent of control is indicated by the ring number.


One poor guy has target panic so bad he gets within 2" of his anchor and away it goes. Every once in a while it goes where he intended - but, as expected the consistency is poor and shows up when you total the scores at the end. He knows, he hates it, but does not want to do what it takes to get over it.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

I think a lot of people coming from the compound side think that's how you're supposed to shoot and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. I've talked to a lot of people who think it would be cool to shoot a recurve, you know "just pulling back and shooting in one fluid motion, no sight; just you and the bow". It sounds great but shooting that way successfully takes a ton of practice, if it's ever achieved with any consistent accuracy.

I imagine some of whom you speak are struggling with the weight of their bow, fighting target panic, have fallen into a set rhythm that doesn't include any reference on the back end, or any combination since one often leads to another.

Lets face it, shooting stickbows isn't the easiest thing in the world and there are lots of pitfalls and wrong turns for most of us as we progress. Add in that most are self taught. About all you can hope for is that people are aware of their limitations and choose their shots on living animals accordingly. 

If they are just target shooters and they are enjoying themselves, who cares.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Easykeeper said:


> I think a lot of people coming from the compound side think that's how you're supposed to shoot and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. I've talked to a lot of people who think it would be cool to shoot a recurve, you know "just pulling back and shooting in one fluid motion, no sight; just you and the bow". It sounds great but shooting that way successfully takes a ton of practice, if it's ever achieved with any consistent accuracy.
> 
> I imagine some of whom you speak are struggling with the weight of their bow, fighting target panic, have fallen into a set rhythm that doesn't include any reference on the back end, or any combination since one often leads to another.
> 
> ...


True - problem is they are all hunters first. Actually the kid described above shot a beautiful big 4 point mule deer a couple years ago. Sure would be hard to walk into the woods with much confidence though.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

centershot said:


> Why do you assume a Target shooter can't snap shoot accurately?


I don't assume anything!

I setup a specific circumstance.

I NEVER said or even tried to imply that ALL target archers can't snap shoot accurately.

Are you trying to yell us ALL target archers can snap shoot accurately?

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Easykeeper said:


> I think a lot of people coming from the compound side think that's how you're supposed to shoot and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. I've talked to a lot of people who think it would be cool to shoot a recurve, you know "just pulling back and shooting in one fluid motion, no sight; just you and the bow". It sounds great but shooting that way successfully takes a ton of practice, if it's ever achieved with any consistent accuracy.
> 
> I imagine some of whom you speak are struggling with the weight of their bow, fighting target panic, have fallen into a set rhythm that doesn't include any reference on the back end, or any combination since one often leads to another.
> 
> ...


:thumbs_up

Ray :shade:


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

It's taken a long time and a lot of practice but, yes I am in control of my shot.

Oh - and yes I can snap shoot "instinctively" accurately as well - it's not as hard as some make it out to be.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Anyone who has mastered control of their bow will find snap-shooting an easy diversion. Snap shooting is not hard for anyone unless, to wit, one doesn't have control of their bow.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

If Snap Shooting accurately was so easy as some people are now trying to say it is than there would be more archers winning tournaments shooting that style.

The fact is...not every archer can do it effectively and just because an archer is a successful target archer...does NOT mean they can effectively Snap Shoot.

Anytime someone claims or implies that everyone who fails a specific test shows absolute proof that an archer has no control over their bow in any and all other circumstances...they should be questioned.

Its like testing a few white boys to see how high they can jump and than claiming white boys can't jump :wink

Ray :shade:


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

BLACK WOLF said:


> If Snap Shooting accurately was so easy as some people are now trying to say it is than there would be more archers winning tournaments shooting that style.
> 
> The fact is...not every archer can do it effectively and just because an archer is a successful target archer...does NOT mean they can effectively Snap Shoot.
> 
> Ray :shade:


Snap shooting is a poor way to hit anything, much beyond 10 yards or so, which is why you don't see people who want to hit what they are aiming at using it. The sad thing is the guys who should be the most concerned about hitting what they are aiming at seem to think snap shooting is the most effective for hunting. Snap shooting is just one tool in the tool box of a well rounded archer/hunter it's not the way and the path.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

BLACK WOLF said:


> If Snap Shooting accurately was so easy as some people are now trying to say it is than there would be more archers winning tournaments shooting that style.
> 
> The fact is...not every archer can do it effectively and just because an archer is a successful target archer...does NOT mean they can effectively Snap Shoot.
> 
> ...


Snap shooting is just not 'as accurate' as taking the time to line up and execute the shot. If you were to do it in a tournament chances are pretty good you'd take a beating. When you through 'every archer' into the mix you really have a can of worms. You can keep trying to separate Target shooters and Hunters, but the fact remains that most of us do BOTH - many of the more successful Target archers are also the most successful Hunters - there are more thing in common than not. Most if not all of the archers I know started as bowhunters and took up target shooting to make them better bowhunters. But you really can not hunt all year around so we need something to fill the time in between seasons. I really do not understand the fascination with trying to separate the two.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Anytime someone claims or implies that everyone who fails a specific test shows absolute proof that an archer has no control over their bow in any and all other circumstances...they should be questioned.Ray :shade:


Just one indicator Ray, it appears you made an incorrect assumption.......


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Viper1 said:


> Also will to bet a lot of the guys you described are the same ones (types) giving advice here on a daily basis.
> Viper1 out.


Nope, those guys say there is too much bickering and arguing over stupid little details and don't visit here much.........guess they have that under control.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

centershot said:


> Just one indicator Ray, it appears you made an incorrect assumption.......


If you're gonna make a claim you need something to back it up...sooo what exactly am I assuming?

Ray :shade:


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

Viper1 said:


> Also will to bet a lot of the guys you described are the same ones (types) giving advice here on a daily basis.
> 
> Viper1 out.






Quote of the year right there!!!!!




Dewayne


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> Snap shooting is a poor way to hit anything, much beyond 10 yards or so, which is why you don't see people who want to hit what they are aiming at using it.


Depends on the archer and what they consider effective. 

The fact is...not all bowhunters need to share the same GOALS as some target archers.



Matt_Potter said:


> The sad thing is the guys who should be the most concerned about hitting what they are aiming at seem to think snap shooting is the most effective for hunting.


For some archers it is very effective...for others...it's more of an excuse for poor shooting.



Matt_Potter said:


> Snap shooting is just one tool in the tool box of a well rounded archer/hunter it's not the way and the path.


For some archers it is the way and the path...but its not for everyone...nor should it be!

Ray :shade:


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

Yes....I feel I'm in control of my shot...it's funny when I attend shoots the archers at the bags are a mixed bag...ALWAYS you can pick out the few that will be in the top 5.... He's the one that is total control of every aspect of his shot.

Guys like Matt Potter,,Jason Wesbrock,John Dimmer..I've never seen a snap shooter on the podium.


Dewayne Martin


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Sometimes more than other times. There is always a degree of variation, in terms of how I lose control, and how much. I think that on some level, it is an ongoing battle we have with our bodies that always want to try something new 

in terms of the examples first described, absolutely. In terms of consistent performance I can accept, rarely, if ever.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

centershot said:


> , but the fact remains that most of us do BOTH - many of the more successful Target archers are also the most successful Hunters - there are more thing in common than not.


NEVER said or tried to imply differently.



centershot said:


> I really do not understand the fascination with trying to separate the two.


That may be because you're fascinated by 'most' and are ignoring the others who do not fall into the category of 'most'.

I'm not fascinated by trying to separate the two but I will acknowledge everyone even if they are part of the minority.

Ray :shade:


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

BLACK WOLF said:


> That may be because you're fascinated by 'most' and are ignoring the others who do not fall into the category of 'most'.
> Ray :shade:


Would that be an assumption or fact?

What fascinates me is putting the arrow in the middle of the target, no matter what the target is. Shooting while I am in control makes that happen a lot more often than shooting when I am not in control of the shot. I have been in both places and definitely prefer control.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Not sure where this post has gone over the last page. I am just going to jump in with a comment regarding the original post.

The other day my coach was telling me I was holding too long. I responded that I am waiting to get control of the bow, rather than having the bow control me. The long hold was like breaking a horse. I was at a point where I needed to wrestle control back and return to that relaxed state that we tend to move in and out of over time. Working on relaxed control is ongoing. My old golf pro used to tell me that you have to give up control to get control. Very Zen. It applies to archery just like golf, if you can figure out what it means.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Not sure where this post has gone over the last page. I am just going to jump in with a comment regarding the original post.
> 
> The other day my coach was telling me I was holding too long. I responded that I am waiting to get control of the bow, rather than having the bow control me. The long hold was like breaking a horse. I was at a point where I needed to wrestle control back and return to that relaxed state that we tend to move in and out of over time. Working on relaxed control is ongoing. My old golf pro used to tell me that you have to give up control to get control. Very Zen. It applies to archery just like golf, if you can figure out what it means.


I can get into a groove where if I were timed from start of draw to release it would not vary much more than a faction of a second between shots. The interesting thing is both my best shooting and worst shooting fits this same outward timing rhythm. The difference is that in once case I feel like I need to drop the string; it's work to hang on, probably a touch of target panic. In the other I'm not even thinking about it and it happens naturally and smoothly. Very similar from outward appearances, very different if you could see what was going on inside. 

You can guess which scenario produces the better accuracy.


----------



## zu! (Feb 19, 2014)

I couldn't snap shoot to save my life. I would have to draw, hold, breathe out, maybe breathe in again, try to feel my back, start shaking,let it down, try again, and maybe hit the target. 

I admire those who can. I'm just a long way from being there yet.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I play around with "snap shooting" some and even mess around shooting without ever reaching full draw. I just don't see much practical use for it. There's certainly application for shooting fast but I wouldn't necessarily call it snap shooting.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

MGF said:


> I play around with "snap shooting" some and even mess around shooting without ever reaching full draw. I just don't see much practical use for it. There's certainly application for shooting fast but I wouldn't necessarily call it snap shooting.


People also don't like calling Instinctive Shooting...Instinctive Shooting.

Snap Shooting has 2 basic definitions.

One is shooting uncontrollably before reaching anchor which more often than not...involves target panic.

The other is shooting while in complete control as soon as anchor is reached.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

centershot said:


> Would that be an assumption or fact?


You tell me. Are you ignoring the archers that make up the minority who in fact can shoot better at fur than they can in competition or while shooting at a different kind of target?

Ray :shade:


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Ray I would not call the second snap shooting 

That is just shooting fast


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

JParanee said:


> Ray I would not call the second snap shooting
> 
> That is just shooting fast


I understand that you may not call it that but others going back decades in our sport have.

Both definitions have been around for awhile.

Ray :shade:


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> You tell me. Are you ignoring the archers that make up the minority who in fact can shoot better at fur than they can in competition or while shooting at a different kind of target?
> 
> Ray :shade:


From a measurement standpoint the existence of such an archer would be difficult to establish as fact. You'd have to somehow compare the accuracy and precision when shooting fur to the accuracy and precision when shooting some other target. One of the first requirements would be a statistically significant number of shots to compare.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> I understand that you may not call it that but others going back decades in our sport have.
> 
> Both definitions have been around for awhile.
> 
> Ray :shade:


Yes but people do all sorts of weird and goofy stuff. LOL just take a look at Washington or your own state house.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

BLACK WOLF said:


> I understand that you may not call it that but others going back decades in our sport have.
> 
> Both definitions have been around for awhile.
> 
> Ray :shade:


You really need to write that book.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

MGF said:


> From a measurement standpoint the existence of such an archer would be difficult to establish as fact. You'd have to somehow compare the accuracy and precision when shooting fur to the accuracy and precision when shooting some other target. One of the first requirements would be a statistically significant number of shots to compare.


Based on your personality...I can understand why you would need a form of measurement.

For me...and others like me...we have seen archers who fall apart in competition type settings or who struggle on certain targets yet are great shots while hunting or stumpin'.

I also believe that out of all the archers that claim to shoot better on fur than paper there definitely those that are lying and those that actually can.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> You really need to write that book.


There's really no need to. The stuff I share has been around allot longer than I have.

Ray :shade:


----------



## spookinelk (Feb 10, 2013)

The fur shooting expert that can't shoot targets is a romantic notion, people want to believe in it... people also want to believe in Bigfoot, chupricabras and loch Ness monsters ....


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

spookinelk said:


> The fur shooting expert that can't shoot targets is a romantic notion, people want to believe in it... people also want to believe in Bigfoot, chupricabras and loch Ness monsters ....


I agree...but that's really not the kind of archer most of us are talking about.

I know...I'm personally talking about those archers that struggle mentally with certain targets or formal competition...but can do better while shooting in there backyard, stump shooting and/or bowhunting.

It's a matter of focus and mental concentration.

Some archers shoot poorly on some targets more than others.

Some archers can shoot better on some targets more than others.

Some archers struggle no matter what target is in front of them and than there are archers who do well no matter what target is in front of them.

ANYONE who wants to deny that can have at it :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## rogbo (Jan 2, 2004)

I'm not the fur vs. paper kind of guy but along those lines, I shoot way better when I shoot by myself. When someone else is watching or shooting with me.....kaka. Usually when I'm hunting (shooting fur) I'm alone. When I shoot paper there tends to be others around.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

rogbo said:


> I'm not the fur vs. paper kind of guy but along those lines, I shoot way better when I shoot by myself. When someone else is watching or shooting with me.....kaka. Usually when I'm hunting (shooting fur) I'm alone. When I shoot paper there tends to be others around.



:thumbs_up I feel confident that most people fall into that category and it supports BlackWolfs position.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

spookinelk said:


> The fur shooting expert that can't shoot targets is a romantic notion, people want to believe in it... people also want to believe in Bigfoot, chupricabras and loch Ness monsters ....



They got some strange critters in de valley, you should get out more in the wee hours. Bigfoot is real!


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

centershot said:


> It was painfully obvious at a local 3D over the weekend that a majority of Trad shooters do not really have control of their shot. Or maybe varied degrees of control would be a better description. As an example the group I was shooting with was messing around after the shoot and we did a 1, 2, 3 shoot all at once. Well I was calling the 1, 2, 3 but stopped after 2 - all 3 of the other guys let rip within a couple seconds. So I started watching a little closer and most don't look like they are really ready to release when the they do. Made we kind of wonder what percentage of Trad archers really have control of the shot. A good indicator is if you can let down - seems that is one of the toughest things to do in archery. What do you think?



I don't have a horse in this race but, maybe I'm totally missing the point of your little experiment. Sounds like they were not expecting to be tricked and released at the time you should have been saying three. I didn't observe those people as you did throughout the day but it seems like they just reacted to the cadence of the count, not necessarily a lack of control.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Based on your personality...I can understand why you would need a form of measurement.
> 
> For me...and others like me...we have seen archers who fall apart in competition type settings or who struggle on certain targets yet are great shots while hunting or stumpin'.
> 
> ...


It has nothing to do with my personality. You presented the existence of archers who shoot better on fur than paper as a fact. How are you defining "great shot"? 

We don't need to address intentional lying. Observations that aren't measured or compared or even counted in any meaningful way can simply lead one to false conclusions. That is a fact.


----------



## Chris Segina (May 2, 2012)

hunting and target shooting are two different things, they just are. Competitive shooting requires a level of precision that hunting just doesn't, it doesn't make one better than the other but they are undeniably different. I know a lot of people who are pretty average shots with a bow or a gun for that matter that cleanly take deer every season by hunting well enough to get shots they can make. The kill zone on a white tail is roughly equivalent to the 3 ring on a 300 target and shooting a 180 isn't likely to win you a lot of competitions but it is good enough to take a deer they just aren't that hard to kill. Accuracy is never a bad thing but the hunter has the luxury of using other skills to make up for short comings that a target archer doesn't. As for being able to let down from full draw I couldn't hunt without being able to as they never do what you want them to, I came to full draw twice before the buck I got last year stepped clear and gave me the shot I wanted eleven paces nearly full broadside, it was a hard hunt but a really easy shot.

Just my 2 cents

chris


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

I thought I had control of my shot prior to attending a Rod Jenkins clinic last weekend. The class was all about control. Having a defined sequence with total control over every aspect of the shot. All the way from how we stand and grip the bow, to the final conclusion. Its not as easy as it sounds.

I believe that the OP was referring to that total control.of the shot. I attend a large trad festival every year. I watch alot of people shoot. 99% of them are flinging arrows. They do not do anything consistently. Even if you are going to snap shoot accurately you have to do the shot sequence consistently to be good at it. When you are shuffling your feet, leaning back and forth, moving your head around, moving your fingers on the grip after you are at full draw, etc.... All of this will lead to inconsistent shot execution, doesn't matter who you are.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Chris Segina said:


> hunting and target shooting are two different things, they just are. Competitive shooting requires a level of precision that hunting just doesn't, it doesn't make one better than the other but they are undeniably different. I know a lot of people who are pretty average shots with a bow or a gun for that matter that cleanly take deer every season by hunting well enough to get shots they can make. The kill zone on a white tail is roughly equivalent to the 3 ring on a 300 target and shooting a 180 isn't likely to win you a lot of competitions but it is good enough to take a deer they just aren't that hard to kill. Accuracy is never a bad thing but the hunter has the luxury of using other skills to make up for short comings that a target archer doesn't. As for being able to let down from full draw I couldn't hunt without being able to as they never do what you want them to, I came to full draw twice before the buck I got last year stepped clear and gave me the shot I wanted eleven paces nearly full broadside, it was a hard hunt but a really easy shot.
> 
> Just my 2 cents
> 
> chris


If the best an archer can do is hit a deer kill zone sized target at 10 yards, he can limit his hunting shots to that and kill deer. He wouldn't have the luxury of being so selective on a 3-d range. While that makes him a successful hunter, it doesn't mean that he is better at shooting a bow when it's fur than he is when it's foam or paper. It just means that his shooting is "good enough" for the way he hunts.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Ray & forest 

You really need to get out more. I know you don't choose to goto competitions and that's fine and your choice. 

But if you did you would see the number of over bowed, miss tuned, target panicked, guys out there. Those of us that get out a little more see this. 

When some guy with a 2000 dollar custom bow back quiver combo. Misses the majority of the targets on a forty target round. Not scores poorly but flat out missed and all targets were under 30. 

Same guy first goes on and on about the four deer and one elk he wounded. Then in the same breath after each missed target he says "can't shoot foam if that was a deer I'd a killed it"

Forgive me for saying - I don't believe it. Yep people don't shoot as well in competition as they do in their back yard - myself included. Yep people don't shoot some targets as well as others - I hate shooting paper ( but I do it) 

But that factor doesn't change a 3 foot miss to "if that was a deer I'd kill it". That factor doesn't magically make total lack of control or basic alignment appear when faced with the mythical fur. 

The reason us "target" guys feel so strongly about this is we get out and see it on a regular basis.

Yes you can limit your shots (I rarely shoot over 20) but the number of wounding stories I hear leads me to question that as well.


----------



## deadquiet (Jan 25, 2005)

MGF said:


> If the best an archer can do is hit a deer kill zone sized target at 10 yards, he can limit his hunting shots to that and kill deer. He wouldn't have the luxury of being so selective on a 3-d range. While that makes him a successful hunter, it doesn't mean that he is better at shooting a bow when it's fur than he is when it's foam or paper. It just means that his shooting is "good enough" for the way he hunts.


I'm new but I agree with this.....because that's exactly what I plan to do.......lol. My hunting skills are sound and I know I will have 5-12 yard shots because I have for the last 15 years using my compound and that's why I'm switching to traditional.......to intensify things again. So (for now) I'm working on that range and hopefully as I grow I can expand it.....but this year I will limit my distance to that or they walk.


----------



## Chris Segina (May 2, 2012)

MGF said:


> If the best an archer can do is hit a deer kill zone sized target at 10 yards, he can limit his hunting shots to that and kill deer. He wouldn't have the luxury of being so selective on a 3-d range. While that makes him a successful hunter, it doesn't mean that he is better at shooting a bow when it's fur than he is when it's foam or paper. It just means that his shooting is "good enough" for the way he hunts.


Completely agree but my point is this a couple days ago some other members were discussing 300 scores that blow me away (280+) I shoot in the 230 to 240 range (usually closer to 230 than 240) which in the competitive arena is pretty crappy but it gives me a 25 yard shot radius I am pretty confident in and am happy with. I don't compete, perhaps someday I will, but I am pretty sure if I went to a shoot with a bunch of people around watching with the added pressure competition in and of itself brings I would almost certainly suck, but I can head to the woods every fall knowing I can make the shots I need to make to kill a deer.

chris


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Chris

If you are a successful hunter who shoots in the 230 range. I think you would be surprised at how well you would do on the 3D range. My guess is you would win most shoots you went to. 

3D isn't shooting the line for paper it's practice for hunting. Your are wandering the woods with 2-3 other guys bsing and having fun. Most of the shots are in that 10-20 yard range that your comfortable with. 

That being said it's a rare archer that averages an 8 (kill shot). 

Matt


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> You really need to get out more. I know you don't choose to goto competitions and that's fine and your choice.


The arrogance and ego represented in your accusations are astonishing or your reading comprehension skills just plain suck. 

In my +30 years of shooting a recurve I've been to more competitions than I can remember and in nearly every competition I placed in the top 3 if not in first place. Even though nearly every one of those competitions were a local competition some of them involved between 300 - 500 archers....so for you to claim I need to get out more is nothing short of a poor assumption gone completely WRONG!



Matt_Potter said:


> But if you did you would see the number of over bowed, miss tuned, target panicked, guys out there.


I do see ALLOT of that...but that doesn't take away the fact that some archers do shoot better at home, while stumpin' and/or while hunting than they do in competition or on a different type of target.

AGAIN...I'm NOT talking about the archer who misses nearly every target, talks about wounding a few animals and than in the same breath says the reason why he missed was because the target wasn't fur!

I'm talking about the archer who struggles under a specific circumstance yet has no issues under another circumstance.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

MGF said:


> It has nothing to do with my personality.


Than why are there some people who will take a man's word as good enough and others that need to see documented proof?

How much a person trusts, is gullible or doubtful....depends ALLOT on their PERSONALITY.

Ray :shade:


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I started one of those 300 round threads. I don't compete either. I was wanting hit some 3-d shoots this spring until I went broke. LOL

Hunting season is short and, for me, hunting opportunities limited but I can shoot all year right out in my yard. I do a little bit of everything. I try to get better and use paper to practice and measure my progress. I'm going to break 280 on a 300 round soon (high score, not average). Yep, just in the backyard but anybody who wants to come and watch is welcome LOL. I've even been going to the local indoor range once in a while so I can shoot in front of people. Competition might make me a little nervous but it doesn't really bother me to shoot in front of people. 

For a while just the act of keeping score made me nervous and put my shooting in the toilet. The last couple of years, I've had trouble shooting at deer too. That's one of the reasons I'm doing it. One of the things I'm trying to do is train myself to keep my mind on the shot rather what's going to happen if I miss...tag soup, poor score or whatever.

I go out back in the woods and shoot cans and jugs with judo points. I do some shooting from my tripod and tree stand, although, I'm hunting more and more from the ground.

I even bought a 3-d deer last fall. Only one because those darned things are expensive. 

I just shoot a lot and look for ways to get better and keep it interesting. My primary interest is hunting but the available hunting really wouldn't be enough to keep me interested all by itself. I may as well have fun trying to get really good with a bow in case I ever do get another shot at a deer.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Than why are there some people who will take a man's word as good enough and others that need to see documented proof?
> 
> How much a person trusts, is gullible or doubtful....depends ALLOT on their PERSONALITY.
> 
> Ray :shade:


It has more to do with my education and experience. It would be too far off topic to go very deep into it but people very often see something and draw inferences that just aren't justified. They're not lying and they saw what they saw. It's just that they don't necessarily have the ability to understand what it means and come to a sound conclusion.

One quick story as an example. I was a manufacturing engineer and I was sent to look into a "problem". I went out to the factory floor and watched. A bunch of units were failing the end of line test. Each time, the operator would pull the unit apart and rotate a round coil spring about 1/4 turn, test it again and it would pass.

I was amazed. It's a round spring. All sides are the same. I asked the gal what she was doing and she went off on me..."we've had this problem for years and engineering won't do anything about it!" and so on. I asked her what would happen if she just tested it again without doing anything. She said it would fail. All the other ladies on the line jumped in to support her.

The next time a unit failed, I suggested that she tug once on her left ear lobe and test the unit again. She did and it passed. We repeated the experiment numerous times with the same results. The folks on the line knew what they were seeing and were being completely truthful. The just had no idea what it meant.

I've seen such things thousands of times. It's really frustrating when it's government making silly decisions based on a faulty (even idiotic) analysis or incorrectly sampled (or intentionally skewed) data. It's the NORM and NOT the exception.

Eye witness "testimony" can be really tricky to interpret.

I trust people to do what people do and think the way that people usually think. I'm rarely disappointed. Drawing sound inferences based on what they see just isn't something that most people are any good at. I think their G.A.P. gets in the way.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

BLACK WOLF said:


> The arrogance and ego represented in your accusations are astonishing or your reading comprehension skills just plain suck.
> 
> In my +30 years of shooting a recurve I've been to more competitions than I can remember and in nearly every competition I placed in the top 3 if not in first place. Even though nearly every one of those competitions were a local competition some of them involved between 300 - 500 archers....so for you to claim I need to get out more is nothing short of a poor assumption gone completely WRONG!
> 
> ...


Huh guess your reading skills suck as well because that's exactly who I am talking about. Yep I know you have shot some comps and done well in your area. 

But yet again you are so invested in your GAP thing you can't get over arguing for that .001% archer out there. 

Like I said before you know better but just like to argue for that GAP.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

The multi quoting and GAP ideology / preaching is a a sure fire way to kill a thread .....

Not nearly as quick as the target vs hunters inference getting tossed in there ...

Looking forward to the book.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Ok, to the OP: am I in control? Not as much as I want to be, which is why I'm working on it. My TP was a loss of control. I'm beating it to a pulp with a more fluid shot sequence (the feather trigger/clicker helped). 

Deadquiet, my only comment to your otherwise good plan would be to practice farther than you intend to shoot with your stickbow. Just like with your compound, practicing farther makes the hunting short (a shorter shot) a "slam dunk" and that confidence, as I'm sure you are aware, really helps.

Chris, I was in the same position for the last couple years. Our local 3D's averaged 18 yards for the traditional stakes and it wasn't hard to end up with an "impressive" score though, sometimes as high as 270 (again, most of the shots were under twenty yards). When it came fall I put two doe in the freezer each year because they were within that same under-twenty range. Then I got TP:lol:

I will say this though: the way these threads have been going the last couple months is doing more harm than good. Playing devil's advocate for mediocrity doesn't help anyone and it confuses those who might be new with a false sense that the old adage that "hunting and target are two different worlds" still holds some truth. Chris' example explains where the difference _actually_ is. If someone wants to just snap shoot without getting into a higher degree of accuracy, that is their choice and no one has any business telling them not to if that's what they want. It's your journey, not theirs. However, offering that this is a viable alternative just because it CAN be used is counter productive. How many people come to traditional because they're tired of missing shot opportunities because it takes too long to shoot? Very few, and many of those people are trying to force low percentage shots. 

As Centershot points out, more people would shoot better if they carry over their compound form and rhythm. Lots of people are far more successful with their compounds than with their traditional bows. It takes much longer to execute a shot with a compound but that doesn't seem to matter, having better accuracy seems to matter. I for one would like to see more archers getting the most out of traditional tackle and not feel the nee to bring out the compound when it comes time to put meat in the freezer.


----------



## ShootingBadger (Apr 19, 2014)

> I'm pretty glad I can turn back. My group of shooting buddies love to crack jokes while we're shooting and they'll get me almost rolling right before my release and I'll have to just give up on that draw and try again when I compose myself. I think it's good practice for it since it's almost out of nowhere.


Laughing mid shot-sequence has earned me more snowbirds than it has any right to. My shooting buddies are too damned funny.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

benofthehood said:


> The multi quoting and GAP ideology / preaching is a a sure fire way to kill a thread .....
> 
> Not nearly as quick as the target vs hunters inference getting tossed in there ...
> 
> Looking forward to the book.


I see the "target vs hunters" as a red herring. The is the "trad" archery forum. Very often one's intent when shooting a bow is to hit whatever target they're shooting at. I don't think it's too hard to demonstrate that some methods or elements of "form" that work better than others. Regardless of your GAP, you hit it or you don't.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

BLACK WOLF said:


> You tell me. Are you ignoring the archers that make up the minority who in fact can shoot better at fur than they can in competition or while shooting at a different kind of target?
> 
> Ray :shade:


Here is a basketball analogy for you - 1,000 people shoot free throws, 999 shoot over hand and one guy at the YMCA shoots granny style - all are successful, but which are you going to teach your kid? There is a reason to shoot with good form, consistent form, proven form and in control of your shot - it works.

Do I ignore the minority that 'say' they can shoot fur better than paper? Yes.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

centershot said:


> Here is a basketball analogy for you - 1,000 people shoot free throws, 999 shoot over hand and one guy at the YMCA shoots granny style - all are successful, but which are you going to teach your kid? There is a reason to shoot with good form, consistent form, proven form and in control of your shot - it works.
> 
> Do I ignore the minority that 'say' they can shoot fur better than paper? Yes.


One also has to wonder whether or not the fellow in the minority would not shoot better yet with the same emphasis on proper form and a more traditional style.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

kegan said:


> One also has to wonder whether or not the fellow in the minority would not shoot better yet with the same emphasis on proper form and a more traditional style.


Could be, but he may be so stuck in his ways that he just won't try anything new.......


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

MGF said:


> I see the "target vs hunters" as a red herring. The is the "trad" archery forum. Very often one's intent when shooting a bow is to hit whatever target they're shooting at. I don't think it's too hard to demonstrate that some methods or elements of "form" that work better than others. Regardless of your GAP, you hit it or you don't.



You left something out. Some methods or elements of 'form' that work better than others, in situations specific to the activity. Control of the shot may be a great thing when shooting spots for points but in other situations it's detrimental. 

I always get the same thing from these 'control freak' threads.
1. These guys seem to be around a lot of stupid people. Maybe it's because where I live most people are fairly serious about shooting, whether it's a gun or a bow. Most people would be ashamed of the mediocrity that some of these guys speak about. Nobody I know would go to a big competitive event and flaunt their ignorance in public. Either you have the skill to at least be competitive or you stay at home and practice some more. I just don't know where they find the idiots who can't hit a bull in the ass, yet show up in public to shoot against the pros.
2. Shot control causes target panic.


----------



## tpcowfish (Aug 11, 2008)

No matter what your target may be, I cannot understand why anyone would not aim to be the very best they could be, trying and utilizing any proven method that helps them improve, I believe there is a basic form method, (grip, draw, anchor , ect.) that everyone should try to master and go from there, to be there best, shooting the stick bow is awesome, actually improving ,and hitting consistently has got to be more fun, but it's a personal thing, up to the individual,


----------



## fieldnfeathers (Nov 7, 2013)

BLACK WOLF said:


> ....I also believe that out of all the archers that claim to shoot better on fur than paper there definitely those that are lying and those that actually can.
> 
> Ray :shade:


I've seen my fair share of excellent archers that consistently harvest animals every year. Interestingly enough, they are also some of the best shots I've seen on paper as well. Conversely, I have seen some pretty darn good archers shoot paper that couldn't/can't hit an animal if their life depended on it. IMHO, actually shooting an animal with archery equipment introduces an entirely different set of challenges. Many of which some people never overcome.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

kegan said:


> One also has to wonder whether or not the fellow in the minority would not shoot better yet with the same emphasis on proper form and a more traditional style.



I don't mean to be rude Kegan, but did you shoot better with 'proper form'? Or did you start missing deer and develop target panic?
I've been around here a long time and I also have a good memory. I just watch the posts and whatever trends that develop over time. Sometimes very interesting.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

FORESTGUMP said:


> 2. Shot control causes target panic.


Exactly the opposite for me. Shooting in control give me the confidence that target panic tries to take away.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

tpcowfish said:


> No matter what your target may be, I cannot understand why anyone would not aim to be the very best they could be, trying and utilizing any proven method that helps them improve, I believe there is a basic form method, (grip, draw, anchor , ect.) that everyone should try to master and go from there, to be there best, shooting the stick bow is awesome, actually improving ,and hitting consistently has got to be more fun, but it's a personal thing, up to the individual,



Question, do you personally know anyone who does not want to 'hit consistently'? I don't, either they enjoy it and try to shoot well or they don't pursue it at all.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

FORESTGUMP said:


> I don't mean to be rude Kegan, but did you shoot better with 'proper form'? Or did you start missing deer and develop target panic?
> I've been around here a long time and I also have a good memory. I just watch the posts and whatever trends that develop over time. Sometimes very interesting.


TP at its root is a fear of missing. Sometimes it takes a while to become good enough to have expectations. When you don't meet those expectations is when tp starts creeping in. Having control (confidence) over your shot is what keeps tp under wraps. Many times if someone has the tenacity to work through tp he comes out the other end better for it.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

fieldnfeathers said:


> I've seen my fair share of excellent archers that consistently harvest animals every year. Interestingly enough, they are also some of the best shots I've seen on paper as well. Conversely, I have seen some pretty darn good archers shoot paper that couldn't/can't hit an animal if their life depended on it. IMHO, actually shooting an animal with archery equipment introduces an entirely different set of challenges. Many of which some people never overcome.



Plain old common sense isn't it? And it works both ways, each having it's own challenges.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Question, do you personally know anyone who does not want to 'hit consistently'? I don't, either they enjoy it and try to shoot well or they don't pursue it at all.


Here is my question - If you want to shoot as well as possible, then why not imitate those who do it the best?


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

centershot said:


> Here is a basketball analogy for you - 1,000 people shoot free throws, 999 shoot over hand and one guy at the YMCA shoots granny style - all are successful, but which are you going to teach your kid?


I'll teach him whatever his G.A.P. profile dictates.

If he really just wants to learn how to effectively use granny style when he wants to just shoot hoops for fun...than that's what I'll teach him...but if his GOAL is to become a competitive basketball player...I'll teach him the skills that best suit that particular GOAL.

A coach can say...screw you and your GOALS...you're doing it exactly my way...or they can base it on a person's G.A.P. profile.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

centershot said:


> Here is my question - If you want to shoot as well as possible, then why not imitate those who do it the best?


EXACTLY!

If an archer wants to be the best Olympic archer...imitate an Olympic archer.

If an archer wants to be the best at shooting moving targets...imitate the best who shoot moving targets.

If an archer wants to be the best shooting off horseback...imitate the best who shoot off horseback.

If an archer wants to be the best Kyudo practitioner...imitate the best who shoot Kyudo.

Pretty common sense...until someone tries to force or pigeonhole everyone into one style or technique.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

fieldnfeathers said:


> I've seen my fair share of excellent archers that consistently harvest animals every year. Interestingly enough, they are also some of the best shots I've seen on paper as well. Conversely, I have seen some pretty darn good archers shoot paper that couldn't/can't hit an animal if their life depended on it. IMHO, actually shooting an animal with archery equipment introduces an entirely different set of challenges. Many of which some people never overcome.


:thumbs_up

Ray :shade:


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

centershot said:


> Here is a basketball analogy for you - 1,000 people shoot free throws, 999 shoot over hand and one guy at the YMCA shoots granny style - all are successful, but which are you going to teach your kid? There is a reason to shoot with good form, consistent form, proven form and in control of your shot - it works.
> 
> Do I ignore the minority that 'say' they can shoot fur better than paper? Yes.


Great post!


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

MGF said:


> I see the "target vs hunters" as a red herring. The is the "trad" archery forum. Very often one's intent when shooting a bow is to hit whatever target they're shooting at. I don't think it's too hard to demonstrate that some methods or elements of "form" that work better than others. Regardless of your GAP, you hit it or you don't.


While I think there are differences that affect our shooting in terms of environment, context, and task, I very much agree with this. Training is specific, and training for the task is optimal. But, the shot itself, on the most basic level, is the same. If you have we all have flat out bad shots time to time, and speaking for myself, they have nothing to do with the target, just me. Still, at ten yards, even the most god-awful flinch is going to be within the confines of a pie plate. Well, most of them, anyway. I once clutched a string that went WAY off and exploded an arrow on the metal pole of a target stand, but that's pretty exceptional, or at least that's my story 

Sure, there are differences taking one shot in a unique circumstance (a.k.a., hunting or IBO) versus 60 of the same (NFAA 300 round), as shooting at a fixed distance repeatedly is a whole lot different than shooting unmarked distance with a new shot every time. Shooting at 20 yards has slightly different shot emphasis than shooting 60 yards (mainly, consistent draw length at release).

But, if you can't get an arrow on a large piece of paper regularly, you're not going to hit a squirrel. Like many, I often shoot better trying to hit small things. I think that's also relevant, and a reason to train yourself to make your actual target area small. A deer is a pretty big target, particularly for a distance that most of us would consider a reasonable hunting shot. The deer's heart is not very large, and I've yet to see one wearing pine cones in the appropriate locations.

To be fair, a lot of the behavior we're talking about, in terms of people who claim to be great shots on real animals, rationalizing lousy performance on foam animals, I've been to a lot of traditional shoots, and I haven't met many. Actually, I can't recall ever meeting a single person who made that claim, so perhaps that itself is somewhat of a red herring. I've seen a guy claim that he missed targets because they were too close, and he practices at 40 yards, because that's the distance he hunts from. That sounded a bit ridiculous, but I've certainly sent arrows over a target, particularly when shooting instinctively, and not having had recent practice at close distances. My brain just got used to shooting 20 yards, more or less, and didn't compensate for 10.

Other than that, I don't see a whole lot to argue about. Seems reasonable that some people will shoot better in circumstances they're more comfortable with, more practiced at, whatever. Certainly true for me. Equally ridiculous is somebody being an absolutely horrible shot in one circumstance, but a total wizard in another.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

The title of this thread is...Are you in control of your shot? 

The FACT is....some people are in control of their shot in one circumstance but in another they may not be.

One simple test is not gonna determine if an archer is in control of their shot all of the time...and just because some archers fail in one circumstance does NOT mean they fail in every other circumstance.

A test is nothing more than an indicator of an issue or an ability within a specific circumstance.

FACTS:

Just because an archer can't hit aerial targets very well does NOT mean they are terrible on every other kind of target.

Just because an archer can't Snap Shoot accurately does NOT mean they can't hold anchor and shoot accurately.

And the same goes for not being able to hold anchor for a specific amount of time. 

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

BarneySlayer said:


> Seems reasonable that some people will shoot better in circumstances they're more comfortable with, more practiced at, whatever. Certainly true for me.


:thumbs_up

The reason why it seems reasonable is because it is :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

BarneySlayer said:


> Other than that, I don't see a whole lot to argue about. Seems reasonable that some people will shoot better in circumstances they're more comfortable with, more practiced at, whatever. Certainly true for me. Equally ridiculous is somebody being an absolutely horrible shot in one circumstance, but a total wizard in another.


Barney, that's it but for the Internet and deer camp talk. Look, one can either shoot a bow or they cannot. The "can" carries over to all targets as much as the "cannot". The excuse helps when the cannot can't be explained other than "I missed and I need to work on that". Some folks need to mature a bit more if they are to carry a weapon.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

centershot said:


> Here is a basketball analogy for you - 1,000 people shoot free throws, 999 shoot over hand and one guy at the YMCA shoots granny style - all are successful, but which are you going to teach your kid? There is a reason to shoot with good form, consistent form, proven form and in control of your shot - it works.
> 
> Do I ignore the minority that 'say' they can shoot fur better than paper? Yes.



I don't 'say' either way but, I still want to know where you manage to find such idiots who know they can't hit a bull in the ass with a bass fiddle yet, still show up to shoot against the professionals.


----------



## Arrowzen (Feb 14, 2014)

centershot said:


> Here is a basketball analogy for you - 1,000 people shoot free throws, 999 shoot over hand and one guy at the YMCA shoots granny style - all are successful, but which are you going to teach your kid? There is a reason to shoot with good form, consistent form, proven form and in control of your shot - it works.
> 
> Do I ignore the minority that 'say' they can shoot fur better than paper? Yes.



The only major conflict with that analogy to archery jargon that I see is this. 

The core elements that go into this supposed guy's hoop shots are pretty consistent from one good free thrower to another. All of the little personal things he does that don't really matter at all during the shot no one cares about. How his feet and legs move without thought, how he curls his hands after the ball flies, how he holds his tongue during and after a shot. If he just shoots the damn ball in a way that swooshes the net for a pro team that is all anyone wants or cares about from that guy.

In archery it seems that some people view "swooshing the net" is secondary to how you do every other unassociated thing... Then again some one will come around and tell you why all of those things do make a difference even if it has no bearing on moving the arrow from the bow to the target.

Just my observations.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

FORESTGUMP said:


> .........., I still want to know where you manage to find such idiots who know they can't hit a bull in the ass with a bass fiddle yet, still show up to shoot against the professionals.


Bout every big shoot one goes to. Heck, go pull up the scores from the recent Vegas, NFAA Nationals, whatever, and look from low to high over hundreds of names. You will find an overwhelming majority were better bass fiddle players than archers.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Sanford said:


> Barney, that's it but for the Internet and deer camp talk. Look, one can either shoot a bow or they cannot. The "can" carries over to all targets as much as the "cannot". The excuse helps when the cannot can't be explained other than "I missed and I need to work on that". Some folks need to mature a bit more if they are to carry a weapon.



So, in that small world of yours, just because someone can hit spots on a wall at 20yds automatically qualifies him to shoot a running deer at 65yds ?


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

FORESTGUMP said:


> So, in that small world of yours, just because someone can hit spots on a wall at 20yds automatically qualifies him to shoot a running deer at 65yds ?


No, just the guy who cannot put an arrow in a 4" spot on the wall at 20-yards has no basis in ability to move to shooting running targets at 65, if that's the implication. Otherwise, that's like saying one can't play Chopsticks on the piano, but give them some Beethoven and look out.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Sanford said:


> Bout every big shoot one goes to. Heck, go pull up the scores from the recent Vegas, NFAA Nationals, whatever, and look from low to high over hundreds of names. You will find an overwhelming majority were better bass fiddle players than archers.



I wouldn't expect to see all the same scores or maybe not even real close. But, I find it fascinating that people who consistently miss the whole target, as some of these fellas describe, would even be there in the first place. Like I said, there must be more idiots in the world that I get to see in my hood.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

FORESTGUMP said:


> I wouldn't expect to see all the same scores or maybe not even real close. But, I find it fascinating that people who consistently miss the whole target, as some of these fellas describe, would even be there in the first place. Like I said, there must be more idiots in the world that I get to see in my hood.


That's why watching and waiting for these "Trad Hunter" types to pick their arrows from the weeds from behind a static rubber deer is frustrating as heck. Hearing them say "if it was only real fur my freezer would be full" is comical, though. Get out there. It's the norm over the exception.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Sanford said:


> No, just the guy who cannot put an arrow in a 4" spot on the wall at 20-yards has no basis in ability to move to shooting running targets at 65, if that's the implication. Otherwise, that's like saying one can't play Chopsticks on the piano, but give them some Beethoven and look out.



I can't agree with that. A 4" spot on a wall has nothing at all in common with a moving target. But, you seemed to be saying that either they can shoot a bow or they cannot without taking the differences into consideration, Some race car drivers are really good on the long tracks but can't hang on the short tracks. And it works the other way also, doesn't mean they aren't good race car drivers, just not the best at everything that's thrown their way.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

FORESTGUMP said:


> I wouldn't expect to see all the same scores or maybe not even real close. But, I find it fascinating that people who consistently miss the whole target, as some of these fellas describe, would even be there in the first place. Like I said, there must be more idiots in the world that I get to see in my hood.


Like I said Forest you need to get out more - not in a derogatory way at all. If your circle of guys are all good more power to them but, if you get out and see what else is there you would be stunned.

Matt


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Sanford said:


> That's why watching and waiting for these "Trad Hunter" types to pick their arrows from the weeds from behind a static rubber deer is frustrating as heck. Hearing them say "if it was only real fur my freezer would be full" is comical, though. Get out there. It's the norm over the exception.



Having been 'out there' in the past more than recently, I have honestly never heard that. I have heard things like son of buck! How did I miss that? Man, I can't believe I screwed up that bad.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

FORESTGUMP said:


> I can't agree with that. A 4" spot on a wall has nothing at all in common with a moving target. But, you seemed to be saying that either they can shoot a bow or they cannot without taking the differences into consideration, Some race car drivers are really good on the long tracks but can't hang on the short tracks. And it works the other way also, doesn't mean they aren't good race car drivers, just not the best at everything that's thrown their way.


They can expertly drive a car - that's in common. 99% of folks cannot shoot a Trad bow well enough to even get a learner's permit, if one was required.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Matt_Potter said:


> Like I said Forest you need to get out more - not in a derogatory way at all. If your circle of guys are all good more power to them but, if you get out and see what else is there you would be stunned.
> 
> Matt


No thanks, it sounds pretty scary out there where people think that fingin pointed sticks all over the place is funny. :mg:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Sanford said:


> They can expertly drive a car - that's in common. 99% of folks cannot shoot a Trad bow well enough to even get a learner's permit, if one was required.



99% ? Strange world 'out there'. It's no wonder I avoid it. I also have a hard time believing that statement.:wink:

Wow, I just had another interesting thought. That puts me in the top 1% without even trying hard. If I were to 'get out there', I might be a world champ in a couple months. I mean, after all, the competition is very limited in numbers.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Guess we will never know.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

FORESTGUMP said:


> So, in that small world of yours, just because someone can hit spots on a wall at 20yds automatically qualifies him to shoot a running deer at 65yds ?


I'd really like to meet the guy who is


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Forest, in '07 I was shooting a PSE Legacy, matched cedars and Zwickey Eskimos. I was snap shooting, having only read and watched Asbell's material. I missed more than four deer in just the early season that year. This continued on, using different selfbows and what not for another few years. I missed a lot more deer and was just lucky I didn't wound anything. Only deer I killed were with a rifle.

I'm still learning and improving, but I've been able to put at least two deer in the freezer every year for the past three years, as well as numerous small game. Even with TP and some misses it's still a much better track record than I ever had before, and I continue to see improvement.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Sanford said:


> Bout every big shoot one goes to. Heck, go pull up the scores from the recent Vegas, NFAA Nationals, whatever, and look from low to high over hundreds of names. You will find an overwhelming majority were better bass fiddle players than archers.


And I have tons of respect for those people. For somebody to go up against the best, knowing they're going to post a fraction of the score, takes a bit of courage, and a whole lot of detachment of ego.

How it relates to the original topic of the thread... hmm.... I would venture that those people will gain control of their shots, because it is merely a matter of training under the right conditions. By having a reference, both numerically, and in comparison to better shooters, their handle on improvement gains that much leverage.

Shooting a bow is as much simply getting out of the way as it is actively doing anything. A statue with pliable, slippery fingers could do it better than any of us


----------



## tpcowfish (Aug 11, 2008)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Question, do you personally know anyone who does not want to 'hit consistently'? I don't, either they enjoy it and try to shoot well or they don't pursue it at all.


I'm sure most people do, and I know it takes time, more for some then others, but when I hear of all these bad shooters at these shoots, it just baffles me, with all the imfo and help available, not trying to knock anyone, we all start somewhere, but if we continue, we should desire to get better I would think


----------



## Chris Segina (May 2, 2012)

Wasn't trying to be a poster child for mediocre shooting :wink: but I do feel my experience mirrors a lot of others on here in that doing a little bit of everything and trying as many different things as possible is what helps me improve. I started out with recurves as a kid, not for the challenge but because that's all there was. Went to a bare bow compound in my mid 20's for the performance and arrow speed (which to me at the time seemed unreal) and shot and hunted successfully with that bow for nearly 15 years. Anyway a couple years ago I decided I wanted a new bow and unhappy with most of the compound choices available today went with a recurve. So I get my shiny new bow and as I am sure a lot of you will appreciate my first few trips back to my range were a little less than confidence instilling. For years all of my off season practice was to wander around my back yard shooting 3D targets from various angles and distances but in coming back to stick bows I just wasn't ready to practice this way I had some very basic form and release issues that are masked by compounds to address before I could be anywhere near ready to hunt. For me personally I found shooting a few 300 rounds a week to be incredibly helpful exactly because it is the same shot 60 times it gives a solid metric to how consistent you are. That first fall I was shooting 210 or so at 20 so felt pretty confident in 15 yards with a real good view (nothing fancy), last year I was up to the 230's so 20 to 25 seemed realistic, its not that I am complacent I still want to get better I would like to be at 250+ by the fall which would fall in the pretty good category of target shooter but a really confident bowhunter.

chris

chris


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter (Mar 27, 2008)

I am not an amazing hunter, but have taken my share of P&Y animals and can hold my own on the 3D course. I have had my share of buck fever and have wounded my share of big bulls and have lost a couple nice bucks. I beat myself up pretty good doing this, but I try to make the best shot that I can.

I'm not buying the comments that some posters are claiming that as soon as they put on the camo they become amazing archers with nerves of steel. These are the same guys twenty years ago that would say "Yeah, but I'd like to see Burley Hall or Randy Ulmer do that on a live animal", We know how that ends. It's almost like some of you are saying that you choose to make bad shots on foam or could care less if you miss. I ain't buyin' it.

I am yet to meet a crappy target shooter that takes quality animals with their bow (Shooting a Doe in your garden at 5 yards doesn't count).


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Yes....I am in control of my one fluid motion shots.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Chris, I'm very sorry if my comment came off as intended for you. I worded myself very poorly.

I think your example of the difference in necessary accuracy is perfectly sound, and mirrors my own shooting over the last few years. This year is the first that I've broken the 250 mark on my backyard 300 rounds, but for the past few years my success in the woods (shooting in the 230-240 range) was much improved. Like you I found that shots under 20 yards on game were much easier than keeping all my arrows in the 4 ring. On 3D my scores have steadily gone up and become more consistently. On courses where the average trad stake is 17-22 yards I do pretty well now, shooting over an 8 average.

My point, though poorly offered, was that arguing for certain styles just for the sake of their existence gets us nowhere. If a fellow can take their different or unique style and apply it with consistency and accuracy then it shows to some extent on paper or foam. Trying to argue that various unorthodox styles are not just equal but _superior_ because of some very specific scenario or some unquantifiable is not helpful.

There are reasons why most cars have four wheels and not three.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

kegan said:


> There are reasons why most cars have four wheels and not three.


Great analogy! If you put a bow in a shooting machine, it will stack arrows all day long. The physics of that cannot be replicated by human talent, but, we can strive. That's called form. 

If anyone thinks they have invented a system that does some similar by a different method, they are only fooling themselves. See, it doesn't matter how one aims, the physics of getting an arrow from point A to point B are governed by much more than eyesight.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

A person has to aim a shooting machine if they want that shooting machine to hit a specific target.

It takes BOTH form and aiming to hit a target. You can NOT hit a target by form alone!

One of the other differences between a man shooting a bow and a stationary machine is that a man has to move his limbs and joints to reload an arrow and try to repeat BOTH the form they had and the aiming position they had on the previous shot if it hit the target.

Why are there soooo many different styles and techniques to choose from to shoot a bow?

It's because there is more than just one way to shoot a bow and fulfill an archer's GOAL.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Chris Segina (May 2, 2012)

Kegan, I wasn't offended at all just trying to make a joke. 

There are certain things that have to happen to make an accurate shot (how accurate is accurate enough depends on what you are trying to do ie pie plate at 10 yards, win Olympic medals or not embarrass yourself on a 3D course) correctly aimed the arrow must come off a stable platform and the release must have as small a variation as possible simply to be repeatable. There are of course many ways to skin a cat but it does have to end up in the same place. ultimately your level of competence will be a combination of your ability and how much you work on it. we all probably know somebody who picks up their bow about a week before the opener and has lots of stories about bad blood trails and near misses, and if you bowhunt long enough you ARE going to lose a couple but if its happening a lot you should be looking to change something.

As for being in control of the shot if I hit what I was aiming at I consider that to be in control, I practice drawing, holding and letting down quietly because I have had to do it a lot hunting, but there is also a point where I have held at draw too long and I am no longer capable of making a good shot, don't have a hard time on that but I know it when I feel it.

chris


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

kegan said:


> Forest, in '07 I was shooting a PSE Legacy, matched cedars and Zwickey Eskimos. I was snap shooting, having only read and watched Asbell's material. I missed more than four deer in just the early season that year. This continued on, using different selfbows and what not for another few years. I missed a lot more deer and was just lucky I didn't wound anything. Only deer I killed were with a rifle.
> 
> I'm still learning and improving, but I've been able to put at least two deer in the freezer every year for the past three years, as well as numerous small game. Even with TP and some misses it's still a much better track record than I ever had before, and I continue to see improvement.


I think the point Kegan is trying to make is that his shooting has improved as his focus has shifted to improving his form. In essence, by working on gaining better control of his shot sequence. He has achieved this by shooting ALOT of targets, with the best form he can achieve. Better form will equal better consistency every time, with hunting, shooting paper, etc...


----------



## Str8 Shooter (Oct 15, 2005)

I'm in control of my shot more than ever these days. The interesting thing is as I develop better control my overall shooting is more fluid and relaxed. When I was on the edge of control I always had to fight to maintain accuracy, if that makes sense, and now I don't. I'm also finding I don't need to shoot nearly as much to maintain excellent accuracy. I doubt I shoot more than 50 arrows a week. The last 3D shoot I went to was a lot of fun because I never felt a moment of hesitation or worry that I was going to lose a shot or make a poor shot.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> I think the point Kegan is trying to make is that his shooting has improved as his focus has shifted to improving his form. In essence, by working on gaining better control of his shot sequence. He has achieved this by shooting ALOT of targets, with the best form he can achieve. Better form will equal better consistency every time, with hunting, shooting paper, etc...


Thanks, Tony, well said. Unfortunately I think Forest was just my TP as an example of the inferiority of more formal form.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Str8 Shooter said:


> I'm in control of my shot more than ever these days. The interesting thing is as I develop better control my overall shooting is more fluid and relaxed. When I was on the edge of control I always had to fight to maintain accuracy, if that makes sense, and now I don't. I'm also finding I don't need to shoot nearly as much to maintain excellent accuracy. I doubt I shoot more than 50 arrows a week. The last 3D shoot I went to was a lot of fun because I never felt a moment of hesitation or worry that I was going to lose a shot or make a poor shot.


Chris

I have found the same thing. But you have near perfect form honed through shooting hundreds of thousands if not millions of arrows at all forms of targets. You shoot field, NFAA and fita indoor paper, 3D and hunt you brains out. 

At this point you are one of the most well rounded archers I know. You can shoot any bow with any aiming style and do well with it. You have achieved this through a ton of hard work and honing your form and shot sequence to the point you don't need to think about it at all - it just happens. This frees your mind to do other things - or not ;-)

Matt


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Matt_Potter said:


> Chris
> 
> I have found the same thing. But you have near perfect form honed through shooting hundreds of thousands if not millions of arrows at all forms of targets. You shoot field, NFAA and fita indoor paper, 3D and hunt you brains out.
> 
> ...


And that folks is what it's all about!


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

centershot said:


> And that folks is what it's all about!


Exactly....he's discovered his G.A.P. profle :wink: He has found what works for him....and he has honed his chosen style and technique.

Ray :shade:


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

He has good form and control of his shot. With those in the bank he can shoot any style or technique he wants. Subtle difference, but very important.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

centershot said:


> He has good form and control of his shot. With those in the bank he can shoot any style or technique he wants. Subtle difference, but very important.


So can he now automatically shoot ANY style or technique or will he have to spend some time learning something new?

Because if he can now accurately shoot ANY style or technique and within ANY circumstance...I want to know what this technique he is using is and be able to do ALL of that.

Ray :shade:


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

Sure has a better chance at it that going about it from the other end. Learn a classic repeatable form, then when your other 'style' goes to pot you can go back to your classic form figure out where your shot sequence is messed up and get back on track. It's Friday Ray - shall we debate that also?


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Exactly....he's discovered his G.A.P. profle :wink: He has found what works for him....and he has honed his chosen style and technique.
> 
> Ray :shade:


Ray you are the very definition of perseveration.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Matt_Potter said:


> Ray you are the very definition of perseveration.



Would you like to guess who contributes the most to making it necessary for him to do so?


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

BLACK WOLF said:


> So can he now automatically shoot ANY style or technique or will he have to spend some time learning something new?
> 
> Because if he can now accurately shoot ANY style or technique and within ANY circumstance...I want to know what this technique he is using is and be able to do ALL of that.
> 
> Ray :shade:




You left out 'any bow', I don't know the guy but, I know he's a baad man. Superman can do anything too, I think.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

FORESTGUMP said:


> You left out 'any bow', I don't know the guy but, I know he's a baad man. Superman can do anything too, I think.


You're wrong Forest...granted....Superman is the pinnacle of what all other superhero's wish they could be....for instance...batman had to "become" and try to be Batman...Spiderman had to become and try to be Spiderman...but Superman?...he was BORN Superman and tried to be Clark Kent! LOL!...but the one thing Superman can't do?...is mine Kryptonite...but maybe he could do it in the evenings after slipping into his Chuck Norris pajamas! :laugh:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> Ray you are the very definition of perseveration.


Matt,

I take back what I said....I'm not gonna continue replying to your posts when you start acting childish and try to imply or start name calling.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

centershot said:


> Learn a classic *repeatable* form, then when your other 'style' goes to pot you can go back to your classic form figure out where your shot sequence is messed up and get back on track.


The key word is 'repeatable'.

Why does it have to be 'classic' and exactly what is 'classic' style? 

What are the exact limb, joint and body positions that an archer needs to copy to be able to shoot any style or technique with?

Ray :shade:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

LOL, and why should your 'other style' go to pot? Sanford said it, either you can shoot a bow or you can't. Come to think about it, I'm not sure I know what my 'style' is. It's somewhere between Howard Hill and Byron Ferguson I think. And, it's been that way since before I ever even heard of those guys so I didn't copy them and they're too old to have copied me.


----------



## Str8 Shooter (Oct 15, 2005)

Thanks Matt. That's a big compliment coming from a guy as skilled as yourself. 

I shot for several years like most people do. I stuck with one thing and ground away and shot decent but never really great. I had good days and bad days. Part of that was simply lack of direction while shooting and part of it was buying into the idea that most trad guys have, the idea that if you just keep doing something long enough eventually you'll get good. Unfortunately that isn't true. If you look at most shooters they have essentially the same form and technique as they had a few months after starting out. Most people hit a comfort level and just stop. Keep doing the same thing and it becomes a habit that you just can't break. Than, 10 years or 20 or whatever, you are at the same level of accuracy you achieved within the first year of shooting. 

As far as I'm concerned the only way to get out of that rut is to develop control over your entire shot and keep your ego out of it. Try different things, find what works and discard the rest. If you look at a large number of successful shooters you will find a lot of common elements. Figure out how to incorporate the same elements into your style and you'll be fine. 

These arguments here online develop to the point of absurdity sometimes. Lets be realistic. In the last year how many people have come on here and asked about how to shoot a yumi or horsebow or shoot upside down or any other unusual method? The answer is very, very few... probably less than 5 people. The average beginner here is interested in what 99% of us here do... shoot trad bow with fingers with a side of face anchor and become accurate within reasonable distances. I wish I had someone who could have steered me into a more structured approach when I started as it would have cut years off my learning curve. Right now, between the internet and the proliferation of instructional media, beginners have a much greater basis to start off right. Why confuse things by arguing so damn much over the 1%?


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

This is FAR more than just about giving advice to the minority or the majority.

As stated previously...there is debate on what's 'best' even in the Olympic community....so in our community...which is far more diverse...there are going to be even more variables that shape an archer's style and technique.

For anyone to come on here and try to pigeonhole everyone into believing there is only one way everyone should learn how to shoot a bow is totally unrealistic when there are so many variables.

The G.A.P. profile covers those variables...easily and efficiently...without forcing the distorted mindset of one way or the highway is correct for everyone.

I can understand if it's confusing to some when they are stuck on believing there is one proper way to learn and teach shooting a bow...but it's very enlightening when you realize there isn't...which also explains why there are so many different ways to shoot a bow accurately and within specific circumstances.

Ray :shade:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Str8 Shooter said:


> Thanks Matt. That's a big compliment coming from a guy as skilled as yourself.
> 
> I shot for several years like most people do. I stuck with one thing and ground away and shot decent but never really great. I had good days and bad days. Part of that was simply lack of direction while shooting and part of it was buying into the idea that most trad guys have, the idea that if you just keep doing something long enough eventually you'll get good. Unfortunately that isn't true. If you look at most shooters they have essentially the same form and technique as they had a few months after starting out. Most people hit a comfort level and just stop. Keep doing the same thing and it becomes a habit that you just can't break. Than, 10 years or 20 or whatever, you are at the same level of accuracy you achieved within the first year of shooting.
> 
> ...



Oops, you lost me with that last sentence. I thought that 100% of us wanted what you called 99 but I got your point. But, what is it that the 1% wants? Just curious. Not asking you to do so but, could you name a couple of them?


----------



## Zurf (Mar 8, 2014)

Let down when? If you're counting to three for a release, and then telling them ON three to let down, that's like a game of Simon Says to the death. 

Further, why limit it to traditional. I'm willing to bet that if you took a group of any kind of shooter and told them on three to not do what you told them to do on the count of three, you'd find disappointing results. Do yourself a favor and don't walk in front of any compound, handgun, shotgun, or traditional shooters when attempting this exercise.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

> Are you in control of your shot?


Always trying to do my best.
Sometimes I'm the windshield. Sometimes I'm the bug. 

Rick


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Str8 Shooter said:


> Thanks Matt. That's a big compliment coming from a guy as skilled as yourself.
> 
> I shot for several years like most people do. I stuck with one thing and ground away and shot decent but never really great. I had good days and bad days. Part of that was simply lack of direction while shooting and part of it was buying into the idea that most trad guys have, the idea that if you just keep doing something long enough eventually you'll get good. Unfortunately that isn't true. If you look at most shooters they have essentially the same form and technique as they had a few months after starting out. Most people hit a comfort level and just stop. Keep doing the same thing and it becomes a habit that you just can't break. Than, 10 years or 20 or whatever, you are at the same level of accuracy you achieved within the first year of shooting.
> 
> ...


Yep, and that 1% would progress further towards their non-typical goals if they started with a basic foundation.
I shoot with a bunch of guys who practice all the time. Probably twice as much as I do, yet they are stuck at the same level of performance as they were 5 years ago when we first started shooting together. Literally zero progression of skills and it's not because they are limited by the equipment.

What is funny is seeing the comments from known good coaches and instructors being pretty much consistent across the board and then the comments from people who don't actually teach new archers being so very opposite.

What the world doesn't need are more crappy traditional shooters.

-Grant


----------



## Str8 Shooter (Oct 15, 2005)

Forest, 
The 1% I referred to are the very few people who shoot in a manner outside of the normal traditional manner. In that I mean the style that most folks who frequent here. The individual how shoots a Asiatic horse bow with a thumb ring, or yumi, or shoots in some way that nearly defies conventional logic and somehow manages to have success with it. I think it's normal to want to improve but following the path that has worked for the majority is a smart way to start. Deciding from the get go that a person wants to shoot with some oddball, difficult way doesn't do any justice and having a cheerleader in the corner cheering them on is just setting them up for failure.

Catering to a persons GAP isn't always the smartest choice. If everytime I screwed up but someone said it was ok because it suited my personality or abilities wouldn't help me develop very well. I see this mentality in the younger workers at my job. They got the everybody is a winner mentality and really have a hard time dealing with valid criticism. Sometimes hard truths are still truths.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> As stated previously...there is debate on what's 'best' even in the Olympic community....so in our community...which is far more diverse...there are going to be even more variables that shape an archer's style and technique.
> 
> Ray :shade:


People may be debating what is best but at least in Olympic Archery they have a National standard that a Coach is required to follow, most of the good Field/3D shooters I know get their training from Olympic Coach and then adapt it to suit Field/3D, why because in the Trad world there is no coaching standard and it's created an army of self taught archers who after several years of shooting still struggle with the basics of shot sequence and Form.

The truth is having a basic National standard gets people shooting to a competent level quickly, then Archers have more understanding of what direction they want to go and can tailor their training in that direction, this is what we need in the Trad world and this is what is happening in Europe at the moment. Novices get good basic coaching for Field/3D and WA Field/3D National teams have a dedicated Coach that all team member are required attend training, you can see the difference in overall standard between the countries that have a Field/3D Coach available and the ones that don't.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

I like knowing how to shoot in a variety of ways.

I can gap shoot off the arrow. 
I can gap shoot off the riser.
I can string walk. 
I can shoot split vision (My version that I fondly call GapStinctive).
I can even shoot with what most would define as instinctive.

Different shots, and shooting conditions might find me switching up between them,
but my favorite/go to at distances of less than 30 yards is the GapStincive.

I can actually shoot more accurately at distances from 30 yards in by string walking,
but I honestly don't enjoy shooting that way, and most of the competitions I shoot in
do not allow it. I do however string walk occasionally when hunting.

Rick


----------



## ranchoarcher (Sep 26, 2013)

I've had the benefit of observing the Olympic head coach giving instruction. He does some training where I often shoot. It is very rigorous, precise, and disciplined. It would be great to have something similar for NFAA or trad in general. So, who's going to volunteer to create the standard and teaching approach? In OLY, the top people got together years ago to do just that. Maybe it's time for field to do the same which would require the top of the heap to come together and hash something out that creates a legitimate standard.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

steve morley said:


> People may be debating what is best but at least in Olympic Archery they have a National standard that a Coach is required to follow, most of the good Field/3D shooters I know get their training from Olympic Coach and then *adapt* it to suit Field/3D,


Key word is 'adapt'.

If a person needs to adapt their form to suit their GOALS...to me that is taking the long way of going about the way they could have chosen or shown. Just look at the number of archers who have to adapt their techniques after trying techniques that they couldn't make work but others could.

There's absolutely no reason to try and convince every trad archer to bend their knees, lean over, cant their bow and grip it and rip it as there no reason to try and convince every archer to stand tall, hold their bow vertical and consciously line up their arrow to the target.

The G.A.P. profile eliminates the need to learn something that is being force fed as 'best' and than adapting it.

The G.A.P. profile helps an archer start off exactly where they need to be at that moment...whether it's shooting for the Olympic team, shooting field rounds, aerial targets, horseback, Kyudo...you name it. There's no adapting unless the archer can't make it work for them.

What I don't understand is how some people can't comprehend what the G.A.P. profile is all about. It's as if some people feel it ONLY applies to 1% of archers or is something that people can graduate to after learning some type of 'best' form.

The fact is we are ALL individuals even though we share similarities. Some people want to pursue their individuality while others want to belong to clubs, gangs or groups of people who share similar interests. There's NOTHING wrong with either one.

Ray :shade:


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

Adapt my be too strong a word 'minor adjustment' as in just a change in anchor position and aiming method. 

I have that *'core shooting'* ingrained and I can take it to another level and adjust my shooting position to make difficult angle shots in Field/3D when required but if you don't have that core shooting baseline then adjusting stance to make difficult shots just makes things worse for those with no basics of Form.

The Form is minor as top Oly shooters have shot WA Field, they have that core shooting and can adjust easily


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

BLACK WOLF said:


> The key word is 'repeatable'.
> 
> Why does it have to be 'classic' and exactly what is 'classic' style?
> 
> ...


Why? Because it is the easiest to repeat. Proven over and over by people that spend their lifetimes on the endeavor (not backyard heros, actual world class shooters and coaches). 

What is it? Basic classic archery stance as taught by the BEST method, Viper's book, Rod Jenkins, etc. They are all more similar than different with minor variations to accommodate traditional techniques.

What alignment - again refer to the BEST method, Viper's book, Rod (see a pattern here?).

Here is my own little personal trad story,
My first go at traditional 20 some years ago was a bust because the pro shop owner showed me how to grip it, rip it, lean over and snap shoot just like G Fred - that resulted spotty accuracy, no confidence and me quitting and returning to compounds a short time later. Then about 4 years ago I saw BigCnyn shoot - whoa, wait a minute here, this guys is standing up! holding back! aiming! and shooting groups that would be decent for a good compound shooter. Now that I had seen what is possible I just had to find out how. Shortly after that I found the Trad section here on AT and thank God Viper's book "Shooting the Stickbow". I totally threw out what the old pro shop expert had told me and started shooting with what I call classic form and execution - and what do you know I actually started hitting what I was aiming at. Last night after all the target shooting bashing I felt compelled to shoot a NFAA 300 round with my hunting/3d bow - shot a 268. World record? Nope, but pretty respectable in most anyone's book. Will classic form work for everybody, probably not - is it a great place to start for 9/10, no doubt in my mind. The other 1/10 just seems to be that guy that has to try to figure it all out on his own.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

centershot said:


> Why? Because it is the easiest to repeat. Proven over and over by people that spend their lifetimes on the endeavor (not backyard heros, actual world class shooters and coaches).
> 
> My first go at traditional 20 some years ago was a bust because the pro shop owner showed me how to grip it, rip it, lean over and snap shoot just like G Fred - that resulted spotty accuracy, no confidence and me quitting and returning to compounds a short time later. Then about 4 years ago I saw BigCnyn shoot - whoa, wait a minute here, this guys is standing up! holding back! aiming! and shooting groups that would be decent for a good compound shooter. Now that I had seen what is possible I just had to find out how. Shortly after that I found the Trad section here on AT and thank God Viper's book "Shooting the Stickbow". I totally threw out what the old pro shop expert had told me and started shooting with what I call classic form and execution - and what do you know I actually started hitting what I was aiming at. Last night after all the target shooting bashing I felt compelled to shoot a NFAA 300 round with my hunting/3d bow - shot a 268. World record? Nope, but pretty respectable in most anyone's book. Will classic form work for everybody, probably not - is it a great place to start for 9/10, no doubt in my mind. The other 1/10 just seems to be that guy that has to try to figure it all out on his own.


Which means it does work for 10/10, with 1/10 simply refusing to do it that way.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

kegan said:


> Which means it does work for 10/10, with 1/10 simply refusing to do it that way.


Not much you can do about that guy, but for the rest no sense starting with square wheels - most can accept round ones work just fine.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

centershot said:


> What alignment - again refer to the BEST method, Viper's book, Rod (see a pattern here?)


Any of these guys as well. You can't GAP with some made up acronym what is a common denominator to all.

I think the main problem you are having here is trying to explain applications of form to someone who hasn't a clue what it even looks like to begin with. In his mind, it has an attachment to only one specific archery style. IOW, he's confused on style v. the basic physics of how a bow throws an arrow.


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> So can he now automatically shoot ANY style or technique or will he have to spend some time learning something new?
> 
> Because if he can now accurately shoot ANY style or technique and within ANY circumstance...I want to know what this technique he is using is and be able to do ALL of that.
> 
> Ray :shade:


Because he has a solid foundation in basic fundamentals his learning curve will be vastly shorter than the average Joe... or possibly even better than the above average Joe. I know you know what he meant... stop trolling.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

grapplemonkey said:


> Because he has a solid foundation in basic fundamentals his learning curve will be vastly shorter than the average Joe... or possibly even better than the above average Joe. I know you know what he meant... stop trolling.


He's not trolling he genuinely believes his rhetoric.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Str8 Shooter said:


> Forest,
> The 1% I referred to are the very few people who shoot in a manner outside of the normal traditional manner. In that I mean the style that most folks who frequent here. The individual how shoots a Asiatic horse bow with a thumb ring, or yumi, or shoots in some way that nearly defies conventional logic and somehow manages to have success with it. I think it's normal to want to improve but following the path that has worked for the majority is a smart way to start. Deciding from the get go that a person wants to shoot with some oddball, difficult way doesn't do any justice and having a cheerleader in the corner cheering them on is just setting them up for failure.
> 
> Catering to a persons GAP isn't always the smartest choice. If everytime I screwed up but someone said it was ok because it suited my personality or abilities wouldn't help me develop very well. I see this mentality in the younger workers at my job. They got the everybody is a winner mentality and really have a hard time dealing with valid criticism. Sometimes hard truths are still truths.



It took me a while to figure out a way to respond to this in a civilized manner. But, I think I got it. You have managed to represent the uneducated attitude that seems to derail many good threads in the forum. It's a lack of understanding some simple facts on the part of people who can't accept reality.
So, Can you lead us down the path that has worked for the majority? What majority are we speaking of ?
Are you one who doesn't understand instinctive shooting? If you consider it 'oddball' and 'difficult' then you are sadly mistaken and I am definitely the cheerleader.
Yes, catering to a persons GAP is a smart thing to do.How hard is it to grasp that each individual is different and the individual is not required to fit any specific mold. We are not talking about a group of boy scouts here (or any organized group training) we're talking about people who come to the forum with a specific goal already in their minds. They sometimes state their intentions right up front. Sometimes it takes a few questions to find out where they are in their knowledge of archery and where they want to go. How hard is that?


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> He's not trolling he genuinely believes his rhetoric.


Don't tell me that Matt... it's the only way I can deal with him, lol. I actually believe Ray to be a guy I could share a beer with... but I wouldn't put an apple on my head and ask him to play William Tell with me.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Here are the basics :wink: 

Right handed student:

#1. grab bow with left hand
#2. grab string with right hand
#3. point bow arm at target, pull string and than let go of string :wink:

Within those basics...there are a ton of variables: Here are just a few

#1. how to grip your bow...high wrist, medium wrist, low wrist, open grip, closed grip
#2. 3 Under, Split Finger or Walk the String
#3. bow arm at a perpendicular angle to the target, 3 deg. off perpendicular, 10 deg. off perpendicular
#4. draw arm elbow in line, slightly high or even higher
#5. dead/static release, dynamic release

At least we got the basics down now :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Here are the basics :wink:
> 
> Right handed student:
> 
> ...



LOL, I was good with the first three but, whatever I suppose.


----------



## Str8 Shooter (Oct 15, 2005)

Forest, we're looking at the same trees but seeing them a little differently.

In all these discussions I haven't mentioned anything about instinctive or any other specific method. The reason for that, and I think why your biases are coloring my comments, are because I do not believe there is anything a person has to perform differently to shoot instinctive or reference aiming. The physical setup and execution of the shot (form) is where the control comes in. The method you choose to direct the arrow to the target, instinctive or otherwise, is a mental process. I for one do not believe that one person can look at someone and tell how they aim based on how they deliver the shot. Lets be perfectly honest... all this True, Pure, Real (feel free to insert any other capitalized superlative) Instinctive business didn't start on this forum until one person started using it to needle another member. Every time that member brought up instinctive shooting it became a pointless argument over whether or not his instinctivenosity was true enough to qualify as True. Too bad cuz now the capitalization and term have managed to pervade everything and create a miasma of polarized opinions. 

People all to often fail to differentiate between form and style. Form are the basic tenets that successful shooters use to deliver the arrow. Style is the individual things a person adapts to fit their particular physical makeup and preferences. Even in Olympic archery (which I don't practice and don't preach about) there are differences in style. The same basics of form will be there but the details will change from one person to the next.

Look at 100 pictures of successful archers. Bowhunters, 3D shooter, field, target, Olympic, etc. If you look at all of them I'd be willing to bet you'll see some common things. Of course there will be minor differences because of style and preference but that is to be expected. The common things if you isolate them are the basics of form the majority should work towards executing. 

My point about not catering to the GAP is simple though I didn't elaborate and I apologize for that. I was on my way out the door to work and hastily typed a response so you wouldn't be waiting nor think I was ignoring you. This whole GAP business is grossly overblown. It's called common sense. Any person looking to give instruction will dig a bit and cater the instruction based on what they find... or they should. Even so, there are times when you have to lay down facts someone doesn't want to hear. For example, I know a guy who loves to shoot but over the years has had very, very little success. He started off in the typical manner that most guys do. Picked up a recurve that was a bit too heavy, let the bow control his body (bend, crouch, snap) because the weight was just too much, and after a lot of fruitless work only progressed to sporadic accuracy at close range. Lots of missed targets at the range and lost, missed and wounded critters. After a few years of this he nearly quit. He asked me what he was doing wrong. I never mentioned aiming but pointed out some of the mechanics he was missing in his shot and suggested a little longer and lighter bow. He didn't really like the answers because he thought there was some magic tip or bow that would make it all come together. Now, I didn't go about any of this in any type of rude or dismissive manner. Since that time he's followed several of the suggestions and his accuracy has improved quite a bit.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Interesting how some people acknowledge that the G.A.P. profile is really nothing more than common sense...which is EXACTLY what it is...but they than claim to refuse to cater to it :wink:

Soooo in other words....some people refuse to cater to common sense.

Go figure!

Common sense tells someone that the 'best' advice is the advice that 'best' fits the individual...not spewing cookie cutter advice just because it fits the majority of trad archers.

If an archer got on here asking to learn how to shoot and they had GOALS of competing and hunting someday...a person would get a standing ovation from a few people here if they told that archer to follow some FITA manual but if a new archer came on here saying they wanted to learn how to aim Instinctively and hunt rabbits, squirrels and deer from the ground....a bunch of panties would get bunched up if someone mentioned Asbell's form techniques.

Why....because most of them couldn't make it work and fulfill their GOALS while many others have.

Ray :shade:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Str8 Shooter said:


> Forest, we're looking at the same trees but seeing them a little differently.
> 
> In all these discussions I haven't mentioned anything about instinctive or any other specific method. The reason for that, and I think why your biases are coloring my comments, are because I do not believe there is anything a person has to perform differently to shoot instinctive or reference aiming. The physical setup and execution of the shot (form) is where the control comes in. The method you choose to direct the arrow to the target, instinctive or otherwise, is a mental process. I for one do not believe that one person can look at someone and tell how they aim based on how they deliver the shot. Lets be perfectly honest... all this True, Pure, Real (feel free to insert any other capitalized superlative) Instinctive business didn't start on this forum until one person started using it to needle another member. Every time that member brought up instinctive shooting it became a pointless argument over whether or not his instinctivenosity was true enough to qualify as True. Too bad cuz now the capitalization and term have managed to pervade everything and create a miasma of polarized opinions.
> 
> ...



:icon_salut: I didn't find anything to disagree with or even comment on except that I appreciate the well thought out response. Common sense doesn't seem to be too common sometimes. I do believe that you took your friends GAP profile into consideration and helped him to accomplish something that he had failed at in the past. It seems that it was time for him to try something different. Yes, if he was over bowed from the beginning he needed to change that for sure. 
You know? If more people would engage brain before putting fingers in gear, there would be waaaay less confusion around here. 
Good post, thanks.

Oops, I had to edit. The old instinctive argument has been going on for lots of years, the players change periodically.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Interesting how some people acknowledge that the G.A.P. profile is really nothing more than common sense...which is EXACTLY what it is...but they than claim to refuse to cater to it :wink:
> 
> Soooo in other words....some people refuse to cater to common sense.
> 
> ...



Yep, plain old horse sense. But we both know that some people just love arguing and I'm guilty of gittin right down in the mud with them if necessary.


----------



## MotherLode (Dec 9, 2005)

My exact thought also , they are the opposite of each other. For me the quickest road to target panic is snap shooting. Although I can do it at will w/o target panic if the bulk of my shooting is doing it with control and separating my aiming from release and getting a surprise type release. Snap shooting is a step backwards and not that difficult at shorter distances of 20 yrds and under , just not as consistent in the bigger picture.





centershot said:


> Exactly the opposite for me. Shooting in control give me the confidence that target panic tries to take away.


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Here are the basics :wink:
> 
> Right handed student:
> 
> ...


Good stuff Ray... let's hope they don't get into a southpaw stance, lol.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Another common sense statement.

A shooting style will more times than not...shape the form techniques an archer uses.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

grapplemonkey said:


> Good stuff Ray... let's hope they don't get into a southpaw stance, lol.


That's for sure! Because we all now the orthodox stance is the only stance we should teach beginners :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## grapplemonkey (Nov 2, 2005)

I worked at our local Sports Authority in the outdoor/marine/guns department... I've seen some goofy things, lol.


----------



## MotherLode (Dec 9, 2005)

Yes it will , the question is will their ego keep them stuck with it with the help od internet pro's ? My advise it to those willing to listen is to put their focus on those that put it out there for all to see and filter out the others , that is where the rubber meets the road in my book. And those are the guys that perk my ears up and I haven't shot a tournament since my compound days , I am simply a backyard shooter these days , but I'm not content on just flinging arrows while getting a pat on the back for mediocre.
I will step out on a limb here with my experience with more than a few years on both sides of the fence and say if all you do is hunt, and you want to become a better shot, move away from the hunter only crowd , that is just reality. 







BLACK WOLF said:


> Another common sense statement.
> 
> A shooting style will more times than not...shape the form techniques an archer uses.
> 
> Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

MotherLode said:


> Yes it will , the question is will their ego keep them stuck with it with the help od internet pro's ?


Just for clarification:

Who says everyone's ego is keeping them stuck using a particular style?

Who says that they can't possibly be making it work?

If they're satisfied and successful with it...why should they change?

If someone's ego is causing them to wound animals because of poor ABILITIES based on the techniques they are using or the lack of dedication and proper practice to master those skills...than by all means...someone needs to call those specific people out and try to show them there are easier ways to become more accurate and how they do NOT have to stick with a specific style because it's more trad or told it's the 'best' way for everyone to shoot.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Mo0se (Sep 24, 2002)

Yes I finally am but I'm not aware of it.


----------



## TerpSox (Feb 19, 2014)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Not sure where this post has gone over the last page. I am just going to jump in with a comment regarding the original post.
> 
> The other day my coach was telling me I was holding too long. I responded that I am waiting to get control of the bow, rather than having the bow control me. The long hold was like breaking a horse. I was at a point where I needed to wrestle control back and return to that relaxed state that we tend to move in and out of over time. Working on relaxed control is ongoing. *My old golf pro used to tell me that you have to give up control to get control. Very Zen.* It applies to archery just like golf, if you can figure out what it means.


A wise man indeed.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Just for clarification:
> 
> Who says everyone's ego is keeping them stuck using a particular style?
> 
> ...




Noooo, that's too simple.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

On acceptance of one's own boundaries of accuracy, there's nothing new under the sun.

From Horace Ford's _Archery, its Theory and Practice_ from the 1850's:

"Having paid so much attention to the beginner, I feel called upon to take one shot at that Archer of long-standing who is very probably giving a sigh of relief as he comes to the concluding chapter of this "tiresome" treatise. Well, Sir, you have practised with the bow, I perceive, some fifteen or twenty years or more, and think, in consequence, you must know all about it. You have hitherto differed from me upon most of the essential points treated of in the foregoing pages, and, having since read them, you do so still. You will have none of these new-fangled ideas; you shoot as your great-great-grandpapa did before you (or was supposed to do —'tis the same thing, of course), and you mean to continue in the same all the days of your life. Even supposing—ridiculous idea!— that the theories propounded and rules laid down are better than your own, still, you say, they will not do for you (at least many of your style of thinking do say so)—you will have none of them, though those who act upon them prove by results how far they are beyond anything you know on the subject. You can generally put in one out of three of your arrows at 100 yards, and now and then (twice, perhaps, in three years,) actually accomplish the half of them! You can, besides, shoot the other distances in proportion, and you are content. Anything beyond these stupendous attainments must be owing to luck, or some peculiar gift of nature; for have not you been practising a great number of years earnestly and energetically, and been unable to accomplish more? Since, at any rate, your own ideas must be best, so far as you yourself are concerned, a different system, whatever it may do for others, cannot by any possibility, you think, do anything for you.

Now, my very self-opinionated friend, I will venture to reply to you, that no system radically wrong and unscientific in theory, opposed to the plain rules of practical sense, and unsuccessful in its results, can be made right either by its having antiquity pleaded in its favour (supposing you can justly do this, which I very much doubt), nor by any special peculiarities of a particular individual. You may have some physical incapability that may prevent your ever becoming a good shot: but if you can use your limbs and muscles like other men, there can be nothing that can render a bad system better for you to act upon than a good one.* If you cannot succeed with the latter, you are still less likely to do so with the former*. You will by no means get over your unavoidable difficulties the easier by persisting in a mode of shooting that only increases them. I do not presume to say that the system advocated in the foregoing articles is the best that can be discovered; but I say that, so long as it accomplishes in myself and others what the wildest flights of your imagination never dream of as possible to be accomplished by yourself, with your own, it is to be preferred to yours. You may say you have tried it, but find you only shoot the worse. This is likely enough, because no man can change from one mode of doing a thing to another, though it be from a bad to a good one, and not for the time experience an increase of difficulty. The habits of years are not to be so easily overcome. A little perseverance, however, would soon put a different face upon the matter. *Of this at any rate be sure, that if you wish to arrive at the top of the tree in any pursuit, you must adopt that mode of action that is indisputably proved to be the only, or the best, means of carrying you there*."


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Sanford said:


> On acceptance of one's own boundaries of accuracy, there's nothing new under the sun.
> 
> From Horace Ford's _Archery, its Theory and Practice_ from the 1850's:
> 
> ...


Noooo, that's too simple.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Matt_Potter said:


> Noooo, that's too simple.


I guess the only thing simpler is the "participation award"


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Sanford said:


> I guess the only thing simpler is the "participation award"


LOL - my kids HATE those things.

Matt


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Sanford said:


> On acceptance of one's own boundaries of accuracy, there's nothing new under the sun.
> 
> From Horace Ford's _Archery, its Theory and Practice_ from the 1850's:
> 
> ...



:set1_rolf2: I thought at first I would have to ask Thin Man to translate that for me. 

It's the same old story, but the last sentence, which you highlighted, tells the rest of the story as it applies to this forum. Not everybody wants to arrive at the top of the same tree. I know what you're thinking but, I will wait for it to be said, and it's coming, hell yeah, it's coming.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Sanford said:


> I guess the only thing simpler is the "participation award"



Your condescending, arrogant attitude is showing. And you fellas wonder why Ray puts the GAP on you every day.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Not everybody wants to arrive at the top of the same tree. I know what you're thinking but, I will wait for it to be said, and it's coming, hell yeah, it's coming.


You mean some folks goal to just be brush jumpers?  Could be, but I think that's more a running sport than a shooting sport.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Sanford said:


> You mean some folks goal to just be brush jumpers?  Could be, but I think that's more a running sport than a shooting sport.


I don't know what a brush jumper is and I don't care but, if that's what they want then it's their business. And, if they were to ask me how to become a better brush jumper, I would be forced to admit my ignorance on the subject. If I suggest that a long pole might help them they might call me stupid because that's not what they're interested in.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

I don't know either, Forest. I've never coached anyone to become a mediocre shot for their purposes and goal, so not sure how that works either.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Your condescending, arrogant attitude is showing. And you fellas wonder why Ray puts the GAP on you every day.


ROFLMAO! 

If the condesending, arrogant and elitist type attitudes would stop...I promise to stop mentioning G.A.P. Scouts honor! :wink: at least for a little while :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Mo0se (Sep 24, 2002)

Some of them have earned the elite title... just sayin.


----------



## KennyO (Feb 5, 2003)

I think whats been lost in this conversation is the level of conscious vs unconscious control. In the OP's example, the shooters who let go at the count of two may have been shooting in their normal rhythm. Many shooters i would wager have a shot sequence where they draw, anchor, acquire their aim, and begin expansion... The goal for many is to NOT consciously control the release once expansion is started unless something feels wrong. Perhaps in the example the sight picture was right and their sub-conscious had been trained to release. Perhaps they were in control of the shot, just not the timing of the shot. My question is.. Did they hit or miss?


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

KennyO said:


> I think whats been lost in this conversation is the level of conscious vs unconscious control. In the OP's example, the shooters who let go at the count of two may have been shooting in their normal rhythm. Many shooters i would wager have a shot sequence where they draw, anchor, acquire their aim, and begin expansion... The goal for many is to NOT consciously control the release once expansion is started unless something feels wrong. Perhaps in the example the sight picture was right and their sub-conscious had been trained to release. Perhaps they were in control of the shot, just not the timing of the shot. My question is.. Did they hit or miss?


Sure my 1,2,3 timing thing messed with them (that was the point, and pretty fun) - but it still showed how well they could handle their shot or a bump in the shot sequence. Along with that I heard several times how "I'm just not holding and aiming like I want" and "I shot that one too quick" or "I short drew and fired that one too quickly". How were they shooting? Well second place was 50 points back.......the other two were 80+ points behind on a 40 target 3D.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

KennyO said:


> I think whats been lost in this conversation is the level of conscious vs unconscious control. In the OP's example, the shooters who let go at the count of two may have been shooting in their normal rhythm. Many shooters i would wager have a shot sequence where they draw, anchor, acquire their aim, and begin expansion... The goal for many is to NOT consciously control the release once expansion is started unless something feels wrong. Perhaps in the example the sight picture was right and their sub-conscious had been trained to release.


The test is not much different that if I snuck up besides someone and tickled their nose with a feather while they were at anchor and expected them to shoot with the same amount of control.

The fact is....some people have very little control over their bow.

The fact is...some people have control over their bow under the circumstances and conditions they practice for and in.

The fact is...some people will loose control of their bow when a different stimulus or a different circumstance presents itself that they haven't practiced for.

The fact is...there are some people who have such great control and focus...that very little can distract them.

Just because an archer doesn't show much control in one circumstance does NOT mean they can't have control in any other circumstance.

Ray :shade:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Sanford said:


> I don't know either, Forest. I've never coached anyone to become a mediocre shot for their purposes and goal, so not sure how that works either.



 Say what? whatchu talkin bout? Is a brush jumper a mediocre shot? I thought you had asked something about a brush jumper.


----------



## ranchoarcher (Sep 26, 2013)

centershot said:


> Sure my 1,2,3 timing thing messed with them (that was the point, and pretty fun) - but it still showed how well they could handle their shot or a bump in the shot sequence. Along with that I heard several times how "I'm just not holding and aiming like I want" and "I shot that one too quick" or "I short drew and fired that one too quickly". How were they shooting? Well second place was 50 points back.......the other two were 80+ points behind on a 40 target 3D.


Question? Were they aware this was an experiment or game for you to make a point with their results? Usually a person expects 1,2, to be followed immediately by three. Unless of course they're told ahead of time that 3 might be delayed. Were they?


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

One was the other 2 were not, guess which one shot first. This was just one example that day. The real 'tell' was when we were standing around after the shoot discussing shot control. Nobody was satisfied with their level of control, myself included.


----------



## ranchoarcher (Sep 26, 2013)

I doubt anyone would say they're 100% satisfied with their performance. It's human nature to zero in on the bad shots and focus on those. Doesn't mean much. Since the two were not aware that makes the results meaningless since they released for an unknown reason. A 3D isn't exactly a good indicator of a person's hunting ability either. The main difference is, in 3D you don't have the option to wait for a better shot.


----------



## artgordon (Mar 2, 2013)

It's not the destination but the journey. Don't forget to enjoy the trip.


----------

