# What proper alignment, transfer and holding look like...



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Best example I can think of. Only problem is trying to explain to a young archer what a chain binder is... LOL!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

So, this is how you achieve a "let off" affect with a recurve - you achieve proper alignment and the stresses are less than at 2/3 draw. This is how top archers manage to hold 50+ lbs. and considerably stronger archers can struggle with 35#.

John


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

I certainly 'get' the concept and have my own images in my mind of this concept. But I can't 'see' your example in my mind, John.


----------



## Old Newbie (Apr 14, 2011)

Doe eyed stare.


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

The forces go in the opposite direction (pulling two things together rather than pulling them apart), but I can definitely see the correlation. Once you get that bar moved into place, the structure of the apparatus can hold the weight without any outside help. Without that lever, you wouldn't be able to get the whole thing in place so that it can hold the weight. If you don't get the lever all the way around, it's going to take a lot of work on your part to hold it there so the whole thing doesn't come flying apart.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Ya know, I'm still not sure I get hold and transfer. Sure I've read about it, and attempt it, and I'd like to think I understand it. But I'm still not quite sure why I can't use the same muscles the whole way through.

That being said, I don't think transfer / hold belongs in the L1 manual. It is not something summer camp counselors are qualified to teach after an 8 hour introduction to archery. Could be I'm just projecting my own lack of understanding on others, but it seems to me to be too advanced a nuance to include in the basic instructors course. :dontknow:


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

Best analogy I can think of....

You know those big doors as might be on a garage or livestock building? The ones that hang on rollers from an overhead rail?










Say, the two meeting sliding sections are a couple of inches apart and you are trying to open it with your finger tips while standing back from it.
You are going to find it difficult! You are trying to exert a force too far out from your body.

Now, if the opening is wide enough to stand in between the two halves and you can shove them apart with both your hands then it's a lot easier.
The force you are exerting is in line with your shoulders.

I don't have an analogy for the transfer.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Mulcade,

Okay, now I 'see' it. I was just looking at the hooks, not the lever, and thinking 'Huh?'


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Greysides said:


> Best analogy I can think of....
> 
> You know those big doors as might be on a garage or livestock building? The ones that hang on rollers from an overhead rail?
> 
> ...


I just have someone hold a strechband apart with their arms out stretched in front of them. And then stretched all the way with their arms stretched out to form a straight line through their shoulders, and they can just feel how much easier it is to hold the stretch band with their skeleton holding the weight, even though the stretch band is actually stretched further out.

I think people get the skeletal alignment concept pretty easily. In fact, kids often have a pretty good instinct for it, but the problem is that the natural way to form that skeletal alignment is to anchor floating near the back of your neck, where compound shooters can anchor because of their use of hard walls and mechanical releases. As fingers recurve shooters we need to anchor on our face, and I get the impression that much of the scapula tucking and all of that other asymmetrical rigamarole is desgined to cobble together this compromise of anchor/alignment and force the body into alignment. The pressure on both shoulders is the same (not counting the mass weight of the bow) so I can't think of any other reason why we should prefer the asymmetrical LAN2 tucking other than to allow us to anchor farther forward than is actually ideal from an alignment perspective.


----------



## shootemstraight (Jan 13, 2007)

I was very hopeful about this post when I saw the title since I'm a very visual person and it would be great to have a picture of what these concepts look like. I'm not sure this hits the nail on the head, but... I think if you actually had a chain binder and physically used it, it would make some sense. The resistance builds and builds, but then it "lets off", but is holding all that weight. And, yes, I guess, it is holding without "outside influence".

Long, long time ago... We constructed "Archie the archer" out of plywood. He was a representative of particular aspects of shooting. For instance, his bow hand was cotton (representing a "soft bow hand". The middle of his bow was a "marshmallow" and that's why he held his bow softly, so he doesn't squeeze the living daylights out of the marshmallow. (the "marshmallow" was really just the middle of a dowel rod, the "bow", painted white). Anyway, he had a rubber band for his bow "string" and a clothes hook for his draw fingers. The clothes hook was attached to a string (his arm, which doesn't get to "help shoot", it just connects the hook to the elbow). The upper arm was a thin board which was hinged at the shoulder and as Archie would draw the bow string it was "difficult" to draw the further you got back. Really difficult, in fact, UNTIL everything came into alignment and then you could let go of his arm and he stayed at full draw, on his own. (basically the rubberband/sting/hinge all lined up the forces)

Now, I can hear all the comments on form everyone is getting ready to post.... please remember, this was a LONG time ago!!! It was not the NTS shooting style. My point is purely that we had come up with Archie to demonstrate the "in the bow" type of feeling - the feeling that it can be easier to hold if you're in alignment. Now that I'm thinking about it, seems like Archie could be resurrected and redesigned.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

shootemstraight said:


> Anyway, he had a rubber band for his bow "string" and a clothes hook for his draw fingers. The clothes hook was attached to a string (his arm, which doesn't get to "help shoot", it just connects the hook to the elbow). The upper arm was a thin board which was hinged at the shoulder and as Archie would draw the bow string it was "difficult" to draw the further you got back. Really difficult, in fact, UNTIL everything came into alignment and then you could let go of his arm and he stayed at full draw, on his own. (basically the rubberband/sting/hinge all lined up the forces)
> 
> Now, I can hear all the comments on form everyone is getting ready to post.... please remember, this was a LONG time ago!!! It was not the NTS shooting style. My point is purely that we had come up with Archie to demonstrate the "in the bow" type of feeling - the feeling that it can be easier to hold if you're in alignment. Now that I'm thinking about it, seems like Archie could be resurrected and redesigned.


Actually, I had thought of making something just like that but I wasn't sure if that was practical or more something like a prop comic would make :embara: Seems a useful idea since the best view of alignment is from directly above, and since we shoot outdoors I can' just fix a camera to the ceiling and use a video screen to demo what we are doing (even though I said that I think people often get skeletal alignment--getting the idea is different that actually executing it...)


----------



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

I just sent a PM to Limbwalker earlier today about this. I understand the concept, but in the last 6 months I've probably played around with 6 different ways to do transfer, holding and expansion, and each seemed correct at the time. I'm interested in descriptions on _how_ to achieve proper holding, which might not be possible here. Seems to be a thing where you know how to do it when you know how to do it.


----------



## shootemstraight (Jan 13, 2007)

Warbow said:


> Actually, I had thought of making something just like that but I wasn't sure if that was practical or more something like a prop comic would make :embara: Seems a useful idea since the best view of alignment is from directly above, and since we shoot outdoors I can' just fix a camera to the ceiling and use a video screen to demo what we are doing (even though I said that I think people often get skeletal alignment--getting the idea is different that actually executing it...)


Archie stood about 3 feet tall. He was mounted on a base (firm foundation that was always the same), but he was able to be taken down and re-assembled by the kids as we discussed each element. He ended up becoming a mascot of sorts and we gave him a club hat at t-shirt.  I thought he would be most helpful to our youngest kids, but it was funny how well our oldest kids "took" to him as well.

Obviously, Archie was just a small part, but between "telling" how to do it, using the stretchy band to "feel" how to do it, and then Archie "showing" a concept - it seemed like most kids got something out of it. But, nothing can replace the first time the archer does something correctly - it's like "oh, so THAT'S what it REALLY feels like!!!" I'm still not 100% on board with how to best to teach transfer, holding, and expansion. But, whatever visual clues we can offer has GOT to help, right?


----------



## DK Lieu (Apr 6, 2011)

Also similar to an over-center locking device, such as a this clamp. The more misaligned the link is to the plunger, the greater the force needed to move the plunger by the handle. As the link becomes in-line with the plunger, the mechanical advantage increases, and the force needed to move the plunger decreases. When the link goes over-center, the force needed to move the plunger becomes negative, and the clamps self-locks.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Without that lever, you wouldn't be able to get the whole thing in place so that it can hold the weight. If you don't get the lever all the way around, it's going to take a lot of work on your part to hold it there so the whole thing doesn't come flying apart.


Precisely. And DK has it as well. And yes, the first time you use a chain binder, you will understand the concept of levers, pivot points and alignment. You'll also know why coaches are interested in whether an archer can get "behind the line" too, because it mimics the lever or chain binder above.

Sorry if this is confusing. We all learn differently. I learn best by observing - visual learner. So this analogy works great for me. 

John


----------



## Old Newbie (Apr 14, 2011)

I grasp it all but I think that we all just need to go to Texas for a masterclass.


----------



## Bob Furman (May 16, 2012)

So is it correct is saying that the angular motion exists in just the upper arm/shoulder and the forearm/wrist exhibit linear motion similar to the crankshaft/piston relationship of a typical vehicle engine?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Bob, I think that's a fair assessment.

John


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

The sketch shows what an observer should see if he/she were standing behind the archer and looking toward the target. The blue dot represents the end of the draw side elbow. The important part is the direction and not the relative length of the lines. For Transfer, the preferred direction is diagonally down but horizontal would be ok. Never up.








When we teach the Transfer movement, we try to get the archer to focus on moving Lan2 a bit more. The back contraction will take care of itself.

Holding is nothing more than a position that consists of a number of required parts...good draw side alignment, good bow side alignment, and good use of the back muscles are the biggest ones. There are some supporting pieces that make things a bit easier (bent wrist, head position, posture, etc.). 

When we teach Expansion, we focus on two things: more Lan2 movement and making sure the long barrel of the gun doesn't get longer. Meaning, don't push or extend the bow arm toward the target.

As the archer gets more and more of their shot process into muscle memory, the focus may change a bit. 

Terry


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Thanks Terry. Now all a person has to do is combine the images to get a 3-D version. Simple enough? 

Where Terry shows Loading, that's when the binder is nearly in-line with the chain it's pulling on, but not quite. At anchor, the chain binder is in line. At holding, the chain binder is "behind" the line and the chain is secure.

John


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

To test to see if the archer has achieved the holding position, using an air-bow or stretch band, we do the collapse test. We try to get them to feel the position they are in when they achieve holding. From here we will work with them using a light weight bow and gradually work our way up to their bow and their normal draw weight.

The reason you can't use the same muscles from Setup to Expansion, is because of the arm position at those extremes. It is impossible to fully use the rhomboids and lower traps when you are at Setup and start the draw process. The load in the back has to move from one set of muscles to the other until you reach Holding. The load basically transfers from the forearm, bicep, deltoids, and Lats to the inner muscles (Rhomboids and lower traps). If you are using these muscles normally, it is just how much is being used once you get to holding.

Terry


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

> When we teach Expansion, we focus on two things: more Lan2 movement and making sure the long barrel of the gun doesn't get longer. Meaning, don't push or extend the bow arm toward the target.


How does the shot stay balanced? All pull and no push seems to make an archer susceptible to posture problems, which then lead to expansion problems? Or are you saying it's ok to push as long as the bow arm doesn't move forward? In days gone by, an equal push-pull kept the string in a static position while you pulled the bow apart.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Midway,

I can only speak for myself here, but if you drop your shoulders under load, at holding, you will get expansion without the sensation of "pushing." Try it.

John


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

bownut-tl. said:


> The load basically transfers from the forearm, bicep, deltoids, and Lats to the inner muscles (Rhomboids and lower traps). If you are using these muscles normally, it is just how much is being used once you get to holding.
> 
> Terry


I'm not getting the bit about the forearm. I don't see why that would change at all. Shouldn't you be using as little for arm muscle tension as possible, just enough to hold your hook, the entire time?


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

Warbow said:


> I'm not getting the bit about the forearm. I don't see why that would change at all. Shouldn't you be using as little for arm muscle tension as possible, just enough to hold your hook, the entire time?


You are correct. Some folks start out with too much tension in the forearms and bicep. If they do, the excess load needs to be transferred to the back. If you start out relaxed and can maintain that through the draw to loading, your fine. 

Terry


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

midwayarcherywi said:


> How does the shot stay balanced? All pull and no push seems to make an archer susceptible to posture problems, which then lead to expansion problems? Or are you saying it's ok to push as long as the bow arm doesn't move forward? In days gone by, an equal push-pull kept the string in a static position while you pulled the bow apart.


The shot remains balanced by how the back muscles are used and the amount of movement that is needed to get the clicker to drop. This only works if you have no more than about 3mm of movement needed. The feeling is as you described "push as long as the bow doesn't move forward". So, if the amount of movement needed to get the clicker to drop is very very small, the amount of expansion is also very very small. The draw side and bow side movement becomes balanced around the spine where you end up with about 1 to 2 millimeters of movement on both sides (towards and away from the target). At release, the bow arm should fall at a slightly down and left angle (RH archer), matching the movement on the draw side (elbow moves slightly down and right). 

Where archers using the NTS become frustrated with expansion is when they have too much arrow point movement needed to get the clicker to drop. Clicker control is critical in getting this to work. When I said the long barrel should not get longer, that was at release to follow through. 

Terry


----------



## Bob Furman (May 16, 2012)

---- So is it correct is saying that the angular motion exists in just the upper arm/shoulder and the forearm/wrist exhibit linear motion similar to the crankshaft/piston relationship of a typical vehicle engine? ----



limbwalker said:


> Bob, I think that's a fair assessment.
> 
> John



With that being the case is it also correct in saying as we expand through the clicker that the angle between the upper arm and forearm will change?


----------



## Bob Furman (May 16, 2012)

limbwalker said:


> Midway,
> 
> I can only speak for myself here, but if you drop your shoulders under load, at holding, you will get expansion without the sensation of "pushing." Try it.
> 
> John


Not to throw a monkey wrench into all this, but how do you mean drop your shoulders under load?


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

Bob Furman said:


> ---- So is it correct is saying that the angular motion exists in just the upper arm/shoulder and the forearm/wrist exhibit linear motion similar to the crankshaft/piston relationship of a typical vehicle engine? ----
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The angle should not change. The arm may rotate in the shoulder socket where the draw hand ends up slightly higher than the anchor point but the angle between the upper arm and lower arm should stay the same.

Terry


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

bownut-tl. said:


> Where archers using the NTS become frustrated with expansion is when they have too much arrow point movement needed to get the clicker to drop. Clicker control is critical in getting this to work. When I said the long barrel should not get longer, that was at release to follow through.
> 
> Terry


Does the head move back, ever so slightly so that the anchor can stay absolutely consistent or does the anchor move back?


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

Warbow said:


> Does the head move back, ever so slightly so that the anchor can stay absolutely consistent or does the anchor move back?


The head should not move, but I know it is hard to tell someone to not move 2 millimeters and they be able to tell they did. With such a small movement the archer just needs to be consistent. With angular movement, most archer's will feel the string being pulled into the chin a bit harder so for most, the anchor might move back a very very small amount.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

bownut-tl. said:


> The head should not move, but I know it is hard to tell someone to not move 2 millimeters and they be able to tell they did. With such a small movement the archer just needs to be consistent. With angular movement, most archer's will feel the string being pulled into the chin a bit harder so for most, the anchor might move back a very very small amount.


Hmm...so I guess that emphasizes that the anchor has to really be settled in. I think for archers starting off with a clicker their anchor is not consistently 2mm from the clicker, so the expansion is a lot greater and lots of head movement or pushing with the bow arm. How do you work on fixing that?


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

Warbow said:


> Hmm...so I guess that emphasizes that the anchor has to really be settled in. I think for archers starting off with a clicker their anchor is not consistently 2mm from the clicker, so the expansion is a lot greater and lots of head movement or pushing with the bow arm. How do you work on fixing that?


To fix it, we make the archer go back to using a stetch band. When we are satisfied they have the alignment we want, both sides, and they are anchoring fairly consistently, we move them to a light weight bow to refine their anchor and alignment process. Once we are satisfied with that, we will try their bow. Usually we have two people watch them. One to check their draw side alignment and one to check their clicker position. We continue to make slight clicker adjustments untill they are close to their final position. We continue to monitor them and make them go back to the stretch band or light weight bow if they struggle. It's sort of an itterative process. The one trick, to get clicker control, is to have the archer look at their clicker position at loading. They just need to keep working the process and moving back and forth between a light bow and their bow until things start to click.


----------



## cemoto2 (Apr 12, 2011)

I understand how proper alignment works but does the physical structure of the archer stop the alignment from working correctly?


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

If you have a short forearm and a long upper arm it can cause difficulties getting the elbow to/behind the draw-force line.










There seems to be disagreement amongst authorities on the subject as to whether the elbow should go behind the line or not.


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

I don't think there is any disagreement by those in the know about being behind the line. If you are able to achieve it, it is preferable. Plucking the string becomes a very rare occurrence. Try getting off the string while in a chicken wing position. It is hard to do cleanly.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Well, this has gone in a very complicated direction. And that's one problem I have with the NTS being introduced at the early levels. It's far too complicated a system for beginning and intermediate archers. It is an elite-level training system that requires a great deal of control to execute properly. Trying to teach NTS to a student who can't reliably set up the point under the clicker seems kinda pointless and frustrating to me. 

Once an archer has enough control and strength to consistently set up the arrow under the clicker, then I say go for it. But until then, we need the apply the K.I.S.S. method. 

John


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

midwayarcherywi said:


> I don't think there is any disagreement by those in the know about being behind the line. If you are able to achieve it, it is preferable. Plucking the string becomes a very rare occurrence. Try getting off the string while in a chicken wing position. It is hard to do cleanly.


I don't disagree with you but note the inscription on the diagram. Not my diagram...... or spelling.



limbwalker said:


> Well, this has gone in a very complicated direction. And that's one problem I have with the NTS being introduced at the early levels. It's far too complicated a system for beginning and intermediate archers. It is an elite-level training system that requires a great deal of control to execute properly. Trying to teach NTS to a student who can't reliably set up the point under the clicker seems kinda pointless and frustrating to me.
> 
> Once an archer has enough control and strength to consistently set up the arrow under the clicker, then I say go for it. But until then, we need the apply the K.I.S.S. method.
> 
> John


Some schools of archery start off beginners immediately with sights and stabilisers. Others start barebow until the basics are mastered and then go with the kit.
You can guess my preference...........I'm still waiting to be told I'm good enough to use a sight! 

A bit like the debate over when clickers should be introduced, immediately or later.


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

To master NTS, you need good clicker control. To learn it, you don't. 

Terry


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Terry, I agree a person can learn the positions without great clicker control, but they will never get "expansion" until - as you point out - their clicker control is adequate. 

I guess it's a "chicken or egg" dilemma.

Personally, my approach is to teach good, solid basic archery form that is easy to repeat and comfortable for the archer until they decide their goal is to compete on the highest levels. Then, there "may" be some benefit to them to pursue more complex training programs. However, as we saw in this and every previous Olympic games, medalists come in every shape, size and style. 

John


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

John,

I agree. The only difference between what you and I do is I start with NTS. The hard part is when you are trying to change an already learned process.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> ...And that's one problem I have with the NTS being introduced at the early levels. It's far too complicated a system for beginning and intermediate archers...


 John, I bet we agree that the NTS method is a pie composed of many pieces. And, that any kid or new-to-the-sport athlete can acquire some pieces easily and become better without mastering *every* piece. So I bet we can agree that it is best <g> to teach the NTS from day one (just not ALL of it!). For beginning and intermediate archers I always use the NTS pieces that they CAN grasp, and I think good coaches know to not overload the athlete, not to try to bother with transfer, for example, if they haven't gotten the other 99.5% of the pie. Transfer is like icing on the cake - you need it to be complete, but cake without icing is still pretty good cake... Out of the 150 or so WW Lindsey and I taught a couple days ago, it was amazing how much of the NTS the troops picked up, how quickly they did so, and how different they were from the first arrow and the last arrow they shot. Some of them were totally transformed, stoked, and fist-pumping and high-fiving each other. I never ever considered the word transfer when teaching them but that did not lessen their experience nor their success. I do think your ranch implement<G> example is a great one - and when an archer tells me that she felt like the bow was a "black hole" on release, "not there", no vibrations, a "sweet spot of nothing", then I know that she is probably transferring more and that we can then consider what expansion is like and how to get to it Of course, just watching the stab tip tells me a lot about how much of the NTS pie she's got in her game.
(Talking about pie and cake - it must be time for lunch!)


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I start with NTS


Terry, I don't think it's accurate to assume that if someone doesn't "declare" they are teaching NTS, then they aren't teaching the fundamental components of it. Any good archery coach is teaching vital components of NTS. Otherwise, their students wouldn't get very far. The new label "NTS" is nothing more than a brand being applied to a technique that has existed for a long time. NTS is just describing the steps. 

And believe me, I've seen enough "NTS" trainwrecks that I wish the young people had never been shown it. 

Yes, Ron, I believe you are correct. I start an archer with components of good form. Components that will easily trasfer to NTS.

But the more I think about it, the more I just shake my head with this "label" we've given what should just be called "GOOD FORM."

Guess we have to label something before we can market it, so...

(Or, label what folks used to call something else  )

Ron, that "ranch implement" will pass you on semi's on the interstate every day. But I forget that most people have never used one to secure a load. When you're about to transport a D-6 dozer and it coming loose on a quick stop can kill you, you learn the value of those binders and what they do, so efficiently and so simply. A great analogy for what we're trying to achieve in archery.

John


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

John - the devices I'ved used to secure heavy gear for transpor typically are much fancier than what you showed...Them there red'uns are too old fashioned, man!


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

John,

I'm not assuming you aren't teaching elements of NTS. Based upon your prior statements, I assumed you weren't teaching all of it. If you are, then I apologize for my assumption. 

Terry


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

How DOES one deal with the short fore-arm situation? Because I'm definitely in there.

I think I could perhaps get full expansion if I could anchor behind my head. Very difficult for me, even harder once I past about 35 OTF. I can definitely feel its something holding me back, but since I shoot barebow there is no clicker that I can't activate.

-Grant


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Midway,
> 
> I can only speak for myself here, but if you drop your shoulders under load, at holding, you will get expansion without the sensation of "pushing." Try it.
> 
> John


Thanks John. I'll give that a whirl. Maybe not at tomorrows event, but I will try. 

Experimentation is a big part of what I do. How does this position feel? How does that motion affect my groups? I have found trying things outside of my experience to be very valuable.


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

grantmac said:


> How DOES one deal with the short fore-arm situation? Because I'm definitely in there.
> 
> I think I could perhaps get full expansion if I could anchor behind my head. Very difficult for me, even harder once I past about 35 OTF. I can definitely feel its something holding me back, but since I shoot barebow there is no clicker that I can't activate.
> 
> -Grant


It really depends upon how short you are and how you start your shot. Before you raise the bow, if you extend the arrow line back, would that line extend inside your elbow or outside? Once you raise the bow and just before you start the draw, where is that line relative to your elbow?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

TexARC said:


> John - the devices I'ved used to secure heavy gear for transpor typically are much fancier than what you showed...Them there red'uns are too old fashioned, man!


That's just a lightweight binder. I thought it showed the hinge points better and the hooks reminded me of fingers on a bowstring...

Nowdays, we use ratchet binders with screw hooks on either end. Much, much safer and you don't need pieces of pipe to leverage them over.

John


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

bownut-tl. said:


> It really depends upon how short you are and how you start your shot. Before you raise the bow, if you extend the arrow line back, would that line extend inside your elbow or outside? Once you raise the bow and just before you start the draw, where is that line relative to your elbow?


I generally start my shot by setting my bow shoulder down to prevent it from rising.
If I understand you correctly the line of the arrow would be inside my elbow for both.

-Grant


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

grantmac said:


> I generally start my shot by setting my bow shoulder down to prevent it from rising.
> If I understand you correctly the line of the arrow would be inside my elbow for both.
> 
> -Grant


When you set your shoulder down, can you also set it back so your elbow is inside the arrow line and keep it inside as you raise the bow? If you can maintain that elbow orientation relative to the arrow line during the draw, you should end up in line or beyond inline. If, during the draw, your elbow is outside the line, getting in line can be difficult unless your shoulder joint and scapula movement is very flexible or you anchor further back on the side of your face. 

Terry


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

We talking bow or string elbow here? I was talking string, can't get that inside on the pre-draw.

-Grant


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

String


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

My, where a simple chain binder has taken us...


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

Topic growth disease.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I'm just not able to get that elbow inside during the draw. I can get inline during expansion though, just not with much weight on the fingers. Hrm, might be time for some real coaching.

-Grant


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

> I can get inline during expansion though


Would that not be sufficient? From a release POV, if not from a holding POV.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Terry, I'd like to hear your take on all the archers at the Olympics that did not have their draw elbow in line with the arrow. They were clearly ahead of the line. Frangilli comes to mind. But there were plenty others.

John


----------



## bownut-tl. (Sep 21, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Terry, I'd like to hear your take on all the archers at the Olympics that did not have their draw elbow in line with the arrow. They were clearly ahead of the line. Frangilli comes to mind. But there were plenty others.
> 
> John


As you know, the decider is where your arrow ends up in the target and can you repeat that shot. Being in line doesn't determine what score you will receive. It might help with style points for the purist, but we don't get those. Being in line helps minimize some problems an archer might have but in the end, consistency is the ultimate goal. My discussion was only geared towards someone that was trying to get in line and not towards someone trying to be consistent from shot to shot. Any method or body position is fine so long as it follows the rules, doesn't injure the archer, and is repeatable. 

Terry


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

bownut-tl. said:


> As you know, the decider is where your arrow ends up in the target and can you repeat that shot. Being in line doesn't determine what score you will receive. It might help with style points for the purist, but we don't get those. Being in line helps minimize some problems an archer might have but in the end, consistency is the ultimate goal. My discussion was only geared towards someone that was trying to get in line and not towards someone trying to be consistent from shot to shot. Any method or body position is fine so long as it follows the rules, doesn't injure the archer, and is repeatable.
> 
> Terry


And, What Terry said here is the bottom line. So, in the end all that matters is being consistent with a particular style, yours, theirs, or his (which all are very small in difference). All teach the same basicis..... Primary thing I get out of this is, be in line with the arrow, learn a minimum of back tension, and have a repeatable release. The rest is arbitrary and will come with prodigious practice. One is not necessarily better than the other. However, all the technicalities of the "proper" form, as discussed here, seem to be at best confusing. But, I have a simple mind.:smile:

Frankly, even though I have an inexperienced view of shooting styles, all the shooters at the Olympics seemed to be popped out of the same mold, almost exactly the same except for a few thumb behind the ear anchors or variance in body position..everyone seem to shot virtually the same. Am I wrong?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Art, it would appear as though they were until you train archers for a few years, then you learn to see the differences. Subtle to most folks can sometimes be screaming out loud to folks like Terry and I. Not sure when it happens, but at some point, you just start to "see" stuff.

John


----------

