# Mark Nocking Point with Color?



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Has anybody ever tried marking the nock point by putting a bit of color on the string?


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> Has anybody ever tried marking the nock point by putting a bit of color on the string?


????????????


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Instead of smashing a brass thing on the string or tying string on to mark the nocking point.


----------



## guyver (Jan 3, 2012)

Not exactly sure what you mean, but...
I recently changed to adjustable tie-on nocks (from crimp on). And it was fairly difficult to see the nock point if it is the same color, so I use red nylon serving for nock points on a black serving now. Very please with the tie-on string nocks thus far.


----------



## guyver (Jan 3, 2012)

Logos said:


> Instead of smashing a brass thing on the string or tying string on to mark the nocking point.


Nock points serve as more than a visual marking. I make sure my arrow is nocked right up against the bottom of the nock point, which I don't believe is possible with some paint or marker. Also np keeps your arrow from moving before and after release.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

I only ask because I have a string that I haven't put anything on yet and I can see from the wear mark on the string exactly where I want the nock.

So.......it occurred to me I could just put a dab of color on strings from now on.

I realize that some might shoot in poor light and need a point they can feel with their fingers, but I don't.

And my arrows all snap onto the string nice and tight.......they ain't moving anywhere after they once get settled.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> I only ask because I have a string that I haven't put anything on yet and I can see from the wear mark on the string exactly where I want the nock.
> 
> So.......it occurred to me I could just put a dab of color on strings from now on.
> 
> ...


Yes they are!


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

I'm amazed that you know so much about my arrows.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

1. Your nocks are way to tight if that's the case.

2. wear marks on serving (cause your nocks are too tight) is not the best way to decide where an arrow should be nocked.

3. Soon?...you'll really be able to see where to nock the arrow..right where your center serving broke.

read up on some bow tuning methods..file your nocks (or use the boiling water/fitment technic) cause the nocks should go on and come off the string with very little pressure...if you can pick your bow up with a nocked arrow?..they are waaaay too tight and (amoungst other things) will break your serving.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Well, those are some interesting ideas.

I'll have to consider them.

Thanks.


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

Logos said:


> I'm amazed that you know so much about my arrows.


Just some friendly advice: It will serve you well to listen to him.


----------



## twalt (Aug 7, 2012)

Duuuude! Its not your arrows, Its all arrows!
They will move upon release.

Don't believe us, just try it a while, get back with us when you stick one where it don't belong.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

twalt said:


> Duuuude! Its not your arrows, Its all arrows!
> They will move upon release.
> 
> Don't believe us, just try it a while, get back with us when you stick one where it don't belong.


Actually, I haven't seen any such movement.

But, as the other poster mentioned, that may mean nocks are too tight.

So, I guess now I'm supposed to file them so they'll loosen up so my arrows can move and I'll experience the problem of which you speak.

Then I'll have the additional problem of putting on a nocking point to solve THAT problem.

Wait......what?


----------



## Moebow (Jul 8, 2010)

Logos,

Sounds like you should just go ahead and use a color mark on your string! There are a FEW that shoot with no nocking point at all. BUT you are getting really good answers here but only want to argue about them. SOOOO as in all things archery, do it your way and see if it works. (hopefully it will for you)

Arne


----------



## kraven (Jan 25, 2006)

^ that.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

LOgos - 

Actually, yes I have, but I was 11 at the time... 

When tuning a bow, sometimes the nocking point has to be moved the diameter of one serving wrap. There's no way you're going to get that type of consistency with a mark on the string. On the other hand, if you never try to tune, or your shooting isn't that precise you may never notice. I'm NOT trying to be a smart you-know-what, but it's the truth. 

BTW - I like a tight nock fit as much as the next guy, but yours may be too tight, hard to tell from here. As far as nock movement on the string, I'm sure someone will be along with a video sooner rather than later. I've just never found it to be an issue. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## vulcan12 (Oct 9, 2007)

Your arrow will move on the shot if it has no resistance. 

You asked for help, and we are trying

Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Viper1 said:


> LOgos -
> 
> When tuning a bow, sometimes the nocking point has to be moved the diameter of one serving wrap. There's no way you're going to get that type of consistency with a mark on the string. On the other hand, if you never try to tune, or your shooting isn't that precise you may never notice. I'm NOT trying to be a smart you-know-what, but it's the truth.
> 
> ...


Well, I have never found it to be an issue either.......and I'm 99% sure I never will. 

If they move, it's not enough to notice. If they start to migrate, I'll notice.

Are the nocks TOO tight?

Well.......I've got about 30 rather expensive new arrows from reputable dealers recommended here over the past few weeks and the nocks are all pretty much the same: they pop onto the string easily and stay where they're put. 

If I was seeing excessive wear on the string from this I'd be concerned. I don't and I'm not. If anything, the nocks are wearing a bit as they break in from being brand new and starting to pop on more easily and smoothly.

And, if I should have to move the nocking point, what could be easier than making a new mark with a marker pen, or even easier, just nocking a smidge above or below the already established mark? 

However, do not get the impression that I disregard advice I get here. Every bit of it (even the rare bit that sounds unbelievable) is read and pondered and stored for future reference.


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

Oh brother. Dude, why not just take these guys advice and put a dang nocking point on the string, you can do it with dental floss which will provide a color reference as well as a bit of a safety factor for your arrow flight. If the buck of a lifetime steps out in front of you and your arrow corkscrews a foot off the mark, don't frikin whine about it to us if you wont listen to sage advice. Bottom line... If your nocks snap on to your string with a "pop", they are too dang tight, I dont care who your arrows are made by or how reputable the manufacturer. Strings come in so many strand counts, that no nock fit is "universal". Hardheadedness knows no end on AT.

Dave


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> Well, I have never found it to be an issue either.......and I'm 99% sure I never will.
> 
> If they move, it's not enough to notice. If they start to migrate, I'll notice.
> 
> ...


This post [sn't for Logos as it is obvious that he has his act together I always tell finger shooters to use an upper and lower nockset and have been argued with many times until they do the "test". Put an upper nockset on your string and shoot until you can effectively tell what your point on is. Then put a lower nockset on snug to the arrow nock.Now, when you shoot, your point on will be 3-5 yards less. Why? because the lower nockset keeps the arrow from moving down the string upon release. Don't believe this? Put the lower nockset on loosely and shoot 5 arrows. The lower nockset will be pushed down the string. Sure, you can shoot just an upper nockset, but your arrow will not come off the string the same place every time causing highs and lows in your groups. I also advocate using dental floss for the lower nockset as I like the nockset snug to the arrow. Thedntal floss is soft and will take a set when the string angle is steep at full draw. This eliminates any arrow torque or pressure on the arrow caused by too tight rigid nocksets.


----------



## scalici5 (Oct 6, 2010)

This is really funny! lmfao


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Hilarious.

What diameter dental floss?

Waxed or unwaxed?

Mint or unflavored?

I don't want my arrow to end up a quarter of an inch to the left if I don't attend to details.


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

https://plus.google.com/photos/116451859615119061133/albums/5440061363494899889/5440061375576120818?banner=pwa

For generations archers have used nock set(s) to define the nocking point, it's probably time for a change.

An arrow hung from the string should fall off with a sharp chop from a finger, otherwise it's too tight.

I like my nocks to slide along the string, the pinch points of the nock keep the arrow on the string. the nock sets determine where.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> An arrow hung from the string should fall off with a sharp chop from a finger, otherwise it's too tight.


Who determined this standard? I'm just wondering if it has a source in science or is simply accepted common opinion.

If an arrow does not fall with the sharp chop......does that mean a "too tight" nock is going to slow the arrow down, impact accuracy or what exact negative consequence are we talking about here?


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> ...the pinch points of the nock keep the arrow on the string. the nock sets determine where.


Ok, but if the nocks are tight enough to hold the arrow in place at a marked spot, that would eliminate the need for wasting a lot of time playing around with adjusting nock sets, wouldn't it?

Just trying to reduce complications and complexities if possible.


----------



## huntmaster70 (May 26, 2006)

Go do what you want-seems that you know more than the people who are trying to help you so they are just wasting their time.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

huntmaster70 said:


> Go do what you want-seems that you know more than the people who are trying to help you so they are just wasting their time.


First of all, we all do what we want and I don't need you to tell me what to do.

Second, I'm just trying to find a layer of compromise between standard accepted folklore and quantifiable fact.

If you don't like that, you are welcome not to read or comment.

As for me, I'm glad to hear all the opinions on this matter and respect every one of them.

My question was: Has anybody ever tried marking the nock point by putting a bit of color on the string?


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

Troll?


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Logos said:


> First of all, we all do what we want and I don't need you to tell me what to do.
> 
> Second, I'm just trying to find a layer of compromise between standard accepted folklore and quantifiable fact.
> 
> ...


yeah..and my favorite color is the same as some folks testicals...brass.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

I'll take that as a no (I'm thinking you mean one of those brass string-balls)......and myself--I think I'll try red paint.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Viper1 said:


> LOgos -
> 
> Actually, yes I have, but I was 11 at the time...
> Viper1 out.


Well, looks like that's going to be the only affirmative.

So how did it work at age 11??

Were you happier just shooting without being a slave to gizmos and technology?

Did the sky fall?


----------



## huntmaster70 (May 26, 2006)

I'm not telling you what to do & I could care less -people are trying to help but you just want to argue & put down any sugestion. If you want to find "a layer of compromise" like you claim, work it out yourself then you can proclaim to the world your findings.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

I have no need to proclaim anything.

I'll work it out. It sounds like it hasn't been tried by anyone here except Viper1 at age 11.

Pretty much uncharted territory.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Videos of nock travel NOT seen by the naked eye.






Ray :shade:


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

Logos said:


> Who determined this standard? I'm just wondering if it has a source in science or is simply accepted common opinion.
> 
> If an arrow does not fall with the sharp chop......does that mean a "too tight" nock is going to slow the arrow down, impact accuracy or what exact negative consequence are we talking about here?


Practice-based experience of archers. A tight nock will slow the arrow and give a false spine reading due to being delayed in leaving the string. I would want an efficient set up, not a detuned one. If it's tight it will wear the serving and have a constantly changing tune but you do get good at reserving strings.



Logos said:


> Ok, but if the nocks are tight enough to hold the arrow in place at a marked spot, that would eliminate the need for wasting a lot of time playing around with adjusting nock sets, wouldn't it?
> 
> Just trying to reduce complications and complexities if possible.


The bow might say something else under high speed filming. 

When you try to buck convention, you may be right, you may be wrong but you'd better be genuinely smarter than average.


Enjoy your way of doing things. 

Greysides 1 out.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Logos said:


> Ok, but if the nocks are tight enough to hold the arrow in place at a marked spot, that would eliminate the need for wasting a lot of time playing around with adjusting nock sets, wouldn't it?
> 
> *Just trying to reduce complications and complexities if possible.*


If that's true why do you want to go with out a nock point? The goal of reducing complications and complexities is exactly the reason for using nocking points in the first place. Eliminating the variable of changing nock position, be it from your grip disturbing the position while drawing or at full draw, putting it on the string in a slightly different position, or having it move upon release as shown in the video is eliminating one possible variable in your shot.

If you really think that you can accurately and repeatedly position your arrow nock on the string without a solid reference point more power to you and have at it. It's something the best archers in the world aren't able to do. Especially when as Viper correctly pointed out, one wrap up or down is often the difference between a good and a mediocre tune.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

I wonder.......if you have to go to high speed filming to even detect these things.......can they really be having a significant impact on performance.

I'll try a little extra lube on the nock area and see if that makes any difference. Then maybe I'll file a couple of nocks and see if they shoot better than the tighter ones.

I'm a ways from flossing or smashing brass thingies on my string, though. We'll see how it goes.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> If you really think that you can accurately and repeatedly position your arrow nock on the string without a solid reference point more power to you and have at it. It's something the best archers in the world aren't able to do.


You misunderstand. I said I wanted a solid reference point, I just asked if anyone had ever tried marking the string with color to accomplish that.

Only Viper1 has tried it and he hasn't reported on how it worked out for him.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

I didn't misunderstand, a color mark on your string is _not_ a solid reference point. I haven't tried it, I want a solid reference point.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Logos said:


> You misunderstand. I said I wanted a solid reference point, I just asked if anyone had ever tried marking the string with color to accomplish that.
> 
> Only Viper1 has tried it and he hasn't reported on how it worked out for him.


I tried it when I was a kid...and it works good until your level of accuracy comes into question in regard to improving.

As I became better and better....I wanted to become even more better :wink: which involved considering everything from equipment to technique.

In regards to knocking points...I quickly realized I needed one if I wanted my accuracy to improve...especially at longer distances or when the target size was the size of an arrow hole.

At close distance and with larger targets...pin point acuracy isot that important.

Ray :shade:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> I wonder.......if you have to go to high speed filming to even detect these things.......can they really be having a significant impact on performance.
> 
> I'll try a little extra lube on the nock area and see if that makes any difference. Then maybe I'll file a couple of nocks and see if they shoot better than the tighter ones.
> 
> I'm a ways from flossing or smashing brass thingies on my string, though. We'll see how it goes.


Actually, you are a long ways from doing anything right archery wise but I'm sure you will have another post on here and actually get some other people to respond .


----------



## crossxsticks (Feb 3, 2012)

itbeso said:


> This post [sn't for Logos as it is obvious that he has his act together I always tell finger shooters to use an upper and lower nockset and have been argued with many times until they do the "test". Put an upper nockset on your string and shoot until you can effectively tell what your point on is. Then put a lower nockset on snug to the arrow nock.Now, when you shoot, your point on will be 3-5 yards less. Why? because the lower nockset keeps the arrow from moving down the string upon release. Don't believe this? Put the lower nockset on loosely and shoot 5 arrows. The lower nockset will be pushed down the string. Sure, you can shoot just an upper nockset, but your arrow will not come off the string the same place every time causing highs and lows in your groups. I also advocate using dental floss for the lower nockset as I like the nockset snug to the arrow. Thedntal floss is soft and will take a set when the string angle is steep at full draw. This eliminates any arrow torque or pressure on the arrow caused by too tight rigid nocksets.


I have read a old post you made maybe in 2005 , about using floss for the lower nockset , i tried it sure glad i did it worked for me.


----------



## crossxsticks (Feb 3, 2012)

Logos said:


> I wonder.......if you have to go to high speed filming to even detect these things.......can they really be having a significant impact on performance.
> 
> I'll try a little extra lube on the nock area and see if that makes any difference. Then maybe I'll file a couple of nocks and see if they shoot better than the tighter ones.
> 
> I'm a ways from flossing or smashing brass thingies on my string, though. We'll see how it goes.


tying on a nock is easy on the string and glove , i dont like the brassy thingies my self but itbeso is telling you what will improve ones shooting by tying on a double nock and floss is really easy to use and it wont be hard to take off if you want but i would bet a malt you would be happy with results . sorry i cant answerer your question about coloring the string i never tried that .


----------



## Florida lime (Jul 28, 2012)

Logos said:


> ... I'm just trying to find a layer of compromise between standard accepted folklore and quantifiable fact.


Logos,

Even when presented with quantifiable fact, you want to dismiss it.

You can do as you wish, and try a colored mark.

Or you can listen to all the advice given to you by people who have been doing this for longer than you or I. :wink:

Or next time you have a question, NO ONE will waste their time answering it.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

If accuracy, ability to nock an arrow without looking and repeatable tuning are not on your list of requirements then have fun.

If anchor is the most important piece of the form puzzle, then nock-point is the most important piece of the tuning puzzle. Both are the foundations that accuracy is built upon.

-Grant


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> ...tying on a nock is easy on the string and glove...


*Glove!!!! Now I gotta wear a Glove???

Is there no end to this crazed, runaway technology?????*


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> Or you can listen to all the advice given to you by people who have been doing this for longer than you or I.
> 
> Or next time you have a question, NO ONE will waste their time answering it.


Gotcha! Blind obedience, do not question or you will be ignored. That's your idea of the way things should work? 

(Several roll eyes icons)


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> If accuracy, ability to nock an arrow without looking and repeatable tuning are not on your list of requirements then have fun.


I did already say I have no need to nock in darkness. Using a colored mark on the string would indeed give me a repeatable nocking point, so all your requirements are fulfilled.

That was easy.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

I see what you're doing here..good one, suckered me in...:set1_fishing: I fell for it hook, line, and sinker...:thumb:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> i dont like the brassy thingies my self but itbeso is telling you what will improve ones shooting by tying on a double nock and floss is really easy to use and it wont be hard to take off if you want but i would bet a malt you would be happy with results .


Well, I may just get to that point. Depends on whether or not I get to the point of being dissatisfied with my accuracy. Thanks.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Easykeeper said:


> I didn't misunderstand, a color mark on your string is _not_ a solid reference point. I haven't tried it, I want a solid reference point.


Again you misunderstand. By "solid" I mean a mark that does not move.

You apparently mean a physical lump of brass or floss or some other substance that you can touch.

I don't see that I need that. The less I have on the string the better, as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> I tried it when I was a kid...and it works good until your level of accuracy comes into question in regard to improving.
> 
> As I became better and better....I wanted to become even more better :wink: which involved considering everything from equipment to technique.
> 
> ...


Thanks.

Two things: First, I agree that a consistent nocking point is important......I just want to use a mark rather than one built from floss or a little smooshed on chunk of brass.

Second......I don't need to put all the arrows into one hole. I use the rabbit scoring system.

If I think it would have hit a rabbit I get a point.

(Don't make fun--it's practical.)


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Easykeeper said:


> I see what you're doing here..good one, suckered me in...:set1_fishing: I fell for it hook, line, and sinker...:thumb:


Me too easy, now if everyone else would see, logos would go back to being a lonely man.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Well, most of them are probably more grown up than you two, and I'm never lonely--so I'm really not concerned.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> In regards to knocking points...I quickly realized I needed one if I wanted my accuracy to improve...especially at longer distances or when the target size was the size of an arrow hole.


Wait.......I'm not using sights. Are you?


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> Well, most of them are probably more grown up than you two, and I'm never lonely--so I'm really not concerned.


Not very intelligent either but that's for your next thread, " String or rubber band on my bow?"


----------



## Double S (Mar 30, 2008)

The members here have been giving you some great advise which you seem not to care about. You can either take the advice or do your own thing... It's all up to you. A lot of these members have been shooting bows longer than I've been alive. They have the years, hands on experience, trophies both game animals and podium. They know what their talking about. If you don't want a "Solid" reference point, Do whatever you want.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Sounds like you didn't read the thread.

I do want a solid reference point. I've said so several times. I want to mark the nocking point with color on the string. 

My question was whether or not anybody had tried that. 

Almost all the responders had NOT tried it, but with zero experience, they still seemed quite sure it wouldn't work. That doesn't make sense. 

I was unimpressed. A few of them got upset.

That's life.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> Sounds like you didn't read the thread.
> 
> I do want a solid reference point. I've said so several times. I want to mark the nocking point with color on the string.
> 
> ...


I didn't see anybody getting upset Logos, rather just sorry they wasted their time trying to help another archer? who wasn't interested in that help. Thats life and we will learn from it.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Why are you guys bothering ?


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

itbeso said:


> I didn't see anybody getting upset Logos, rather just sorry they wasted their time trying to help another archer? who wasn't interested in that help. Thats life and we will learn from it.


Itbeso, your first response on this thread was "????????????????????????????"

You're still in the same boat after two pages.

Give it up. I got some good advice and I thanked people for it where it was sincere.

Nobody forced you to respond.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Logos I have tried it it does not work consistently your arrow will move without a nocking point on the string if you are happy being a mediocre archer don't put one on your string and move on
Gary


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

itbeso said:


> This post [sn't for Logos as it is obvious that he has his act together I always tell finger shooters to use an upper and lower nockset and have been argued with many times until they do the "test". Put an upper nockset on your string and shoot until you can effectively tell what your point on is. Then put a lower nockset on snug to the arrow nock.Now, when you shoot, your point on will be 3-5 yards less. Why? because the lower nockset keeps the arrow from moving down the string upon release. Don't believe this? Put the lower nockset on loosely and shoot 5 arrows. The lower nockset will be pushed down the string. Sure, you can shoot just an upper nockset, but your arrow will not come off the string the same place every time causing highs and lows in your groups. I also advocate using dental floss for the lower nockset as I like the nockset snug to the arrow. Thedntal floss is soft and will take a set when the string angle is steep at full draw. This eliminates any arrow torque or pressure on the arrow caused by too tight rigid nocksets.


HOLY COW! This may be why I get the occaisional high arrow. Thanks for the tip.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

If one is already confident enough to nock reference off a serving wear mark only, what is to "try" about marking some color there as well? IOW, what change is expected?


----------



## Palma (Feb 9, 2011)

Brass nock = once and done. 
Red paint= touch up after touch up.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Sanford said:


> If one is already confident enough to nock reference off a serving wear mark only, what is to "try" about marking some color there as well? IOW, what change is expected?


Thanks. In the case of the first......that one would be easier to see, plus I have other bows with new strings where I could try this idea if it works out ok.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Palma said:


> Brass nock = once and done.
> Red paint= touch up after touch up.


Thanks. That makes sense. Depends on what I use and if it comes off or gets covered up. I may try a tiny touch of toothpaste and see if it makes a spot that lasts.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

2413gary said:


> Logos I have tried it it does not work consistently your arrow will move without a nocking point on the string if you are happy being a mediocre archer don't put one on your string and move on
> Gary


Thanks. I haven't noticed the "moving," or any results that could be caused by the arrow moving, but I'll keep it in mind. You have to remember that I'm fairly new at this, so I'm still testing a lot of different ways of doing things and narrowing down the potential causes of any arrows that may seem errant.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Logos said:


> Wait.......I'm not using sights. Are you?


No...I'm definitely not using sights. I've chosen to learn multiple barebow aiming techniques and choose one of them dependent upon the shot circumstance.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

Logos said:


> Thanks. I haven't noticed the "moving," or any results that could be caused by the arrow moving, but I'll keep it in mind. You have to remember that I'm fairly new at this, so I'm still testing a lot of different ways of doing things and narrowing down the potential causes of any arrows that may seem errant.


Of course you didn't notice any effects of stray arrow movement upon release. Your nocks are way too tight. Which does have a quantifiable negative impact upon accuracy. By your own admission you're still quite new at this. You see, basically you're totally without a clue. You're so clueless that you can't even tell that you don't have a clue. Which is fine. Nobody is born knowing this stuff. But you have lost sight of the fact that you know so little that you have absolutely no base line against which to "test" for anything, much less what does or doesn't work. Those "errant' arrows you speak of, are they missing the target because you have no form? Poor execution? or is it because you can't put the arrow on the string the same way twice in a row? Who knows? Not me, not the other guy, and certainly not you. 
Part of the path to accuracy is consistency. Part of achieving consistency is to remove the variables. Just using a small smudge of color to mark the nock point is still leaving a hige variable in play. You have no arguement or excuse that will change that fact. Period. If you want to actually become good at this, learn how to tune. This is a good guide:
http://www.bowmaker.net/index2.htm
And use a righteous nock set of some sort, brass or tie on. 
OOORRRRRRRR...
if you're happy with what you've already got going on, that's cool too. Keep on truckin'. But remember NOBODY ever got good at this by half *****ing it.
And speaking of such you do a pretty good job of looking the donkey's derrier when you argue against hugely successful bowhunters, and National champions who cumulativly have decades and decades of practical, SUCCESSFUL experience.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Bender said:


> Of course you didn't notice any effects of stray arrow movement upon release. Your nocks are way too tight. Which does have a quantifiable negative impact upon accuracy. By your own admission you're still quite new at this. You see, basically you're totally without a clue. You're so clueless that you can't even tell that you don't have a clue. Which is fine. Nobody is born knowing this stuff. But you have lost sight of the fact that you know so little that you have absolutely no base line against which to "test" for anything, much less what does or doesn't work. Those "errant' arrows you speak of, are they missing the target because you have no form? Poor execution? or is it because you can't put the arrow on the string the same way twice in a row? Who knows? Not me, not the other guy, and certainly not you.
> Part of the path to accuracy is consistency. Part of achieving consistency is to remove the variables. Just using a small smudge of color to mark the nock point is still leaving a hige variable in play. You have no arguement or excuse that will change that fact. Period. If you want to actually become good at this, learn how to tune. This is a good guide:
> http://www.bowmaker.net/index2.htm
> And use a righteous nock set of some sort, brass or tie on.
> ...


Damn Bender, I'm proud of you but, it is a useless argument. Let's move on to his next thread which I referenced earlier.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Well said Bender. We've got people who have been setting national records for decades on this thread. Literally some of the best recurve archers alive and probably the only thread EVER on AT where they are all agreeing.

-Grant


----------



## JimPic (Apr 8, 2003)




----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> No...I'm definitely not using sights. I've chosen to learn multiple barebow aiming techniques and choose one of them dependent upon the shot circumstance.
> 
> Ray :shade:


Well done. I really like the idea of shooting without sights.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Bender said:


> Of course you didn't notice any effects of stray arrow movement upon release. Your nocks are way too tight. Which does have a quantifiable negative impact upon accuracy. By your own admission you're still quite new at this. You see, basically you're totally without a clue. You're so clueless that you can't even tell that you don't have a clue. Which is fine. Nobody is born knowing this stuff. But you have lost sight of the fact that you know so little that you have absolutely no base line against which to "test" for anything, much less what does or doesn't work. Those "errant' arrows you speak of, are they missing the target because you have no form? Poor execution? or is it because you can't put the arrow on the string the same way twice in a row? Who knows? Not me, not the other guy, and certainly not you.
> Part of the path to accuracy is consistency. Part of achieving consistency is to remove the variables. Just using a small smudge of color to mark the nock point is still leaving a hige variable in play. You have no arguement or excuse that will change that fact. Period. If you want to actually become good at this, learn how to tune. This is a good guide:
> http://www.bowmaker.net/index2.htm
> And use a righteous nock set of some sort, brass or tie on.
> ...


It always amazes me that people like this (with such a high opinion of themselves) are so insecure that they feel a driving need to attack others.

I opened the thread with a question. 

I asked if anyone had experience with using a mark on the string as a nocking point.

If you can't answer the question, feel free to stay on the sidelines.

Three people have answered the question......and quite a few others have offered friendly advice that was appreciated.

Snide and condescending remarks are not welcome.

I know it's hard not to be condescending when you are an amazing archery guru, but insults are never good teachers.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Examples to shape future behavior:

Intelligent and realistic response from Viper1--


> BTW - I like a tight nock fit as much as the next guy, but yours may be too tight, hard to tell from here.


Compare this with--


> Your nocks are way too tight.


"Hard to tell from here."

Simple truth.

Now, since I clearly stated in this thread that *I was going to file a couple of nocks as suggested and see if it made a difference*......I don't understand the claims that I'm arguing with the advice I've been getting.

Thanks to all who gave serious and thoughtful advice.

Those who felt the need to attack are worthy only of a bemused grin and a chuckle.


----------



## martha j (May 11, 2009)

if you have gotten 30 some arrows from reputable arrow makers in the last few weeks & the noks all fit the same, (tight with no movement) your serving is oversize.
which your being NEW at this game you would'nt be aware of.
to answer your question, yes you can use magic marker, paint, tooth paste or what ever makes a color to use as a repeatable refference point.
the final outcome is really no concern to anyone on this site because we've been at this a long time & pretty well know what works & why.
most started out a long time ago when brass noks were not available yet, but made due with what we had on hand at the time. moms sewing thread for me in the 50's along with some model airplane glue from my brother.
have fun on the journey of archery.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Martha.......well....... I've actually (to make things even more complicated) got three different nock types and three different string types and all seem to have subtle differences in size). Some are better fits than others. I just ordered 6 more arrows with what I think is the best (largest) nock type.

These are all snug, I'm just not sure if they're snug enough to make a discernible difference in performance, but......like I said, a little filing on the worst ones should reveal if a slightly looser fit will make a difference.

As to marking a nocking point, I'm going to try that first because.....it might work for me. I do have the tool for putting a brassie on the string, but when it comes to actually DOING that.......I find I just shudder at the thought. I'll tie something on if it comes to that, but if I don't see any adverse effects in doing without it--I'm not likely to bother.

As you said, there's no reason that should cause any gnashing of teeth from anyone else.

I'm actually quite satisfied with my accuracy at this point (not that it's great, but it's certainly acceptable for someone getting back into the sport after 50 years absence) and I will get better. I was quite a good instinctive shot in my early teens.......without any of the modern conveniences.

Thanks again.


----------



## martha j (May 11, 2009)

ahhhhhh yes the teenage years, oops better not talk about that, but what a fun time was had.
careful on the filing, go slow & use the finest sand paper you can so it stays slick in the nok so won't wear the serving.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

What do you consider fairly accurate?


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

martha j said:


> ahhhhhh yes the teenage years, oops better not talk about that, but what a fun time was had.
> careful on the filing, go slow & use the finest sand paper you can so it stays slick in the nok so won't wear the serving.


Thanks. I now have two new strings (smaller diameter serving) on the way as well as the new arrows. I'm started on the task of sandpapering the problem nocks to perfection.

In time, all these things may work together.

Wouldn't it be nice if I didn't have to orchestrate this uniformity but could just buy gear that matched up?

I'd have more time to shoot.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

grantmac said:


> What do you consider fairly accurate?


One minute of rabbit at 15 yards.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

My goodness has this been a frustrating thread.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

CFGuy said:


> My goodness has this been a frustrating thread.


When in Rome, do as the Romans do. When in Logosland, Just get the hell out of there as fast as you can.:mg:


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

CFGuy said:


> My goodness has this been a frustrating thread.


Horse, meet water.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

grantmac said:


> Horse, meet water.


Indeed! I just don't get the point of spending this much time trying to get people to agree with the answer one justified in one's head before the question was asked. Either trolling or too much free time.
Logos: Honestly, "more time to shoot" wouldn't be an issue if threads like this didn't exist. You seem to have a very preconceived idea of what archery is, or "should be" to you. If the thought of a brass bead somehow makes you shudder, maybe you're better off finding a stick in the woods and tying some string around the ends. The FF or Dacron string you use was likely manufactured with some form of metallic tool, as were the arrow heads and nocks you use, as was the bow you likely shoot. There are much higher caliber archers here than you realize, and they're not going to agree with the answer you want to hear. If archery "should be" a certain way to you and the idea of using a brass bead is so repulsive, then do it your own way, but at least have the wisdom admit, to yourself if not others, that these will not work as well as the tried and true methods of those much more experienced than you. You may have to compromise based on whatever it is you're looking for - I know that a compound can shoot an arrow (most likely) much faster and more accurately than a traditional barebow, but I don't care, I want to shoot barebow - though, I'm not going to pretend that I will get the same accuracy as with a compound. Ironically, I'm just as much a fool to get sucked into this thread and comment on the trend here.


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

Logos, no attack. Just the honest truth. 
Like they say, "The truth will set you free....But first it will make you miserable.
Oh and BTW, although I make no claim to being a "guru" and have come to despise the term, I AM, however quite arrogant....and don't give a big rat's rear end.
Have fun.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

CFGuy said:


> Indeed! I just don't get the point of spending this much time trying to get people to agree with the answer one justified in one's head before the question was asked. Either trolling or too much free time.
> Logos: Honestly, "more time to shoot" wouldn't be an issue if threads like this didn't exist. You seem to have a very preconceived idea of what archery is, or "should be" to you. If the thought of a brass bead somehow makes you shudder, maybe you're better off finding a stick in the woods and tying some string around the ends. The FF or Dacron string you use was likely manufactured with some form of metallic tool, as were the arrow heads and nocks you use, as was the bow you likely shoot. There are much higher caliber archers here than you realize, and they're not going to agree with the answer you want to hear. If archery "should be" a certain way to you and the idea of using a brass bead is so repulsive, then do it your own way, but at least have the wisdom admit, to yourself if not others, that these will not work as well as the tried and true methods of those much more experienced than you. You may have to compromise based on whatever it is you're looking for - I know that a compound can shoot an arrow (most likely) much faster and more accurately than a traditional barebow, but I don't care, I want to shoot barebow - though, I'm not going to pretend that I will get the same accuracy as with a compound. Ironically, I'm just as much a fool to get sucked into this thread and comment on the trend here.


You're not a fool, you had something to get off your chest and you did it.

Allow me to condense and get to the meat of your pain.....you said:



> ...at least have the wisdom admit, to yourself if not others, that these will not work as well as the tried and true methods of those much more experienced than you.


I understand totally. Your pride has been wounded, as has been the pride of several others here.

I have failed to grovel in the presence of my superiors.

I plead guilty and I sympathize with you and that little group here who share your pain. I can't fix it because the problem lies with you.......and at some level, I know you know that.

Again, thanks to those who have offered sincere and helpful information without taking the opportunity to insult me in the process.

Those folks will be happy to know that I'm making some progress in getting nocks and strings to fit with some consistency and uniformity. I hope to be able to use a mark on the string as a nocking point with at least one bow if I can get that string and some arrows fitted to each other to my satisfaction.

If I can't, I'll just tie on some dental floss.

I may even smoosh on some brass BBs at some point.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Logos, out of curiosity, what is the reason for "not" having a fixed reference to nock if you already take advantage of plastic nocks that are designed to give uniform and consistent hook-up to the string? It seems that you have adopted the benefits of one way to nock an arrow, using more modern materials and design, at the avoidance of another.

Not knocking any method, just wondering why a nock set is even an issue.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> You're not a fool, you had something to get off your chest and you did it.
> 
> Allow me to condense and get to the meat of your pain.....you said:
> 
> ...


Sad, He He He Ha Ha Ha.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Haha, "pride has been wounded"? Bit of a misdiagnosis there but I probably shouldn't have said anything to begin with. My issue is not with trying something because you want to try it, it's for arguing with people who have a lot more experience than you - this will come off as foolish in any subject. Indeed I am the fool for getting involved in something silly over the internet, my mistake. Let us know how your methods work, and happy shooting.


----------



## guyver (Jan 3, 2012)

1) Look at the title of the thread 
2) Look at amount of responses
3) Something ain't right

Well, Im off to make rubberband strings and Styrofoam arrows (wait that sounds fun)


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Sanford said:


> Logos, out of curiosity, what is the reason for "not" having a fixed reference to nock if you already take advantage of plastic nocks that are designed to give uniform and consistent hook-up to the string? It seems that you have adopted the benefits of one way to nock an arrow, using more modern materials and design, at the avoidance of another.
> 
> Not knocking any method, just wondering why a nock set is even an issue.


It would have been far easier to just dab a touch of color or bleach a little spot with toothpaste on the string than to tie floss on it or put brass balls on it.

The brass balls are hard on my fingers and I hate tying knots.

So I asked if anybody here had experience with that......not realizing that if I didn't immediately drop the idea it would become such an emotional issue for a few folks here.

That's all.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

CFGuy said:


> Haha, "pride has been wounded"? Bit of a misdiagnosis there but I probably shouldn't have said anything to begin with. My issue is not with trying something because you want to try it, it's for arguing with people who have a lot more experience than you - this will come off as foolish in any subject. Indeed I am the fool for getting involved in something silly over the internet, my mistake. Let us know how your methods work, and happy shooting.


I will. And I will be quite open about it.

What I have already learned from this thread is that there are (at least) several different types of nocks just in MY possession and they are not at all uniform.

Some probably ARE too tight (may cause problems). Some are marginal. Some are tight where they initially meet the string and then really loose after that initial resistance--so loose that they can easily move up and down the string, but still tight enough when leaving the string that they may impede the progress of the arrow--so, anyhow--I'm learning.

I bought a few smaller diameter strings.....some still on the way--hope they are all the same.

I probably should establish which nocks are best and then change out all my nocks to that version anyway.......aside from the question of how to mark a set nock point.

Thanks.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Good to hear, tons to learn here (I've only scraped the surface). While I don't have the experience to recommend so, in principle at least, consistency is the window to accuracy, so figuring out what you like best is probably a good idea (something I should do with my arrows as well). My comments were more directed toward the nocking point itself, but again a learning situation.


----------



## Thin Man (Feb 18, 2012)

Logos, 

If your fingers are irritated by brass or knots (assuming bare finger drawing), some guys use the double (and triple) serving method.

Once the primary serving fits the arrow, you locate the nock point with your color and then serve over an area both above and below the nock point where your fingers touch, leaving the nock location bare. You can then serve the same areas again for an even thicker finger area. 

This provides a natural nock location between the thicker over-servings, and also give the fingers a thicker, more comfortable holding area. I've read of this technique many times, but have not tried it since I am a tab shooter. But I have considered it just to see what a thicker serving feels like, even under the tab. 

I personally dislike brass, preferring the tied nock, or even a very finessed mini-served nock (about 1/4" long ... tedious to achieve yet very flat).

If you're a serving type of guy, might be worth a think. 

The color for nock alone technique will certainly work with arrows that don't slide up or down the string by finger pressure. My G-nocks on aluminum arrows snap on firmly and don't tend to move up or down - these would be candidates for color marking if I were to do so. 

My woodies use the standard glue-on nocks that have a larger hole where the string rests. They snap on securely, but easily glide up and down the string (which is good for a fast arrow-to-bow flourish with a quick slide up to the fixed nock without looking). But my finger pressure while drawing will push them up the string absent a hard nock. While tuning I will often experiment on the bare string away from the nock to try a different height (I shoot split finger) and I get some slide on occasion with the woodie nocks, so these definitely require a hard nock for my technique.

Good luck.


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

itbeso said:


> Let's move on to his next thread which I referenced earlier.




I'm doing better than you are. I've refrained from posting on this thread for two days.........nah, nah, na-na-nah!



Oooophs........



Oh BUGGER!!!!!!


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Thin Man:



> This provides a natural nock location between the thicker over-servings, and also give the fingers a thicker, more comfortable holding area.


That sounds really comfortable......also like a lot of work.  I don't doubt that one could mark the nock point on a few strings and send them out to a string guy to have it done.

Thanks.


----------



## Nitroboy (Jan 15, 2006)

I have used a paint marker to mark my nocking point on longbows long ago, it works very well if you keep stuff consistent I was pretty accurate at 10yds somewhere around 1/2 to 3/4 average rabbit , I had arrows given to me that had the nock groove was flat and straight it didn't snap on the string just slide on snuggly, I did this when I had nothing to use as a nocking point and like I said it works and will work well if you do your part, I moved on to putting tied nock sets on and got alittle better accuracy say 1/4 rabbit at 15yds so to answer your question it can be done and done accurately just like the Indians done it, AND its just like anything else it takes practice and a open mind, just cause everyone doesn't do it doesn't mean it can't be done and can't be done very efficiently


Nitro....out


----------



## Bowmania (Jan 3, 2003)

Did Sharpie change his handle??????????????????????

Bowmania


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Nitroboy:



> ...to answer your question it can be done and done accurately just like the Indians done it, AND its just like anything else it takes practice and a open mind, just cause everyone doesn't do it doesn't mean it can't be done and can't be done very efficiently.


Thanks, Nitro......I may quote you on that.


----------



## Old Sarge (Sep 9, 2008)

Man I have just read this entire thread and am now brain dead. The OP obviously doesn't have a clue and isn't smart enough to know it or to accept the knowledgable answers he has received. I'm surprised that Sharp hasn't responded to this thread because he is also a big advocate of double nock sets. It would have been great if he had because it would have been the first time in the history of this forum that we all agreed on something. That's actually kind of cool! Thanks Logos for being intelligent enough to bring us all together! I think I'll start a fire in the back yard and roast some marshmallows.


----------



## Nitroboy (Jan 15, 2006)

Quote away Logos, I don't mind, some people take stuff way too serious these days especially over the Internet, lol, me I keep an open mind about things, mainly cause I have done all of it and then some, just keep doing what you wanna do, as an old friend told me one day..........."Time will tell and ***** will smell!"


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Logos you could have learned to make a string by now and put serving on if you would just put that mouse down and get to work

Gary
Do you live in Wisconson.?


Logos said:


> Thin Man:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

Logos,
The reason you want your nocking point to be moveable is they can change from time to time. Different arrow, rest, shooting style may require a relocation of your nocking point. So coloring, overserving, etc. is highly impractical.

Just a word. You asked a question and people answered and gave you their opinion and you became defensive and snarky because they were telling you your idea won't hold water. You are new to shooting traditional and will no doubt encounter many more problems with equipment and shooting, even more serious than a simple nocking point. How much help do you think you will get from these people with that kind of attitude? I could write it off to youth but you aren't a youth so I don't know what has driven this Quixotic confrontation here.


----------



## mikemike (Jul 16, 2012)

During tuning, etc, there's nothing friendlier than a little dab of white out.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Bowmania said:


> Did Sharpie change his handle??????????????????????
> 
> Bowmania


For a second there?...I thought the same! :laugh:

But now?..i'm thinking it's DoubleS's "double"! :laugh:

could it be?.....is he that shrewd?....to "know" that he's grown so weary of all the bickering here only to stop and "think" that...

"A common enemy makes for strange bedfellows?"

Has Simon in fact created this fiendish alter-ego in an effort to bring us all closer together to combat this evil army of arrogance aka as logos?..in an effort to stop us from bickering so much amoungst ourselves?..thereby making his job far easier just monitoring and mediating one thread rather than the entire forum?

cause that's what i would do! :laugh:

*AT'ers!...Man your Yumi's and Keyboards and Prepare For Battle!* :laugh:


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

itbeso said:


> When in Rome, do as the Romans do. When in Logosland, Just get the hell out of there as fast as you can.:mg:


You finally said something that s not controversial.


----------



## Double S (Mar 30, 2008)

LMAO!. Nope it's not me that's for sure. I'm too busy painting the living room so I can finish my fence post Euro mount and plaque and get it up hanging.Plus I like a solid, Physical indicator.



JINKSTER said:


> For a second there?...I thought the same! :laugh:
> 
> But now?..i'm thinking it's DoubleS's "double"! :laugh:like
> 
> ...


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Double S said:


> LMAO!. Nope it's not me that's for sure. I'm too busy painting the living room so I can finish my fence post Euro mount and plaque and get it up hanging.Plus I like a solid, Physical indicator.


Simon?...if it made ya LYAO?..then my mission is fulfilled and well worth every keystroke!


----------



## Double S (Mar 30, 2008)

JINKSTER said:


> Simon?...if it made ya LYAO?..then my mission is fulfilled and well worth every keystroke!


Mission completed...Thanks!. :wink:


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

JParanee said:


> Why are you guys bothering ?


EXACTLY what I was thinking...... You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Nitroboy said:


> Quote away Logos, I don't mind, some people take stuff way too serious these days especially over the Internet, lol, me I keep an open mind about things, mainly cause I have done all of it and then some, just keep doing what you wanna do, as an old friend told me one day..........."Time will tell and ***** will smell!"


Exactly.


----------



## Nitroboy (Jan 15, 2006)

Come ON!!! Just a few more post and it hits 5 PAGES!!!!


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

It's probably just that the question about using a mark on the string for a nocking point has been talked to death.

However, does anybody else use a golf glove for shooting? My fingers were getting a little sore and I had this old golf glove lying around from my when I used to play golf (luckily, I golfed lefty) and.....gosh, it works great.

Cabretta, it's called. Groups improving.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Logos said:


> It's probably just that the question about using a mark on the string for a nocking point has been talked to death.
> 
> However, does anybody else use a golf glove for shooting? My fingers were getting a little sore and I had this old golf glove lying around from my when I used to play golf (luckily, I golfed lefty) and.....gosh, it works great.
> 
> Cabretta, it's called. Groups improving.


Try a real archery glove or tab and a real nock locator, I think you'd be pleased with the improvement.


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

I love it when people half ***** stuff and ask questions/make statements attacking the ones kind enough to lend a hand to try to justify their crappy efforts, or lack there-of... then get smart-***** when they are called on their ignorance or apathy. Reminds me of someone I had in the examination chair the other day, basically told me that 8 yrs of school and 8 yrs of experience meant nothing... I kindly took off my coat and handed it to him, he was like what is this for... I told him that obviously he knew more than I, so he could play doctor the rest of the day. I dont expect that I gained any respect from him doing that, but at that point, he needed to be taught a lesson--- he was being ignorant and hard-headed. He got the picture, but I still dont expect he will do the right thing and he will likely suffer for his stubborness. So be it.

dave


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Let's get one thing straight the Indians lost the war. If they would have tied their nocks in they would have been more consistent. My wife ties her nocks is and she is an Indian
Gary


Nitroboy said:


> I have used a paint marker to mark my nocking point on longbows long ago, it works very well if you keep stuff consistent I was pretty accurate at 10yds somewhere around 1/2 to 3/4 average rabbit , I had arrows given to me that had the nock groove was flat and straight it didn't snap on the string just slide on snuggly, I did this when I had nothing to use as a nocking point and like I said it works and will work well if you do your part, I moved on to putting tied nock sets on and got alittle better accuracy say 1/4 rabbit at 15yds so to answer your question it can be done and done accurately just like the Indians done it, AND its just like anything else it takes practice and a open mind, just cause everyone doesn't do it doesn't mean it can't be done and can't be done very efficiently
> 
> 
> Nitro....out


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

2413gary said:


> Let's get one thing straight the Indians lost the war. If they would have tied their nocks in they would have been more consistent. My wife ties her nocks is and she is an Indian
> Gary


I heard she was also a lawyer, so she must be----------------------------------------------------------Sioux:mg:


----------



## Nitroboy (Jan 15, 2006)

2413gary said:


> Let's get one thing straight the Indians lost the war. If they would have tied their nocks in they would have been more consistent. My wife ties her nocks is and she is an Indian
> Gary


LOL... Gary's funny lol



Are we to 5 pages yet..............yawn...


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

grantmac said:


> Try a real archery glove or tab and a real nock locator, I think you'd be pleased with the improvement.


Yeah, I have a glove in the mail to me. 

I just had to use something because my fingers were a little sore and I didn't want it to get worse. I was amazed at how well the golf glove worked and just wondered if anybody else used one.

Apparently not......nobody seems to have experience with it at all.

The golf glove works so well that I wonder if I'll even have to use the "real" archery glove.

It's amazing what a fresh outlook and an open mind can do when an intelligent and creative person is trying a new sport.

I wonder what I'll come up with next?


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

The Wheel


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

2413gary said:


> Let's get one thing straight the Indians lost the war. If they would have tied their nocks in they would have been more consistent.
> Gary


This is a common misconception. The war was lost to germs.

Actually, diseases brought by the Europeans killed 80 to 90 percent of the Native Americans.

In fact, the germs moved faster than the colonial white man and huge numbers of Native Americans died before the Europeans moved very far west of the first settlements.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Matt_Potter said:


> The Wheel


No......I have ended my brief flirtation with compound bows (except for one classic wall-hanger).


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Logos,

Golf gloves have been used, they work fine. I prefer tabs because buying a glove seems silly when a pair of scissors and a few scraps of leather gives me protection for my fingers I can carry around all the time, never lose, and get a clean release.

You don't see the nocks moving because your string is too tight. Plain and simple, we do know that much. The adage that an arrow should fall off the string with a light or sharp tap comes from the fact that it works best. I'm guessing you're using Dacron, which has a lot of stretch (which is why I dislike it so). Well, when the arrow tries to paradox around the bow and tries to free itself of the string, it won't be able to cleanly. It will pull the string further forward, out of its natural path. The trouble is, now the string has been forced on a different course, and the amount of "pulling" won't be the same. You're also robbing yourself of some serious performance.

I shot without a nocking point when I started. My accuracy was about what you're experiencing. I thought the same thing, "Natives didn't need it!" Well, that's because they didn't shoot that far, or with that great of percision. They were trackers and hunters by nature. Shooting skills were not their primary need. I thought that so long as I held the arrow the same ("aim" and anchor) it would shoot the same? Nope. Because the tiny differences in height will mess with the balance of the limbs. I build bows, and believe me, messing with that balance is crucial to getting an arrow to fly perfectly, which is what you need when you put a broadhead on there. Nitro here mentioned trying it, but from his signature I see he's a compound shooter. I highly doubt he spends as much time as any of the folks here do shooting longbows and recurves. Not that there's anything wrong with that- compounds are great. Find someone with lots of experience in the field you're curious about.

Here's a simple test. At fifteen yards shoot an arrow that has no fletching. If it goes straight to the mark you aimed at without any wobble, time and again, then it's balanced to your bow and you're consistent. So do it at twenty yards. Then thirty. When you put fletchings on an arrow you make it even more forgiving and give it even better steering qualities, but if set up right a field point arrow won't need them.

If you can't get that bare shaft to fly right then it means you have more form work, more tuning, and more consistency needed. I can get a bareshaft to fly perfectly for me at 20 yards, and on a whim tried a spare string without a nocking point while typing this to see just how BADLY my pefectly tuned arrow would act without any sort of nocks to keep it in place. The arrow hit the dirt about ten feet in front of me. I remember trying a bareshaft when I first started, when I used the same thing you're talking about- tight nock and a sharpie. I was, oh about 10. Just heard about bareshaft tuning. The arrow came out of the bow sideways, and went flying into the woods. I just dismissed bareshaft tuning as pointless after that.

It only took another seven years before I was smart enough to realize that I was just doing everything wrong, and it wasn't the method or the tecnique's fault. It was all on me.

In the end, you can get as serious about this as you want. The sooner you start observing and triyng to implement the tried and true, time tested methods (solid tuning, solid form, basic bow set up) the sooner you will start working towards your real potential. If, however, you just want to sling arrows for fun, then have at it. 

We all started somewhere, and many of us wish we would have either had the advice available now, or were smart enough to take it when it was first given.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> This is a common misconception. The war was lost to germs.
> 
> Actually, diseases brought by the Europeans killed 80 to 90 percent of the Native Americans.
> 
> In fact, the germs moved faster than the colonial white man and huge numbers of Native Americans died before the Europeans moved very far west of the first settlements.


Actually Logos, You are showing your ignorance again. The initial interchanges between europeans and native americans were very peaceful. The natives were decimated by germs brought by the foreigners. Thw indian "wars" as we know them weren't for another 200 plus years.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

He's related to Sharp!!!!!!


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

2413gary said:


> He's related to Sharp!!!!!!


I disagree, Sharp can make some insightful posts when he is not in an argumentative mood.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

LOL. This is a funny thread.
Swimming against the current could be seen as good exercise or an exercise in futility. In this case it's the latter.
I have built a few selfbows in the last year or so and during the shooting in phase I don't put a nockpoint on the string. That's because I don't know at that point in time where it will need to be. I'm also not looking for any real accuracy until the bow is completed,shot in good and the finish is on. I just eyeball the arrow and if it looks to be about 90 degrees to the string,I shoot it. Not being concerned with accuracy,it works for my purpose at that time. But,once the bow is shot in and finished,it gets a nockpoint on the string slightly above the 90 degree point and then adjusted as needed from there.
So,in answer to your original question. No,I've never put a 'mark' on the string but have shot some without a nockpoint on the string. Would I settle for a paint mark on the string? No. Why? Well first it's too much pain in the rectum always loking to see where to place the arrow for each shot. Second,having seen the slow motion videos that show exactly what an arrow is doing upon release, I would not even consider it. Why? because it would be rather stupid when a nockpoint is soooo easy to install and use. Just makes good sense.
Remember,swimming against the current.:BangHead:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

logos..you are to be commended for your inspirational outlook as it pertains to improvisation..i can remember getting my first mini-bike at age 12..and using my football helmet for cranial protection flying through the piney woods of south florida..i can also recall that when i got my first streetbike?..besides buying a real motorcycle helmet i also wore hightop workboots, my fathers old welding gloves and a jean jacket i had cut the sleeves off of and pop riveted on a bunch of dog choker chains to act as poor mans mail armour as frugality can oftens times be the mother of invention..but the problem was?..none of it was real efficient and all of it was well below meeting any sort of basic standards..much like i suspect your nocking point and golf glove will perform. :laugh:

and i think i invented yet another new drink!...it's..

1 Parts: Arrogance
2 Parts: Ignorance
3 Parts: Narcissism

it's as easy as 1,2,3 to make and i think i shall name it..

"The Moron"

Bottoms Up! :laugh:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Thanks, Kegan.

I have learned a lot since the beginning of this thread. You must realize that I'm working with five bows and a bunch of new arrows and every piece of archery gear I have is new (most used, but new to me).

I had the impression that strings and nocks would be fairly uniform. Seemed a logical thing to expect. 

HAH! Why did I think this stuff would be logical?

So, I'm now in an organizational process that is quite complex, but I'm making progress. I've discarded and replaced three strings with servings that are clearly too thick (well, for my purposes right now at least) and I'm sanding some nocks that need sanding and by next week I should be getting to where I can feel the gear is consistent.

I didn't ask the question about marking a nocking point because I was having problems with accuracy. I'm fine with the degree of accuracy I have had from the beginning. I too, started shooting as a child and it's amazing how the brain and body remember after fifty years.

I only asked the question about marking the nock point because I had taken off all the old nock point markers (some seemed in the wrong place and some just annoyed me) and I wanted to avoid putting more on if I could avoid it.

The majority here seem to think I should not get away with avoiding it.......although a few don't seem to think it's a big deal.

Anyhow, I'm still shooting bare strings right now and doing fine (fine means I figure I could feed myself if I had to, because I could hit a rabbit at least four times out of six at 15 yards).



And yes, I'm having fun......although sanding nocks is not part of the fun. Luckily, most of them were acceptable or close to it, once I got the string problem sorted out.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

itbeso said:


> Actually Logos, You are showing your ignorance again.


Probably.

I aspire to get to your level, though.


----------



## zestycj7 (Sep 24, 2010)

Nice thread.
I enjoy drinking my morning coffee and having a funny story to read.
Don.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> Probably.
> 
> I aspire to get to your level, though.


Well, you've had about 70 years to get there and haven't come close. Some people just can't see the forest for the trees.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

itbeso said:


> Actually Logos, You are showing your ignorance again. The initial interchanges between europeans and native americans were very peaceful. The natives were decimated by germs brought by the foreigners. Thw indian "wars" as we know them weren't for another 200 plus years.



Food for thought. Not about germs or war but bows and arras. I have an interest in history but not a historian by any stretch of the imagination. 
So, when the first settlers arrived,were the natives shooting short ***** bows and the europeans shooting long bows? That must have been some interesting conversation with the parties speaking different languages.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Food for thought. Not about germs or war but bows and arras. I have an interest in history but not a historian by any stretch of the imagination.
> So, when the first settlers arrived,were the natives shooting short ***** bows and the europeans shooting long bows? That must have been some interesting conversation with the parties speaking different languages.


First Europeans were indeed shooting long bows......conversations, it appears, were limited.

http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_bow.htm


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> Thorfinn and his band found their promised riches— game, fish, timber and pasture—and also encountered Native Americans, whom they denigrated as skraelings, or “wretched people.” Little wonder, then, that relations with the Natives steadily deteriorated. About three years after starting out, Thorfinn—along with his family and surviving crew—abandoned the North American settlement, perhaps in a hail of arrows. (Archaeologists have found arrowheads with the remains of buried Norse explorers.) After sailing to Greenland and then Norway, Thorfinn and his family settled in Iceland, Thorfinn’s childhood home.


Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/vikings.html#ixzz27sUeVhf9


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Logos said:


> First Europeans were indeed shooting long bows......conversations, it appears, were limited.
> 
> http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_bow.htm



So,may I then assume that the natives were chootin short bows with rawhide string and no nockpoint???


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

That's likely pretty correct.

http://www.uiowa.edu/~osa/learn/ancient/archery.htm


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Logos said:


> Yeah, I have a glove in the mail to me.
> 
> I just had to use something because my fingers were a little sore and I didn't want it to get worse. I was amazed at how well the golf glove worked and just wondered if anybody else used one.
> 
> ...


Logos,

I think this is what some were referring to. Many of your posts carry an undertone of sarcasm, condescension, and a general feeling of trying to be contrarian. If a golf glove works fine for you, then great, use it to your heart's content. But asking "what do you guys think" with the desired answer already set in your mind, and reacting sarcastically when someone more experienced than you tells you you'll probably have better results with something else, is frankly asinine (not to mention ironically closed-minded), and I don't think I'm the only one who wonders, "Why bother?". Again, use whatever you will, but there's probably reasons people haven't tried the relatively simple ideas you bring to the table - generally speaking, I'd wager a decent golfing glove is more expensive than a tab or an archery glove, and likely not as effective as something designed to slip off a string. And you know what, if you don't want to take Grant's advice, great, do your own thing, that's not the issue - it's the "yeah but you haven't tried it how would you know" responses that come off as somewhat arrogant and argumentative.
Again, great if you found little things that are working for you and have saved money in the process - just be careful not to come off as the creative genius of the archery world.

And great post Kegan.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

CFGuy said:


> Logos,
> 
> I think this is what some were referring to. Many of your posts carry an undertone of sarcasm, condescension, and a general feeling of trying to be contrarian. If a golf glove works fine for you, then great, use it to your heart's content. But asking "what do you guys think" with the desired answer already set in your mind, and reacting sarcastically when someone more experienced than you tells you you'll probably have better results with something else, is frankly asinine (not to mention ironically closed-minded). Again, use whatever you will, but there's probably reasons people haven't tried the relatively simple ideas you bring to the table - generally speaking, I'd wager a decent golfing glove is more expensive than a tab or an archery glove, and likely not as effective as something designed to slip off a string. And you know what, if you don't want to take Grant's advice, great, do your own thing, that's not the issue - it's the "yeah but you haven't tried it how would you know" responses that come off as somewhat arrogant and argumentative.
> Again, great if you found little things that are working for you and have saved money in the process - just be careful not to come off as the creative genius of the archery world.


I just posted about the glove as a joke when somebody bemoaned the fact that we hadn't reached five pages and it seemed the boys needed a new object for their snide comments.

I quit golf......that means I just had the glove laying around, so it didn't cost anything now......just using up old resources.

It actually does work really well, although I'd rather not have anything interfering with the feel of the string--BUT, my fingers were getting a little sore.

The boys will do better once they understand my somewhat dry and understated humor.

There are a couple here that clearly are not the sharpest broadheads in the quiver.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

FORESTGUMP said:


> So,may I then assume that the natives were chootin short bows with rawhide string and no nockpoint???


Interesting that the short bows developed when the horse came along and thus the need for a compact bow to shoot from the horse.

Kind of like us in the tree stand.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Logos said:


> The boys will do better once they understand my somewhat dry and understated humor.
> 
> *There are a couple here that clearly are not the sharpest broadheads in the quiver.*


Gee..i think that in general?..most if not all of the folks here who bother to post are rather bright..with their only shortfall being differentiating between trying to help someone (who seriously seeks such) to become a better archer and some knuckleheaded troll laying out bait..and i'm happy they posess that shortfall...it speaks volumes of how pure their thoughts and ambitions are as they would never dream of engaging in such pathetic nonsense...so they give all the benefit of the doubt...and honorable character trait on their part which others of a lower demeanor seem to take great pleasure in exploiting...and for several pages now logos it has come to my attention that you are not new here..and that you are a somebody who has decided to amuse yourself by toying with the kind intentions of others...i might also assume you are financially secure..with little left to do with your time other than praying upon the minds of others as you troll the forums..and you have in fact found a goldmine here as there are many dedicated archers here that will attempt to help you until their last dying keystroke..but know this..while my belief system is based upon the Holy Bible?..my spiritual system is based upon Karma..and as actor Russell Crowe stated in the movie "The Gladiator"?..i ask you..

*"Have I Not Entertained You!"*

:laugh:

Happy Trolling and L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## Thin Man (Feb 18, 2012)

In regards to gloves:

I had read a post on another forum where a guy discussed using "White Mule" leather work gloves for shooting (old-school, wondrous work gloves). 

I had a pair, so decided to give it a whack. Not bad at all. As protective as many (and better than some) of the archery gloves out there, and did not drag on the string at all (leather, to boot!). 

Ultimately not my cup of tea, as I like a bit more thickness on the fingers, but certainly an option if one's fingers take to the feel.

Skin that cat, lads ... but use a sharp wit during the process!


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Logos said:


> First Europeans were indeed shooting long bows......conversations, it appears, were limited.
> 
> http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_bow.htm




Anyone want to take a shot at when the first arrow flinger figured out that to nock the arrow on the string at a consistent position had advantages and the string nockpoint was born? Not exactly rocket science there and surely someone must have had the idea hundreds of years ago. I mean they figured out how to make a simple machine to throw a small spear,just seems as if the arrow locator on the string would be obvious.


----------



## huntmaster70 (May 26, 2006)

Imagine having Logos as a neighbor


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Thin Man said:


> In regards to gloves:
> 
> I had read a post on another forum where a guy discussed using "White Mule" leather work gloves for shooting (old-school, wondrous work gloves).
> 
> ...


I tried a couple other gloves, but the golf glove was the only one that was thin enough to give me the "feel" of the string that I needed. Fingers feel fine today. I hope that I can stay away from gloves for the most part.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Anyone want to take a shot at when the first arrow flinger figured out that to nock the arrow on the string at a consistent position had advantages and the string nockpoint was born? Not exactly rocket science there and surely someone must have had the idea hundreds of years ago. I mean they figured out how to make a simple machine to throw a small spear,just seems as if the arrow locator on the string would be obvious.


First suspect would be America, mainly because our culture has a genius for convincing people that they absolutely must have something in order to sell it to them to make a profit. 

All cultures buy and sell, but America seems to be a leader when it comes to inventing new products for the masses to buy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Fh_YwAnv7w

And.....

Chop-O-Matic hand food processor. "Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to show you the greatest kitchen appliance ever made ... All your onions chopped to perfection without shedding a single tear."
Dial-O-Matic, successor to the Veg-O-Matic (and very similar to a mandolin slicer). "Slice a tomato so thin it only has one side."
Popeil Pocket Fisherman. "The biggest fishing invention since the hook ... and still only $19.95!" (According to the program Biography, the original product was the invention of Popeil's father and only marketed by Ronco, but as of 2006, Popeil had introduced a redesigned version of the product.)[4]
Mr. Microphone: a short-range hand-held radio transmitter that broadcast over FM radios. A convertible rolls up to a curb and an enthusiastic young man shouts out "Hey, good looking, I'll be back to pick you up later!" followed by the pitch "Broadcast your voice on any FM radio!!!"
Inside-The-Shell Egg Scrambler. "Gets rid of those slimy egg whites in your scrambled eggs." Popeil has said the inspiration for this product was his lifelong revulsion toward incompletely blended scrambled eggs.[4]
Six Star 20-Piece Cutlery Set
Showtime Rotisserie, a small rotisserie oven designed for cooking smaller sized portions of meat such as whole chicken and lamb. "Set it, and forget it!"
Solid Flavor Injector. This product accompanied the Showtime Rotisserie and was used to inject solid ingredients into meat or other foods. A similar product, called the Liquid Flavor Injector, allowed for the injecting of liquid ingredients into meat, e.g., lime juice into chicken.
GLH-9 Hair in a Can Spray (Great Looking Hair Formula #9)
Drain Buster
Smokeless Ashtray: "Does cigar and cigarette smoke irritate your eyes?" Commercials showed this device drawing smoke from burning cigarettes back into the ashtray itself.
Electric Food Dehydrator: "Instead of giving kids candy, give them apple snacks or banana chips. And it's great if you're a hunter, fisherman, backpacker, or camper. Makes beef jerky for around $3 a pound, and you know what went in it, because you made it yourself!"
Ronco Popeil Automatic Pasta Maker
The Cap Snaffler: "Snaffles caps off any size jug, bottle, or jar ... and it really, really works."
The Showtime Six Star Plus 25 Knife Set and the Solid Flavor Injector: "Three easy payments of $13.33!"


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Not just SOME.......but EVERY.....



> Saunders invented the Nok Set and nocking pliers in 1964. Since then, there have been pretenders who have come and gone, *but every archer needs a Nok Set*, the world's most popular arrow to string indexing device or nocking point locator.
> 
> Light weight rounded brass collar with protective inner soft plastic liner to grip and protect the bowstring and keep arrow-to-string position consistent.
> 
> ...


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

wow - I am sorry I opened this thread and looked at it - I have never seen such silliness - logos - you go shoot with no nock locators - hope to see you at the Worlds this year where you can show us all how thousands of years of archery were all wrong and you are spot on.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Bowmania said:


> Did Sharpie change his handle??????????????????????
> 
> Bowmania


Nice - I was thinking it was you that changed in your infinite wisdom and accuracy from ranting about how, accrding to you, everyone is gap shooting and raging against Rages to anti-nock locators


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> wow - I am sorry I opened this thread and looked at it - I have never seen such silliness - logos - you go shoot with no nock locators - hope to see you at the Worlds this year where you can show us all how thousands of years of archery were all wrong and you are spot on.


True, there has been silliness......but also many serious, measured and helpful answers to my question.

I'm not sure what you mean by thousands of years of archery being wrong......I haven't said anything like that--is it comforting to you to pretend that I have?

All I've said was that I'm not convinced I need anything more than a mark on the string........that really has nothing to do with thousands of years of archery being wrong.

(?)


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

The betting shall now commence :wink:

So who do you think will win this battle of witts and facts?

Will it be sharp?

Or will it be Logos?

Sorry guys...I just had to :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Do you actively look for fires that you can throw gasoline on?

Or just do it when you happen to come upon one?


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

You don't NEED a glove or nock locator, just as you don't NEED repeatable accuracy or to avoid nerve damage.

However if you WANT repeatable accuracy and to avoid nerve damage, then you NEED a nock locator and a proper glove (or tab).


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

Logos said:


> I just posted about the glove as a joke when somebody bemoaned the fact that we hadn't reached five pages and it seemed the boys needed a new object for their snide comments.
> 
> *I quit golf......that means I just had the glove laying around, so it didn't cost anything now......just using up old resources.*It actually does work really well, although I'd rather not have anything interfering with the feel of the string--BUT, my fingers were getting a little sore.
> 
> ...


Was it too easy? 

Are you a retired engineer? You sound like my brother in law.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Logos said:


> Do you actively look for fires that you can throw gasoline on?
> 
> Or just do it when you happen to come upon one?


Naw....not usually...but after following this thread...I just couldn't help myself :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

betting - who would bet? When an expert like Black Wolf is in the room - all he has to do is speak and the debate is settled! :angel:


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

String feel is another misunderstood approach from new archers (again, I've been there and tried that). However, it does little more than giving you a basic idea of where the string is, which would be the same when you apply pressure through a glove or tab. True, some are down right thick. Some perhaps too thick. I've just gone to tabs because any hunting weight bow (ie. 45#+) required some protection to keep up the consistency of shooting I was looking for. I always thought the callouses on my hands and fingers were enough, well, they weren't. It accomplishes more than just protecting your fingers. You may not realize it, but when your fingers do start to become sore you will start to flick or react badly to the release due to the discomfort. Given how much fun shooting is, it's not something I'd want to have to stop doing because of a little preventable soreness.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

reddogge said:


> Was it too easy?
> 
> Are you a retired engineer? You sound like my brother in law.


Never really got started with golf......never liked it. Feel better in a sport where I can transfer the skill to shooting living things if I need to........a martial art. 

Can't get a rabbit stew with a damned golf club.......usually.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> betting - who would bet? When an expert like Black Wolf is in the room - all he has to do is speak and the debate is settled! :angel:


Sorry...no fighting out of the ring! This isn't a title fight. I'm still holding the belt and I don't plan on giving it up anytime soon :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I prefer suspenders


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Well of course you do LOL

Ray :shade:


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Is everyone taking crazy pills ?


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

no - we are all sane JParanee - you are just living in an episode of the Twilight Zone were you are the crazy one but don't know it yet


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Funny


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

This is the most entertaining thread ever it has kept me laughing for three days way to go Logos it's a Grand Slam. I will be sad when it's over.
Gary


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

WOW just read the whole thread.. there is 30 minutes I won't get back. Although loved the posts from some of the regulars... some funny stuff here. Wonder if his (logos) IP addy is close to anyone elses on here?


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> no - we are all sane JParanee - you are just living in an episode of the Twilight Zone were you are the crazy one but don't know it yet


That was an awesome show! Just need William Shatner to join this thread and we may be in the Twilight Zone yet! 

The REAL question is a)Does the OP want to be as accurate or possible, or b)is he planning on giving up all of his worldly possessions and surviving in the wilderness with a minimalist lifestyle?? Because if it's "b" then he may be forced to defend himself against a Zombie Apocolypse WITHOUT a nock point, and then he wil be more prepared than the rest of us! :halloween


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> That was an awesome show! Just need William Shatner to join this thread and we may be in the Twilight Zone yet!
> 
> The REAL question is a)Does the OP want to be as accurate or possible, or b)is he planning on giving up all of his worldly possessions and surviving in the wilderness with a minimalist lifestyle?? Because if it's "b" then he may be forced to defend himself against a Zombie Apocolypse WITHOUT a nock point, and then he wil be more prepared than the rest of us! :halloween


Not true, milkweed fibers and sinew both make good nocking points for zombie survival bows.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

kegan said:


> Not true, milkweed fibers and sinew both make good nocking points for zombie survival bows.


Yep...Yep! :thumbs_up :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> The REAL question is a)Does the OP want to be as accurate as possible....


Not exactly.

I want to be as accurate as reasonably possible.....



> ...he may be forced to defend himself against a Zombie Apocolypse WITHOUT a nock point, and then he wil be more prepared than the rest of us!


The story that I don't want a nock point is just a myth started by one of the duller broadheads here. Don't believe it.

Actually, I have consistently said that I most likely WANT a nock point......the only question was--could a nock point made with a bit of color or a marker like toothpaste suffice?

Since this thread started, I've been shooting without any nock point at all with a few different bows and doing very well with all of them.

I'm beginning to think that either I have unusual skill at eyeballing the right angle and estimating the proper placement of the nock, or........

The whole nock point controversy is much ado about nothing.

(Yikes!!!)


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

and the baiting continues as we make our way towards page #7.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Logos,

I believe there's a difference in what is being considered "good". Do you have access to an NFAA blue face? Shoot 20 shots at one and you can get an idea of whether the shooting is good by other's standards. 

It's not where the arrow starts, but where it comes off the string. This is something that changes when the bow begins to release.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Logos said:


> Has anybody ever tried marking the nock point by putting a bit of color on the string?



And in every post on all six pages, the answer has been no,no and no. Why is that? The same as driving around with the space saver spare tire on your vehicle. It can be done, just doesn't work all that well.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Logos said:


> I'm beginning to think that either I have unusual skill at eyeballing the right angle and estimating the proper placement of the nock, or........
> 
> The whole nock point controversy is much ado about nothing.
> 
> (Yikes!!!)


Nope


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> I believe there's a difference in what is being considered "good". Do you have access to an NFAA blue face? Shoot 20 shots at one and you can get an idea of whether the shooting is good by other's standards.


As I said before, I have only 15 yards that I've eked out in the back yard with a safe backstop.

My accuracy standard is low compared to most here, I'm sure. I just took up the sport again after 50 years. I'm now mostly shooting a 28 lb. (about 32 with my DL) Wing recurve off the shelf and a 25 lb. Bear Tigercat recurve same way.

All I ask at this point is that I perform on a "feed yourself" level. I can reliably put four of six close enough to center in a group where any of the four would kill me a rabbit. The misses are not more than a few inches off. I figure that's good practical accuracy and that's all I care about for now. I shoot fast as I would if hunting. Don't know that I will ever care about trick shooting or real perfect target shooting.

I have improved over the last few weeks, but I'm actually surprised at how well I did immediately. I shot so much when I was a kid that I guess it kind of stuck with me.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

oh - I get it - he is just getting back into it again after 50 years - if he quit when he was 45 - he is like 95 today - so we are dealing with a tad bit of dementia -  - just havin' fun with ya


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

Kinda funny Sharp... I was thinking at least senile, dementia may be the answer


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

FORESTGUMP said:


> And in every post on all six pages, the answer has been no,no and no. Why is that? The same as driving around with the space saver spare tire on your vehicle. *It can be done, just doesn't work all that well.*


And therein lies the center and crux of this discussion.....thank you for laying it out.

It may not work "all that well" for some people (and what exactly defines "all that well"???).......but may work well enough for some people who are not avid and perfectionistic target shooters.

Since all shooters are different, nocks, strings and abilities are far from uniform......there is really no way anyone can claim anything on this issue with any kind of hard evidence.

All that can legitimately be claimed is that tradition, popular wisdom and common practice supports either a tied-on or clamped on marker on the string rather than just a color marker to show the nocking location.

That's certainly powerful, but not perfect. Common practice and tradition have been wrong before.

In fact, "it can be done" may be the only important issue for some of us who are looking for uncomplicated fun rather than perfect accuracy.

There is no "right" or "wrong" in this discussion.......the fact is that what's right for each person may be different.

If you can shoot well enough while avoiding one extra and annoying complication--I'd say you have an advantage.

Go for it.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> oh - I get it - he is just getting back into it again after 50 years - if he quit when he was 45 - he is like 95 today - so we are dealing with a tad bit of dementia -  - just havin' fun with ya


Well, I'm just a kid of 65......but I hope to be shooting and posting here when I'm old enough that the posts just go kjjg suulkthf suthsghrvm snf and brace height of wpgj 23 but maybe sfljhg7 or mssl grif.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Logos,

Broadhead flight will suffer drastically without a nocking point to keep nock travel low. Again, this is from personal experience. 

As for accuracy, it's not only target shooters who are interested in it. It helps remove one of the many variables that can come up when hunting.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

exactly Kegan - the reason I target shoot is so I can be the most accurate hunter I can - not the otherway around - If I make a bad shot on a piece of paper or foam - the only one that suffers is me - If i make a bad shot on an animal - that poor animal suffers due to my poor accuracy or decission to shoot.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Maybe with a well-fitted nock the nock travel wouldn't be at a level that would impact accuracy more than a couple of inches at hunting distances.

Hard to say as definitive tests seem to be nonexistent.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Logos said:


> Maybe with a well-fitted nock the nock travel wouldn't be at a level that would impact accuracy more than a couple of inches at hunting distances.


A couple of inches can make the difference between a clean kill and just wounding the animal. I prefer to use everything possible to put the advantage in my favor, so that I may hopefully have a clean kill versus unnecessarily wounding the animal. A nock point will most certainly increase your percentages of meeting the objective, which is to cleanly kill the animal which you are hunting. Why would you want to use a method that will cause your shot to err a few inches from where you are aiming? :confused3:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Too many maybes and too little in the way of science.

A couple of inches won't make a difference on a deer unless you're a femoral artery shooter.

I don't hunt, so it doesn't apply to me anyway.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Logos said:


> Well, I'm just a kid of 65......but I hope to be shooting and posting here when I'm old enough that the posts just go kjjg suulkthf suthsghrvm snf and brace height of wpgj 23 but maybe sfljhg7 or mssl grif.


Your posts are already going "kjjg suulkthf suthsghrvm snf and brace height of wpgj" and you are flat out wrong about not needing a solid nock point - not only do you need one but you need 2 and you are being told this by some of the best and most experienced archers in this country. The fact that you are 65 and completely lacking in common sense just makes this thread sad.

Matt

Matt


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

Logos, you are so full of your own bullcrap that you are beyond help or concern in my opinion. The whole thread, you keep talking about rabbit stew and now you say you dont hunt. This whole thread and you are a complete joke.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Matt_Potter said:


> The fact that you are 65 and completely lacking in common sense just makes this thread sad.


Actually, the only problem on this thread has been a few insecure people like yourself who have a need to attack others.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

uabdave said:


> Logos, you are so full of your own bullcrap that you are beyond help or concern in my opinion. The whole thread, you keep talking about rabbit stew and now you say you dont hunt. This whole thread and you are a complete joke.


No, you're the only joke.

Show me one place where I've claimed that I hunt.

Read better and infer less.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Dear Logos please forgive me for you are the MAN!!!!

In 1972 when archery came back to the Olympics, Doreen Wilber won the Olympic Gold Medal, by shooting with just a pencil mark on her string. So to answer your question, YES, you can be accurate with just a mark on the string.

So now for the rest of you dirty rotten so and so's who are just like me, you had better beg for forgiveness. 
BTW I am not going to to take my nock set off!!! You still are the MAN!!!
Gary


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

If you go back and read my past posts you will find I am probably one of the least confrontational people on this or any other forum - just got really sick and tired of watching you jerk people around - knock yourself out paint on nock point - it will not work.

Matt


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> In 1972 when archery came back to the Olympics, Doreen Wilber won the Olympic Gold Medal, by shooting with just a pencil mark on her string. So to answer your question, YES, you can be accurate with just a mark on the string.


Thanks, Gary.

I love learning about the history of archery.

Doreen is probably just as old as me.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Matt_Potter said:


> knock yourself out paint on nock point - it will not work.
> Matt


Apparently, Doreen Wilber proved you can win the Olympics with one.......so you're wrong.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Gary - I know you aren't full of crap so how did you possibly learn that little esoteric fact???

Matt


----------



## Old Sarge (Sep 9, 2008)

Logos, do us all a favor before you post any more of your ridiculous drivel. Google the Easton tuning guide and read it. Learn how to tune a bow, what is important to the process then go out and follow the program as outlined in the tuning guide, after a week of doing that report back on what you have learned. Until then don't bother posting anymore because you are either a very confused individual or someone who just doesn't want to learn. The Easton tuning guide will give you a chance to learn the most accepted program in the industry without bothering anyone.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Old Sarge said:


> Google the Easton tuning guide and read it. Learn how to tune a bow, what is important to the process then go out and follow the program as outlined in the tuning guide, after a week of doing that report back on what you have learned. Until then don't bother posting anymore because you are either a very confused individual or someone who just doesn't want to learn. The Easton tuning guide will give you a chance to learn the most accepted program in the industry without bothering anyone.


Easton has an ulterior motive for making things complicated......they want to sell more stuff.

Don't tell me, Old Sarge, that you actually fall for their drivel.

(Large Wink)


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

2413gary said:


> *In 1972 when archery came back to the Olympics, Doreen Wilber won the Olympic Gold Medal, by shooting with just a pencil mark on her string.* So to answer your question, YES, you can be accurate with just a mark on the string.


yeah...okay...when archery first came back to the olympics.."doreen" very well might have beat claudette, edna and gertrude...but welcome to 2012..4 decades later..and ya might beat Katness Everdine but try beating Brady, Rick & Rod with a pencil mark on your string! :laugh:

Now Gary..obviously?..you figured out who logos really is...spill it. :laugh:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Wow! This ought to create a new dilemma! Someone witnessed in video that nock-slide happens with recures/longbows, and forevermore, we need two nocking points. Now, someone wins the Olympics with no nocking points.... no video, though.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

JINKSTER said:


> Now Gary..obviously?..you figured out who logos really is...spill it. :laugh:


Oh please tell me it isn't ITBESO

Matt


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Sanford said:


> Wow! This ought to create a new dilemma! Someone witnessed in video that nock-slide happens with recures/longbows, and forevermore, we need two nocking points. Now, someone wins the Olympics with no nocking points.... no video, though.


and the punchline is...

"many of us returned to stickbows to keep things simple, easy..and more relaxed."

:laugh: able! :laugh:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Matt_Potter said:


> Oh please tell me it isn't ITBESO
> 
> Matt


It's "itbeso" :laugh:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Sanford said:


> Wow! This ought to create a new dilemma! Someone witnessed in video that nock-slide happens with recures/longbows, and forevermore, we need two nocking points. Now, someone wins the Olympics with no nocking points.... no video, though.


Yeah, someone winning the Olympics with a pencil mark for a nock point DOES create a problem for your argument.

Bigger problem for all the experts and gurus with their feet in their mouth.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> and the punchline is...
> 
> "many of us returned to stickbows to keep things simple, easy..and more relaxed."
> 
> :laugh: able! :laugh:


Well, to make things simple, we could split the difference between two and none, uhhhhhh say, one  Wonder if that's been tried before and worked?


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

OK - you got us so show us the documentation, unmask yourself, and PLEASE show up at a shoot with no nock point.

Matt


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Matt_Potter said:


> Gary - I know you aren't full of crap so how did you possibly learn that little esoteric fact???
> 
> Matt



Just the facts Matt, just the facts. So Sandy's Olympic Coach, who works for the EASTON FOUNDATION, is a walking encyclopedia about The Olympics and the Olympians, he knows so much information it is scary. BTW Doreen Wilber just passed away 2 years ago.
Gary
Just the facts Matt, just the facts! Sandy's Olympic coach is an

encyclopedia on aolympic information


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Matt_Potter said:


> OK - you got us so show us the documentation, *unmask yourself*, and PLEASE show up at a shoot with no nock point.
> 
> Matt


ain't gonna happen Matt...he's upset too many hence hasn't got the yarbles. :laugh:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Logos said:


> Yeah, someone winning the Olympics with a pencil mark for a nock point DOES create a problem for your argument.


Funny, don't recall setting up any argument or counter-argument.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Matt_Potter said:


> Gary - I know you aren't full of crap so how did you possibly learn that little esoteric fact???
> 
> Matt



Just the facts Matt, just the facts. So Sandy's Olympic Coach, who works for the EASTON FOUNDATION, is a walking encyclopedia about The Olympics and the Olympians, he knows so much information it is scary. BTW Doreen Wilber just passed away 2 years ago.
Gary
Just the facts Matt, just the facts! Sandy's Olympic coach is an

encyclopedia on aolympic information


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Matt_Potter said:


> OK - you got us so show us the documentation, unmask yourself, and PLEASE show up at a shoot with no nock point.
> 
> Matt


Gary is the one with the information and check his posts for the source.

I shoot in my back yard every other day. I always win that tournament.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Matt_Potter said:


> Gary - I know you aren't full of crap so how did you possibly learn that little esoteric fact???
> 
> Matt



Just the facts Matt, just the facts. So Sandy's Olympic Coach, who works for the EASTON FOUNDATION, is a walking encyclopedia about The Olympics and the Olympians, he knows so much information it is scary. BTW Doreen Wilber just passed away 2 years ago.
Gary
Just the facts Matt, just the facts! Sandy's Olympic coach is an

encyclopedia on aolympic information


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

2413gary said:


> Just the facts Matt, just the facts. So Sandy's Olympic Coach, who works for the EASTON FOUNDATION, is a walking encyclopedia about The Olympics and the Olympians, he knows so much information it is scary. BTW Doreen Wilber just passed away 2 years ago.
> Gary
> Just the facts Matt, just the facts! Sandy's Olympic coach is an
> 
> encyclopedia on aolympic information


Ok I buy that but, in what context did it possibly come up - did you ask him recently??

Matt


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Logos can't show up he is home cooking rabbit stew without rabbit.


----------



## Bowsage (Apr 29, 2008)

Sharpie ink is smelly!


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Matt,
Sandy's coach told us this during one of her lessons. I just remembered(I am old you know). So I had Sandy text him for the information.
Gary


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I find that really hard to believe - next to impossible to believe


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Well, thanks to all (especially the friendly posters).

I think my question is answered about as well as it can be answered.

I'll report back over the next few weeks as I do some personal investigation of the nocking point issue.

Thanks again.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Now come on Sharp I have never question you on any of your research on light arrows. I just gave us the Facts


sharpbroadhead said:


> I find that really hard to believe - next to impossible to believe


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

Logos said:


> I'll report back over the next few weeks as I do some personal investigation of the nocking point issue.


That really won't be necessary. 8 pages of snide, condescending remarks in response to people infinitely more qualified than you to answer the question you asked are more than adequate and have pretty much negated anything you could possibly have to say in the future. 

Friendly advice from one OF to another...your wife is right, you need help.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

Logos ... you come across as pretty argumentative and kinda angry ... 

.......The other 65 yr old kids in your area won't play with you ?

Bender , Matt Potter , Sharp etc know what minute of rabbit is .... they have the scores to prove it and, personality differences aside , they are very very helpful bunch who know their stuff ... get critters on the ground and win tourneys ..... much like the dudes at Easton who have done countless studies and slo mo movies of nock location etc .... they can't be doing that to sell stuff ... seems like a ton of work for little profit unless they are in business with those dastardly Dental Floss companies 

To actually answer your question .. I have done a lot of shooting as you described , no locator just a mark on the string as I am a bit fanatical about string stretch so i shoot a bunch of arrows before applying nock locaters .. and you cannot compare the accuracy of without , to with locators/ nock points .. even at minute of rabbit ranges .....

light years apart in repeatable accuracy 

but have at it ...

I look forward to your findings


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Long Rifle said:


> That really won't be necessary. 8 pages of snide, condescending remarks in response to people infinitely more qualified than you to answer the question you asked are more than adequate and have pretty much negated anything you could possibly have to say in the future.
> 
> Friendly advice from one OF to another...your wife is right, you need help.




Rather harsh words just because the man does not see the issue the same as others do. His idea may not fit the mainstream of what most people believe about a nock locator on the string but he does have a right to that opinion. And a nock locator may in fact not be necessary. Moebow posted that there are a FEW who shoot without it, then 2413gary says that someone won in competition without it. So, there's some proof that it can be done. If his idea is practical or not is a matter of opinion. 
There are many things in this world accepted as fact that may not be as much fact as it looks at first glance. Personally,the nock locator seems to be more convenient for me but since I have shot a bit without it I could see where a mark of any kind might be just as good as long as it allows you to place the nock at the same place every time. 
Heck I bet people thought that old dude who played with a kite in the middle of a thunderstorm was a little crazy. And look what further investigation actually revealed to him.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

benofthehood said:


> Logos ... you come across as pretty argumentative and kinda angry ...
> 
> .......The other 65 yr old kids in your area won't play with you ?
> 
> ...


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

benofthehood said:


> Logos ... you come across as pretty argumentative and kinda angry ...


No, I suspect you're angry because somebody revealed that Doreen Wilber won the Olympics with a pencil mark for a nocking point when the experts here were insisting that you can't get good accuracy with a marked nocking point.

I don't see that there IS any argument any more.

So why keep attacking me? Bad news so kill the messenger?


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

I love this thread... bet if he shows up to a tourney he's the "best looking" one there.


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Rather harsh words just because the man does not see the issue the same as others do. His idea may not fit the mainstream of what most people believe about a nock locator on the string but he does have a right to that opinion.
> Heck I bet people thought that old dude who played with a kite in the middle of a thunderstorm was a little crazy. And look what further investigation actually revealed to him.


Gotcha FORREST, he's eccentric and has questions. That's justification for asking them but it certainly doesn't make him Ben Franklin. It's been my observation that people who are genuinely looking for answers take the information given in the spirit with which it was offerred and if it doesn't pass pass his personal muster, discount it, go back outside and find out for themselves. They don't generally embark on a 7 page one-on-one running confrontation with pedigreed people who were trying nothing more than to help them from an experienced stance. 

Sorry, I just don't have a lot of sensitivity for people who questions knowing full well that they weren't going to take the advice anyway...which became apparent around page 3.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

rsarns said:


> I love this thread... bet if he shows up to a tourney he's the "best looking" one there.


Not a chance Ren, that would be me.:teeth: And please don't give any more exposure to this person, I think the local clinic has just about pinned down his whereabouts. I am happy to see that he bit hook, line and sinker on the Doreen Wilber fabrication. Good job Gary, turn about is fair play.Logos, you just got punked. One of the easiest marks of all time.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Maybe we should start a new, best looking archer thread!


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

BarneySlayer said:


> Maybe we should start a new, best looking archer thread!


I'd win the "looks most like the caveman" prize.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

rsarns said:


> I'd win the "looks most like the caveman" prize.


Alley Oop or Fred Flintstone?:wink:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

As I suspected the Doreen Wilber not using a nock locator is not true


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

itbeso said:


> I am happy to see that he bit hook, line and sinker on the Doreen Wilber fabrication. Good job Gary, turn about is fair play.Logos, you just got punked. One of the easiest marks of all time.


So Gary is full of Crap - I knew it just knew it - LOL - well done

Matt


----------



## Old Sarge (Sep 9, 2008)

itbeso said:


> Not a chance Ren, that would be me.:teeth: And please don't give any more exposure to this person, I think the local clinic has just about pinned down his whereabouts. I am happy to see that he bit hook, line and sinker on the Doreen Wilber fabrication. Good job Gary, turn about is fair play.Logos, you just got punked. One of the easiest marks of all time.


Priceless! Very well done Gary.


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

I even went and researched pictures of her shooting... I had a hard time believing it, but couldn't make out in the pictures if there were noicking points or not...


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)




----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Using a glove, to boot!


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

you guys are so easy now all of you got a hook in your lip
Gary


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Now i'm really angry! . going to go sulk.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

Gold !


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Pretty girl, too.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

2413gary said:


> you guys are so easy now all of you got a hook in your lip
> Gary



Well then, were you telling a straight out lie then or now??? Might make it hard to believe you on anything in the future. Same goes for all those screaming 'great job,wonderful,tell us another one,you the man gary. Some peoples character seems questionable. So you have now set a precedent for the future. I don't like to be forced to research everything someone says to find out if he's telling the truth or running a silly game. 
Would you prefer to clear up the confusion for those of us who would like to maintain trust.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Dear Mr. Gump I have not changed my statement and will not. And I would not even think to dishonor Doreen Wilber She is a Great champion. I am not running a silly game I always post the truth. My information comes from a very reliable source. And that's all I got to say about that.
Gary


FORESTGUMP said:


> Well then, were you telling a straight out lie then or now??? Might make it hard to believe you on anything in the future. Same goes for all those screaming 'great job,wonderful,tell us another one,you the man gary. Some peoples character seems questionable. So you have now set a precedent for the future. I don't like to be forced to research everything someone says to find out if he's telling the truth or running a silly game.
> Would you prefer to clear up the confusion for those of us who would like to maintain trust.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Logos said:


> Pretty girl, too.
> 
> View attachment 1486602


And a great outfit! Love the glasses, hair, shirt, EVERYTHING! If I find that setup at a thrift store, it's MINE!


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

2413gary said:


> Dear Mr. Gump I have not changed my statement and will not. And I would not even think to dishonor Doreen Wilber She is a Great champion. I am not running a silly game I always post the truth. My information comes from a very reliable source. And that's all I got to say about that.
> Gary


Wait!!!

But I'm still the Man, right???

And I would be the *last* person to expect anybody to go without a physically palpable nock point if that's what they're accustomed to.......It's probably a better way (at least slightly better).

I think it would be extremely unwise for anyone to go to no nock point or a pencil marked nock point if they have become dependent on the brass or tied type.

However......for me--well, I now have 10 arrows with custom sanded nocks that fit my new string perfectly and the 25-lb Bear gave me seven out of ten on the 15 yard rabbit this afternoon (with not even a mark on the string, much less thread or floss or brass BBs). That's my best so far. (That was on my fourth set of ten......my limit these days).

Now, I understand that such accuracy is child's play for the experts, but as an old man who only recently came back to archery after 50 years absent......I'm happy as can be.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

2413gary said:


> Dear Mr. Gump I have not changed my statement and will not. And I would not even think to dishonor Doreen Wilber She is a Great champion. I am not running a silly game I always post the truth. My information comes from a very reliable source. And that's all I got to say about that.
> Gary



Which information,which source? The fabricated ones? How can we know the difference?

Sorry Sir. But a half truth is a whole lie. Fabrications can be very believeable depending upon the source of the information. I,for one, had come to respect you and sincerely believed the things you have posted in the past. 

I do realise that you have not said that the statements you made were untrue. Someone else did that,but, you have not 'set the record straight' either.

I also believe that the OP might have been asking a leading question which he sort of knew would be met with resistance which he might have even enjoyed a little too much. Sooo, I took a quick look at some of his other posts and found nothing to indicate that he might be 'runnin a game'.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

No logos you aren't the man just a little misguided hope your nock less string works for you now PLEASE LOCK THIS THD!!!!
Gary


Logos said:


> Wait!!!
> 
> But I'm still the Man, right???
> 
> ...


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> I also believe that the OP might have been asking a leading question which he sort of knew would be met with resistance which he might have even enjoyed a little too much. Sooo, I took a quick look at some of his other posts and found nothing to indicate that he might be 'runnin a game'.


I understand how you could be skeptical about me......but, I did ask the question on the opening post in honesty.

I had no, NO, idea that it would be met with such hostility.

Yes, I did banter with some of the more volatile personalities here (probably shouldn't have) but it was just a case of responding in kind to some nasty talk.

I do apologize for that.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

2413gary said:


> No logos you aren't the man just a little misguided hope your nock less string works for you now PLEASE LOCK THIS THD!!!!
> Gary


Actually, I must admit that I DID look for a way to lock this thread when it turned into an exercise in trashing LOGOS......however, I could not find a way to lock it.


----------



## Bebe (Mar 18, 2006)

I'm taking Gary's initial statement about Doreen as truth. Which he recalls from a coaching session with D. Rabska and furthermore a text from S. McCain to verify it as such. If Gary was knitting a fable or keyboard deceit I doubt he would go to that extent and detail.

I've shot longbows with no nock locator and when I've done so, I've very much appreciated some sort of coloration on the string near a nock point to promote consistent nock point from shot to shot. So in answer to Logos initial question, YES. Sounds like a fine idea to me, and I was much older than Viper when I shot a bow with a string with "color" and I've done it more than once.

Only reason I might have shot that style more than the rest on this board may be because I live out yonder in the "wild Wild West!"


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Oh my oh my! Why would we want to lock the thread now?

I believe that if a person was very careful to place the nock on the string at exactly the same place each and every time that one could possibly achieve some degree of accuracy. Why he would choose to do so does not compute for me. But if he does then it's likely possible.
That could lead to a completely different can of worms concerning nock movement on the string. Probably not a good time for that.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Bebe said:


> I'm taking Gary's initial statement about Doreen as truth. Which he recalls from a coaching session with D. Rabska and furthermore a text from S. McCain to verify it as such. If Gary was knitting a fable or keyboard deceit I doubt he would go to that extent and detail.
> 
> I've shot longbows with no nock locator and when I've done so, I've very much appreciated some sort of coloration on the string near a nock point to promote consistent nock point from shot to shot. So in answer to Logos initial question, YES. Sounds like a fine idea to me, and I was much older than Viper when I shot a bow with a string with "color" and I've done it more than once.
> 
> Only reason I might have shot that style more than the rest on this board may be because I live out yonder in the "wild Wild West!"


I hope you don't have nock locators on the next time we compete:wave3:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Oh my oh my! Why would we want to lock the thread now?
> 
> I believe that if a person was very careful to place the nock on the string at exactly the same place each and every time that one could possibly achieve some degree of accuracy. Why he would choose to do so does not compute for me. But if he does then it's likely possible.
> That could lead to a completely different can of worms concerning nock movement on the string. Probably not a good time for that.


I have said this in different ways, but I'll say it more bluntly.

It's mostly because I'm too lazy to want to mess with putting stuff on my string.......and a secondary reason is that the brass things hurt my fingers and tying floss and knots etc. and adjusting them seems like more work than it's worth--given that I'm looking for practical accuracy, not perfection.

That's the nasty truth stated as bluntly as I can.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Logos said:


> and tying floss and knots etc. and adjusting them seems like more work than it's worth


How in the world do you get up in the morning? It would seem like just to much work for ya...that you would feel better off just laying in bed all day long so you could conserve your energy.

Sorry....I'm just messing.

I think you should shoot your bow however you want. As long as you are enjoying it...nothing else should really matter.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Logos said:


> given that I'm looking for practical accuracy, not perfection.
> 
> That's the nasty truth stated as bluntly as I can.


"Practical accuracy" that sounds right up there with " I can't hit foam but I am death on deer". It takes about 5 minutes to tie on 2 nocks try it

Matt


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Matt_Potter said:


> "Practical accuracy" that sounds right up there with " I can't hit foam but I am death on deer". It takes about 5 minutes to tie on 2 nocks try it
> 
> Matt


Yeah.....five minutes.......then I have to adjust them due to other problems that they create.

Seven out of ten on the rabbit at 15 yards today.......bare string. 

And I don't hunt anyway......not animals, at least (old recurves.......yes, I do hunt them).


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

I guess given that we can choose to shoot without sights, that in itself is a form of one choosing "practical accuracy". Instinctive v. gap, "practical accuracy". Shelf v. elevated rest and plunger, "practical accuracy".


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

There are no associated problems with nocking points. At least, no worse than choosing the wrong spot to hold the arrow and put some paint on the string. If you soak them in glue, you can simply "wind" or "screw" them up and down the serving. 

Also, getting it close will usually be more than enough for the level of accuracy you're looking for here. A good place would be around 1/4" or so above parallel I believe? Guys, mind clarifying?


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

BLACK WOLF said:


> How in the world do you get up in the morning? It would seem like just to much work for ya...that you would feel better off just laying in bed all day long so you could conserve your energy.
> 
> Sorry....I'm just messing.
> 
> ...



My thoughts exactly and I have tried to maintain that position in this thread. It's his song,play it any way he wants to.
However, I do have a hard time understanding the 'effort' part. It takes more effort to string the bow or to draw and shoot and certainly less than the ten shots on the rabbit. That's the part that 'does not compute'.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

FORESTGUMP said:


> My thoughts exactly and I have tried to maintain that position in this thread. It's his song,play it any way he wants to.
> However, I do have a hard time understanding the 'effort' part. It takes more effort to string the bow or to draw and shoot and certainly less than the ten shots on the rabbit. That's the part that 'does not compute'.


Clearly, what's easy for you is not easy for me. I hate tying knots and I hate the thought of undoing them and tying them again if the arrows don't seem to be going exactly as they should.......and the brass things hurt my fingers.

Stringing the bow is quick and easy......taking ten shots is fun.

Messing around putting bling on the string is a pain.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Sanford said:


> I guess given that we can choose to shoot without sights, that in itself is a form of one choosing "practical accuracy". Instinctive v. gap, "practical accuracy". Shelf v. elevated rest and plunger, "practical accuracy".



Yep. And what a pita trying to glue a rug of some kind on that shelf. Just shoot it off the wood or metal and save all the effort.


----------



## Nitroboy (Jan 15, 2006)

9 pages!!! I was giddy at 5 but 9!!? LETS GO FOR 10!!!!


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Logos said:


> Clearly, what's easy for you is not easy for me. I hate tying knots and I hate the thought of undoing them and tying them again if the arrows don't seem to be going exactly as they should.......and the brass things hurt my fingers.
> 
> Stringing the bow is quick and easy......taking ten shots is fun.
> 
> Messing around putting bling on the string is a pain.


There has to be a word to describe these odd feelings you're having toward something that's so simple and effective. Now just what could it be? Oh now I know. ANAL.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Yep. And what a pita trying to glue a rug of some kind on that shelf. Just shoot it off the wood or metal and save all the effort.


I've done that with the Bear Hair Rest. Just cut it to size, pull off the paper and slap it on--not hard for me, and I like the way it looks on the bow.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Logos said:


> Clearly, what's easy for you is not easy for me. I hate tying knots and I hate the thought of undoing them and tying them again if the arrows don't seem to be going exactly as they should.......and the brass things hurt my fingers.
> 
> Stringing the bow is quick and easy......taking ten shots is fun.


Seriously....mark the string where you feel it gives you the best arrow flight...than...tie a string nock on and forget about it. Simple...easy...and you never have to worry about it again...until you change strings.

If you can tie your shoes...you can easily tie on a string nock.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

FORESTGUMP said:


> There has to be a word to describe these odd feelings you're having toward something that's so simple and effective. Now just what could it be? Oh now I know. ANAL.


No, "Anal" would be when you are overly perfectionistic about accuracy and tuning, tuning, tuning your bow.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Seriously....mark the string where you feel it gives you the best arrow flight...than...tie a string nock on and forget about it. Simple...easy...and you never have to worry about it again...until you change strings.
> 
> If you can tie your shoes...you can easily tie on a string nock.
> 
> Ray :shade:


Yes.....but there's a damned good reason for tying my shoes.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Yep. And what a pita trying to glue a rug of some kind on that shelf. Just shoot it off the wood or metal and save all the effort.


Hey, there are folks...! Shooting handicapped is not my thing, but a guy showed up at one of our 3D shoots with an old compound, shooting fingers and barebow. Check-in had no clue where to stick him, so he was sent to and wound up in my group by the time we got the second target. He was shooting flat off the base of the riser, flat on the flat metal.... Didn't look practical at all, but well, he ended averaging 8.8 per target. Again, I ain't advocating intentional handicaps and I take all advantages I am given, but to many other archers, the whole Trad thing makes little sense other than folks like to do what "they" like to do.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Logos said:


> Yes.....but there's a damned good reason for tying my shoes.


I'm surprised you don't wear just slippers or clogs :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

7 out of ten on my 6' high rabbitt this morning at 15 yards. My accuracy is just fine and don't rag on me for using a 6' high rabbitt because I don't hunt anyway and proportion is way overated.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> I'm surprised you don't wear just slippers or clogs :wink:
> 
> Ray :shade:


Slippers and clogs are for yuppies and girls.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I think this is one of those threads that the compound guys read and go - ***? Glad I don't shoot trad


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

sharpbroadhead said:


> I think this is one of those threads that the compound guys read and go - ***? Glad I don't shoot trad


It's working then. Some were lurking around so we came up with this one to mess with their minds. Bet they hightailed it back to trying to figure out their cams and who has the most expensive sight or rest etc etc.:zip:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Logos said:


> No, "Anal" would be when you are overly perfectionistic about accuracy and tuning, tuning, tuning your bow.



Yeeah,you're probably right. Just grasping for straws and chose the wrong one. Help me out,whats a good one?


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Logos said:


> Slippers and clogs are for yuppies and girls.


But so are nockless strings :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> I think this is one of those threads that the compound guys read and go - ***? Glad I don't shoot trad


Actually, I was thinking that the compound guys would be saying, "Tuning, tuning, tuning.......nocking points, gloves, tabs, bare shafts, paper tuning, plunger rests......man, these "traditional" guys are far from traditional........these guys are as anal and over-equipped as we are!!"



(That's the way to use that word, Forest.)


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Nitroboy said:


> 9 pages!!! I was giddy at 5 but 9!!? LETS GO FOR 10!!!!


Ok, buddy......here we are!


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Maybe there should be a new "traditional" forum where the shooters eschew all the high tech stuff and just shoot without any unnatural gizmos added onto their bows.

:?:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> Maybe there should be a new "traditional" forum where the shooters eschew all the high tech stuff and just shoot without any unnatural gizmos added onto their bows.
> 
> :?:


You're right and you win. You go there first and we'll all follow.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

itbeso said:


> You're right and you win. You go there first and we'll all follow.


It's a trick, isn't it?


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

wow - now tuning is not traditional - LOL - this Logos guy has to be a troll - nobody could be that ..... - well, better not say it - or I may get banned.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> wow - now tuning is not traditional - LOL - this Logos guy has to be a troll - nobody could be that ..... - well, better not say it - or I may get banned.


Tuning is most certainly traditional.......examples being the violin or the harp or any of the other stringed instruments.

(Wink)


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Can you really get banned for Calling someone stupid???


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

In all seriousness.......I do think it's a legitimate question when we ask: 

At what point does the technology and add-on gimmickry and obsessive "tuning" reach a level that makes us all but the same as the compound shooters?

(?)


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

in all seriousness its all a matter of personal preference and is totally subjective .......

people enjoy archery for various reasons , excellence in repeatable accuracy is one of those reasons . generally speaking, to attain such you'll have to tune your bow ... wanna punch arrows out at 15 metres all day you probably don't need such fine tuning , nor form work etc 

As I hunt game both small and large , rove , stump ,compete , shoot target , indoor and 3D , Field and clout , roving marks and practice trick shooting I try and tune my gear so that my results are predictable , based as much as possible on my effort as I have removed as many unknowns as possible through tuning . Albeit i do it with woodies , I am no more "trad" than Dave Cousins .. we are all archers 

Don't know much about "add on gimmicks " .. i do know that I don't take knives to gunfights though .

Tuning ain't "trad" , nor is good productive training ... its just using my time productively as it yields better results .

it ain't for every one though as some people , and good luck to them, are happy to just fling arrows 

ymmv


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> In all seriousness.......I do think it's a legitimate question when we ask:
> 
> At what point does the technology and add-on gimmickry and obsessive "tuning" reach a level that makes us all but the same as the compound shooters?
> 
> (?)


Well, I don't think WE would ever ask that question because anybody in their right mind knows the difference between a recurves capabilities and a compounds capabilities. And , of course, while you were away for 50 years, you spent all your time studying up on bows and all the new technology so you could enlighten us with"Mark nocking point with color"?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Logos said:


> In all seriousness.......I do think it's a legitimate question when we ask:
> 
> At what point does the technology and add-on gimmickry and obsessive "tuning" reach a level that makes us all but the same as the compound shooters?
> 
> ...


Uh, I am a compound shooter. But I usually log more time on my stick bows. Something about burning my fingers just feels satisfying.

Compound shooters use wheels. That's the real difference.


----------



## Spikealot (May 27, 2009)

I like the 'Pilot' brand 'Silver Markers' because they are a fine point and they have them at all the local Walgreens.
Also - I put a mark above and below my arrows nock rather than right at the nock point because wether your nocks fit tight or loose - they will still wear
any sort of paint off the string.


----------



## Thin Man (Feb 18, 2012)

Benofthehood makes a good point. 

Any pastime (or obsession) can be as casual or as serious as one wishes. The participants on a forum tend to be seeking and swapping information based upon varying degrees of need. That we are on a forum is an indication that, for whatever reason, we are going above and beyond the minimum required of our passion.

My sister came over last year and decided to flick some arrows in the backyard. She liked it, so I set her up with a 20# Polaris, the other accessories, and made her some woodies. She set up a bag in her backyard and was set to go. Her only lesson was my intro during that first session.

She shoots only on whim, just for a brief relaxation, perhaps a couple of times a month. I shoot more arrows in one day than she has shot in a year. She loves it when she shoots, yet has not one percent interest in any aspect of archery other than her occasional session in the back yard. *She obsesses everything else in her life like a neurotic basket case* ... yet does the opposite with archery. (I offered to make her a leather back quiver so she could look like a Goddess of the Woods, and she declined, preferring instead the $5 belt-hook kiddie quiver I gave her ... go figure!)

She's happy with her simple. I maintain her bow and make her arrows. She has fun. I check her brace height. She does not know what that means. I type these comments. She watches a show. 

It's all good.


----------



## Old Sarge (Sep 9, 2008)

sharpbroadhead said:


> wow - now tuning is not traditional - LOL - this Logos guy has to be a troll - nobody could be that ..... - well, better not say it - or I may get banned.


Way to show great restraint Sharp! I'm proud of you! I'm having a difficult time myself. After reading all of this though I've come to realize that I have been doing this all wrong for the past 53 years of shooting. After I walk the dog I'm going to take off all of my nocking points, deliberately de- tune all of my set ups, recurves, longbows, and barebow compounds, and probably go so far as to shoot the arrows I use for my compounds with the stick bows and vice versa. This thread has shown me a new simpler way to shoot and will certainly allow me to achieve practical accuracy from as ad away as 10 feet.

I have started practicing again and had planned on shooting the IBO trad worlds this year, as well as several NFAA events during the summer. With my new untuned bow set up I am going to ask in advance for anyone that may end up shooting with me to please help me find all of my arrows for any shot longer than the bunny. I am going to order 3000 shafts and start fletching immediately so I will have enough ammo to make it through these events. If my shoulder is good enough by then I may go to Vegas also. If I decide to go I'll call the director and request my own personal target butt at least 30 feet away from everyone else so as not to shoot everyone else's target with my new found practical accuracy.

Itbeso, who makes the 6' foot rabbit? Is it McKenzie or Rhinehart? I'll need to get one soon. Will 3 out of 10 from 15 yards get me to the podium.


----------



## JimPic (Apr 8, 2003)

Logos said:


> In all seriousness.......I do think it's a legitimate question when we ask:
> 
> At what point does the technology and add-on gimmickry and obsessive "tuning" reach a level that makes us all but the same as the compound shooters?
> 
> (?)


Technology and add-on gimmickry?! It's a 6" piece of dental floss that'll help you put EVERY arrow where you want it to go! It's not rocket science


----------



## Moebow (Jul 8, 2010)

Old Sarge,

Maybe you can get the NFAA to add a new "untuned, no nocking point" division? To be sure, it would be "unfair" to compete against anyone that was doing it right.:icon_1_lol:

Arne


----------



## Speck1 (Jul 31, 2012)

I think we either need Yoda or Dr. Phil to settle this one. Good grief! Speck


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Ok this thd is starting to work now Sarge if you can just get a few more Trad shooters thinking like you please sign up in the RU division. This thd makes me laugh it's like eating ice cream I think when it melts it's over. But then I start licking the bowl Wow.
Gary


Old Sarge said:


> Way to show great restraint Sharp! I'm proud of you! I'm having a difficult time myself. After reading all of this though I've come to realize that I have been doing this all wrong for the past 53 years of shooting. After I walk the dog I'm going to take off all of my nocking points, deliberately de- tune all of my set ups, recurves, longbows, and barebow compounds, and probably go so far as to shoot the arrows I use for my compounds with the stick bows and vice versa. This thread has shown me a new simpler way to shoot and will certainly allow me to achieve practical accuracy from as ad away as 10 feet.
> 
> I have started practicing again and had planned on shooting the IBO trad worlds this year, as well as several NFAA events during the summer. With my new untuned bow set up I am going to ask in advance for anyone that may end up shooting with me to please help me find all of my arrows for any shot longer than the bunny. I am going to order 3000 shafts and start fletching immediately so I will have enough ammo to make it through these events. If my shoulder is good enough by then I may go to Vegas also. If I decide to go I'll call the director and request my own personal target butt at least 30 feet away from everyone else so as not to shoot everyone else's target with my new found practical accuracy.
> 
> Itbeso, who makes the 6' foot rabbit? Is it McKenzie or Rhinehart? I'll need to get one soon. Will 3 out of 10 from 15 yards get me to the podium.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

2413gary said:


> Dear Logos please forgive me for you are the MAN!!!!
> 
> In 1972 when archery came back to the Olympics, Doreen Wilber won the Olympic Gold Medal, by shooting with just a pencil mark on her string. So to answer your question, YES, you can be accurate with just a mark on the string.
> 
> ...




Behind the scenes communication has almost convinced me that this post was probably true from the beginning. It was backed up with a few other posts which revealed the source of the information. All represented as the truth by 2413gary.
And then,apparently someone started posting statements designed to create the appearance that 2413gary had made his statements with the intention of baiting the OP,and that they were not in fact the truth after all. 
So in all fairness to 2413gary,I could possibly owe him an apology. Except for the fact that he never bothered to clear up the confusion created by the other poster. So until that happens I will withhold that apology.

Meantime,there have been several posts that indicate that it is entirely possible to do what the OP has suggested and even do so very effectively. For example, Bebe posted that he has shot without a nock locator on the string. I trust his word on the issue.

What I would like to know now is if anyone has bothered to find out once and for all if the lady olympian actually did shoot without a nock locator. I have not had the time to investigate but still extremely interested.


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

Logos, when you get done with this thread start another one on how to aim. That should be fun.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

I'm 65 years old.

I'll be dead before this thread ends.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

thats why I like ya Matt your not always trying to be politically correct


Matt_Potter said:


> Can you really get banned for Calling someone stupid???


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I except your apology
Gary


FORESTGUMP said:


> Behind the scenes communication has almost convinced me that this post was probably true from the beginning. It was backed up with a few other posts which revealed the source of the information. All represented as the truth by 2413gary.
> And then,apparently someone started posting statements designed to create the appearance that 2413gary had made his statements with the intention of baiting the OP,and that they were not in fact the truth after all.
> So in all fairness to 2413gary,I could possibly owe him an apology. Except for the fact that he never bothered to clear up the confusion created by the other poster. So until that happens I will withhold that apology.
> 
> ...


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I was going to say that but was AFRAID to
Gary


reddogge said:


> Logos, when you get done with this thread start another one on how to aim. That should be fun.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

I shot withot a nock locator as a kid, with my banarama yellow fiberglass bow, an arrow made of a whittled down redwood plank, roughly 3/8" thick, a screw pushed in the front, and taped on shoe box cardboard with vanes. At about 20 yards, I could hit a half sheet of newspaper, most of the time. Didn't keep statistics, though.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> Quote Originally Posted by 2413gary View Post
> Dear Logos please forgive me for you are the MAN!!!!
> 
> In 1972 when archery came back to the Olympics, Doreen Wilber won the Olympic Gold Medal, by shooting with just a pencil mark on her string. So to answer your question, YES, you can be accurate with just a mark on the string.
> ...


Forest Gump then commented:



> Behind the scenes communication has almost convinced me that this post was probably true from the beginning. It was backed up with a few other posts which revealed the source of the information. All represented as the truth by 2413gary.
> 
> And then,apparently someone started posting statements designed to create the appearance that 2413gary had made his statements with the intention of baiting the OP,and that they were not in fact the truth after all.
> 
> ...


This is what I have to say about that......

Ask Gary and he'll probably give you contact info for his source.

I'm mad at Gary 'cause he first called me "THE MAN" and then reneged and said I'm confused.

I don't see how I could be both.....so was he lying the first time or the second? 

Gary......you need to quit flip-flopping!!!

Actually, here's what I think: that story sounds like a great story and Gary should find out more and pass it along.

Questions for that coach:

1. Did she ALWAYS shoot with just a pencil mark on her string? 

2. Why? Did she have a reason? Did she feel she shot better that way? Did she run out of equipment and had to make do with just a pencil mark?

3. Was using a raised nock point discussed by her and the coaches? 

4. Did other competitors use pencil marks? How many?

5. When did the raised nock point become the standard method (as it appears it is today)? 

I'm sure there are plenty of other questions, Gary.......why not get some answers?


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

2413gary said:


> I except your apology
> Gary



LOL, good thing you excepted it instead of accepting because it has not been extended yet. Look closer,it actually says "could possibly".
And now that you mention it maybe itbeso owes ya one also since he was the one who made it appear to the rest of the participants that you had gone fishing and used a fabricated 'fact' as bait in the hopes of making someone else look stupid. The problem with that kind of thing is that, not only do they sometimes backfire,but they always create confusion. So that still leaves the question, fact or fabrication????


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Speck1 said:


> I think we either need Yoda or Dr. Phil to settle this one. Good grief! Speck


Check with Dr. Phil.

I called Yoda and he just said, "Want this I don't," and hung up.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

BarneySlayer said:


> I shot withot a nock locator as a kid, with my banarama yellow fiberglass bow, an arrow made of a whittled down redwood plank, roughly 3/8" thick, a screw pushed in the front, and taped on shoe box cardboard with vanes. At about 20 yards, I could hit a half sheet of newspaper, most of the time. Didn't keep statistics, though.




Hey that was some good shooting with that kind of equipment.:set1_applaud:


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Ok it's time to put up or shut up we all should shoot an NFAA 900 round with our nocks sets on. Then take them off and shoot again. this should take about a week. Then post your scores each one who does this will know the Truth. Anybody out their brave enough to try?

Gary


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Spikealot said:


> I like the 'Pilot' brand 'Silver Markers' because they are a fine point and they have them at all the local Walgreens.
> Also - I put a mark above and below my arrows nock rather than right at the nock point because wether your nocks fit tight or loose - they will still wear
> any sort of paint off the string.


I appreciate that......I'll stop in at Walgreen's later today. 

I should get a couple of strings today and I want all my bows finely tuned by the weekend.

"Silver Marker."

Sounds good.

Maybe if I get into any tournaments or last until the next Olympics......I'll get some endorsement money!


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

2413gary said:


> Ok it's time to put up or shut up we all should shoot an NFAA 900 round with our nocks sets on. Then take them off and shoot again. this should take about a week. Then post your scores each one who does this will know the Truth. Anybody out their brave enough to try?
> Gary


Remember........Pilot' brand 'Silver Markers.'

Accept no substitutes.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

now your picking on me cause I can't spell. Are you an english teacher too?


FORESTGUMP said:


> LOL, good thing you excepted it instead of accepting because it has not been extended yet. Look closer,it actually says "could possibly".
> And now that you mention it maybe itbeso owes ya one also since he was the one who made it appear to the rest of the participants that you had gone fishing and used a fabricated 'fact' as bait in the hopes of making someone else look stupid. The problem with that kind of thing is that, not only do they sometimes backfire,but they always create confusion. So that still leaves the question, fact or fabrication????


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

2413gary said:


> Ok it's time to put up or shut up we all should shoot an NFAA 900 round with our nocks sets on. Then take them off and shoot again. this should take about a week. Then post your scores each one who does this will know the Truth. Anybody out their brave enough to try?
> 
> Gary


It would have to be a modified 900 round for logos. I know!, 60 inches, 50 inches, and 40 inches at rabbitt targets. I'm sure he could hit 7 out of 10 at each distance and be one proud archer. Of course, his misses would have an excuse, he's been "away" for 50 years. That's one heck of a long time confined to a straitjacket. Of course, this question was what got him committed in the first place. Bellview Board, "Mr. Logos, would you have us believe that you don't need nocking point locators on a bow?". Mr. Logos," Absolutely not, I just put a mark on the string and shoot. I can hit 7 out of 10 arrows in my rabbitt at 15 yards, more or less." Bellview Board, in chorus "He's certifiable, lock him up and throw the key away for 50 years."


----------



## jusoldave (Apr 28, 2012)

itbeso said:


> 7 out of ten on my *6' high rabbitt* this morning at 15 yards. My accuracy is just fine and don't rag on me for using a *6' high* rabbitt because I don't hunt anyway and proportion is way overated.


A six _foot_ high "rabbit"? This could explain a lot...


----------



## trevorpowdrell (May 8, 2012)

How about trying a bit of masking tape for the nock locator. 
No knots to tie. Easy on the fingers.
About as easy as marking the string with a marker or paint.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

trevorpowdrell said:


> How about trying a bit of masking tape for the nock locator.
> No knots to tie. Easy on the fingers.
> About as easy as marking the string with a marker or paint.


Why not go all out? 

*DUCT TAPE!!!!*


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

FORESTGUMP said:


> LOL, good thing you excepted it instead of accepting because it has not been extended yet. Look closer,it actually says "could possibly".
> And now that you mention it maybe itbeso owes ya one also since he was the one who made it appear to the rest of the participants that you had gone fishing and used a fabricated 'fact' as bait in the hopes of making someone else look stupid. The problem with that kind of thing is that, not only do they sometimes backfire,but they always create confusion. So that still leaves the question, fact or fabrication????


" As the World turns". Gump--Gump__gump, I didn't have to do or say anything to make that someone you speak of, look stupid. As far as creating confusion, I think every one on here has been confused from the beginning question And if I created more confusion, then maybe this thread and the op will go away so we can get to Logos' next thread " String or rubber Band on my new recurve?".(and how many strands of rubber band do you recommend. I have a 26# , 62" kcimas bow?)


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> How about trying a bit of masking tape for the nock locator.
> No knots to tie. Easy on the fingers.
> About as easy as marking the string with a marker or paint.


Actually, I think the Silver Marker is the easiest way.

I'm not concerned about arrows moving up or down on the string. I'm sure it happens, but the impact on accuracy is not likely to be significant. 

Maybe only a couple of feet on a six foot rabbit.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)




----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

Former bunkmate or current?


----------



## BowmanJay (Jan 1, 2007)

Run forrest run!!


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Logos said:


> I'm not concerned about arrows moving up or down on the string. I'm sure it happens, but the impact on accuracy is not likely to be significant.


At 15 yards probably not, however you will begin to notice it more later. You will, unfortunately, never be able to "finely tune" your new strings with this method. Fine tuning requires good groups, good bareshaft flight, or good paper tuning. Not going to happen with any nock slide.

As for eschewing "gimmicks" why bother with those fiberglass laminated Bear bows? Just a marketing scheme. Nocking points have been around longer than fiberglass (Pope wrote about using them in "Hunting with the Bow and Arrow").


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

itbeso said:


> " As the World turns". Gump--Gump__gump, I didn't have to do or say anything to make that someone you speak of, look stupid. As far as creating confusion, I think every one on here has been confused from the beginning question And if I created more confusion, then maybe this thread and the op will go away so we can get to Logos' next thread " String or rubber Band on my new recurve?".(and how many strands of rubber band do you recommend. I have a 26# , 62" kcimas bow?)



Just the facts mam,just the facts.
Did she or did she not? Did the lady olympian shoot without the nock locator or not? Simple.
I am noticing a tendency to run from this subject but no effort to fess up or just tell the truth.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

kegan said:


> As for eschewing "gimmicks" why bother with those fiberglass laminated Bear bows?


Easy......they are beautiful.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

kegan said:


> At 15 yards probably not, however you will begin to notice it more later. You will, unfortunately, never be able to "finely tune" your new strings with this method. Fine tuning requires good groups, good bareshaft flight, or good paper tuning. Not going to happen with any nock slide.


You're not good at picking up on ironic humor, are you? I don't believe in "fine tuning" and I mentioned a six foot rabbit in connection with it. 

Aside from that.......your opinion has been echoed by many here, but so far it's been opinion unsubstantiated by proof.

If the majority here opined that the sky was brown instead of blue, I guess the rest of us would have to salute you and agree.

Real life doesn't work that way.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Only proof I have is that I did all of this myself years prior. You're going off of your experience, why not take mine into account?


----------



## uabdave (Mar 12, 2007)

That's simple Kegan, bc he doesnt respect anything but his own ego and his own backward moronic ideas with regard to shooting. I just sincerely hope he never has any influence on a young aspiring archer in any way, shape, or form. If he does, the student of his bullcrap will surely fail.

Dave


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

kegan said:


> Only proof I have is that I did all of this myself years prior. You're going off of your experience, why not take mine into account?


I do take your experience into account.

However, it conflicts with the experience of others (including at least one Olympic Champion). This is also taken into account, as is the rancor and defensiveness of a few of the posters here.


----------



## Bebe (Mar 18, 2006)

I've enjoyed the humor and zigs and zags of this thread. It's almost painful to read the help "offered" and then not "taken" which seems to result in resentment and insults. But what might be best appreciated is the amazing "small" miracle a bent stick and string can bring. There's an inherent beauty and simplicity to sending an arrow towards the heavens and watching it arc back to earth, it's primal and raw.

But don't let me distract you from sharing your knowledge of accuracy and wit. It's all fun and jostling. What's a good contest without a joust?


----------



## Old Sarge (Sep 9, 2008)

Update: all nocking points removed, strings taken off and twists randomly taken out. All rests have been adjusted so as to not be anywhere close to center shot, and all points have been unscrewd and been replaced by closing my eyes and reaching into a pile of points on my workbench. Would have used a blindfold but was too lazy to put one on. This is for 2 longbow, 2 recurves, and 3 compounds. After I get back from the store to buy my silver sharpie I'll do my wife's bows. It may be a good idea for me to remove 2 fletchings from each arrow before I start since I would be too lazy to bother puttin on all three. What the heck, why should I need that many?

As for the 900 round I'll play but it may take me awhile, can't shoot that many arrows at one time quite yet. I'll do it in stages. Also I have serious doubts that my arrows with the practical accuracy set up will ever hit the 60 or 50 yard target. May luck out and hit the 40once or twice. Still waiting on instructions from Itbeso as to where the 6 ft. Rabbit target so I can practice.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

I wish you all the best. 

I've tried to be helpful and explain the "why's" which are apparently insufficient for you. I have tried to be honest and straight with you about my personal excperiences, having experimented with many of the very things you're asking about now. As a matter of fact, the only thing I did not try is the golf glove idea. I never meant to be rude, or dogged, or some how give you information not based on my own "findings". I've used sharpie to mark my strings when shooting barefinger without nocking points. I have tried to eschew the "mordern" side of traditional shooting for the sake of simplicity and enjoyment just as you have- and I also built all my own gear at that time. However in every instance I've found that small things do add of quickly, and doing things the "right" way is not because it's the accepted dogma, but because there is truth in it arrived at by people far smarter than I am who have already been down this road. If you ever want to be able to honestly hit that rabbit every single time, or just take up trick shooting to impress the local kids, take a few steps back and look at where others have been first. It will save you a tremendous amount of time and give you a good example- if 9 out of 10 people all have the same experience, but one person says otherwise, why follow the minority? We all like to think we're "special" but most of us are not. Ego is a tricky thing. If, however, you are shooting for the pure and unadulterated joy of watching an arrow fly, please be very honest and up front about that, and do not try to kid yourself or others with immediately following it with comments about "practical accuracy". It confuses those who are looking to give you guidence as to where you are headed. Whatever your desire with archery is fine, there is NOTHING wrong with just slinging arrows for the sake of playing with a stick and string and watching feathered missles fly. 

Your condescending tone towards others is beyond rude though, and I hope you aren't this way to people in person.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Sarge leave your wifes bow alone I was just kidding hate to hear that you are sleeping on the couch.


Kegan great post thank you for what you do

Gary


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Old Sarge said:


> Update: all nocking points removed, strings taken off and twists randomly taken out. All rests have been adjusted so as to not be anywhere close to center shot, and all points have been unscrewd and been replaced by closing my eyes and reaching into a pile of points on my workbench. Would have used a blindfold but was too lazy to put one on. This is for 2 longbow, 2 recurves, and 3 compounds. After I get back from the store to buy my silver sharpie I'll do my wife's bows. It may be a good idea for me to remove 2 fletchings from each arrow before I start since I would be too lazy to bother puttin on all three. What the heck, why should I need that many?
> 
> As for the 900 round I'll play but it may take me awhile, can't shoot that many arrows at one time quite yet. I'll do it in stages. Also I have serious doubts that my arrows with the practical accuracy set up will ever hit the 60 or 50 yard target. May luck out and hit the 40once or twice. Still waiting on instructions from Itbeso as to where the 6 ft. Rabbit target so I can practice.


Sorry Sarge, I checked with my source on those 6' rabbitts however they were sold out and backordered for 20 years. They shipped their whole inventory to some guy named Locos or llogos or something like that. They also told me that a lot of their targets were being donated to a local kids archery club in that same small town. The targets are almost unused except the toes and the ears are all shot out.Keep in mind these are standing rabbitts. Hmmmmm. No, it couldn't be! Mark that string for you sir?


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

I think I need help is there a AT Anonamous ? I think I need help is there a O I already asked that. I think I I ??? 

Sombody please please take me hunting I need help.

Garrrrry


----------



## Old Sarge (Sep 9, 2008)

Very good post Kegan! Well thought out and stated. Thank you.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

itbeso said:


> Sorry Sarge, I checked with my source on those 6' rabbitts however they were sold out and backordered for 20 years. They shipped their whole inventory to some guy named Locos or llogos or something like that. They also told me that a lot of their targets were being donated to a local kids archery club in that same small town. The targets are almost unused except the toes and the ears are all shot out.Keep in mind these are standing rabbitts. Hmmmmm. No, it couldn't be! Mark that string for you sir?


Want to buy a rabbit target?

Prices have gone up since the market was cornered.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

kegan said:


> I wish you all the best.
> (Snip)
> Your condescending tone towards others is beyond rude though, and I hope you aren't this way to people in person.


Rude? I haven't been rude......or condescending. I informed you that your experience has been taken into consideration along with all the rest. Now why isn't that good enough for you? What's "rude" or "condescending" about that?

It appears you will not be happy *unless your experience is placed above the other experience and people immediately do what you say *instead of weighing all the facts.

I hope you're not that way to people in person.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Again, thanks much to all the people who answered in a friendly way.

I think the fact that an Olympic Gold Medal was taken by somebody with only a pencil mark on the string is enough to show that one can indeed shoot well without brass, bling and other junk on the string.

It's also clear that some people do better with brass, bling and other junk on the string......or at least they have convinced themselves of that.

That's ok too......whatever the case may be.

Question answered.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Is there a liars anonamous??? That might be helpful too. Some here obviously wouldn't know the truth if if it slapped them in the face.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Don't be too hard on them......they were just a little desperate and defensive and they were mostly joking around anyway.

:amen:


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

I asked 9 pages ago why you guys where bothering


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Logos said:


> Don't be too hard on them......they were just a little desperate and defensive and they were mostly joking around anyway.
> 
> :amen:



Sure, I understand that,but when someone puts something out there as fact in a serious discussion and then someone else says that the first lied just playing some sort of wierd game,then I would like clarification. But at least now I know that we have some who can't 'man up' when the going gets a little tough. If the person had stepped up and said that he was just kidding about the lady olympian shooting without a nockpoint locator on the string,then I would be ready to chuckle and move on. But when the person ducks and dodges and does everything possible to avoid the subject, I am left with no choice but to believe it was a lie from the start. A lie told in an attempt to make someone else look bad in some way. That I have no respect for.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Great post Kegan.

Logos: I think the vast majority of the people that have read this thread with disagree with your take on whether or not you speak in a condescending manner. Your idea of what "facts" and "science" are, are quite far off base to say the least. You've continually proven that you have an idea set in your mind about what works and what doesn't, regardless of who tells you otherwise out of their own experience, and are here because you enjoy arguing or get some sort of satisfaction at irritating people over the internet. You've argued points and have been sarcastic to some incredibly helpful, well experienced archers, and in general I would think have earned somewhat of a poor reputation on this forum (internet anonymity notwithstanding). I'm not sure why you're still on here to be honest - you have all the ideas already set in mind, why not go test them out and compare results with other shooters? That would be far more scientific than the approach you've taken so far. And if you want truly scientific, why not set up an at home double blind study using the same shooters, same bows with the same draw weight, the only differences being nocking point? That way you can truly prove whether or not your methods are as sound as you seem to believe. And I don't mean to be rude, but expecting people to pick up on subtle sarcasm and irony over an internet forum is quite unrealistic and somewhat characteristic of social disorders.
Oh and you don't bother with the "you're pride was hurt/you're insecure" comments either. . Happy shooting.


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

You guys might as well face facts. There are people who have nothing better or more interesting to do than create turmoil, this gentleman is one of them. That's the reason that help from experienced archers is being met with sarcasm and smart ***** remarks, and that's also the reason they have an "ignore" feature. He has earned the distinction of being the first time I've ever seen a need for it.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

CFGuy said:


> Great post Kegan.
> 
> Logos: I think the vast majority of the people that have read this thread with disagree with your take on whether or not you speak in a condescending manner. Your idea of what "facts" and "science" are, are quite far off base to say the least. You've continually proven that you have an idea set in your mind about what works and what doesn't, regardless of who tells you otherwise out of their own experience, and are here because you enjoy arguing or get some sort of satisfaction at irritating people over the internet. You've argued points and have been sarcastic to some incredibly helpful, well experienced archers, and in general I would think have earned somewhat of a poor reputation on this forum (internet anonymity notwithstanding). I'm not sure why you're still on here to be honest - you have all the ideas already set in mind, why not go test them out and compare results with other shooters? That would be far more scientific than the approach you've taken so far. And if you want truly scientific, why not set up an at home double blind study using the same shooters, same bows with the same draw weight, the only differences being nocking point? That way you can truly prove whether or not your methods are as sound as you seem to believe. And I don't mean to be rude, but expecting people to pick up on subtle sarcasm and irony over an internet forum is quite unrealistic and somewhat characteristic of social disorders.
> Oh and you don't bother with the "you're pride was hurt/you're insecure" comments either. . Happy shooting.


Guys, why do you bother with this troll, he doesn't shoot archery, never has owned a bow and has just frustrated a bunch of you for 11 pages.Let it go and let him go. If he shows up on another thread continue to ignore him, regardless of whether he straightens his act out or not.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Sure, I understand that,but when someone puts something out there as fact in a serious discussion and then someone else says that the first lied just playing some sort of wierd game,then I would like clarification. But at least now I know that we have some who can't 'man up' when the going gets a little tough. If the person had stepped up and said that he was just kidding about the lady olympian shooting without a nockpoint locator on the string,then I would be ready to chuckle and move on. But when the person ducks and dodges and does everything possible to avoid the subject, I am left with no choice but to believe it was a lie from the start. A lie told in an attempt to make someone else look bad in some way. That I have no respect for.


I'd say the explanation for his behavior is that he regretted revealing information that made the "experts" here look bad (Doreen's gold medal with a pencil mark for a nocking point).

So, when some of the more insecure and defensive folks tried to pretend the information was bogus--he was kind of conflicted as to what he should do--because arguing with them might be seen as supporting me (God forbid anybody should go against the happy little lynch mob).

He actually did verify that his info was correct, although not with any great enthusiasm.

I think his integrity is intact. He apparently is not going to respond about the five questions I asked about the Olympian in question. That's up to him. Clearly he's stepped on the toes of some of the local bullies and wants to keep a low profile.

Can hardly blame him, can you? Dare to disagree with them and they call you a troll and repeatedly trash you.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Sure, I understand that,but when someone puts something out there as fact in a serious discussion and then someone else says that the first lied just playing some sort of wierd game,then I would like clarification. But at least now I know that we have some who can't 'man up' when the going gets a little tough. If the person had stepped up and said that he was just kidding about the lady olympian shooting without a nockpoint locator on the string,then I would be ready to chuckle and move on. But when the person ducks and dodges and does everything possible to avoid the subject, I am left with no choice but to believe it was a lie from the start. A lie told in an attempt to make someone else look bad in some way. That I have no respect for.


Forest, why don't you take yourself a little less serious and get in the spirit of this thread. We have an op who is a nutcase, we have a bunch of regulars who get a little adversarial from time to time, who have banded together, for the most part, to make logos look silly, and this thread has been really fun unless you were actually trying to help the nutcase and most of that ended after page 2. I don't think anyone owes you any clarification and I don't think anyone is clamoring for your respect. The statements were made to make logos look bad. So what, the man has tried to insult everyone on here but his inane putdowns are so sophomoric they become laughable to everyone but him.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

CFGuy said:


> Great post Kegan.
> 
> Logos: I think the vast majority of the people that have read this thread with disagree with your take on whether or not you speak in a condescending manner. Your idea of what "facts" and "science" are, are quite far off base to say the least. You've continually proven that you have an idea set in your mind about what works and what doesn't, regardless of who tells you otherwise out of their own experience, and are here because you enjoy arguing or get some sort of satisfaction at irritating people over the internet. You've argued points and have been sarcastic to some incredibly helpful, well experienced archers, and in general I would think have earned somewhat of a poor reputation on this forum (internet anonymity notwithstanding). I'm not sure why you're still on here to be honest - you have all the ideas already set in mind, why not go test them out and compare results with other shooters? That would be far more scientific than the approach you've taken so far. And if you want truly scientific, why not set up an at home double blind study using the same shooters, same bows with the same draw weight, the only differences being nocking point? That way you can truly prove whether or not your methods are as sound as you seem to believe. And I don't mean to be rude, but expecting people to pick up on subtle sarcasm and irony over an internet forum is quite unrealistic and somewhat characteristic of social disorders.
> Oh and you don't bother with the "you're pride was hurt/you're insecure" comments either. . Happy shooting.


I'm liking CFguy right about now...and while i've yet to read/see any credible evidence wether or not the dear lady actually used "just a pencil mark on her bowstring" to win a gold medal?..is irrelevent to me at this point..as that was fourty (40) years ago...one decade shy of 1/2 a century...back when we still stuck our digits in holes in a round wheel and spun it to make a phone call and if we needed a number we looked it up in the book..and through the miracles of todays technology and modern science?..everyone from the descriminating target archer to the diligent hunter who doesn't wish to risk wounding game?..

use nock points..except for logos here..who's taken every dedicated poster here for a 12 page ride down troll mountain. :laugh:


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

See?

That's what they do.

Attempt to intimidate.

All they get out of me is a bemused grin and a chuckle.

It's not worth it to sink to their level.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Logos, I don't think you'd know what a logical fallacy was if it punched you in the teeth.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

(Grin)

(Chuckle)

(Yawn)


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Question answered, I see no reason to hang around and banter about nothing.

I'm done with this thread.

Let the lynch mob rant. It appears to make them feel better.

:amen:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

itbeso said:


> Forest, why don't you take yourself a little less serious and get in the spirit of this thread. We have an op who is a nutcase, we have a bunch of regulars who get a little adversarial from time to time, who have banded together, for the most part, to make logos look silly, and this thread has been really fun unless you were actually trying to help the nutcase and most of that ended after page 2. I don't think anyone owes you any clarification and I don't think anyone is clamoring for your respect. The statements were made to make logos look bad. So what, the man has tried to insult everyone on here but his inane putdowns are so sophomoric they become laughable to everyone but him.



Naaah,I don't see it that way little buddy.

I really had intended to let the lies go and forget about it but you pulled my string again. After a few private messages I started to realise that one of two things had happened. Neither of them very honorable for grown men.
One is that mr gary made up a story and got caught then ran like a rabbit ducking behind every bush he could find to avoid simply coming clean.
Two is that he actually told the truth and you then twisted it to look like he lied as a way of insulting another poster. I don't know what else is hiding here except the truth which still has not been told in public. I can only imagine that you guys are friends and he was not about to come clean and expose your game or that he's afraid of you for some reason and won't expose you in public.
Either way, no matter I suppose. However, privately your partner in crime maintains that his original story was in fact the truth.

I don't know how much clearer it can get but I might offer some advice. Next time it happens and the heat starts to build in the kitchen, try this. 'Just kidding guys' and put one of those little smiley faces or a wink eye or something and then let the real truth be known by all.

BTW,mr hotshot. I read all of the OPs previous posts and found exactly the oposite of what you claim in this post. So lets not start the vicious circle of more bs to cover the smell of older bs.
Take yourself more serious. Grow up,man up and just tell the truth.:laugh:


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

itbeso said:


> Forest, why don't you take yourself a little less serious and get in the spirit of this thread. We have an op who is a nutcase, we have a bunch of regulars who get a little adversarial from time to time, who have banded together, for the most part, to make logos look silly, and this thread has been really fun unless you were actually trying to help the nutcase and most of that ended after page 2. I don't think anyone owes you any clarification and I don't think anyone is clamoring for your respect. The statements were made to make logos look bad. So what, the man has tried to insult everyone on here but his inane putdowns are so sophomoric they become laughable to everyone but him.


Who looks silly ?


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Naaah,I don't see it that way little buddy.
> 
> I really had intended to let the lies go and forget about it but you pulled my string again. After a few private messages I started to realise that one of two things had happened. Neither of them very honorable for grown men.
> One is that mr gary made up a story and got caught then ran like a rabbit ducking behind every bush he could find to avoid simply coming clean.
> ...


wow...this is gett'in juicey..complete with behind the scenes, cloak n dagger style pm's of he said/she said utterances and dual member persona's?..all in a effort to do what?..bait and set somebody up?...man...thought i left those sorta behaviors behind in the 12 step rooms. :laugh:

and before anybody says anything about me responding here?..

wifeys watching "unreal psycho housewives from somewhere" so my entertainment choices were limited this evening. :laugh:


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Forrest when you ask I told you in a PM evidently the Truth hurts you asked I answered but like a child one answer is not enough for you. I have nothing to hide I have told the TRUTH so SUCK IT UP CUPCAKE and get over it. But don't worry our relationship it still intact. I still love ya
Gary


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

Face it guys, you've been played like a Stradivarius, a trophy trout, a mark in a card game by Logos, including me, but it has been enjoyable. Thanks all for the entertainment.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

reddogge said:


> Face it guys, you've been played like a Stradivarius, a trophy trout, a mark in a card game by Logos, including me, but it has been enjoyable. Thanks all for the entertainment.


Bingo 

But not me


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

JINKSTER said:


> wow...this is gett'in juicey..complete with behind the scenes, cloak n dagger style pm's of he said/she said utterances and dual member persona's?..all in a effort to do what?..bait and set somebody up?...man...thought i left those sorta behaviors behind in the 12 step rooms. :laugh:
> 
> and before anybody says anything about me responding here?..
> 
> wifeys watching "unreal psycho housewives from somewhere" so my entertainment choices were limited this evening. :laugh:



Ya made me laugh Jinks. Thanks.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Naaah,I don't see it that way little buddy.
> 
> I really had intended to let the lies go and forget about it but you pulled my string again. After a few private messages I started to realise that one of two things had happened. Neither of them very honorable for grown men.
> One is that mr gary made up a story and got caught then ran like a rabbit ducking behind every bush he could find to avoid simply coming clean.
> ...


First of all Forest, I'm not your little buddy nor am I a buddy of yours at all. Second, I Have some friends on here but I don't know of any "partners in crime'. Third, yes Gary is a friend of mine but to insinuate that he is afra[d of me for any reason is idiotic on your part. Fourth,What heat and what kitchen are you referring to, I've been having a hilarious time on this thread. It is not often we get someone coming on here thinking he is going to make us look silly then has to leave with his tail between his legs. Fifth, Obviously you haven't read any of Logos posts because there were very few that didn't try to put down the person trying to help him.sixth, When a fellow archer comes on sincerely asking for help, I will always try to give of my knowledge and experience. always. Seventh,I didn't realize you were the "truth Police" here on archery talk. Eighth, It sounds like I'm the only Person on here that has actually met and talked to Doreen Wilber in person, so the next time you question my character, at least know a few of the facts. Ninth, Gary was told that story by A coach so stay off his case, he thought he was relaying credible information.Tenth, truth or not, it was a beautiful moment in the saga of the disembowelment of logos.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

2413gary said:


> Forrest when you ask I told you in a PM evidently the Truth hurts you asked I answered but like a child one answer is not enough for you. I have nothing to hide I have told the TRUTH so SUCK IT UP CUPCAKE and get over it. But don't worry our relationship it still intact. I still love ya
> Gary



You did Sir,and I appreciated it. But I believe it would have helped the thread and done more for the common good if done in the open forum.
We're all good and I see that you were not the perp. Thanks again.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

itbeso said:


> First of all Forest, I'm not your little buddy nor am I a buddy of yours at all. Second, I Have some friends on here but I don't know of any "partners in crime'. Third, yes Gary is a friend of mine but to insinuate that he is afra[d of me for any reason is idiotic on your part. Fourth,What heat and what kitchen are you referring to, I've been having a hilarious time on this thread. It is not often we get someone coming on here thinking he is going to make us look silly then has to leave with his tail between his legs. Fifth, Obviously you haven't read any of Logos posts because there were very few that didn't try to put down the person trying to help him.sixth, When a fellow archer comes on sincerely asking for help, I will always try to give of my knowledge and experience. always. Seventh,I didn't realize you were the "truth Police" here on archery talk. Eighth, It sounds like I'm the only Person on here that has actually met and talked to Doreen Wilber in person, so the next time you question my character, at least know a few of the facts. Ninth, Gary was told that story by A coach so stay off his case, he thought he was relaying credible information.Tenth, truth or not, it was a beautiful moment in the saga of the disembowelment of logos.



Lol. You made me laugh too. Thanks


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

This thread is like a train wreck, you don't want to read it... but you can't resist looking... LOL


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

IT is there anyone you haven't shot with - and I hate to say I told you so but I did I really did - so are you going to paint your nocks on for Vegas cause if you do I might just take you up on the 2 beers just to even things


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Jinkster I think there is enough information here for you to write a book I almost passed out after your last post. I will be patiently waiting to proof read the first copy
Gary


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

oops


----------



## dragonheart II (Aug 20, 2010)

Mine is red. LOLukey:


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Good night John boy


----------



## Attack (Oct 25, 2011)

I drew mine on with a knife......... It didn't work


----------



## Charon (Apr 17, 2011)

Logos I've just following this thread from the beginning. Now admittedly I myself have never tried shooting shooting without a nockset, so I can't answer your question directly. Its just that I was thinking that your ideas may get a better reception at a different site. Try the Pirates of Archery at: http://piratesofarchery.net/bb/index.php
They're a little rough around the edges. There are some resident "experts" who are accomplished target shooters and bowhunters. But most important they have the reputation of "thinking outside the box." They have no "sacred cows." Its not a bunch of guys who have been bullied into mindlessly following some absurd party line.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> IT is there anyone you haven't shot with - and I hate to say I told you so but I did I really did - so are you going to paint your nocks on for Vegas cause if you do I might just take you up on the 2 beers just to even things


Does the wear and tear show?:teeth: The list wasn't complete until I got to shoot with you though. Looking forward to the next time also. See you in Vegas.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

Charon said:


> Logos I've just following this thread from the beginning. Now admittedly I myself have never tried shooting shooting without a nockset, so I can't answer your question directly. Its just that I was thinking that your ideas may get a better reception at a different site. Try the Pirates of Archery at: http://piratesofarchery.net/bb/index.php
> They're a little rough around the edges. There are some resident "experts" who are accomplished target shooters and bowhunters. But most important they have the reputation of "thinking outside the box." They have no "sacred cows." Its not a bunch of guys who have been bullied into mindlessly following some absurd party line.


Thanks. I suppose it might be a good test to ask the same question there and see what happens. Who knows, the question might turn out to be a sacred cow there as well. I've always said that sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger.



Although, to be fair, the mindless contingent here is small. You could pretty much count on one hand (well, maybe two) the people who got ugly on this thread. Those types are present on most forums and so it will always be. Remember, there are probably hundreds that were reading.

It may be true that a groupthink culture has developed on this forum, and there's a certain amount of self-righteous tomfoolery, but most are polite and helpful and well versed in archery lore.

I'll have to check out the Pirates.

Thanks.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Logos said:


> Thanks. I suppose it might be a good test to ask the same question there and see what happens. Who knows, the question might turn out to be a sacred cow there as well. I've always said that sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Logos, You're always trying to get the last word and the last putdown. The mindless contingent, as you call yourself, can be counted on one finger. You.Unfortunately, ever so often some arrogant pseudo intellectual comes along who thinks he can win a war of words with childish arguments and worn out cliches. Never ceases to amaze me how pathetic, people like you are. The only good thing about you trying to stay up the postors here is that you have given us all the best laugh we have had in a long time. I do feel bad for the more conscientious postors like Kegan, who were beyond patient with you only to have your kindergarten rudeness thrown back in their face. I won't say good shooting because I doubt you have ever even picked up a bow.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Maybe this horse is bloating with gas, but is there anything beyond having to take the time to tie (or crimp) on one that makes a nocking point undesirable? If you're going to bother to mark a string means that you're going to tune it anyway and try to use it as a consistent location.

I didn't use a nock locator when I didn't know about them, but I did realize, even as a pre-teen, that if I put the nock about 1/2" or more above square, that it seemed to have better arrow flight. Once I returned to archery as an adult, with the benefit of other archers who knew what they were doing, a nock locator was standard, and I thought, "Hey, what a great idea, I wish I had that." Even then, it wasn't an issue of exact accuracy or tuning, or even the string slipping during the draw or shot.

They're just really convenient, particularly when using indexed nocks, in that I don't even have to look at the string to put the arrow in the right place.

Seems like not using a nock locator would make shooting more of a hassle, regardless of accuracy issues. Is it a purist ideology? I was trying to teach a guy at the local range, and suggested he try a nock locator, and he had the same reason for not wanting on, he wanted to keep it simple. He also had it in his head that his draw length should change based on the distance, and that it was better for the string arm to be away from his face, because that way didn't have to worry about the string hitting him.

Genuinely curious, what's the draw? I can't really believe that it's easier, or simpler.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Who's winning ?


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

JParanee said:


> Who's winning ?


Mark on string---1, Nock locators-----the rest of the archery world. Want to ask the question again?


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

BarneySlayer said:


> Maybe this horse is bloating with gas, but *is there anything* beyond having to take the time to tie (or crimp) on one that makes a nocking point undesirable?


Horse exploded long ago.



I don't know about others.......(I wish we could get more info about why Olympic Champ Doreen Wilber decided to use a pencil mark on her string) but my main reason other than avoiding work was that those little brassie things hurt my fingers and I wanted to keep things simple.

As yet, nobody has proven there's a measurable benefit to the tie ons or the crimp ons, so I'm not interested in complicating things at this point.......and a smooth string looks nice.

If you can win the Olympics with a pencil mark for a nocking marker......it's good enough for me.

Those pretty brass things may be popular, but I was never one to try something just because all the other kids were doing it.

I don't have a brass earring or a tatoo, either.


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

I'm guessing #2 pencils were a no-no too? Too confusing and complicated?


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

Charon said:


> Logos I've just following this thread from the beginning. Now admittedly I myself have never tried shooting shooting without a nockset, so I can't answer your question directly. Its just that I was thinking that your ideas may get a better reception at a different site. Try the Pirates of Archery at: http://piratesofarchery.net/bb/index.php
> They're a little rough around the edges. There are some resident "experts" who are accomplished target shooters and bowhunters. But most important they have the reputation of "thinking outside the box." They have no "sacred cows." Its not a bunch of guys who have been bullied into mindlessly following some absurd party line.


I have the hugest urge to respond to this in absolutely the most sarcastic way I can, but I won't. "Bullied mindlessly"? I actually laughed out loud at this. Yes, Kegan, Viper, Ray and others are very well known for their bullying around here - I just about cry nearly every time I shoot because I can't shoot the way I want any more (I'm sorry I couldn't resist)! 

Again! I implore thee! Test out your methods and compare to others - basic science will not lie!


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

itbeso said:


> Mark on string---1, Nock locators-----the rest of the archery world. Want to ask the question again?



Sure 

This gentlemen has some of the best archers (supposedly) in the world going back and forth for 12 pages 

He is obviously wasting all your time for his own shear amusement. 

I mentioned on page 3 why are you all bothering ?

I mentioned on page 9 again why are you all bothering ?

Ill say it again why are you all bothering.

If this is what retired guys do with there time I'm not ever retiring


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

JParanee said:


> why are you all bothering ?
> why are you all bothering ?
> Ill say it again why are you all bothering.


I think it's because a few will FOREVER go ballistic when I say:


> As yet, nobody has proven there's a measurable benefit to the tie ons or the crimp ons, so I'm not interested in complicating things at this point.......and a smooth string looks nice.


They want me to say INSTEAD, "Thank you for your wise teaching. I was so ignorant until you helped me see the light. I'll put lots of bling on my string immediately and then we'll all be alike, and to prove it.....our bows will all look alike." 

That's the SURFACE why.......motivation, of course, goes WAY deeper.

Internet forums take on a tribal nature......and tribal sociology is apparent.

Readers of "Lord of the Flies" will understand and relate to the scenario.

Groupthink is an interesting phenomenon. It is a warm and comforting thing for the tribe--BUT......severe anxiety occurs when the groupthink is questioned.

This happens for several reasons: pride, insecurity, fear of losing prestige, fear another tribe could be superior, fear of loss.......but the result is always a violent reaction against the one who brought the anxiety (happily, we see only verbal violence in the internet venue).

You will notice, if you examine some other threads......if a forum member challenges one of the perceived leaders and defenders of the groupthink......he will immediately be challenged by one of the acolytes. If he immediately backs down or vanishes, all is well, but if not.......all hell can break loose.

So, yes......there is what is commonly known as bullying behavior involved. It is usually perpetrated by the acolytes rather than the leaders (although even a mild reproach from a leader carries much weight).

But, as I said before, we only see the really bad behavior in a very small group here.

I hope that answers your question. You see......they "bother" because they must.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

L -

What's been omitted form this discussion is (and you are correct), any semblance proof that a hard nocking point has any benefit.

May I suggest that you: 

Shoot an indoor 300 round (removes a lot of variables) both with and without a hard nocking point.

If you don't see any real difference, then you're right, *you *don't need one. 

If there is a difference, rethink your position or not, your call. 

If you're not interested in quantifying your theory, then you really don't have a dog in the race.

You're also correct that trying to prove or disprove anything over the Internet may be a waste of time. That's why my approach in cases like this is to state your case and move on.

Do you really think this was worth 13 pages .. so far?

Viper1 out.


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

Logos said:


> Horse exploded long ago.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You just have to start mannin' up a little, toughen up those delicate little fingers.


----------



## Logos (Jul 29, 2012)

> May I suggest that you:
> 
> Shoot an indoor 300 round (removes a lot of variables) both with and without a hard nocking point.





> Do you really think this was worth 13 pages .. so far?
> 
> Viper1 out.


In answer to your last question, yes.....it was worth 13 pages to find out about Doreen Wilber.

In answer to your first question.....I don't have a need to prove anything and I couldn't prove anything even if I wanted to try.

I haven't made any claims. People here made claims that a brass or tied nocking point is needed. I've just said that, lacking evidence, I'm unconvinced.

That caused some people to behave badly.

As far as my participation in this thread at this point goes......I stated that I was done with the thread a while ago.

Now I'm just answering questions, as I just did yours. 

It would be impolite to ignore polite questions directed at me.


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

+1 to what Viper said.



> I don't have a need to prove anything


Then why the constant need for the experienced to "prove" their methods to you if you won't try them yourself? You ask a question, get an answer, argue the answer without any factual evidence on your own part, then demand factual evidence from the people you asked. _Really_? None of this seems ironic to you? I really don't think you're done with this - if you were taking a logical, critical thinking approach to this, you would have simply tried a clamp on nocking point (easy to take off) for yourself and made a decision based off your own findings rather than being a very practical example of what "confirmation bias" looks like.

Again, let's take a neutral approach - decide for yourself what is more important - holding true to what is in your view traditional (i.e. no metal on your string) and living with the fact that logically, you will not be as precisely consistent, or simply try it for yourself and compare results.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Logos might not know archery but he sure knows how to play you guys 

I'm beginning to think you guys deserve him  

Logos you've taken the boys around the ring over an absurd subject. 

Some have graciously and genuinely given there advise and you have shed it like a duck does water

I would offer up my reasoning why i use 2 nocks on most bows, but that's not what you really want. You sir are a bright fellow that is rather well read and thinks himself the gamer. 

I see no harm in what you do if you can find someone to play with 

So carry on kind sir I can't wait for your next topic


----------



## CFGuy (Sep 14, 2012)

What some may not understand is that this thread might be equally entertaining for others responding, "counter-trolling" so to speak .


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

CFGuy said:


> What some may not understand is that this thread might be equally entertaining for others responding, "counter-trolling" so to speak .


CF, are you just now getting to that understanding. It started for me at the original question.:angel:


----------



## Double S (Mar 30, 2008)

Logos said:


> In answer to your last question, yes.....it was worth 13 pages to find out about Doreen Wilber.
> 
> In answer to your first question.....I don't have a need to prove anything and I couldn't prove anything even if I wanted to try.
> 
> ...


I'll close this thread for you. :thumbs_up


----------

