# "Shooting the Stickbow" Questions



## Thin Man (Feb 18, 2012)

Keep in mind that when throwing a ball accurately, the hand and ball ain't nowhere near the eye, and this "nowhere" varies from person to person. Yet "instinctive throwing" works quite well for many people as long as they practice it with studied repetition. 

Instinctive shooting is learned through the same studied repetition. Your brain will make the necessary adjustments for accuracy ... whether straight/cant or shelf/elevated ... so long as you are consistent within your repetitive shooting and allow the brain process your visual feedback within this consistency over the time it takes to do so.

I shoot with both shelf and elevated rests, and either straight or canted, depending upon the bow. I aim the same way for all configurations. The brain makes the aiming adjustments after a few shots if I'm picking up a different bow that day. If I'm shooting the same bow over several days, the brain knows what to expect right out of the gate each day. 

Our brain is way smarter and much more adaptable than we give it credit for, especially in matters of subtle discrimination concerning minute detail. However, we must provide it with studied repetition in order to bring that smartness and adaptability into our service.

By the way, with a flipper rest you can still use all aiming methods with the bow held either straight or at a cant. The elevated rest *is* a shelf ... it's just in a different area of the bow. Your eye can easily learn to aim off of whatever sight picture your setup presents to it.

Hope this helps soothe the brow a bit on all of this. There are many takes offered upon this subject, and I certainly fall into the "casual and no big deal" camp on this one.

Good luck.


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

The benifit to shooting off the shelf is it get the arrow closer to the hand and high/low hit are easier for your mind/body to adjust for when shooting instictive. Fred Asbel has some very good books on instictive shooting. I read as many books by different authors as I could get my hands on, and took something from each one and applied it to my shooting. I do not believe one source of information is sufficient to cover everyone and all the different types of archery and shooting styles. Basically a target archer should source target archery information and a hunter or instictive shooter should source information pertaining to that. However a lot can be learned by studing the different aspects of each and putting what applies to practice.

James


----------



## Sauk Mountain (Aug 3, 2015)

If you want to be a better target archer, listen to the advice of a target archer. If you want to be a better bowhunter, listen to a bowhunter.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

I think the message is that instinctive is not really an aiming method well suited for target archery. There are some folks that shoot instinctive target pretty well, but good target archers primarily use aiming methods such as stringwaking and gap, with elevated rests. So this really comes down to what you mean by wanting to be an instinctive target archer. If you are looking to be competitive, then you should probably adopt another aiming system. If you are interested in recreational shooting, then it does not really matter how you shoot. Just enjoy yourself. If you want to shoot hunting style but not hunt, then keep on the path you are going. My main question is how you decided that you wanted to be an instinctive archer when your interest is target shooting. If it has to do with being influenced by hunters, then I can understand that, but many hunters do not understand target archery. I know, I have to explain it all the time as one of the rare World Archery target archers at my local club. I am easy to find. I am the guy with the 72 inch bow that is not wearing camo. The nice thing about this forum is that you get exposed to all types of archers, where you may not get that at your local club.


----------



## arrowchucker222 (Jun 17, 2013)

I don't 
' care what you "think" is the right wY to shoot. Gap, string walk., so called instictive.(I really believe no such thing really exist ") you use some form of gaping or string walk. If you don't I would love to shoot you for some beers or $$ whatever you want. So called insticve will work for 1 or 2 shots. To be consistent you need somethings else. Sorry but we are NOT 
Howard Hill!


----------



## Paul68 (Jul 20, 2012)

arrowchucker222 said:


> I would love to shoot you for some beers


What flavor of beer?


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Be careful. I would take an instinctive archer on in a FITA target shoot, but I would probably get cleaned in an unmarked 3D. No beer for me.


----------



## Paul68 (Jul 20, 2012)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Be careful. I would take an instinctive archer on in a FITA target shoot, but I would probably get cleaned in an unmarked 3D. No beer for me.


That's what I'm hoping for..... ha! I'm one of the ignorant pagans who believe there is such a thing as "instinctive" and could never compete on known distance or target, but stump shooting will fill the cooler. 

BTW - who is building you 72" bows? That is something I would sincerely love to see.


----------



## Sgiles (Sep 1, 2013)

an elevated rest in my experience only opens up options in tuning ecspecially for someone newer to the sport. They are also more forgiving for slight form mishaps since you have more clearance. They have zero affect for aiming purposes. All that sounds good in theory but i never noticed it to be true in real life. i could elaborate but instead of listening to us you should just try it. You can get a Bear or Hoyt stick on rest for like five bucks, tune your arrows to it and tell us how it works out for you. Also canting you bow shouldn't make any difference, like stated above you'll almost always either lean your head into it or bend at the waist to meet the bow. So your really not opening up your sight picture. If you cant the bow without leaning into it I'd bet a dollar your torquing the string. Good luck.


----------



## Nekekal (Dec 25, 2012)

If you are shooting instinctive as I do, why cant the bow. It isn't like you need to see better. Instinctively, the bow doesn't need to be in front of your face. 

And the arrow doesn't need to be close to your finger. In old west pistol shooting, the barrel was not real close to the shooters finger. You can adjust to it being some distance away very easily. One of the reasons you want a bit of distance is to keep the feathers away from your finger so you don't end up bleeding. The broad flat shelf is not a particularly good launch pad for arrows. A lot of people make a small bump on the shelf to make it easier to avoid clearance issues between the shelf and the arrow. A rest is just the bump taken to the extreme. I don't use the rest, I use the bump.


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

OK, I have been reading without commenting, because I want to hear the opinions. But I'll chime in for just a second and then go back to reading.

First, thanks everyone for commenting. It's valuable to me (Especially since my damn bow isn't here yet, and all I can currently do is _READ _about shooting!)

Second, I hope my post didn't come off as: "Shooting the Stickbow is WRONG!" because that isn't what I meant at all. What I meant was more of a "Huh, this is actually opposite of what I've previously read and heard. Wonder why?"

Third, Arrow rests are cheap and temporary. I probably _will _try it. No reason not to.

OK, a couple of specific responses:

*Nekekal *I've never heard of putting a bump on the shelf. Can you post of a picture of your setup?

*Hank D Thoreau* I honestly don't know what shooting I'm going to do. I doubt it will be typical range/target shooting though. When we were kids my favorite shooting was stump shooting. Once our club gets its walk through built, I imagine that's where I will spend most of my time. That said, a lot of practice happens on the range, and that's where good habits are built, so its not like I will never shoot at the blue face target. But if I ever get to be where I want to be, I will be shooting standing targets, 3D targets, and even foam disks out of the air. I just want to *shoot*. 

*arrowchucker222* To be fair, it isn't just Howard Hill who shoots off the shelf (or in his case off of the fist)... It's also Fred Bear, G. Fred Asbell, Ben Pearson, Byron Ferguson...


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

*Question 2: Forearm slap*

One topic that was really interesting to me in the book was the problem of the arrow string slapping the forearm. I never really had that problem shooting recurve, but it is something that nails me somewhat frequently with the longbow. So, I always assumed that it was a brace-height thing. And, I noticed that even the great Howard Hill always wore an arm guard (although that might have been for effect, cause lets face it, they look cool on him!)

But the book talks about an idea I had never considered: Altering your stance to give yourself more clearance from the string. 

I'm wondering: Does anyone else have issues with string slap, and if so, what do you do about it? (One thing it seems to me is that string slap _has _to reduce performance dramatically, right? So, getting it out of your game would seem preferred to wearing cool gear...)


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

I shoot what you would call instinctive which is a term that is not really an accurate way to describe what I am really doing which is subconscious gap shooting 

I also shoot off the shelf 

My point is even if I switched over to a slightly elevated rest eventually my mind would recalibrate to the subconscious sight picture and I would adjust 

All this talk of if you want to be a hunter vs target shooter etc is nonsense .... To a certain degree anything we try to hit is a target 

I have been at this for 40 years and I can tell you that along the way I have made a lot of mistakes by trying to emulate some of the folks you pictured 

The difference between any of the aiming techniques is just that ...... They are aiming techniques... that's it 

All other mechanics with in reason should be the same no matter what shooting technique you are using 

Form is form 

I will tell you that my style of aiming subconscious gap (so called instinctive) does have its limitations 

It works well for my style of hunting but a person that is an accomplished Gap shooter will mop the deck up against what you are referring to as an instinctive shot in most situations 

Tony's book is a great reference to proper bow mechanics , equip4ment , form, etc 

Shelf or rest is your choice 

Aiming style is your choice 

But if you are following some of the writings of the above pictured people you might want to source out better info 

Don't take my word for it 

Go to some bigger shoots 

Shoot with a lot of different people and see who is predominately making good shots 

Than judge the information that you are receiving 

I would look to shooting off of a rest if I were hiding to Alaska were chances are I would be hunting in the rain and shooting veins other than that I am perfectly content to shoot off the shelf for my purposes


----------



## Halfcawkt (Dec 27, 2015)

First, the rest thing: the elevated rest can be quite helpful for some. But that is only related to what I want to talk about. You mention canting the bow. I used to can't the recurve pretty hard, but have since stopped. Long story short, I find it easier to tune the bow vertically. I can tell you your point of impact changes horizontally from vertical to cant. Play with that and you will see. For me, vertical is more repeatable, but to each his own. I still cant the long bow, though.


The grip is usually to blame if I catch a wicked string slap. Brace height, stance and other things can come into play, but it usually is my grip. The longbow takes a different kind of grip, they also usually have a lower brace too. For me, the string buzzing my arm is typical for the longbow. Since I shoot about a third if the time with it, I always wear an arm guard while shooting a bow.

Keep in mind I was speaking in general terms. There are exceptions to most things I covered, but what I said is true, in general, from my experience.


----------



## Bowmania (Jan 3, 2003)

Here's the best advise I can give you went it comes to instinctive shooting. Bring a lot of money if you're shooting gappers for beer. The best shooters (living and dead) are gappers (split vision) - Hill and Furgurson.

I also wouldn't pay a lot of attention to "bowhunting form". They're happy shooting at 20 yards. The distance between the last target and the second last that oly guys shoot is 20 meters - that's longer than 20 yards that the "bowhunter form" guys are happy shooting AND THAT SECOND LAST DISTANCE for oly guys IS 70 METERS. Who's form would you rather use?

The "bowhunter form" guys will tell you that they have to shoot around stuff, so they have to shoot hunched over. Bull, I'll put my species kill and kill numbers up against anyone and I've never had to shoot hunched over. ALIGNMENT IS ALIGNMENT.

I better stop here, I've probably ruffled up enough feathers.

Bowmania


----------



## Sauk Mountain (Aug 3, 2015)

Who's advocating hunching over when they shoot??


----------



## Halfcawkt (Dec 27, 2015)

I see both sides of the "bow hunting posture debate." A ground Hunter on the stalk may very well find himself ha sing to shoot at odd angles in less than ideal circumstances. But I tend to believe that in most of those cases hunching can be avoided with more creative body positioning.

I can honestly say that I have almost never had ideal conditions for any of my muzzle loader kills over the years. Positions can be tricky, but you'll almost always find a better position that won't get you busted but remains less than perfect with a slit second of creativity. 

The best thing hunters can do is practice from all sorts of positions so they don't get caught out in a tight spot in the field. Obstucted shot at 3D can help. The league I shoot gets off on brush in the flightpath, so I get plenty of practice.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

JParanee said:


> I shoot what you would call instinctive which is a term that is not really an accurate way to describe what I am really doing which is subconscious gap shooting
> 
> I also shoot off the shelf
> 
> ...


I'll just say x2 to JP's post, well said.

The main reason I shoot off the shelf? My bows are made to be shot that way and while I could add a stick on rest I've never felt the need. 

I agree that the height of the shelf or rest is something that the shooter adapts too. I have a couple of favorite bows by different bowyers and the shelf sits a little higher on one than the other. Going back and forth between them I have vertical issues for a few shots but if I shoot either one for an extended period of time both shoot where I aim.

But then, like JP I don't claim to be an instinctive shooter. I definitely shoot better when I see the arrow; even though I don't use the point to aim, if I'm not aware where the arrow is pointing my shot is just a poke in the dark.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

weaveman said:


> I do not believe one source of information is sufficient to cover everyone and all the different types of archery and shooting styles. Basically a target archer should source target archery information and a hunter or instinctive shooter should source information pertaining to that. However a lot can be learned by studying the different aspects of each and putting what applies to practice.
> 
> James


For me, I didn't start killing game consistently until I stopped listening to hunting-only archers and applied target archery lessons to my shooting. It took me close to five years to break the bad habits I picked up from Asbell's books/video.

Archery is pretty simple. Start with the bale and bridge. You work on the basics to get your consistency down to where you can group well, then move on from there to achieve the desired level of accuracy, and then learn to adapt it to different positions and targets. We all have little nuances that contribute to how we personally decide to shoot, and only you can find out what works best for you on the bale and bridge. 

For example, I personally cant my longbow but try not to go too far. It helps my anchor and sight picture, but canting leads to clearance issues with my shirt and chest. I've killed game holding the bow in a variety of positions and there are always trade offs. Again, time with the bale and bridge are the only things that can help you find out what works best for _you_. Don't worry about what "camp" certain methods, equipment, or styles fall into, just find what works best for you and work towards achieving the highest level of accuracy you can.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

As a new archer you will likely have some tuning issues. Shooting off a rest generally reduces feather wear on a poorly tuned setup. Excessive feather and shelf wear is a very common complaint of new archers.

Secondly we are ALL target archers 99.99% of the time. The best hunters I know are also the best target shooters. The guys who claim you can shoot a deer like a target seem to leave a lot of deer in the woods.

Grant


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

OK, very interesting discussion. There are a couple of things that I need to understand better tho, so here goes:



Sauk Mountain said:


> Who's advocating hunching over when they shoot??


Yeah, I'm not sure either. I guess Howard Hill said that he drew from a slightly leaning/bent position and swung up into his stance. Maybe that's where that came from...? IDK.



JParanee said:


> All this talk of if you want to be a hunter vs target shooter etc is nonsense .... To a certain degree anything we try to hit is a target


That is very true. But the distance and elevation will vary much more in a hunt than in a standing target shoot, and that does affect things... right? A target archer, who has been shooting at 30 yards every day in practice will nail a 30 yard shot with regularity. That's different from a 3D shooter (or a hunter) who comes over a ridge and sees a deer doesn't _know _the distance, and he also might have elevation to consider. So whereas a target shooter and a hunter are both shooting at a target, there is a difference... I think we can all agree with that, can't we?



JParanee said:


> I have been at this for 40 years and I can tell you that along the way I have made a lot of mistakes by trying to emulate some of the folks you pictured





kegan said:


> For me, I didn't start killing game consistently until I stopped listening to hunting-only archers and applied target archery lessons to my shooting. It took me close to five years to break the bad habits I picked up from Asbell's books/video.


I'd love to know what. That's not a challenge, I _honestly_ would love to know what it was in Asbell's book, or whoever's that created bad habits that had to be unlearned? Where were they off, and what should a beginning shooter avoid?


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

I shot mostly gap but can do instinctive on running or flying game or targets. I shoot bows now with rug rests, seal skin rests, feather rests, springy rests. It doesn't make a hoot of difference to me what rest is on there the arrows goes where I point it. I both cant the bow and shoot vertical (not the same bows though). Again, don't sweat the small stuff. Just learn to shoot and you'll have fun.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Some metal risers, with a rest, put your hand closer to the arrow than some wood bows shooting off the shelf, depending on the shape of the grip, your wrist position, etc.

Aside from the fact that most instinctive shooters are instinctively using the sight picture, which has nothing to do with hand position, imagine...

Give yourself a thumbs up. Imagine a laser came out of the thumb, perpendicular to the nail. How is that different than pointing your finger? A thumb in that position is farther from your wrist than an arrow on an elevated rest.

You can shoot instinctively well with any setup, and it doesn't have to meet Asbell criteria. He does what he does, and that's cool, though that doesn't mean that you have to.

'Instinctive' aimers can do very well in target competitions. In unmarked events, it really lessens if not eliminates any disadvantage of not having explicitly known aiming references, but only if they actually practice, a LOT at all ranges, and get a very good feel for their arrow's trajectory. A friend of mine, shoots 'instinctively' in the 'gapstinctive' sense, and beat me and my loose 'floating riser gap' aiming at a recent unmarked 3D, and had the top score at the shoot out of over 100 archers. Then again, at a traditional unmarked shoot, prior to that, with over 300 archers, the top score at the whole event used a gap method of aiming.

As far as real hunting, the real challenge is the hunting. Everything that comes before that allows you to get the shot. If you can get inside of 15 yards on an animal that doesn't know you're there, it doesn't matter how you aim, so long as you're good at it, and can shoot the same way you do when you practice. That, in itself, is a significant 'If'.

Try stuff, see what works for you. Take what other experienced offers have to say for consideration, but not as gospel.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

MarkJoel60 said:


> I'd love to know what. That's not a challenge, I _honestly_ would love to know what it was in Asbell's book, or whoever's that created bad habits that had to be unlearned? Where were they off, and what should a beginning shooter avoid?


Well, qualifying that what he advocates obviously works for him, I would say things off the top of my head, aspects that didn't work for me, nor jive with pretty well understood biomechanics, or even contradict his own reasoning...


Hunching over and leaning over the arrow
Swing draw (which also flirts with shoulder injury, particularly with heavy hunting bows)
Insistance on a split finger draw (nothing wrong with it, but 3 under is fine to, and provides an easier sight window to ingrain)
Loosing the arrow in a timed manner, i.e., you release it exactly as you hit anchor, whether the rest of the shot is ready or not. This tends to creep into short drawing.
The insistance that a high grip is required for 'Instinctive' aiming. Not only is it not true, but some people will shoot more consistently with a medium or low grip. I like a high grip on my recurve, and it seems to work well for me, but that doesn't mean it will be best for others.

I liked his books, and I think he has plenty of valuable insights to offer, but you've got to pick them through and evaluate them carefully for yourself. I'm sure somebody can shoot well the way he does, though I haven't actually met these people. The best 'instinctive' shooters I know may have a slight cant to their shots, though otherwise their form is pretty consistent with conventional 'Trad' 'target' archery.

Honestly, it's all archery. It's a matter of adapting techniques that work best for you, with shooting scenarios (and rules of competition), that you're interested in pursuing.


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

Bad habits can be created by trying to emulate a certain style of shooting that doesn't fit you personally. Byron Ferguson covers this in his book and refers many times that his style must be modified to fit the individual shooter. 

There is a big difference in target shooting vs hunting. Hunting and hunting practice is from mostly unknown distances angles and shooting situations, over/under obstacles, elevated stands, thru/between brush, ect. Target shooting is standing on a line at mostly know distances and shooting for score/point, where the first shot is not the most important. So I disagree that we are all just shooting at "targets". Reading all this brings to mind another advantage of shooting of the shelf, which is when canting the bow the point of impact is less affected. I some time can't and some times dont, but in hunting situations I find I can't the bow alot more than I do in practice.
I started off years ago as an instinctive shooter and later realized my shooting style had developed into more of a split vision type.

James


----------



## Todd the archer (Feb 7, 2003)

Some shooting methods work better in different situations. Shooting an upright form with a clicker will work good maybe from a tree stand but other conditions don't allow such regimented styles. For example at our indoor 3-D league they like to make things interesting. Sometimes we shoot through a cut out in cardboard to simulate shooting out of a blind. Shooting kneeling and one that is harder than you might think, standing on a 4X4 surfboard style and of course the 4X4 is not flat and rocks a bit. Try drawing through a clicker and watching your gap is nearly impossible.

If keeping shoots close using a precise method may not be necessary and going with a more fluid style may actually be more effective .


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

MarkJoel60 said:


> OK, very interesting discussion. There are a couple of things that I need to understand better tho, so here goes:
> 
> 
> Yeah, I'm not sure either. I guess Howard Hill said that he drew from a slightly leaning/bent position and swung up into his stance. Maybe that's where that came from...? IDK.
> ...


As Barney answered this question I won't get into detail but if you are emulation GFred ....he's a nice guy but his shooting info is not to good ....sorry 

Back than he is what we had and I too read and enjoyed his stuff than I went to shoot with a lot of different shooters and believe me I was shocked to see any one emulating him on a course was not doing that well  

His hunting books about stalking etc are good reads 

His shooting info regretful damaged a whole generation of shooters .... He's a very nice guy thou  

I consider target shooting .......paper , 3 D , field , etc anything that is not a living creature 

The ones that say that they are lethal on fur but not paper is the stupidest thing I have ever heard 

You take a guy like Demmer , Martin or Rogers that can keep them in a cup on a 300 round these are the same guys that will spank ya bad on a 3D course 

To them no to me it's all targets .....just different games 

I thought the same thing as you and many others ...... Than I went out and shot with a lot of different people and saw what is reality and what is fiction


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

weaveman said:


> Bad habits can be created by trying to emulate a certain style of shooting that doesn't fit you personally. Byron Ferguson covers this in his book and refers many times that his style must be modified to fit the individual shooter.
> 
> There is a big difference in target shooting vs hunting. Hunting and hunting practice is from mostly unknown distances angles and shooting situations, over/under obstacles, elevated stands, thru/between brush, ect. Target shooting is standing on a line at mostly know distances and shooting for score/point, where the first shot is not the most important. So I disagree that we are all just shooting at "targets". Reading all this brings to mind another advantage of shooting of the shelf, which is when canting the bow the point of impact is less affected. I some time can't and some times dont, but in hunting situations I find I can't the bow alot more than I do in practice.
> I started off years ago as an instinctive shooter and later realized my shooting style had developed into more of a split vision type.
> ...


Many people shoot 3 D and FITA and never hunt they are doing exactly what you are saying and are not hunters or practicing to hunt they are competing on paper and foam targets


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

weaveman said:


> Bad habits can be created by trying to emulate a certain style of shooting that doesn't fit you personally. Byron Ferguson covers this in his book and refers many times that his style must be modified to fit the individual shooter.
> 
> There is a big difference in target shooting vs hunting. Hunting and hunting practice is from mostly unknown distances angles and shooting situations, over/under obstacles, elevated stands, thru/between brush, ect. Target shooting is standing on a line at mostly know distances and shooting for score/point, where the first shot is not the most important. So I disagree that we are all just shooting at "targets". Reading all this brings to mind another advantage of shooting of the shelf, which is when canting the bow the point of impact is less affected. I some time can't and some times dont, but in hunting situations I find I can't the bow alot more than I do in practice.
> I started off years ago as an instinctive shooter and later realized my shooting style had developed into more of a split vision type.
> ...


This is just my opinion so take if for what it's worth, but if I have to deviate very far from my "target" form I don't take the shot. I don't buy into the twisted up and shooting around obstacles idea, but then I pass up a lot more shots than I take too.


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

*BarneySlayer*: OK, thanks that was a nicely detailed answer. Very helpful. If anyone has other things, I'd love to hear them, too. 

*JParanee*: I think you misunderstand me. I'm not defending Asbell, or off the shelf shooting, or anything. I am just trying to understand the reasons behind the opinions. 

*weaveman*: I think its fair to say that any style eventually gets modified. 

Reminds me of that old story about the guy who asks his wife one night after dinner: "Honey, you make the best pot roast, but I notice you always cut both ends off. Why is that?" And the wife says she doesn't really know, because her older sister taught her to cook and that's how she did it. The next time the sister is over, the husband asks her. But she doesn't know because her older sister taught her... well, there are four girls in the family and each of them says the same thing except the oldest who says: "Well, that's how mama taught me how to cook."

So now they're really interested and they _all _go to the retirement home to ask Mama. The husband who started it all asks: "Every woman in your family cuts both ends off of their pot roast because you taught them to. We'd all like to know why? Why do you teach them to cook that way?"

And the Mom says: "I cut off both ends of the pot roast because that's the only way I could fit it in the pot that I had!"


----------



## reddogge (Jul 21, 2009)

I have taken hunting shots from tree stands, deer almost directly under me where you have to slide hips back, bend at waist severely, lay the bow over on its side. Also from a kneeling position under briars. Same as 3-D where you shoot uphill, downhill, sidehill. No such thing as strictly target positions in these games. I did pass on a very large buck once because I was kneeling behind a utility trailer and had to shoot UNDER the hitch. I passed.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

weaveman said:


> Bad habits can be created by trying to emulate a certain style of shooting that doesn't fit you personally. Byron Ferguson covers this in his book and refers many times that his style must be modified to fit the individual shooter.
> 
> There is a big difference in target shooting vs hunting. Hunting and hunting practice is from mostly unknown distances angles and shooting situations, over/under obstacles, elevated stands, thru/between brush, ect. Target shooting is standing on a line at mostly know distances and shooting for score/point, where the first shot is not the most important. So I disagree that we are all just shooting at "targets". Reading all this brings to mind another advantage of shooting of the shelf, which is when canting the bow the point of impact is less affected. I some time can't and some times dont, but in hunting situations I find I can't the bow alot more than I do in practice.
> I started off years ago as an instinctive shooter and later realized my shooting style had developed into more of a split vision type.
> ...


Those are your experiences. Mine have been just the opposite. Differences are only there if you want them to be.

You don't have to take any of those kinds of shots to kill an animal. Those low percentage shots should not be taken if you're not comfortable/capable. If you are capable, then you should certainly be able to consistently put all your arrows in the same spot when those variables have been removed and things are more calm and comfortable. The skills carry over.

Likewise, that's only one form of target archery, indoor paper, and I can promise you every arrow, even the first, counts. As a matter of fact, your scenarios describe 3D archery quite a lot better than it does actual hunting. While hunting I limit my shots to "gimme's" simply because I have no interest in losing/wounding an animal. Stuff still happens, why increase the chance of something going wrong? I just let them walk and hunt another day. 

I only say this because I practiced all of that for years, only to consistently come up empty handed. It works for some, but not all, so I don't feel any of that can be said with full resolution.

MarkJoel60,

What caused me issues with Asbell's methodology was what BarneySlayer described, and the ideas you seem to be concerned with in your first post. The swing draw, his ideas on focus, and his teaching snap shooting (releasing as you hit anchor) as well as his interpretations of what instinctive shooting involves. It's just my experience though; only you can tell what works and the only way to formally test it is on the bale and bridge. 

Don't be afraid to shoot any and all types of targets. I did myself a massive disservice avoiding paper for a long time. When I did finally shoot it my scores were utterly pathetic. No wonder I had never killed anything, I had lulled myself into thinking I was better than I was because of my proficiency in "hunting" practice. It seems that target archery is often written off as "easy", standing in one spot just hammering away. The truth is it isn't. You have to be consistent, and that consistency does carry over into the woods if you can also learn to hold your composure.


----------



## Sauk Mountain (Aug 3, 2015)

Those G. Fred Asbell books about instinctive shooting have probably hindered more archers than helped, I know I was worse off. Stalking and Still Hunting is a good read. 

This thread has been very informative and has caused me to rethink a few things, which is one of the things forums are good for.


----------



## j.conner (Nov 12, 2009)

Canting the bow is primarily for line of sight to the target if the sight window is not tall enough. Not canting is more consistently repeatedable than canting.

Shooting off the shelf is less forgiving than using an elevated rest. The tune is more critical and there is less adjustability.

"Instinctive" aiming is a result, not a method. Those spectacular examples noted above developed the skill with many decades of practice. They probably have an aiming system but are long since unable to articulate it. I would take the Hollywood hype and showmanship with a grain of salt too.

In my opinion, you should select equipment and technique based on what you want to do. If you want to hunt and plink, where 10-20 yards is the rule, then off the shelf recurve or longbow is fine. Paper plate accuracy is generally what you want for North American big game. If you want finer accuracy and greater distances, then more advanced equipment and more refined technique is required. If you want to put 100 arrows into a bullseye, then a target rig and a full-on shot cycle is in order. The equipment and corresponding techniques differ, but the core requirement is consistent and repeatedable form.

Regarding the longbow slapping the forearm or wrist, this is a common side effect of the low brace height and broom handle grip. Best thing to do is roll the elbow and wear a nice big arm guard. Sporting some fancy leather is one of the great joys of shooting longbow. Target recurve teaches a 45-degree angle of the bow hand knuckles, which also helps clear the elbow/forearm. This might be why some longbow shooters use such a big cant too.

Do yourself a favor and learn/use an aiming system - it will dramatically shorten your learning curve. Stay away from the over-bowed, hunched over, grip-it-and-rip-it, snap shooting style as you are very likely to develop target panic. Granted, it is OK and fun to do if that's all you ever want to do, but you can also take it easy on yourself and learn something more manageable over the long term.

Above all, have fun. It is all about goals and expectations, so it's all good as long as those are in line. Frustration kicks in when those are out of whack.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

MarkJoel60 said:


> *BarneySlayer*: OK, thanks that was a nicely detailed answer. Very helpful. If anyone has other things, I'd love to hear them, too.
> 
> *JParanee*: I think you misunderstand me. I'm not defending Asbell, or off the shelf shooting, or anything. I am just trying to understand the reasons behind the opinions.
> 
> ...


Mark

I'm an off the self shooter myself 

For my purposes it works just fine


----------



## Sauk Mountain (Aug 3, 2015)

I'm an off the shelf shooting bow canter with a subconscious gap aiming method. I only cant the bow to where the top limb is at about the 1 o'clock position, which is the position the bow seems to want to naturally go to when I draw. I don't do the hunch over shooting position that you see a lot of bowhunters doing in books and magazines, that is a recipe for short drawing everytime. 

I don't agree that shooting off an elevated rest is difficult to adapt to if you've been shooting off the shelf. I had a Sage with 45 and 55 lb limbs. When I got the 55 lb limbs, the only arras I had that were close to the right spine were fletched with 4" vanes so I put the little stick on rest on the riser that came with the bow and moved the nocking points up the string. Yeah it was different, but it probably only took a handful of shots till I didn't notice it anymore.


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

*To Cant or Not to Cant*

I know, I know: Why don't you just go and shoot already??? Well, the bow gets here tomorrow. In the meantime, doing more reading, and studying. Some questions about canting.

Here are some things I've picked up from reading through the thread, as well as thinking about the points raised:

Canting is harder to repeat. The difference between a 5 degree cant and a 10 degree cant seems slight, but -- all other things being equal -- it will change the arrow placement. That is a reasonable reason to stay away from canting. Especially in the early learning, it is better to be consistent, and canting adds complexity I just don't need. 

And if you use an arrow rest, canting is even worse. Quick drawing of that in action:









Now, if you are telling me -- no big deal, your brain adjusts the the difference and after a few arrows, you'll never know the difference... maybe so. But in terms of consistency, it does seem that canting and arrow rests are not a good partnership.

So... just don't cant. Hold it vertical. Simple. The argument of the upper bow limb getting in your way isn't a good one, since everyone ends up using a site window anyway, and the bow being in your sight window is actually a good thing. I guess a pure concentrate and shoot guy doesn't use a bow or arrow in his site line (in theory) but in practice, he probably does. 

And then I ran across this... You guys probably have seen Jeff Kavanaugh's Youtube page... right? I really like his videos because he breaks things down well.

In his video "Gripping the Bow" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mOQTc14uCI) he talks about why he cants -- and it has nothing to do with sight lines, or hunting. He says that canting the bow keeps the elbow pointed out, and that keeps his shoulder in a proper position to draw with his back. 

Here are some screen grabs showing the main points. 
First is a straight-on shot that shows his angle. 







Second shows his shoulder position when he cants. Hard to see it in the Gray T, but the 
elbow is out and the shoulder is rolled slightly forward







Last shows his shoulder when he holds the bow vertically. Notice the elbow points more down 
now, and the shoulder is more locked. (It's easier to see in motion)







That's a reason I have never heard before. I am wondering what your thoughts on it are...?


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

JParanee said:


> Many people shoot 3 D and FITA and never hunt they are doing exactly what you are saying and are not hunters or practicing to hunt they are competing on paper and foam targets


Sounds like me. I shoot target, field and 3D but have no intention of ever hunting. The last thing I need is another sport to learn. I have too many already.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

I was shooting a field tournament in a strong wind with a pretty good compound shooter. I asked him how far he was aiming off. He told me that he never aims off, he cants to compensate for the wind. He did not cant a lot and used the level on his bow as a guide. That tells me that canting can move your point of impact, a lot. That 5 to 10 degrees makes a difference. His cant was not even noticeable to me.


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

To be clear, when I personally refer to target archery, I'm referring to olympic, indoor, and shooting on a line across an open field at a target. Where the bow is held basically staight up and down. 3D and FITA are based on hunting scenarios. Most of our hunting setups down here are on the ground in some type of blind. It's very hard to find a tree that you could get 10 feet off the ground in. And when you do your in the canopy with limbs all around you. If you don't practice canting and shooting from sitting, kneeling or bent over positions you're not going to get many shots. I have nothing against target archery and have learned and put alot to use from it. For me personally shooting actual target type archery has no benifit. But applying different disciplines and techniques of target archery to my shooting does. If I had 3D courses closer to me and shoots, you would see me there. The closest regular course and shoots to me would be in Austin, about 100 miles one way, that's to far for me to go practice on a regular basis. I've actually thought about setting up a 3D course on my farm but the cost of the targets out ways the need. 

James


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

The OP is talking about target archery. I would include field archery as a target discipline since you are standing at a marker and shooting, not much different that in target archery. FITA field is definitely target archery as it uses the same equipment classes as Olympic archery and has proportional scoring. The field round in NFAA is a target archery round, even though it uses the same non proportional scoring as the hunter round. The distances are all even multiples of 5 and you have a banded target. Even the hunter and animal rounds are shot in a lane with no obstructions. In fact, it is a rule that if you hit anything overhead you get to take the shot over. 3D can be shot as either a target or hunter shoot. Some courses are set up with non hunting distances. They are that way where I live. Even the compound folks would not take the 65 and 70 yard shots in the field, and certainly would not do it wearing their red and white stay dry Hoyt staff shooter shirts, not because the deer can see it, because they can't, but because they might snag the shirt on a thistle. If you put a target out there, a target shooter can shoot at it. The only thing a pure target shooter does not do, is hunt. That is at least true for me. Aerials, re-enactment, SCA, clout, speed, etc. are all forms of target shoots, as long as they use targets. Flight has no target so it is in a class by itself.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

How long of a bow are you shooting that you have to cant it while shooting 

I shoot from blinds ,kneeing etc and only in a rare situation do I have to really cant it


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

Joe, that shot wouldn't work out of alot of pop-up blinds. I rarely hunt with anything over 60" AMO. My current hunting bows are 58 and 56. My old bow is 54", hard to find a bow that short anymore especially in a takedown. My longbows are 58" and 60". From Oct-February when I'm not at work I run the hunting on a ranch between Georgewest and Freer. We have a lot of bow hunters, mostly compound, and I have had to take steel post and set them around pop-ups to raise them up and tie them to, then brush in more around the bottom of the blind so that certain hunter's could draw their bows without hitting the top of blind. That's with them shooting under 36" compounds. I just picked up a set of hex 6 I put on my 17" riser, hoping to use it this year. The other issue I have seen is hunter's rasing there bow up to start draw and hitting the top of even tall blinds. Most shots are 10-30 yds with 15-20 being the most common, it's hard to see further unless your shooting down a sendero and I set blinds up to shoot across senderos because I like to set up blinds 10-15 feet back in the brush and have small shooting lanes cut for better cover of the blind and hunter. That low down open stuff under the canopy is non-existent there, if you want to shoot under the brush you almost have to lay down. It makes it tuffer when you're targeting specific bucks and not just any mature deer. The ranch is a little over 5000 acres for anyone wondering. 

Looking at your shooting position again, if you sat on your heels that would work. I don't like building blinds much taller than the brush around it so they don't stick out like sore thumbs. It is normal to have deer at 5 yds or less. This past season I had 2 fighting bucks crash into the side of my blind, I could have poked them with my arrow.

James


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

weaveman said:


> Bad habits can be created by trying to emulate a certain style of shooting that doesn't fit you personally. Byron Ferguson covers this in his book and refers many times that his style must be modified to fit the individual shooter.


That was one of my favorite things about his book, most specifically when he would talk about how Howard Hill was his archery Hero, and Howard did ___, but that didn't work for him, and then he realized that Howard was doing ______ or _____, or had a _____, whatever, so that worked for Howard, but he wasn't Howard, so he had to do something differently.

In essence, yes, you are entitled to opt for what works better for you, regardless of how any world champion or guru does it themselves. Not to say that you shouldn't at least observe what the better archers are doing, and maybe give it a try, but if it doesn't fit, it won't work.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Weave 

Try and find one of the old double bull recurve blinds 

In that I can even shoot from a stool with a vertical bow 

Don't get me wrong nothing wrong with canting thou

Good luck with the Hex's I think you will like them


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> The OP is talking about target archery. I would include field archery as a target discipline since you are standing at a marker and shooting, not much different that in target archery. FITA field is definitely target archery as it uses the same equipment classes as Olympic archery and has proportional scoring. The field round in NFAA is a target archery round, even though it uses the same non proportional scoring as the hunter round. The distances are all even multiples of 5 and you have a banded target. Even the hunter and animal rounds are shot in a lane with no obstructions. In fact, it is a rule that if you hit anything overhead you get to take the shot over. 3D can be shot as either a target or hunter shoot. Some courses are set up with non hunting distances. They are that way where I live. Even the compound folks would not take the 65 and 70 yard shots in the field, and certainly would not do it wearing their red and white stay dry Hoyt staff shooter shirts, not because the deer can see it, because they can't, but because they might snag the shirt on a thistle. If you put a target out there, a target shooter can shoot at it. The only thing a pure target shooter does not do, is hunt. That is at least true for me. Aerials, re-enactment, SCA, clout, speed, etc. are all forms of target shoots, as long as they use targets. Flight has no target so it is in a class by itself.


Hank, it'd hard for me to explain what I consider the difference, there's to much gray. If I don't do it in the feild on a regular basis when actually hunting, then it's target type archery to me. I understand that some if not alot of it could be used in hunting but the basis of it is for score on paper not, scoring on a game animal. I don't know how else to explain it. The OP originally started thread on instictive shooting and if it was correct to continue doing or do something that didn't apply to instinctive shooting. He has since realized he is use a version of split vision shooting. He may end up gaping, as I probably will after 38+ years of shooting I have slowly progressed towards gaping, but I'm not there yet.

James


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

I hear what you are saying. I think we are saying the same thing, but from different perspectives. One thing I see a lot is folks take up archery and say things like, "I want to be an instinctive archer". This is before they even have enough experience to know where they are going in archery and whether that is the best approach for them. Sometimes it is the influence of others, possibly mentors. I did not start by saying that I want to be a stringwalker. I evolved to it. It turned out to be what worked best for me. I think folks need to explore different styles. The OP mentioned shooting aerials. I find that pretty tough the way I shoot. Any moving target or popup novelty target is a challenge with my aiming method. If I were going to shoot them a lot, I would have adopt a more instinctive style. Instinctive may be a good choice, but I think the OP needs to do some exploring and learn a bit about how target shooters do it, if he plans to pursue target archery. And besides, a little extra knowledge is never a bad thing.


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

Hank, I think you hit the nail on the head. I think most beginers staring off with little knowledge and no coaching pick up a bow and start shooting it. They do what seems natural to them, and believe it is "instictive". Take my son for example, he's 9 now. He started shooting bows at 5, he decided he wanted to shoot basically trad this year. I set him up with a bow and let him start shooting. Once he got the feel for it, I asked if he was aiming or just shooting at what he wAntes to hit. I thought he was shooting more instinctively, to my surprise he was using the point to aim and basically naturally gaping. This was with no instruction from me on aiming just form coaching most of it carried over from him shooting a compound with adjustment to his anchor, release and grip. I don't see my middle brother much but had a chance to shoot with him the other day. He doesn't shoot much and I was surprised when he told me he naturally used the point to aim also. I believe my starting of instictive and then all the years of bowfishing have kept me from being a full blown gapper.

James


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

At some point, I think that some of it comes down to what you are focused on. A brilliant Instinctive shooter (watch some of Jeff Kavanaughs shots, they're pretty incredible) has probably trained his brain and muscles to the point that he doesn't notice anything about his arrow -- which is not the same thing as he doesn't actually "see" it. He sees it even though he isn't focused on it. God knows how many arrows it takes to get to that level.

But it happens in a lot of things. I was driving on the highway a while ago. Checked my mirrors. Everything was clear. I was getting ready to pass, but something seemed off. I slowed down instead of passing, and a moment later a car passed me. At some point I had seen that car. I wasn't trying to commit all of the cars on the road to memory. In fact, I was doing a bunch of other things like talking on the phone, and adjusting the radio. But somehow in the midst of all of that, my brain saw that car, and remembered it, and when I was getting ready to make a move on the road, it remembered that it not passed me. 

How about that! I'm an instinctive driver! 

I'd be willing to bet that the best instinctive archers have a gap-calculation system that would amaze people if they could watch the brainwaves as it does its stuff. But I also believe that they have no idea they are doing it. 

The bad news is: I guess there is no magic, huh?


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

JParanee said:


> How long of a bow are you shooting that you have to cant it while shooting


Did you see my post showing Jeff Kavanaugh's video about canting the bow? I was wondering what you think about when he says that canting the bow is what helps him get a more natural draw...?


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

MarkJoel60 said:


> Did you see my post showing Jeff Kavanaugh's video about canting the bow? I was wondering what you think about when he says that canting the bow is what helps him get a more natural draw...?


I think if he shot with the correct knuckle position he wouldn't need to cant to get his elbow rotated. 

Grant


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

grantmac said:


> I think if he shot with the correct knuckle position he wouldn't need to cant to get his elbow rotated.


Can you post a pic/image of the correct knuckle placement?


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Mark - 

Shooting the Stickbow was written to dispel most, if not all of the myths you are bringing up. And they are myths. 
The best advice you've gotten here, and there has been a lot of really good advice btw, it is go to a real or at least larger match and see what the top shooters are doing. Yes, regardless of what the targets look like, it's still a target and the same rules apply. 

A lot of the crap you see on "trad" youtube channels are there because some trad types want to separate themselves from the so-called" rigidity of the more mainstream compound world and what they believe is it's kissing cousin "target" shooting. Hence, the typical hunched over, heavily canted, snap-shooting non-sense. These are usually the same guys who try to tell you how close range a bow is as a weapon. It ain't the bow, it's the shooter. And remember, all you need to post a video on youtube is a cell phone, an internet connection and a youtube account. Some guys just sound better than others, until you break down what they are saying. 

Shooting the Stickbow was designed to build a solid foundation, from which you can build or let evolve into whatever style you like. Without that foundation, your learning curve takes a pretty big hit, if not a dead stop. 

Easy was right, that if you have to contort yourself into an uncomfortable position to get a shot, the shot becomes more luck than skill and probably shouldn't be taken. (Sorry, we are ALL sportsmen hunters, we hunt because we enjoy it. We're not part of a SWAT team or Delta Force, and if someone says need to hunt to feed their families, then maybe their priorities are a little out of order.) I don't hunt any more, but in my ten + years of still hunting (that means from the ground), I never had to be a contortionist to get a shot off - and never had a problem filling my tags. But I didn't limit myself to a 15 yard shot either.

Having that solid foundation, actually teaches you how far "off optimal" you can go and still make a good shot. Again, without that, it's guess word / luck.

Look, you can do or believe whatever you like. The guys here, most anyway have been doing this for a long time and a lot have learn this stuff the hard way. We're trying to help, but ultimately it's your call.

BTW - the whole thing about the rest and canting goes back to a basic misconception. A guy who hits more often than missing is never aiming off his hand (the pivot point), but on some level lining up the arrow tip or entire shaft, so the wrist follows the arrow and the arrow doesn't follow the wrist. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

MarkJoel60 said:


> Did you see my post showing Jeff Kavanaugh's video about canting the bow? I was wondering what you think about when he says that canting the bow is what helps him get a more natural draw...?


Mark I agree with what Grant said about hand position 

My pointer finger and middle finger are on the back of the bow (the part that faces away from me) 

They are applying light pressure straight thru the grip to the web of my thumb 

My two lower fingers are curled to the outside of the grip 

But listen to what Tony (Viper) and his book have to say ...... It's good stuff and you will get a good baseline to develop from 

Like Tony said there is a lot of bad shooting info out there and I am still working to get away from what you and we are speaking of


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

MarkJoel60 said:


> OK, I have been reading without commenting, because I want to hear the opinions. But I'll chime in for just a second and then go back to reading.
> 
> First, thanks everyone for commenting. It's valuable to me (Especially since my damn bow isn't here yet, and all I can currently do is _READ _about shooting!)
> 
> ...

















Here is your picture. I make the bump. Shelf plate and striker plate.
Dan


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

Bow came today. Finally get a chance to go and shoot and stop petering everyone with theoreticals.

Interestingly, it even comes with a small adhesive arrow rest! 

Question... 

If I understand correctly, the book says to put the rest on the bow as far back as possible? Like so?







But it seems that this was designed to maybe go here







Because there is a hole cut out in the rest that matches the hole in the bow:







My question is, where does it go? And should I use something other than the adhesive if I line it up with the hole?


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Here is your picture. I make the bump. Shelf plate and striker plate.
> Dan


Dan, thanks for the picture. But how is that any different from shooting off of the shelf? Isn't that giving you the same amount of contact with the arrow that the shelf does?


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

To minimize torque, the ideal position of the rest will result in the contact point between the arrow and rest being directly over the deepest part of the grip.

That said, if you don't torque the grip it's probably a non-issue.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Mark -

That's not what the book said. It suggested you put the rest directly over the deepest part of grip (or throat), as Easy said to minimize the effects of hand torque. OR put it where ever it looks best. The difference isn't critical for a new shooter. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

MarkJoel60 said:


> Can you post a pic/image of the correct knuckle placement?


I assume Grant means keeping the knuckles at a 45 degree angle.


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

"Shooting the Stickbow was written to dispel most, if not all of the myths you are bringing up. And they are myths"

Everything else anybody ever wrote, thought or taught is wrong, a myth or a lie. If it isn't in his book, according to V1.
That's the myth right there. Three quarters of what's in Stickbow was already written and or taught by some one else before. V1 did a great job of compiling the information but if you believe his way is the only way, then Byron Ferguson is a fake and Howard Hill is a myth.
I stated it before, what works for some doesn't for others, everyone is different. Read, watch, study, ask questions and shoot. Don't be afraid to try different things, after your shooting develops you will find a combination of things that you will mold into what works best for your personal goals.

James


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

A good book organizes and communicates knowledge in an effective way. It is not necessary for the author to invent the information. If that was necessary most of our college text books would be gone. The goal is to make a book that folks can learn from. Viper has done that.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

I acknowledged that. "V1 did a good job of compiling the information "

What I don't agree with is his opening statement. 

If you read though his last reply, you should have noted where he contradicts what you stated about the compound shooter canting his bow to compensate for the wind drift. And that was witnessed by your own eyes. If canting the bow doesn't affect the impact point then why have levels on your bows? The higher up off the bows pivot point the arrow is the more it will affect it. That's physics and in books, how can that honestly be called that a "myth"? 

James


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

MarkJoel60 said:


> Dan, thanks for the picture. But how is that any different from shooting off of the shelf? Isn't that giving you the same amount of contact with the arrow that the shelf does?


No contact. Center shot and adjustable is key here. I made the pieces to fit together with matching bump. 







Dan


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Waveman,

The left/right impact difference that occurs when canting a compound (or Oly recurve for that matter) is the result of the dominant eye and bow sight being moved out of line with the arrow, not how far the arrow is above the hand. A lot of us have/had been shooting instinctively with elevated rests for a long time. It's much ado over nothing.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

James - 

It's a myth because it's been misinterpreted, as J stated in the above post about canting with a sighted bow. 
And don't confuse torque with canting, it's not the same thing. The former is dynamic and to some degree random, while the latter is static, in simplest terms. 

Just like some things that Hill and other "trad heros" have said that have either been misinterpreted by "neo-trad wanna-bes" or have been proven to be less than optimal through decades of testing and experience. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

If you cant or need to cant the bow to make a shot, the closer the arrow is to the bows pivot point the less affect the cant will have on the impact point of the arrow, period. Having to can't is a norm when shooting longer bows and you cannot stand straight up and down to keep the bottom limb out of the dirt and away from obstructions. Therefore having the arrow down on the shelf closer to the pivot point is/can be a benifit. Just because you can't or don't shoot like that doesn't make it wrong or a myth, it simply doesn't work for you or your style of shooting. I find myself shooting with the bow more straight up and down alot, it is typically more accurate for me. However I regularly practice and train from sitting and kneeling positions so that I am prepared if/when I need to execute that type of shot. Maybe you should try shooting your 72" target bow from sitting in a chair on the line at your blue targets to get a better understanding, but keeping the arrow on an elevated rest may prove difficult.

James


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

J. Wesbrock said:


> Waveman,
> 
> The left/right impact difference that occurs when canting a compound (or Oly recurve for that matter) is the result of the dominant eye and bow sight being moved out of line with the arrow, not how far the arrow is above the hand. A lot of us have/had been shooting instinctively with elevated rests for a long time. It's much ado over nothing.


That is why when canting you are supposed to cant your head/body at the same angle to stay in alingment. Not stand straight up and down and cant only the bow. The reaction of the arrow coming off the different angles of the rest and strike plate when bow is canted changes and so does your impact point. Some of it has to do with the slight different alingment of your body, but if you keep your body/head in alingment with the canted bow the effect is minimized. That is why you see Trad/instictive shooter "hunched over/distorted" not because they are emulating some one or some style, it is because they are trying to stay in as much alingment as possible with the bow.

James


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

James - 

The fallacy (or myth) there is that your "aim" is off the wrist joint, but it's not. Anyone who is shooting consistently is aiming off the arrow, whether they know it or not. If you think an elevated rest throws you off when canting that much, there's something else going on. *Sorry, too many people have done it successfully for too long to debate it now. *

I said the same thing in a previous post. If you choose not to believe it, that's you're call. 

There is no valid reason for not using an elevated rest on a recurve, unless you plan on shooting in a class that doesn't allow them. 
That's the reality. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

weaveman said:


> That is why when canting you are supposed to cant your head/body at the same angle to stay in alingment. Not stand straight up and down and cant only the bow.
> 
> James


Boy, I sure am glad I learned to shoot before Al Gore invented the internet. :wink:

Seriously, some of us have killed lots of game with longer bows. My favorite hunting recurve right now is 67". Like I said, this is much ado over nothing.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

weaveman said:


> If you cant or need to cant the bow to make a shot, the closer the arrow is to the bows pivot point the less affect the cant will have on the impact point of the arrow, period.


That is true if you align a shot, pivot on the wrist, and then shoot. However, if you truly did this, you'd be way off in either case, as the arrow is going to be about 3 inches above the center of the wrist anyway.

But, what actually happens when people cant, is that they pivot the front end along the axis of the arrow, not the wrist, _in relation to the target_.

The idea is sensible, but it also has a false premise.


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm sure you'll do it anyway. A "stickbow and classical archery" is using mostly wood bows and wood arrows, no sights and shooting off the shelf. Metal bows, mechanical rests and sights are not classical. I sight down the arrow using split vison and shoot split fingers. It's my choice to shoot split finger I know that it puts the arrow further under my eye , I am still using the arrow for left/right alingment. I'm am not aiming with my wrist. If everything is still in alingment and I cant the bow the reaction of the arrow is basically the same but on a different plane than with the bow straight up and down. The higher the arrow is above the pivot point the greater the change of plane the arrow is leaving the bow in. To many archers successfully shoot with a canted bow to argue that point now. Howard Hill shot with a canted bow,and schrunched up hunched over form to keep he DL close ro 28" but he maintained his alignment and shoot the way he did. Just because somethings don't work for you or you choose not to do it does not make it wrong or a myth. When I shoot the longer distances 45-50+ yards I strive to keep the bow straight up and down, If I had to cant the bow I wouldn't take the shot in a hunting situation. I agree with alot if not most of what is in Stickbow, but disagree that it is or V1s or anyones opinion or instruction is the only correct way to engage in archery for everyone with/in all types of archery. My own thoughts and methods included. No one is 100% correct and no one is 100% wrong when trying to define archery , a style or technique when applied to anyone, other than the individual applying it to himself. Even then it may be wrong only experimenting with theories and methods and beliefs will you arrive at what is correct for you. But when you apply them to other individuals they will never be 100% correct. V1 put a great book out there with a ton of useful information but believing it is the only correct source is wrong to the extreme. It's not like math where 1+1 is always 2. Individuals vary in shape, size, form style and goals so stating that there is only one way to do things and only one source of correct information and all else is a myth is a blatant misconception. I would be embarrassed it I had to go up against the likes of Jeff Kavanagh or Byron Ferguson with there mythical styles, they could both shoot circles around most if not all of us out to atleast 50 yards and probably further. I am not condoning emulating them but I do condone appling some of what they do and say or at least trying some of it in your shooting where/when applicable to see if there is a benifit towards the individual shooting and shooting goals. 

James


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

Barney, you are correct. If you don't align the whole upper body with the bow including the wrist. But there is still a difference between 3" and 4 - 4.5" all things being equal the effect is greater.

James


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

James,

I'm sorry, but most of the "traditional" shooting advice being bantered around the internet is more about being different than being accurate. But if it works for you, God bless. Best of luck.


----------



## Halfcawkt (Dec 27, 2015)

I love being different. What I have found however is conventional wisdom on form is conventionally wise for a reason. The more I have fought the convention, the worse my accuracy. The more I've embraced it, the more I hit where I want.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

half - 

That's kinda what it comes down to. Sure there are some anatomical variations among people, and they have to be taken into consideration at some point. The fact is that we all (most anyway) have 2 arms, 2 legs and one head connected to a torso, in roughly the same design. The geometry and physics may vary within a small window, but don't really "change". Exceptions are just that, exceptions. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

weaveman said:


> Barney, you are correct. If you don't align the whole upper body with the bow including the wrist. But there is still a difference between 3" and 4 - 4.5" all things being equal the effect is greater.
> 
> James


James, The simple answer is a misunderstanding about center shot alignment. So if you have a riser that's cut past center, allowing for horazontal adjustments. Then there is no reason to cant the bow. If the bow is cut outside then I can see were you require your horizontal adjustment to be more vertical. In turn your point of aim will become more a combination of the two. In terms of eye alignment, windage and elevation.

History, tell you that wood arrow would vary in spine a lot. So to get true paradox clearance out of their arrow, with a outside center shot bow, archer's would cant. You see it today in some high level shooter's only because that is what they learned and they cant very little, if any. They also know how to tune for this setup.
Dan


----------



## fieldnfeathers (Nov 7, 2013)

I don't shoot worth a damn if I cant my bow. Gave up on that years ago. Some people are unbelievably accurate doing it. Sadly, I'm not one of 'em.


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

What is different about tuning for a cant, if you always shoot with a cant? I tune basically straight up and down but hold slightly low and left when shooting with bow canted. Where this got off track is on the benifits or draw backs of shooting off the shelf vs the same when shooting of an elevated or mechanical rest. When shooting off a non adjustable strike plate correct spining and strike plate thickness adjustments determine horizontal impact point, the same as adjusting plunger in and out, tuning does that. The more the center shot is off the more critical the spine of the arrow necessary to center horizontal hits. An under spined arrow can be tuned to hit center horizontally by build the thickness of strike plate up, on an over spined arrow if riser is not cut past center you can not remove enough thickness and your options would be to add weight up front or use longer arrow if you didn't drop spine. A bow with an elevated rest is easier to tune for a wider range of arrow spines and forward weight where a bow that is shot from the shelf with out a readily adjustable strike plate take more effort both can be tuned to shoot equally well.

James


----------



## Sauk Mountain (Aug 3, 2015)

I've never noticed a difference in point of impact shooting with my normal slight cant versus holding the bow straight up and down, so with an open mind, a full quiver, and a backyard that allows me to shoot as far as I want to I went out to do a little testing. I keep yardage marked out to 40 yards and shoot at that distance quite often, so I figured I'd do my testing there. Sunny day, 80 degree weather, very little breeze blowing. Martin Savannah 45# at 28", full length Easton 2216's. Total arrow weight right around 600 grains. No warm up shots to get in the groove. I shot 3 groups of 6, one with my normal shooting stance which is the bow slightly canted with the tip of the top limb around 1 O'clock, standing straight up, another with the bow straight up and down, and another with the bow heavily canted using the hunched over shooting position that you see a lot of folks shooting. Unfortunately, I accidentally erased the picture of the heavily canted hunched over group so you'll just have to take my word for it as I don't have time this afternoon to go out, shoot it again and snap another picture. What you'll notice by the two pictures I have is that there is little to no difference in the group size or impact area that can't be explained by the limitations of the shooter (me) at that distance. They're typical of what I produce at 40 yards, sometimes better, sometimes not. Now for the interesting part, the group I shot with the bow heavily canted and hunched over was all over the place. I actually missed the target completely with one of the shots, it went to the right of the target and killed dirt. So for me, shooting the bow straight up and down or with the bow slightly canted results in about the same group at the distance I shoot at. It's possible that the hunched over heavy cant position is so foreign to me and that is what led to the wild group, but I tend to think that it was the position itself that was the culprit. 
View attachment 4227290

View attachment 4227314


----------



## MarkJoel60 (Apr 21, 2016)

Sauk Mountain said:


> I actually missed the target completely with one of the shots, it went to the right of the target and killed dirt.


The important thing is that you killed it. The last thing you want is wounded and half-crazed dirt thrashing around!


----------



## ghostgoblin22 (May 3, 2013)

I read shooting the stickbow, it has a lot of great information , but I'm pretty much the opposite of what it preaches and I'm a better archer because of it, 
I look at it differently because I come from a golf family, no golf swing is exactly the same



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

ghostgoblin22 said:


> I read shooting the stickbow, it has a lot of great information , but I'm pretty much the opposite of what it preaches and I'm a better archer because of it,
> I look at it differently because I come from a golf family, no golf swing is exactly the same


Can you elaborate? Interested in specifically what you're talking about.

I certainly seem to do better, as do others I know, doing one or two facets differently than 'text book', by whatever book you choose, but on the whole, the fundamentals of our good shots seem pretty similar, even though we come at it from different angles, styles, what have you.

What is it the book is talking about that doesn't work for you, and what does?

For the most part, to me, the book seemed unusually non-preachy, and open to personal implementation.


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

Suak, I don't adjust my hold by mucH about an 1-1.5" low and left from where I would normally hold for a given distance. If I don't arrows will hit about the same maybe a little more high and right. If I was shooting at a 6" circle the arrows would be in the outer ring or barely out of it. But that is me and everyone one is different. I shoot at the 1" orange dot that are used for firearm shooting targets. I pin them to my mostly blank archery targets. 

James


----------



## octocog (May 21, 2015)

ghostgoblin22 said:


> I read shooting the stickbow, it has a lot of great information , but I'm pretty much the opposite of what it preaches and I'm a better archer because of it,
> I look at it differently because I come from a golf family, no golf swing is exactly the same.


For me, using StS as a regular reference and putting the knowledge into practice has made me a much better shooter, even though I am more "trad" and the book skews toward Olympic recurve. I figured that listening to someone who has "the skills to pay the bills" would get me alot further than reinventing the wheel on my own. Same as when I've learned musical instruments >> become good following established, proven fundamentals, then tailor as needed to further improve and suit your personal style.


----------



## berzerk64 (Nov 27, 2013)

This should put all form questions to rest. We're all doing it wrong.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

berzerk64 said:


> This should put all form questions to rest. We're all doing it wrong.
> View attachment 4229298


You mean backwards.
Dan


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

I think he means that we should be shooting Penobscot bows.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

I think he means we all need photoshop.


----------



## cubefx (May 8, 2012)

berzerk64 said:


> This should put all form questions to rest. We're all doing it wrong.
> View attachment 4229298


Funny,

I just rigged the recurve with the whisker biscuit for one of my friends, because she wanted to do that trick in her act.


----------



## berzerk64 (Nov 27, 2013)

I just mean I want her next to me on the line. I won't shoot for anything....but I won't care.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

kegan said:


> I think he means we all need photoshop.


Photoshop can't make my form look that good


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

octocog said:


> For me, using StS as a regular reference and putting the knowledge into practice has made me a much better shooter, even though I am more "trad" and the book skews toward Olympic recurve. I figured that listening to someone who has "the skills to pay the bills" would get me alot further than reinventing the wheel on my own. Same as when I've learned musical instruments >> become good following established, proven fundamentals, then tailor as needed to further improve and suit your personal style.


I really liked the book. Before I found it, I felt like it needed to be written. I had read quite a few books, and went in a lot of different directions. Most of the very useful stuff, I had already, painfully, and tediously, figured out for myself, by trying many other ways first, continual experimentation, grabbing bits of useful details from knowledgeable people I had been fortunate enough to meet etc. There were a few things that were totally knew, but most of what I was reading made me go, "Yeah, me too!" Not that it wasn't useful, or a waste of time. It was really validating to see that a guy who's been at the game for a very long time, a long time ago, had figured out that which from a lot of 'experts' had been steering me away. It solidified my perspective, as much as added to my knowledge base. It's not the only book I'd recommend reading, but it would be the first.

The other thing I like about it, is while it stresses fundamentals, it also is fairly non-denominational about most things. Sure, he's got his own bias about what makes sense, but he also is pretty up front about the fact that somethings will work better for some people than others, some variations have inherent weaknesses that come along with benefits, and why. Reading it, I don't feel like making my own decisions goes against anything that's being written, but rather, it is simply important that I know why I choose to do something one way or another, and what I'm compromising, and I think that is an important truth to recognize. Whatever you're doing, you're making compromises to get the best total result, _for you,_ doing whatever it is _you want to do_ with archery.


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

Well stated, Barney. I only have a couple of questions, would you have known those things that gave you those "aahah or oh yeah" moments if you hadn't experimented and sought information in other sources or only tried things one way? Would you have been able to confirm your findings, theories, causes and effects if you had only read Stickbow or would you have still sourced other material to confirm and understand? 

Using the basic fundementals is important. Being aware of cause and effect is equally important. Experimenting and trying different techniques and equipment is they only way to truly know the results for the individual and if the results are positive or negative for the individual. The way individual archers hold or grip there bows and different types of bow varies across a large spectrum. In the end there is no right or wrong way if the results are positive towards the individuals goals.

James

PS: Where can I get a copy of that woman archer?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

weaveman said:


> Well stated, Barney. I only have a couple of questions, would you have known those things that gave you those "aahah or oh yeah" moments if you hadn't experimented and sought information in other sources or only tried things one way? Would you have been able to confirm your findings, theories, causes and effects if you had only read Stickbow or would you have still sourced other material to confirm and understand?
> 
> Using the basic fundementals is important. Being aware of cause and effect is equally important. Experimenting and trying different techniques and equipment is they only way to truly know the results for the individual and if the results are positive or negative for the individual. The way individual archers hold or grip there bows and different types of bow varies across a large spectrum. In the end there is no right or wrong way if the results are positive towards the individuals goals.


That's a very valid and important point, and I think the fact that you raise it suggests that maybe we've been mixing or crossing signals. I'll let Tony confirm or deny for himself, but the impression I get, reading the book, is that your point is entirely... the point. 

Ultimately, you have to try for yourself, and while it is important, when experimenting, giving the method enough of a chance, and as importantly, _applying it correctly_, we must ultimately evaluate the results, and be free to say, "That particular piece doesn't help me." There are always exceptions, but if we're being honest with ourselves, and by definition, they shouldn't be the norm.

I think the perspectives that sometimes butt heads, so to speak, which don't need to, is the idea that you have to work with what actually works for you, the individual, because you're not somebody else, particularly the expert who may propose this, that, whatever, and the idea that it is of utmost importance to comprehend and implement fundamentals before carefully tailoring aspects you'd consider personal style, or what not.

What often happens, is that one sees the other as either mantle of the inflexible impractical, highly limited realm of the 'target' archer, or the 'neo trad' flannel and fedora swinger who's definition of technique is to begin with unnecessary contortion, and then deliberately ignore everything about the shot process and just 'let the magic in.'

Those extremes of perspective do exist, but not nearly as commonly as we might assume.

I'm coming to learn, very slowly, that sometimes it's better to ask follow up questions, such as, "What do you mean by that, specifically?" before responding to what I think somebody said, because often, particularly when I get that emotional trigger punched, I misunderstood what they meant, sometimes almost entirely.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Sorry, answering your actual question.

If I had only read that book, I think it would have been okay, from a strictly shooting perspective, but eventually other information always comes along. I would still have to try for myself and experiment to figure out if other methods didn't work well for me. Ultimately, it's the same destination, and the same trip. It just would have been a shorter path.

There are still other things in other books, or people, which I have found useful, which weren't in the Stickbow book. I like a lot of what G. Fred writes, particularly from a storytelling perspective, his love for the woods, how much he just enjoys shooting. I really liked Byron Ferguson's book, mostly in that he explained precisely the process by which he figured out exactly what you're talking about, we have to figure out for ourselves what will work best for us. He couldn't shoot well when he attempted to emulate Howard Hill. Similarly, I can't shoot well if I try to emulate either him or G. Fred. I really like the perspective put forward by whichever of the Wensels wrote 'Come November'. He only speaks for himself, but he also speaks frankly, and with experience, with a very much 'whatever works' attitude. All of these are valuable, so long as you can keep them in context.

Hopefully, I understood the question well enough to have covered it with an adequate answer


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

Barney, we are on the same page. My issue, as I believe you understand now is with the stament that the questions, things, styles and techniques that OP and members were discussing are wrong, impractical or myths. That there is only one correct way or source for all archery combined and/or individuals. 

This is what I'm talking about "That particular piece doesn't help" . I would only add " and I understand why". Because we really must understand each process and how it does or doesn't benifit the individual. 

James


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

James, I think you're totally 'on target', so to speak, though I think others were shooting at different targets 

What do we mean by myth?

There is certainly a kind of mythology going on in the 'trad' culture, and there are two different uses of that word that come to mind, to me anyway.

The first is the mythos, the story, the lifestyle, the role-playing, the philosophy. It's about identity and attitude more than it is shooting. It's valuing simplicity, relaxation, socializing, telling stories, fantasizing about living in the 'old' days. I think that's entirely legitimate. When I go to 'traditional only' shoots, I really dig it. We even pretend we're sneaking up on the targets from time to time, tell each other to be quiet, to keep the animal from spooking, since the last arrow that landed in its 'nads might have put him on alert. It is, fun.

The second is a subset of the first, which is, kind of ironically, exactly the fault you're talking about, the mythology of a 'right' way to shoot 'traditionally.' Unfortunately, it gets entangled in the first part, drives some away from the traditional archer community, and hinders a lot of people (most of them by my estimation) from becoming better archers, even if it works relatively well for a few. Admitting to knowing your point on distance undermines your credibility as a 'real' traditional archer. Admitting to knowing how you aim makes you a cheat among some circles, though I'm glad their not circles I frequent.

It's funny that it's the same problem that you're describing from the 'target' community, albeit more rare, in my experience. I once heard a story related from a friend/instructor/high-level competitor, about an olympic coach who was trying to give instruction to a guy who came with his longbow. The coach told him he needed to put a sight on it, or else he would never have any accuracy. Uh.... what? yeah...


----------



## weaveman (Oct 18, 2015)

You understood the question perfectly. The are things in all the books and videos that I agree with or have found to be true for myself. There are also things in those same books and videos that I don't agree with and have difficulty proving for myself. I don't go on a rant about them, instead I am grateful for the tidbits of new information I gathered from each and the reinforcement of the thing I know or believe to be true and useful. Take Byron Ferguson for example, I don't believe that you should intentionally can't the bow to bring horizontal impacts to center, for "ME" tuning the arrow bow combination does that at the position I shoot the most at. With G. Asbel "I" don't agree with bending the knees like he does or atleast as much as he illustrates, it doesn't work for "ME" . These things don't work for me personally as an individual, however I would never tell someone it is wrong for them. It helping other archers I may suggest they try it or I could suggest they try not doing it and let them make the decision of whether anything was gained or not. Getting back to the whole cant or not to cant and elevated rest or off the shelf thing. For an Olympic style shooter there maybe no benifits gained and they are probably detrimental to them. To the Hunter or 3D shooter the benifits could be great. A statement that they are falasies or myths and nothing is to be gained by the individual is like a slap in the face to anyone that has seen benifits using these methods. 

James

We are both posting at the same time 
By "myth" I am referring to V1s use of the word as a discription of some thing that is untrue, unattainable, a falsely, or a fairy tale in as in a mythological tale. 
Not to be confused, I am not meaning "done in a mythical way" . Or emulating something mythical as some of the Trad/instictive shooters are accused of.


----------

