# BEST method and injuries



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Let me begin by saying I KNOW this will be a sensitive subject where some feelings may get hurt. However I think it is a VERY important subject, especially for our youth and elite archers. What is more important than keeping them healthy so they can achieve their goals?

And I would ask that if someone is "tired" of this discussion or just doesn't care, then simply, respectfully, move on. 

Since most of my "injury" related comments on the coaching philosophy thread were either pulled or dissapeared as a result of a mysterious computer glitch (still waiting to hear which one it was), at the request of many I tried to re-create my responses on the "Moderators?" thread. 

I would encourage anyone with ACTUAL FIRSTHAND knowlege of an injury incurred as the result of an archer attempting to learn the BEST method to please speak up. I hope we can see a pattern and head this thing off if at all possible. 

This is the meat of what I wrote: ____________________________


Trying to recall exactly what I posted is impossible, but I think I said that I would recommend to any archer who wanted to learn the BEST method that they find whatever way possible to get one on one DIRECT instruction from coach Lee or possibly Guy Krueger. I've known Guy as long as anyone and really respect and like him, but I've not seen him teach the BEST method to students first hand. That's the only reason I qualify that comment. I have seen coach Lee teach firsthand, and truly believe that he knows his stuff and can help an archer attain outstanding results.

The other point I was trying to make was that I believe an archer who worked directly with coach Lee was less likely to develop injuries as a result of the training, or "switch" from their current style of shooting. Unfortunately, I've seen ample evidence (as have many others who have contacted me personally) that attempting to learn the BEST method on one's own, or with a coach that is not COMPLETELY qualified (and there are more of those than not), can be hazardous. I think it's fair statement to make since so many archers that I know have suffered serious injuries while attempting to switch to the BEST method. Even some of our top senior shooters have been sidelined by injury because of this. This should get ALL of our attention.

Perhaps archers who learn the method from the beginning are less prone to injury than ones who switch from another style. Perhaps other coaches or even coach Lee himself is not able to head off all the problems before they occur. The man does have about 100 balls in the air at the same time! Add to that the fact that just about every archer HEARS the instruction differently, or basic physiological differences between archers, and you're going to get injuries. And we have.

I've known quite a few of the early Jr. Dream Team kids that were injured. Some even quit the program because of it. One I know even stopped shooting because of it. I will not post personal information on this forum however. That is between the archer, their parents and the program.

I had also written that I myself suffered my ONLY injury in a lifetime of shooting when I attempted to switch over to the BEST method. For me, it was an issue in my forearm that resulted from switching tabs and grasping the string differently than I had before. The result was that I couldn't shoot from September of 2006 to January of 2007. At all. It was revealed through an x-ray and MRI that I had an unusual bone spur in my right forearm and that the switch likely aggrivated a sensitive situation. However since 2008, when I decided to switch back to shooting the style I had in '04, I've not experience any pain or discomfort at all. Makes me wonder if it was the method, or my interpretation or both that was the cause. But there is no doubt in my mind that the switch was the problem now. Not the arm.




> Most of the injury stories are pretty old, and have been discussed widely before, so why would someone try so sensor the story now?


Well, it may be old news to you, but that doesn't explain all the PM's I'm getting (even after the posts magically "dissapeared") regarding injuries incurred by archers who've attempted the BEST method. Or all the requests I've received to re-post my comments because of the concern about BEST-related injuries.

I'm sure there are worried parents and archers out there. I am one of them. I saw one student that I sent to the program suffer SERIOUS setbacks due to the program. She eventually recovered (on her own) and is now a VERY competitive junior archer.




> If one could only recover the historical insurance claims for archers at the OTC, we might see a definitive pattern.


C3, I actually thought of that just today. It would be really interesting to see the injury reports and trips to the medic at the OTC in the past several years. And I don't know about you, but I had NEVER seen huge ice packs on archer's shoulders (on a daily basis) until I arrived at the OTC. I still find that unusual. I shot and lived for weeks with many Olympic archers in '04 and can't recall ever seeing ice packs seran-wrapped to shoulders. But just about every RA had them at the OTC, and probably still do. I'd love to hear more explanation (from a qualified physician) about the need for those.

John.


----------



## tjblignaut (Jan 29, 2009)

Hi Limbwalker

I have three coaches at the club I shoot at, with two of them 'teaching' best method and the other did his coaching qualifications in the States. I prefer the 'US' method as it doesn't tinker with my natural instinct too much on how to shoot, I learn't instinctive first. Was being taught Best method, but have problems with the senior coach teaching it so have now moved solely to the coach who did his qualifications in the US. 

Last year end of November while still trying to learn best method, the coach tried to force my right elbow (I shoot right handed) back into the line with the arrow as my elbow was infont of the arrow. This caused an injury to my right shoulder that put me out of the sport for a month and a half. I don't have weak shoulders as I have represented South Africa in Triathlon, and used to swim everyday with the previous German national coach as my coach. I have also done a fare amount of Kayaking. For the month after 'I' injured my shoulder I battled to lift my arm properly and had to support it with my left arm when lifting it. To this day it is still not 100% healed. I'm not sure if its Bursitis or tendon inflamation, but I do know it was because I was trying to force my drawing elbow into the correct line... prior to this I was shooting 320's at 30m, had only been in the sprt 6 months. 
T


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

*Old News*



limbwalker said:


> Well, it may be old news to you, but that doesn't explain all the PM's I'm getting (even after the posts magically "dissapeared") regarding injuries incurred by archers who've attempted the BEST method. Or all the requests I've received to re-post my comments because of the concern about BEST-related injuries.
> 
> 
> 
> John.


What I meant by my "old news comment" was that this is old coaching news. Many of the problems with BEST arose out of a lack of understanding of the proper way to execute the shot early on. 

As an example, early on, archers were rolling their bow shoulder over in an attempt to get into alignment. This will put unnecessary stress on the rotator cuff and can eventually cause injury. This is not the proper way to get into alignment and has *never* been what Coach Lee advocated. If an archer is doing this he (or she) isn't using the proper technique. We now fully understand the implications of rolling the shoulder over and it is to be avoided all all costs!


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

JDT_Dad said:


> What I meant by my "old news comment" was that this is old coaching news. Many of the problems with BEST arose out of a lack of understanding of the proper way to execute the shot early on.
> 
> As an example, early on, archers were rolling their bow shoulder over in an attempt to get into alignment. This will put unnecessary stress on the rotator cuff and can eventually cause injury. This is not the proper way to get into alignment and has *never* been what Coach Lee advocated. If an archer is doing this he (or she) isn't using the proper technique. We now fully understand the implications of rolling the shoulder over and it is to be avoided all all costs!


In college the one of the training guides for physical therapists had detailed sections on counter-indicated exercises, showing the common exercises and stretches that were bad for people. A similar list for archery would be a good idea. I knew that rolling one's shoulder over was bad for form, but I did not know it could lead to injury (I often have to consciously stop myself from doing it when I draw as I try to get inline, now I'll **really** have to avoid it...I've even "caught" a high level shooter / coach rolling his shoulder, which he hadn't realized he had fallen into...)


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

Would it be considered hijacking if I asked by "rolling the shoulder" do you mean in towards the bow, away from the bow, or both?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> This is not the proper way to get into alignment and has never been what Coach Lee advocated.


Which I think was my point all along. At least while I was involved with the program, I had serious concerns that we coaches 1) understood properly what we were supposed to be teaching, and 2) communciated that clearly to the students. I also had serious concerns about what seemed to be an ever-evolving system. A coach had to be there every single step of the way to keep up with coach Lee's newest change. I know I missed several changes and struggled to keep up and provide the proper instruction to the students. So that makes me wonder how well many coaches that received even less one-on-one time with coach Lee are understanding this technique. 

So this is why I can only recommend an archer work directly with coach Lee to learn the BEST method. 

I received a flurry of PM's today supporting the intent of this thread as well as some firsthand information about injuries both at and away from the OTC while students tried to learn the method. Many of those PM's were from folks that didn't want to post publicly due to their position or concerns of retaliation. I think that's too bad, and may potentially harm our sport.

One message suggested that even those archers who were working directly with coach Lee early on suffered injuries, and the OTC trainers were getting more archers in for treatment than any other sport at the OTC, including the rugby and track and field athletes. I'd like to know exactly why that was, and I think it is important that the information surrounding those injuries (and the changes made to fix the problem) are available to the public at large.

Hopefully the issues of injuries and the BEST method is being addressed when new coaches learn the method. It is a serious issue that needs to be dealt with. When I recieved my training, the only thing we heard about injuries was that the BEST method should REDUCE the number of injuries because it is biomechanically efficient. Sounds good, but just the opposite was true in practice based on my observations. I saw a disproportionate amount of injuries with archers attempting to learn the BEST method, many of whom were residents at the OTC. Some of those archers are no longer shooting because of those injuries, or had to sit out for long periods to recover.

We should be able to at least discuss this and see where the proble lies so we can prevent injuries for archers who want to learn the BEST method.

I think we've established the fact that here in the U.S., the talent pool is not deep enough for us to sustain injuries to our most talented archers. We simply cannot afford it.

John.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

I once was told *ANY* form is good form as long as it:

1. Does not cause you harm

2. It is repeatable

Do we get too hung up on *form over function*?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

target1 said:


> I once was told *ANY* form is good form as long as it:
> 
> 1. Does not cause you harm
> 
> ...


Archery is a detail oriented sport. It is kind of hard not to get caught up in the details


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Target1,

I think we can easily answer that question by looking at the past 4 men's Olympic champions... 

Huish, Fairweather, Galiazzo and Ruban. 

Roughly speaking, they represent the four major techniques used in the world by elite archers. I think that's as good a lesson as us coaches will ever see.

John.


----------



## Spiderkiller (Jan 30, 2007)

*error*



JDT_Dad said:


> This is not the proper way to get into alignment and has *never* been what Coach Lee advocated.


This is inaccurate. I sat in two seperate seminars that coach Lee gave in 2006 where he was explaining the best method. Three things stood out in my mind in both off the seminars. 1) He said that the Korean technique was wrong. 2) He said by turning your head and keeping your eyes straight, it made your bow arm stronger and 3) Rotate your elbow and bow shoulder to get into alignment. This was clarified directly when a person in the crowd asked how to get the bow arm correct.

I asked in a previous thread, has there ever been an independant study on this technique to prove whether or not it is indeed biomechanically effecient. Does anyone have hard data or facts on this?


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

*Toward the Bow*



InKYfromSD said:


> Would it be considered hijacking if I asked by "rolling the shoulder" do you mean in towards the bow, away from the bow, or both?


I was thinking "toward the bow" as this is how many people try to get both shoulders into alignment with the bow arm. They "roll" the bow arm scapula towards the bow _by itself_ in order to facilitate alignment. This is incorrect as the pivot point is really the spine. The entire upper body rotates around the spine which moves the bow shoulder toward the bow, and the draw shoulder away from the bow. The bow arm scapula in _not_ rolled over.

Moving the bow arm scapula away from the bow would make it impossible for most archers to achieve alignment of the shoulders and bow arm so I have never seen anybody attempt this.

Hope this helps.


----------



## gig'em 99 (Feb 1, 2008)

I have a tid bit to add to this: When I first started studying BEST, and exclusively learning from "Total Archery," I felt I had a firm grasp on the technique. The pictures made sense, I noticed improvements in my shooting. But over a few months, I then noticed minor pain in my bow shoulder and significant pain in between my bow arm (left) scapulae and spine. When I was setting up, trying to align my shoulder properly, unbeknownst to me, my bow shoulder was falling to far forward, towards the path of the string. I wasn't hitting myself with the string, as the better posture taught in the BEST still prevented me from any string slap or contact with my chest. But that bow shoulder was slightly forward of the line. It created some very strange pressures around my rib cage in by back. And took me 3 weeks of no shooting and intensive PT to get back to 100%. 

All of this gets me to a bigger and more important point about the HP Certified coaches...and in particular the ones that are able to be involved in the JDT. Here in Austin, one of the HP coaches, who is also fortuntate enough to be able to attend and coach at the dream team camps, very quickly spotted the problem at the end of a tournament...the last time I shot for 3 weeks. But his assessment was spot on. I hadn't seen it in the videos that I took of myself becuase I didn't choose good angles, and may not have noticed the subtle problem anyway. But here in a moments evaluation by one of Coach Lee's "certified HP coaches," the problem was diagnosed and the correct way to set up demonstrated. It helped me a lot.

So I'm not saying that everyone who's sat through a Ki Sik seminar is capable of doing that, but with the regular exposure to his method, and his coaching, it makes the other HP coaches, and certainly the JDT coaches better skilled at spreading the correct message. Maybe not every nuance, but close.

In a subsequent sit down conversation with this local HP coach, I found it very interesting that Coach Lee is far more concerned with the PRINCIPLE of the method, not necessarily the specific step by step. So I asked the question, "Is it more important THAT I'm getting in line, or how I'm getting in line?" The answer I was given was...THAT I'm getting in line.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Spiderkiller said:


> This is inaccurate. I sat in two seperate seminars that coach Lee gave in 2006 where he was explaining the best method. Three things stood out in my mind in both off the seminars. 1) He said that the Korean technique was wrong. 2) He said by turning your head and keeping your eyes straight, it made your bow arm stronger and 3) Rotate your elbow and bow shoulder to get into alignment. This was clarified directly when a person in the crowd asked how to get the bow arm correct.


Watch what Lee does. He has never rolled his shoulder toward the bow in any demonstration I have seen. None of his Australian archers do either. Coach Lee rotates his entire upper body around his spine during the second set/setup to achieve alignment, he does not roll his bow arm scapula toward the bow.

This is a prime example of how two people can watch a demonstration and come away with differing conclusions as to what is being said. Yes the bow arm shoulder does move toward the bow, but not because it is being rolled over into the bow but because the entire upper body is rotating. There is a difference.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

In traditional Asian culture, the teacher choses his students. The student does not chose the teacher. An outsider has to prove his dedication and earn the trust of the teacher to be accepted as a student. When he becomes a student, he learns without question and does what he is told. When accepted as a student, he will forever represent his teacher and his teachings. 

The problem these days is pride. No one what to be told otherwise (especially over here by an Asian guy!). Everyone says they are willing to learn but keeps comparing back to what they did in the past. When there is no immediate satisfaction, it must the the coaches fault for I (or my kid) am the best and can do no wrong.

So you learn from a 2nd or 3rd party coach and injure yourself. Someone has to take the blame for it! Can't be one's self, must be the teachings of the guy who created the method! Some even claim to be taught directly under the founder. I think until someone who is willing to forget all past teachings and immerse themselves completely in the teachings of the new coach, day and night, everyday; can they then comment on his method.


----------



## Xcreekarchery1 (Aug 7, 2007)

i have been coached by caoch lee several times at JDT camp and at his last seminar which i attended to help. there is no conceivable way that you can injure yourself by being biomechanically efficent... its just not possible. thats the most important part of the shot. if it hurts you cant be doing it right, email him mabye heil watch a video and he can tell you whats making it hurt, he did for me. upon switching to B.E.S.T i notced a pain in my rear shoulder, i talked to him and he told me how to swith what i was doing to what is actually best method. So if you are hurting you cant be doiong it rite. The reason people were getting hurt before was because of little things that coach figured out that people werent doing, little internal things that you cant see. he fixed that with what is now extra set, he did not change best at all he just relized that people werent doing it. Since extraset people have had no injuries and scores have shot up. When i was there the past JDT camp the only injury there was me, because i was doing it wrong. the person at sports med told me that she had watched what he coaches and at first was alittle weireded out so she did some reseearch in her Med. books. turns out that she really liked what he was doing and said these words " it takes a real coach to come up with this, and en even better caoch to teach it to different people."


----------



## Spiderkiller (Jan 30, 2007)

JDT_Dad said:


> Watch what Lee does. He has never rolled his shoulder toward the bow in any demonstration I have seen. None of his Australian archers do either. Coach Lee rotates his entire upper body around his spine during the second set/setup to achieve alignment, he does not roll his bow arm scapula toward the bow.
> 
> This is a prime example of how two people can watch a demonstration and come away with differing conclusions as to what is being said. Yes the bow arm shoulder does move toward the bow, but not because it is being rolled over into the bow but because the entire upper body is rotating. There is a difference.


He may not be doing that now, but I was at both of the seminars when he said this is what you do. Again, I sat there and listened to him answer the man's question in the crowd about how to get the bow arm correct. The individual asked do you rotate the elbow out to get the shoulder to rotate in alignment. Coach Lee answered yes. There was nothing misinterpreted on my part in listening to that answer.

Maybe the reason the form has changed from when it was initially introduced was because of the shoulder pain and/or injuries that were initially developing do to this teaching.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Xcreekarchery1 said:


> So if you are hurting you cant be doiong it rite. The reason people were getting hurt before was because of little things that coach figured out that people werent doing, little internal things that you cant see. he fixed that with what is now extra set, he did not change best at all he just relized that people werent doing it. Since extraset people have had no injuries and scores have shot up. "


I would like to expand on what was said above. The extra set in NOT a change to what Lee has been demonstrating and teaching all along. He simply added a verbal explanation to what he was demonstrating so that more people would understand what he is looking for. It is not a change, but simply an amplification to what he has been teaching all along.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Spiderkiller said:


> He may not be doing that now, but I was at both of the seminars when he said this is what you do. Again, I sat there and listened to him answer the man's question in the crowd about how to get the bow arm correct. The individual asked do you rotate the elbow out to get the shoulder to rotate in alignment. Coach Lee answered yes. There was nothing misinterpreted on my part in listening to that answer.
> 
> Maybe the reason the form has changed from when it was initially introduced was because of the shoulder pain and/or injuries that were initially developing do to this teaching.


This is really off topic, but I'll try one more time.

I think we are talking about two different things. You are speaking of elbow rotation and I am speaking of rotating or rolling the scapula. Two totally different pieces of the body. 

You do have to be careful that you do not roll your shoulder over when you rotate your elbow, but that is a different story.

This is not a form change as you suggest but rather a misunderstanding of the system. Either you misunderstood the answer, or Lee misunderstood the question, but you never roll your scapula toward the bow. 

By the way, this is not new to BEST. It has never been a good idea to roll your bow shoulder toward the bow, no matter what system you are using. Take a look at the Australians if you don believe me. You won't see them rolling their scapula toward the bow and they have been using Coach Lee's system for much longer that we have. 

Believe your eyes, be skeptical of what you hear. It has served me well.

I promise to stay on topic in the future.


----------



## Spiderkiller (Jan 30, 2007)

Actually, I think that this is right on topic as it has to do with potential injuries, but I do think it is really useless to argue what was said in the mentioned seminars as not everyone was there to witness what Coach Lee explained. I do know that there has been a substantial difference in the manner the technique is being taught now compared to what was taught in the very beginning. 

The original explanation based off of what I viewed and what was said, is that the elbows pronation of the horizontal plane created an internal rotation of the shoulder. This combined with the teaching of tightening of the tricepts creates a scapular protraction (the scapula moving away from the spine) which would place the Infraspinatus, Levator Scapulae, Teres Minor and Posterior Deltoid at risk for injury. This IS what was taught in the original seminars back in 2006. 

From what I am seeing, this IS NOT what is being done now. I guess there is still hope for progress. 

It would be great to get factual data from the OTC on injuries to help put all of this to rest. 

Cheers.


----------



## Huntmaster (Jan 30, 2003)

Spiderkiller said:


> It would be great to get factual data from the OTC on injuries to help put all of this to rest.
> 
> Cheers.


You'll never get any injury reports from the OTC, guaranteed. I don't blame them either. It is simply not in the interest of the program. If someone in the know wants to step forward and confirm the decrease of injuries, that would be another thing. Releasing medical information is against federal law anyway, and can be a lightening fast path to serious trouble.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Releasing medical information is against federal law anyway


Yea, personal records, but not statistics from programs I don't think. Otherwise, how would the sport be able to say where we rank in injuries per participant related to other sports? I think we certainly could get an injury report from the OTC without any personal information attached. Maybe a FOIA is in order? If the OTC is even subject to them. Man I hate FOIA's though...

I sometimes wonder what Barnes, Cuddihy Fairweather and Marcus must think when (if) they read all this stuff. 

Are we repeating what went on in Australia already, or is this a new morph. And if it is a new morph, then why aren't we just doing what the Aussie's did. Seemed that a few of them "got it" just fine...

What do you say Barnsey or Marcus?

John.


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

Relasing personally identifiable information is strictly forbidden. Releasing statistics on the types and numbers of injuries isn't. Why wouldn't they keep statistics? Are they afraid of what the stats might show or they just don't care or are the numbers so miniscule there's nothing to track?


----------



## Xcreekarchery1 (Aug 7, 2007)

Spiderkiller said:


> He may not be doing that now, but I was at both of the seminars when he said this is what you do. Again, I sat there and listened to him answer the man's question in the crowd about how to get the bow arm correct. The individual asked do you rotate the elbow out to get the shoulder to rotate in alignment. Coach Lee answered yes. There was nothing misinterpreted on my part in listening to that answer.
> 
> Maybe the reason the form has changed from when it was initially introduced was because of the shoulder pain and/or injuries that were initially developing do to this teaching.


he has never done this, i dont know where you got mixed up. he may have said rotate, that means rotate your whole body so that your shoulders are not parrell to the target, it is actually closed to the target. this is not rolling your shoulder over and in because everyperson he has taught hasnt done this. i agree he can be hard to understand at times but i know that he wuldnt say roll you shoulder over. its just not him


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

If I may be so bold and please excuse my lengthy response. :embara: First of all, it has been really hard for me to log onto the AT system. For some reason it kept bouncing me out for over two weeks (I think it is that conspiracy theory! :mg 

John, I have noticed lots of injuries as well. There were two issues I felt that needed to be researched in order to figure out what could be done about these “above average” injuries. First is the biomechanical issue. As we have all agreed, when using biomechanics, it should be less stressful on the body. However, many of the adjustments used to fit into BEST method could be less efficient and more stressful on the body, or at least from what I have seen. However, I agree that when an archer does it right, it appears to be a fairly strong form style. It’s just rare to see it being used right! Have 10 people listen to and be taught by Lee and they will give you 10 different results. This does not point the finger at Lee. It is human nature to try to analyze and digest what is said and then interpret into your own understanding. Now, I have studied many arts of archery, the biomechanical, the physiological, the psychological and the psycho-physiological aspects of our sport (not to mention the equipment part! :zip. I have talked with 100’s of international coaches and professional scientists about the understanding of our body and how it works when shooting a bow and arrow. Some of the comments that Lee has made in his lectures of explaining the biomechanics has been, for lack of the right communicative word, controversial. I have attributed it to his grasp of the English language and him trying to explain a very difficult subject in his secondary language. It is hard enough in the first language let alone a second one. This leads me to believe that we are not getting the full understanding of what he wants to communicate. However, that is just the way it is. Eventually it will be learned and fully understood in time. Those willing to stick it out and believe in it will be potential leaders in the future, if this is the “magic” potion that proves to be the future.

For those of you who get frustrated by others who question the method, you should be thankful that these discussions get hashed out and rehashed. This makes the person who wants to explain this method to figure out how to use better tools of communication. Eventually you will get it right and those who question it will understand it better. However, if it is wrong, you will figure that out as well. 

For those who think it is nothing but pride to argue a potentially good program. All of these folks on here have a love and passion for the sport and want to do what is right. If this program was such a fantastic program and “biomechanically efficient” then it would have been easy to have lots of champion shooters. Thus this program appears to be just another method that works good, like how Darrell did it, like how John Williams did it, like how Jay Barrs did it, and others who climbed the ladder of success doing it “their” way. 

Now, the second reason for the possibility of injury. When I was at the OTC I, with several other coaches we were shown the strength training program for the archers. This is something that Lee does not get involved with since he feels that the strength trainers are the professionals of “strength” training. What I saw was a perfect place for injuries. The methods used were of a typical testosterone leaden group of guys/gals who wanted to show off their capabilities and wanted archers to be “he-men”, so to speak. I think the bulkiest champion archer over the past 50 years was Victor Sidorik of the former Soviet Union who won the World Championships in 1973. It required brute strength to fight the gale force winds and rains during the event. After him, most of the male champions were of the meso-ecto (muscular-skinny) frame with the exception of Michael Frangili and Mr. Galieozo (sp) (meso-endo) frame or… fluffy frame…. . Some of the archers are at fault due to them rushing the physical training, but realistically it was a program I would NEVER advocate. You should not need much strength anyway if this program is so biomechanically efficient! You may need endurance but not brute strength. If you need a lot of strength to shoot the shot over and over again, then there is something wrong with the system you are using. In my humble opinion…. :embara: 

And finally, for those who are worried that they will be banned, blackballed, or ordered to Gitmo (that’s a joke – just in case you take it seriously) if they speak out against the program. With Denise Parker in charge of the USAA, there has been a lot of repairing of burned bridges. You should not fear that anything will happen to you except to be listened too and issues to be addressed. The new leadership has an open door policy and Denise’s concern for members, coaches, archers, kids, and the rest of us who are square pegs trying to fit in a round hole are heart felt and wants to move the organization forward.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> However, I agree that when an archer does it right, it appears to be a fairly strong form style. It’s just rare to see it being used right! Have 10 people listen to and be taught by Lee and they will give you 10 different results. This does not point the finger at Lee.


Rick thank you for your reply and I want everyone to understand that I could not agree more with the above statement. I want to be clear in my support of coach Lee, the program and his development of a good shooting method, whatever we end up calling it. But it would be irresponsible to ignore significant injury issues we've seen as coaches. And folks need to be fully aware going into it that there is clearly that potential if they do not receive the proper instruction. 

As for the rest of what you wrote, well, you've squarely hit the nail on the head and explained the situation as it stands far more eloquently than I ever could. That is one reason why you are my archery hero.

Thank you.

John.


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

Injuries can happen when ever you make changes to your shooting technique, no matter what the method is. Making a change often requires the use of new muscles or muscle groups. When archers try to make these changes, especially before they really understand the technique or have the coordination to do it correctly, they will be more prone to injury. It's like giving a new archer a 45 pound bow! Coaches need to start their students on new technique first without a bow, then with a stretch band or string loop, builidng up strength and getting the technique right. Then they may move to a light weight bow, or lighter limbs in their competition bow, working up to their competitive weight. These changes can't be made in a day or even a week. It takes months, and possibly years to make some form changes.

At the first sign of PAIN it's time to STOP and evaluate. Make sure that the technique is being done correctly. Don't be afraid to get another coaches opinion, or send a video to the OTC for a look. Pain is the first sign, and if stopped soon, it will often prevent injury. Continuing to shoot with pain, means you're doing something wrong and an injury will occur, often requiring surgery and/or a long rehabilitation process.

I find that often there is just too much tension from trying to force new technique. Just getting the archer to relax will sometimes stop the pain.

Regarding the RA's ice packs - they're just giving you the cold shoulder.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Regarding the RA's ice packs - they're just giving you the cold shoulder.


Funny Lloyd. 

Were those common during your time there? I can't recall seeing archers all iced up anywhere else before that, but I have seen a few since (I think as a result of seeing RA's with ice packs on their shoulders...).

Even when I was training hardest, shooting hundreds of arrows/day from a 52# bow, I never felt the need to ice my shoulders. Heck, I even started out with a 56# Gold Medalist recurve (didn't know any better then) and other than fatigue, didn't really have a reason for ice or a heating pad. 

John.


----------



## Guest (Jun 11, 2009)

I have looked at the BEST method and brought all available information to my Chiropractor, he spent several days looking at the system its alignment and function, looked at how it affects the body/muscles etc in the short term and long term.


his words to me were " you people actually do this to your body and joints on purpose ?"

his feelings were that it could produce stable short term frame work for a young archer that in time will deteriorate exponentialy later.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Rick McKinney said:


> IIt’s just rare to see it being used right! Have 10 people listen to and be taught by Lee and they will give you 10 different results. This does not point the finger at Lee. It is human nature to try to analyze and digest what is said and then interpret into your own understanding.


Hmm...but for a program to be rolled out nationally, through multiple iterations of proxies, shouldn't it be such that it is robust enough and have enough check sums and error tolerance that it will still be safe and effective in the form it reaches the general public? Everyone seems to agree that Coach Lee's is a great coach, but the BEST system seems not to be well suited to propagation through proxies, so while it may work well in the OTC where people get hands on tutelage from the master, it increasingly sounds like a bad idea to roll out BEST nationally until it can be made safer when propagated and more self-sufficient from Coach Lee. If Coach Lee were to leave now, what would we have? A system that only he can teach, and no him to teach it?

...just wondering...


----------



## monty53 (Jun 19, 2002)

Warbow said:


> Hmm...but for a program to be rolled out nationally, through multiple iterations of proxies, shouldn't it be such that it is robust enough and have enough check sums and error tolerance that it will still be safe and effective in the form it reaches the general public? Everyone seems to agree that Coach Lee's is a great coach, but the BEST system seems not to be well suited to propagation through proxies, so while it may work well in the OTC where people get hands on tutelage from the master, it increasingly sounds like a bad idea to roll out BEST nationally until it can be made safer when propagated and more self-sufficient from Coach Lee. If Coach Lee were to leave now, what would we have? A system that only he can teach, and no him to teach it?
> ...just wondering...


You would have to rely on his book,” Total Archery”, which leaves a lot to your own interpretation!


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

monty53 said:


> You would have to rely on his book,” Total Archery”, which leaves a lot to your own interpretation!


Well, there is also his new $65 book, _Inside the Archer_, coming out later this month. It is co-written with long time student of Coach Lee, and self-publisher, Tyler Benner. Looks like it will be a gorgeous and informative book, if rather more expensive than any other archery tome I know of.

http://www.astraarchery.com/Inside_the_Archer.html

But with all these warnings about how easy it is to mis-interpret Lee's nuanced system, I wonder if it is wise to try and learn anything about BEST from a book?


----------



## tylerbenner (May 29, 2009)

Ice packs are suggested by all physical trainers to alleviate swelling and prevent injury. After an 8 hour day of shooting, it is a good idea to ice, even if you are not experiencing any pain or discomfort. Physical exertion builds up acid in the muscles and causes miniature tears. Icing helps neutralize swelling and flush out any contaminants. It is the job of the trainers at the OTC to remind athletes to take care of their health: hence, ice packs.

Nearly every athlete at the Olympic Training Center (of any sport) either uses the ice bath, ice packs, ice massage, etc.

Recovery is just as important an element of training as the actual training.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Tyler, thanks for the explanation. That does make sense. Guess I never heard that while I was there, but then I don't recall asking either. Just remembered that being the first time (and only place) I had seen it.

Not being argumentative here, but should weightlifters then ice themselves after a day at the gym? Because I've not seen that. I have heard (and spoke to first hand) of runners taking ice baths after training. Maybe it's the same theory. One of the 5K runners I met at the Olympic village would be sitting in a tub of icewater nearly every afternoon at the training building. Looked dang uncomfortable but when I asked her about it, she said her legs would be "dead" without that treatment. 

Makes me wonder why I never saw any of the archers in Athens iced up too... Perhaps they did after they got back to their rooms? But then, our archers never did.

John.


----------



## northpawmom (Apr 26, 2009)

I wouldn't even try to pretend that I know the "Best" method.  My daughter uses it daily, and is being taught by Coach Lee. When we first started using the "Best Method", after Coach Lee's first Best method seminar at Lancaster Archery; What I heard alot of was "bone on bone". I heard that it wasn't so much muscle. I also remember that he said that it was important to work on your core muscles so that it would be easier to use the "Best method "correctly. I didn't see anything about this in the above posts. 
I do know that working on your core muscles is alot of work, and some are very hard to work on, they need some specialized exercises to make them stronger. 
I know my daughter has had a few ice packs on her shoulders.  She has not had any terrible injuries, just occasionally some overuse,:sad: and when she is not doing the "Best method" correctly is when she gets the pain. That is her que that she has to change something in her form. :set1_chores030: I know that working with the "Best method" she has gone up 11 pounds using "bone on bone". 
Maybe one of the above coaches could explain the bone on bone thing.


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

Archers have been icing their shoulders for as long as I can remember - part of preventative maintenance, as Tyler explains. We have always had some injuries, and many will just be from just repetitive use. I know some athletes that used Ibuprofen quite a bit. That's why I say it's important to make athletes aware and evaluate everything at the first sign of pain. Proper warming up and stretching before and after shooting is also often skipped even though it is critical for preventing injuries. Strength training is also very important.

Bone on bone - or using bone strength as opposed to muscle strength. I use an exercise where I have the archers hold a stretchband out in front of them with both hands. Then they pull it apart until they get to a T position. Of course they all relax at that time. I ask why - and they guess... The stretch band is now at it's furthest distance and heaviest weight, but it is easy to hold for a long time. Move forward just a little bit, out of line, and it becomes very difficult to hold. This is how you use bone strength instead of muscle strength. You should feel like you are inside the bow - inside the pressure of the bow. That's what good line (or alignment) is all about.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I know some athletes that used Ibuprofen quite a bit.


Guess that's always been my approach. Never even thought of ice.



> You should feel like you are inside the bow


Lloyd, that's a great way to describe it. Mind if I use that?

John.


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

> Lloyd, that's a great way to describe it. Mind if I use that?


Sure. I stole it anyway. I heard that Hardy Ward described it that way. The demo with the stretch band really drives it home for the kids.


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

Well, I'll give my one cents worth - take it or leave it.

First off I am not HP certified - indeed as far as actual certifications go I'm NADA level I for a few more days (I can't remember to call them to find out about renewal, I run out on the 20'th). I would *love* to be higher but have not had the conjunction of time or money to go through the courses (I've always had one or the other) - if certs mean something to you quit reading.

So we first need to define exactly what "bio-mechanically efficient" means - we all seem to be using the words in the same way but with different meanings. Efficient with respect to injuries, score, length of time in archery, seerity of injuries, something else, or a combination of those?

Really - we may have a system that is bio mechanically efficient with respect to the number of injuries but have one major one later in your life that ends your career. You may have a system that you shoot until the day you die in your 110's yet have a fairly regular strain on your muscles. While it is usually so that "bio-mechanically efficient" works across most cases it almost never does across all. As far as I can tell BEST is focused on winning the Olympics - given what the desire was that is perfectly fine but for many out there that may not be the focus. I have not seen much said that didn't have the focus on Olympic Gold and high end shooting.

IMO BEST pushes the focus of the stresses to stronger parts of our body but parts that heal slower. That is it is less liekly to have the small injuries common to archers and is VERY steady to hold, yet long term archery as a enjoyment is detrimental as the injuries are less likely to be recovered from. That is with respect to effeciency to number of injuries and ability to shoot well it is *great*, with respect to long term shooting it is not. This is assuming you do the over all talk of transferring forces where he says - more on that next.

Next we have how easy is it to accomplish? For the sake of argument say that BEST is truly the best system out there no matter what your goal is- indeed lets say it is so far beyond everything out there that you could expect to never have a problem (obviously not true, but for this argument les pretend it is). Now - how easy is it to achieve? From what I have read minor changes result in many small injuries and many major. Unless you have regular access to someone with deep understanding (and that requires regular trips to the OTC) then you can expect to get hurt. Is this hyperbole? Dunno, but so far the supporters of the system seem to be saying so - unless you have regular visits with Lee or his protege's you are likely to get into a situation that will cause injury. Since the vast vast majority of us will *never* do that (some may be lucky enough to get a single class with one of his protege's when attending coach's clinics). When discussin Olympic hopefuls then regular trips are expected - my students want to hunt and shoot in local tournaments and that is an unacceptable requirement. You can have the best method in the world that solves everything but if only 5% of the people can do it and the rest get hurt all the time, well, it isn't too useful outside of those 5%.

Lastly what the above two things seem to suggest to me that the system is *not* going to be widespread in the US. I can not, and will not, argue with it's successes. I also will not argue with nearly every statement Lee makes. The system most definitely moves stresses from weaker parts of your body to stronger ones. It also definitely creates a VERY stable platform to shoot from - it's successes in tournaments is pretty much impossible to argue against. 

My issue is with long term shooting of the form and how exacting it has to be. As a general form taught by all NADA instructors/coaches I think it is going to cause harm - indeed I see the supporters saying something similar with respect to the ability of most people to teach. As far as long term consequences go it hasn't been around long enough so time will tell there - I personally hope to be wrong there.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

strcpy said:


> From what I have read minor changes result in many small injuries and many major. Unless you have regular access to someone with deep understanding (and that requires regular trips to the OTC) then you can expect to get hurt. Is this hyperbole? Dunno, but so far the supporters of the system seem to be saying so - unless you have regular visits with Lee or his protege's you are likely to get into a situation that will cause injury. Since the vast vast majority of us will *never* do that (some may be lucky enough to get a single class with one of his protege's when attending coach's clinics).


I can see how somebody reading this thread might come to the conclusion that access to Lee or one of his protege's is necessary to avoid injury. This fear is just as unfounded as the ice pack story is. 

Most who participate in the sport are doing so on a recreational basis. They are shooting 30 to 100 arrows per week. They are not Olympic hopefuls shooting 300 to 1000 arrows a day 6 days per week. 

The two levels of shooting have very different outcomes when committing a major form flaw which may cause injury.

If you are shooting 30 to 100 arrows per week I would argue that you are more likely to suffer injury by turning your ankle on the range than you are if you are committing a major form flaw. You just aren't shooting enough arrows to severely injure yourself. Any level 1 or 2 instructor is going to be satisfactory for the casual shooter, even if the instructor isn't up to snuff on the details of the BEST method.

On the other hand, if you are serious about the sport, your need for good coaching is going rise, not only to prevent injury, but also to improve your game. When the number of arrows go up, you don't want to be committing any major form flaws as you are far more likely to injure yourself if you do. This is not unique to BEST, it is going to be true for any method you are shooting.

This is why we have the various levels of coaching. We do not demand a high level of knowledge from our level 1/2 instructors because a high level of coaching skill isn't necessary to safely instruct archers at this level of activity. (Before I get flamed, yes I know that some very skilled and capable instructors aren't even certified).

So relax, teach your hunters how to shoot with the BEST form, they won't need to go to the OTC because they aren't training like Olympic hopefuls. They are training to be hunters and hunters aren't going to be shooting 300/day arrows from their tree stand and if the do they should take up another sport:mg:
[/QUOTE]


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> The demo with the stretch band really drives it home for the kids.


Yea, I can see why it would. Thanks.

JDT Dad, 

I can only conclude that your last post was directed toward me, with the reference to coach Lee or his protegee, and the ice pack comment. I guess you can believe what ever you want. My opinion still stands, that if someone wants to learn coach Lee's method, they need to be working directly with him. I was the first person Tom P. and coach Lee asked to be a Junior Dream Team coach in 2006. Some of my personal students were on the first JDT roster. I attended and coached at two of the first three JDT camps and continued to work with JDT archers and at least two RA archers through the first two years of coach Lee's time here in the states. I know what I saw, and it is the basis for that statement. Take it however you wish. I can elaborate on that if you need me to. I also know what I was being told by the JDT students and parents that confided in me.

I have no idea where you're going with the "teach your hunters" comment. For starters, the BEST method would never work in real hunting situations for about 100 reasons. If you were an avid traditional bowhunter you would know that already. I also find it laughable that you assume hunters don't train like olympic hopefuls... I know many traditional hunters that shoot more arrows than members of USAT or CERTAINLY the Jr. Dream Team. That comment is way off. In fact, most serious traditional bowhunters shoot hundreds of arrows/week because they love the sport and the flight of the arrow, and yes, they are constantly trying to improve and understand more.

I've fielded many, many questions and had serious discussion on traditional forums about traditional bowhunters learning the BEST method. You would be surprised just how serious a lot of those folks are about improving the quality of their shooting.



> they won't need to go to the OTC because they aren't training like Olympic hopefuls.


This Oly. hopeful never even saw an OTC prior to traveling to the Athens games. So, remember, there are plenty of ways to get there. All our Olympic hopefuls (of which only a few have been to the OTC) need to be aware that they have options. Working with coach Lee at the OTC is a very good option, and one I still recommend, but it is only one of many options.

John.


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

JDT_Dad said:


> So relax, teach your hunters how to shoot with the BEST form, they won't need to go to the OTC because they aren't training like Olympic hopefuls. They are training to be hunters and hunters aren't going to be shooting 300/day arrows from their tree stand and if the do they should take up another sport:mg:



My IGNORE list just keeps growing and growing...


----------



## tjblignaut (Jan 29, 2009)

Okay i'm by no means near the level of a lot of commentators on this forum and have not been involved in the sport for too long but I personally believe that archery form is WAY over complicated, similar to golf. There are fundamentals and correct me if i'm wrong, but those fundamentals can be counted on one hand. The rest comes down to natural ability and practice. As far as i'm concerned you can take someone who has never shot a bow and teach them the perfect form, whatever that maybe, but if they can't shoot they can't shoot. 

As far as the bone on bone argument goes, surely the reason we have muscles and tendons is to support and stabalise the joint areas? And the muscles and tendons are there to protect the joints from bone on bone contact? Is this correct? Surely bone on bone contact will eventually lead to serious injuries at a later stage? 
Tim


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Yea, I can see why it would. Thanks.
> 
> JDT Dad,
> 
> ...


Actually, the post was directed at strcpy. 

Strcpy said "my students want to hunt and shoot in local tournaments and that [seeking out Lee] is an unacceptable requirement". So that is where my reference to hunting comes from.

From this statement I inferred, perhaps incorrectly, that his students are not shooting all that much. Strcpy also brought up a concern about everybody will have to visit the training center if they want to shoot with the BEST system. I was merely pointing out that not all archers train with the same level of intensity, and hence my comments about different coaching requirements for different levels of archers. Not everybody is an Olympic archer or Olympic hopeful. 

Please forgive me if I have slighted any traditional bowhunters. The original poster said he had a target audience which included hunters. Most of the hunters I know really don't practice very much, and certainly not as much as the JDT's or RA's that I'm familiar with. I'm sure that is not true of all hunters shooting recurve or traditional. My apologies to those I insulted, it was just my feeble attempt at humor. I hope most readers realized this. 300 arrows from a deer stand seemed pretty funny to me.

I do not disagree that the more serious students of BEST should seek out the finest coaches. I just don't think those who are just beginning their journey into the sport and BEST system need to seek out Coach Lee. That IMHO is just silly. We have different levels of instruction and coaching for archers of different levels of skill. I think it is wrong to leave beginning level archers with the impression that they need to seek out Coach Lee. They don't, and they shouldn't fear injury either.


I am fully aware that there are many paths to the Olympics Games. Some will use the OTC some will not. Some will use BEST, some will not. For those who are seeking higher levels of performance, yes they do need to seek out higher levels of coaching, but not everyone needs (or even wants) to seek out Coach Lee. I was just trying to point this out to stcrpy in my last post.

John, I'm sorry you took it personally. 

Dave G.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

InKYfromSD said:


> My IGNORE list just keeps growing and growing...


I think JDT Dad may just be unfamiliar with how hard many hunters practice, as John has pointed out. When I go to the range, hunters out number target shooters, and many of them are very serious and very good. And there is overlap, people don't have to be one or the other.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Warbow said:


> I think JDT Dad may just be unfamiliar with how hard many hunters practice, as John has pointed out. When I go to the range, hunters out number target shooters, and many of them are very serious and very good. And there is overlap, people don't have to be one or the other.


Warbow, you are right, and had I thought about it a little longer, I would have realized it also. At my club, we have about 250 members, all but a handful of which are compound, traditional or barebow shooters. The best of them do practice, but most do not. It is a club dominated by older folks who just like hanging out with other shooters. That's fine, but I should never have implied that all people involved in this side of sport don't work hard. That was never my intention, but I managed to do a pretty good job of it.

If you read my reply to stcrpy, I think you can see I was just trying to point out the fallacy of the argument of having to go to Coach Lee to learn BEST even if you are just beginning or not shooting all that much.

It was a poorly crafted response and for that I apologize.

Dave G.


----------



## archerymom2 (Mar 28, 2008)

Although -- 300 arrows from a tree stand would be a pretty good cardio workout!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I just don't think those who are just beginning their journey into the sport and BEST system need to seek out Coach Lee. That IMHO is just silly. We have different levels of instruction and coaching for archers of different levels of skill. I think it is wrong to leave beginning level archers with the impression that they need to seek out Coach Lee. They don't, and they shouldn't fear injury either.


When you qualify things that way, I agree with you. When I say that an archer would be best served (at the present time) by working directly with coach Lee, I mean those who are seriously training with international competition in mind and in their immediate future. Hopefully soon we will have some very well qualified coaches who understand coach Lee's method and can instruct a student without risk of injury. Maybe we already have a few. I would think that Guy Krueger would be qualified by now, and since I'm familiar with Guy, I would recommend him to any archer who asked me. I simply don't know other coaches who I can say with certainty understand FULLY coach Lee's teachings. But then I've also been away from the program for almost two years now, and a lot can happen in two years. There is no doubt in my mind there are a few coaches out there that believe they are fully qualified to teach the BEST method, or coach Lee's method. Whether they are or not is up for debate. Only coach Lee could answer that.

On another note:

I want to back up and recognize Alexander Kirillov as another elite coach here in the U.S. that I had included in my original "short list" (the one that was deleted). I failed to include him in my re-post and that was just a oversight. One could argue that he's produced as many world class archers here in the U.S. as any coach. And I think he's a good guy. I'm sure a lot of folks don't care one way or the other about my opinion on qualified coaches, but I've spent the past 5 years paying closer attention to this topic, and I've learned a few things. Unfortunately, aside from Rick, few of the "true" experts on Olympic coaching in the U.S. ever post here - so you get what you get 

John.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

archerymom2 said:


> Although -- 300 arrows from a tree stand would be a pretty good cardio workout!


That is kind of what I was thinking when I posted the remark. I had a vision of some poor guy missing the deer 299 time on opening day when I wrote the initial comment.:mg:

I hope nobody on the board has actually done that. 

My initial post was a bad attempt at humor gone terribly wrong.

Dave G.


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

inkyfromsd said:


> my ignore list just keeps growing and growing...


+1


----------



## crownimperial (Jan 26, 2009)

Well lets face it, archery is all about consistency it doesn't matter which method you use as long as you do it the exact same way every time. The KSL shot cycle or "Best" method if you will, is a method which i believe makes is easier to duplicate the same thing again and again and again. The reasons for injures in the method in my opinion, is the coaches who are trying to teach more of it then they understand. Now dont get me wrong there are many amazing coaches out there, its just that IMO the KSL method is a somewhat hard method to understand and really grasp at times. Its almost imposable to completely as they are still tweaking aspects of it. But i can honestly say i have switched to this method and i have had a wonderful coach too tooter me in it, one of the best actually. Not ounce did i get hurt or injured switching, and i consider it to be the best decision in my archery career, as i have so much more strength an stability and consistency then i did with my older form. If anyone that may be reading this and wanting to switch or think about it, i would honestly recommend it too you. But make sure you get a couch that understands what is being taught. Im not saying to go out and find the best coach im saying look around do some research an find a good recommended coach for your personal needs weather it be for fun or if you really want to get serious. epsi: 

(i know i am new to this forum and i hope i dont get riped for this i just thought i would share my personal experiences with switching to the KSL cycle and also some of my views on it)


----------



## massman (Jun 21, 2004)

*Any method, Any coach*

I've been reading these post over these last few days and holding off in commenting....

Unless I have missed it I have not seen anyone comment on the archers responsibility for any injuries. Yes, No? Do they have a percentage of responsibility in this? If mis-instructed and that mis-instructions as dilligently followed by the archer causes the injury then NO. If however the instruction is correct and is not followed then again what percentage of responsibility does the archer own?

When I'm coaching I'm always making sure that the archer is performing their form as best as can be done. However a classic injury is the archer striking their bow arm elbow. Now we all know what the simple fixes are for this in the predraw and what muscles to use to keep the elbow in position. However that does not stop some students from deviating and causing themselves an injury.

That is a simple example for the seriousness of the injuries discussed within this topic. But I hope it will allow some to look at the situation in a different light or perspective. 

BEST Regards,

Tom


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

JDT_Dad said:


> If you read my reply to stcrpy, I think you can see I was just trying to point out the fallacy of the argument of having to go to Coach Lee to learn BEST even if you are just beginning or not shooting all that much.


My personal experience with the system is that it caused shoulder injury. The general solution was to go see someone who was recently HP certified by Lee. That what I was doing wrong was subtle and it needed that level of attention. That is, for the most part, the answer given many times here. I'm not a serious shooter, 50-100 arrows a week. I have students that shoot more than I do. I've never had that problem with the more classic "T-stance".

I tried to learn by reading all the books I could find, watching videos, and such things. For the traditional forms that was perfectly fine, I could shoot well without any real injuries (or rather the ones I got were my fault). I could also teach it quite well and as I continued working at coaching certifications there was little new content. Not that I wasn't learning things in those classes and knew it all, but it was a refinement.

OTOH we have generally established (not just this thread) that is not going to be the case with BEST, that the nuances of the form are what goes from injuries to long term stability. Even for recreational archers this is going to be the case. I've been told numerous times - and I believe them - that my own personal problems would go away if I went to some courses. I do not think that is acceptable for widespread teaching and, in fact, I note that the NAA's and Lee's focus is on Olympic Development - hence I will not complain about it. However a great deal of the people being told that is the solution *are not* serious competitors, truly serious competitors should be doing that no matter the form used anyway.

That is what I meant in that section. As said there are hunters that practice as much or more than a large portion of tournament archers. To tell them that their local instructor is no longer any good and they have to go to Lee or one of his protege's is not acceptable. To tell that level II or level III that in order to coach well they are going to have to be that protege is unacceptable. This is especially true when we start talking about real injuries here from subtle changes - this also means that you need *regular* visits.

Now, to be fair, the none of the orgs are saying that, the closest is the NAA and nearly their entire focus is on Olympic development, the above mentioned hunter is following the wrong org in that case. It has been the community in general doing that. The best advice I got was to not use BEST, my end goals were not going to be well met by it. If I really wanted to use it (for whatever reason - at some point I will pay to attend a training camp for a coaching cert just because I want too) then I needed to pony up the time, money, and dedication needed - that is also a valid answer. I *should* have been told that from the start, instead I was simply told it will solve everything if I only go see XXX coach that I couldn't remotely afford as an actual coach anyway. I figured that, like the older T-method, I could figure it out from reading and asking on the internet. 

That, I believe, also leads to many of the reported injuries because it is *not* a realistic answer to most people and they keep plodding away at something doing real damage to them as they are assured it will work one day. They would be better served by going back to the older T form until/unless they decided to be truly serious about tournament shooting. Maybe one day there will be so many HP certified coaches that it becomes cheap and easy - heck I will one day go do mine and I donate my coaching time anyway nor am I alone in that, but until then I think what I said above will hold more true than not.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Pls note that if you all are talking about inner rotation of the bow shoulder and possible damages coming from improper use of this tecnique, I have to point out that:
- Inner rotation has been noted to be used by some Korean male archers back to 1989, in my memory
- Tecnique has been investigated deep in many countries. In Italy, it was decided at that time that it was too risky to teach and to use , and not suggested to coaches
- Ukraina went to adopt it for several years, mainly dedicating it to women with valgus elbow. from 1999 to 2004 several Ucrainian girsl were using the tecnique, wwre the most famous was Katarina Paleka. But, after some unknown problems, the technique has been abandoned there.
After the appearance of Total Archery, several archers and coaches have tried (again) the technique, also in Italy, while the probelms that could come out from its improper use were well known. Some have been successfull, some others have had to stop because of injuries, some others have modified it to reduce the risk. So, the full rotation technique is now usually applied "half way" with non complete inner rotation. This hibrid tecnique is nothing new, and limits the rotation of the elbow to keep its inner part vertical instead of looking downword lik in the full rotation tecnique. But, it is more difficult to control and frankly I find it an hybrid solution with no real merit. Anyway, it comes helped by the use of very high gip profiles (that automatically make the shoulder rotate in some way) and so is now very popular. 
Personally, I have experimented in the past the inner rotation of the front shoulder with several archers, mainly to solve valgus elbow probelms, with limited success. 
In one case only I have been totally successfull, solving the problem to a women that was at that time member of the Italian National team and I was personally coaching. She has been able to change from the low shoulder to the inner shoulder rotation in less than six months, without any injury, while also keeping with the new shoulder position the pushing technique she was using since childhood.
But, I have to add, apart from solving almost all string interference problems to her bow arm, after the change she was simply back to score at same level as before (around 1300)
Still I think that this technique is difficult to teach and to control, and needs the supervision of a very skiled coach. Because of this and of no evidence that you can get much more higth results with it in comaprison to others, I don't see any merit in its use, if not necessary for other reasons, as mentioned. Risk is not related to results, so why?

Pls note that my comments are limited to the front shoulder-inner rotation tecnique, with no relationship to the so called "BEST" tecnique, that as far as I understand also involves many other steps than this one, only.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I'll add to Vittorio's comments that the vast majority of the information I've received about injuries since this discussion began (and I've learned about 15 or so injuries to well known archers, many of which I didn't already know about) have to do with this rotation of the front shoulder. Clearly this is a problem and I hope that it has been addressed. Most likely it already has. 

When I was learning the BEST method myself, I could tell this rotation was going to present a problem for me. It was painful from the very first time I attempted it. The injury I suffered in my right forearm interrupted the process of learning the method, most likely saving me from injuring my front shoulder if I had really pressed the issue. But as much as I don't like the idea of having pain when I shoot, I doubt I would have gone much further with it. 

Tom, with adults I agree with you. However, I don't place much responsibility with the archers who I know have been injured. They are mostly younger students - teens and early 20's - and they are doing exactly what they were told as much as they are able to understand it. Most of these kids aren't experimenting on their own. However, in some cases their personal coaches are experimenting without proper training, and that's the part that worries me.

John.


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

If these comments are directed at me I'll answer - for me it was both shoulders. As I read now yes my inner shoulder rotation was off and that may have very well been the cause of *both* issues. I'm not very motivated to try again until I pay for a HP certification course and get the training for myself - I learned not to simply go by reading. At my point in life I do not need a few weeks to recover from an injury that could have been avoided.

I will say to Limbwalker's last comment I have *never* tried to teach BEST to its fullest, if I can not do it myself and do not understand it to that extent I *will not* teach it (I do not think his post was directed at me, but I will answer). If I do run across a student that is truly capable of going as far as they want (and like most I have had a few, though none want to go further than local so far) I figure I will give them a basic form education (while for me that means I teach the older T method I also make them aware of BEST and tell them to read as much as they can and I will answer any questions I can or point them to people who will/can answer things I can not) and spend time dealing with mental which I *can* teach, that isn't much different from BEST and the older T form. I figure that if I adhere to the principle of "do no harm" they can go as far as they want.

In fact I will say that there are many ideas that cross from the BEST system back into the older T method and I use them myself and talk about them to my students. So I am definitely not against the the whole thing. I *really really* like his description of a breathing/shot cycle and I have found many of his exercises to be VERY beneficial no matter the form. I probably personally shoot and teach 90% of the BEST system and find it in many ways superior to the teaching given before (then again I will say many of those old books give a great deal of insight when taken with those BEST techniques too), at the least it is quite structured so that students will not have hard issues if/when changing coaches..


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Hmm....all of the talk sort of begs the question of how BEST/KSL Shot Cycle varies from classic T stance archery, and what specific differences are significant. So far the possibility of rolling the front shoulder, whether by design or accident and either grossly or subtly "internally", seems a major issue related to BEST to be aware of, as people try to get their bow arm in line with their back. Is that an accurate summation?

What other aspects are controversial vis-a-vis possible injuries?

When people say that many archers are responsible for their own health/injuries then I say I need more empirically verified information to help me prevent them. I think that USA Archery should be on top of making such information available, especially as they roll BEST out nationally...


----------



## Flint Hills Tex (Nov 3, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> So this is why I can only recommend an archer work directly with coach Lee to learn the BEST method...
> 
> I received a flurry of PM's today supporting the intent of this thread as well as some firsthand information about injuries both at and away from the OTC while students tried to learn the method...One message suggested that even those archers who were working directly with coach Lee early on suffered injuries, and the OTC trainers were getting more archers in for treatment than any other sport at the OTC, including the rugby and track and field athletes...When I recieved my training, the only thing we heard about injuries was that the BEST method should REDUCE the number of injuries because it is biomechanically efficient...
> 
> John.


Exactly! I'm not a coach, nor an expert archer, but I am in orthopedic nursing, and treatment of rotator cuff injuries is one of our specialties, so I'm pretty familiar with the pathophysiology. The shoulder is the most "flexible" joint in the human body, permitting more range of motion/ROM than any other. The rotator cuff is a very important component in shoulder movements, and any damage to it causes pain, loss or restriction of ROM and can become irreversible. Today's reconstructive surgery can help alleviate the pain and restore restricted ROM, but the shoulder will never be the same.

Damage can be caused by sudden trauma, degenerative tendonopathie or sub-acromial impingement. You can't do much to prevent the degenerative stuff, but that doesn't usually become an issue until an archer reaches his/her mid to late 40s. Sudden trauma can definitely occur during archery training, and is almost always due to a *non-physiological* strain! Impingement is most commonly the result of the build-up of a bone spur on the acromion, the part of the scapula which, together with the clavicula and humerus comprise the shoulder joint. This bone spur is in turn the result of repeated or chronic inflammation of the shoulder joint, caused by *non-physiological* strain!

If the archers learning the BEST method are experiencing even minor pain in either of their shoulders, I seriously doubt that the method is then truly biomechanically/*physiologically* efficient. Physiological movements are not painful! If the only way to learn the BEST method correctly (i.e. without the danger of injury) is to learn it directly from Coach Lee, then I see a great problem for the USArchery recurve program. 

I also question the wisdom in locking in young archers nationwide to just coach Lee's method. I'm sure that many coaches who want their students to have a chance at making the US team will adopt the BEST method, figuring that will improve their chances. If, however, the method is in fact not based on sound physiological principles and leads to injuries, the coaches may be inadvertantly ruining their students' chances!


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

I'm just wondering ...... all these talks about injury with this coach Lee's method ...... were there no injuries associated with the previously popular method?

Sounds to me like this new method is to be blamed for all the injury incurred in this sport, so it makes me question if the previous method was faultless in this regard.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Good question for Lloyd there... 

How common were trips to the trainers before? Were ice packs a common treatment required by the RA's in the past? 

It would be nice to see a comparison of a lot of things at the OTC, pre and post program change. Injury rates would logically be one of the items on the priority list. What is more important than keeping our top talent safe from injury?

A robust and professional program would welcome an opportunity to show progress I would think.

John


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

I'm not sure the mere account of ice pack or icing is a very good indication of injury.

I think in all sports, at olympic standards, its very hard to avoid injuries. Using ice is both a preventative measure as well as a recovery accelerant. 

Just because someone use ice doesn't mean much. I'm sure athletes in other sports use much more ice and other stuff during their training than archers. Is that to say their program is flawed? 

I just think this is part of the risk when your pushing the limits of your sport to be the best in the world.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

*The Ice packs have been explained*



limbwalker said:


> Were ice packs a common treatment required by the RA's in the past?
> John


I think the ice packs have been explained:



tylerbenner said:


> Ice packs are suggested by all physical trainers to alleviate swelling and prevent injury. After an 8 hour day of shooting, it is a good idea to ice, even if you are not experiencing any pain or discomfort. Physical exertion builds up acid in the muscles and causes miniature tears. Icing helps neutralize swelling and flush out any contaminants. It is the job of the trainers at the OTC to remind athletes to take care of their health: hence, ice packs.
> 
> Nearly every athlete at the Olympic Training Center (of any sport) either uses the ice bath, ice packs, ice massage, etc.
> 
> Recovery is just as important an element of training as the actual training.


I have no reason to doubt Tyler Benner's explanation. The ice packs are used by the RA's at the request of the trainers, and not required by the RA's because of injury. They are used as an aide in the recovery phase of the training cycle and can help prevent injury.

For those of you who don't know Tyler Benner, he was a long time RA at the OTC and is the co-author of KiSik Lee's new book on the BEST method. Having been an RA he is familiar with why the ice packs are used.


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

You'd be seeing more heat packs than ice packs if there were injuries around.


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

*some observations*

Good coaches are good at recognizing easy, smoothly functioning mechanics/performance in their students. 

A good base of knowledge in anatomy/kinesiology/movement mechanics etc. in general isnt needed but it sure does help when wading through sporting movement and the tensions present in those movements.

When a good coach sees someone struggling with the BEST method red flags go up because they can see and sense the inefficiency of the unfamiliar movement. This may be because the movement is new and not well practiced. It may be because the movement is painfull. It may be because the movement is difficult (for hundreds of reasons). A good coach should be able to figure out what "it" is and what "it" means. Good archers might communicate more with their coach and with or with out a coach a good archer should learn more before moving on.




To me, it looks like the BEST method is best for those people who already move in very efficient (non-painful) postures and are injury/strain free.

It might NOT work best for a hunch backed, chicken necked, flat footed, knock need archer with scoliosis, winged shoulder blades and a broken hand from from punching the wall after shooting worse from reading to much free archery advice. 

BUT THERE MAY BE ANOTHER "BEST" METHOD FOR THE POOR GUY





People who have spent life times ingraining any postural inefficiences/faults, be the fault born of injury, deformation or habbit, may have a hard time employing what we all commonly refer to as "good form" and in some cases "good form" might be the WORST form. THIS IS TRUE OF ANY MOVEMENT IN ANY SPORT.



Almost anyone can observe that MOST olympic athletes have very efficient movement mechanics. These mechanics are displayed during sport, walking and at rest. Not all elite level athletes are put together perfectly but most of them mostly are  

As a matter of fact most high-caliber athletes, would they have trained as much in another sport as they had their own, would be amazingly talented in that sport. 



I am describing "faults" or inefficiencies as something that has the potential to cause strain in the system--thus forcing some kind of adaptation in the system (which may or may not need to be delt with)--im NOT describing a fault as a fault in ones being  . I think faulty people are neat!


having a postural fault does not always prevent someone from achieving mastery in sport. The neat stuff, the stuff you cant see, has a lot more to do with mastery than replicating some perfect and ideal form which is based upon a perfectly put together body.

Fundamentals first--then good training based on INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE AND REACTION TO THE TRAINING..

Now, if ya got all the invisible tools and happen to be put together great and are the product of great training..then you are probably going to have some tremendous ability. Most of the Korean archers tend to fall into this group. So do most american football running-backs.. its because they gravitate towards the AVAILABLE AND POPULAR sports in which they can accell.

Form is one aspect and one form is not applicable to all. You may, through massage and stretching and proper training be able to get closer to the BEST method as its layed out but observe there is still variation amongst top archers--even those who shoot with the same style.

someone else already said this and i agree : good form is pain free form that allows you to improve.

even small changes in deeply ingrained patterns/forms should be delt with intelligently. the recommendations above for swithching to a lighter wt bow when making ANY form change would probably go a long way in reducing injury.

just observing,
ryan

ps i hate the term "bone on bone". muscles, tendons,ligaments and their facia hold your bones in place as far as i can tell. bones dont stay in shooting positions because they are lined up in some particular way--it just takes a lot less muscular effort when they are.

ice baths, ice packs, ice massage, and contrast showers (hot to cold--back and forth) are a great way to promote recovery. that being said if you NEED an ice pack on your owie all the time then figure out whats causing the owie.


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

*hmmm*



ryan b. said:


> To me, it looks like the BEST method is best for those people who already move in very efficient (non-painful) postures and are injury/strain free.


im not saying what im trying to say:darkbeer:

if its working dont fix it might apply..


one is going to have less trouble implementing bio-mechanically efficient shooting technique if one is already bio-mechanically efficient in the ideal way. if you are bio-mechanically correct strain with this system should be low. most people are NOT.

giving a shot at "fixing" whats "wrong" may or may not be worth it depending on the archers goals.


----------



## Flint Hills Tex (Nov 3, 2008)

*Is going for the gold worth the sacrifice?*

I'll admit that athletes striving to rise to the top will be more prone to injury than those persuing archery as a leisurely pasttime. Yes, you see this phenomenon in a lot of the olympic venues, but then again, archery is not per se a dangerous sport (as long as you stay behind your bow), compared to, say, soccer, Judo, ski jumping, etc.

I still maintain that, while any athlete can injure him-/herself in any sport, archery is a sport that, if practiced properly, DOES NOT commonly result in injuries, even at the olympic level. Anybody out there who could give us some insight into other nations' olympic training programs? Are they experiencing similar injury rates?

I recently saw a documentary on previous olympic champions from former Communist Block nations. Even without doping/steroids, some of those athletes are crippled for life. A Chinese gymnast, now about 30 years old, walked stooped with swollen, rheumatic joints. She looked more like her own grandmother.

If a particular method, in this case the BEST method, is leading more archers to injury than to olympic gold, we need to be asking whether it is worth it!

Why have other nations stopped their BEST training programs? Why can it apparently only be effectively taught by Coach Lee? Why are the Koreans still winning, even though they eschew the BEST method?


----------



## Huntmaster (Jan 30, 2003)

Flint Hills Tex said:


> I'll admit that athletes striving to rise to the top will be more prone to injury than those persuing archery as a leisurely pasttime. Yes, you see this phenomenon in a lot of the olympic venues, but then again, archery is not per se a dangerous sport (as long as you stay behind your bow), compared to, say, soccer, Judo, ski jumping, etc.
> 
> I still maintain that, while any athlete can injure him-/herself in any sport, archery is a sport that, if practiced properly, DOES NOT commonly result in injuries, even at the olympic level. Anybody out there who could give us some insight into other nations' olympic training programs? Are they experiencing similar injury rates?
> 
> ...


OK, I've stayed quitet for long enough. First off, Coach Lee will be the first to tell you that this is NOT the Korean method. The Koreans use their arm to draw, and are not achieving the alignment that is possible with the BEST method.

It seems to me that the blame is going on the BEST method. I'll be the first to admit that there are a couple things that I don't agree with, but then again I do..........I've implemented the same thing accomplished slightly differently in my daughters shooting in specifically 1, possibly 2 parts of the shot.

The draw: What are you fools talking about rotation is bad???? Just how many of you shoot a compound? How many have seen compound shooters? Do they not rotate in the draw? Come on, just because you don't understand how to do it, doesn't mean it's bad. Oh, and by the way, NONE of those compound shooters have even worked with Coach Lee, so it's not him teaching this, but he's apparently not the fist one to include it either.

Now I'm not saying rotation in the wrong way is good here. Don't mistake me by any means. I suppose if you tell me rotation of the arm in the shoulder socket is bad, I might agree with you (there's going to be a slight ammount anyway, but neglagble).

Do we really know what the BEST method is? Maybe we should have a quiz? Who here is qualified to give it?

So where does the fault lie? Some in the teachings? Possibly some in the athletes? Maybe the blame is on the system. Hey, if you're being taught by "one of the worlds top coaches", how influencing is that to make you press ahead hoping the pain you're feeling is temporary? How stuck are some on getting a certain "look" as opposed to looking for unnatural motion in the archers interpretation?

Yes, archers have been hurt. I've also seen some of those archers, and I can't imagine where they picked up the interpretation that I saw. Is it really the method, or is it the archers, or possibly the coaching they're receiving? Is turning a kid loose on their own for a week or more at a time good for the archer? Can they really implement these things without the help of a coach? How many shots does it take to make a bad habit, and how many does it take to break an old one? Even one day with an improper interpretation is enough to screw someone up for quite some time. Believe me, I know.

So here’s some food for thought. Is it really one method? Is it partly the KISS method? The BEST method? The compound method? McKinney's method? Some other method that you want to name? What’s really involved in shooting a good form? Is the good shooter just one that ‘gets’ back tension (this is a misnomer if I ever knew one)? You see, for every archer, there is a different idea of form. I don’t care if it’s all the same form. I can tell my daughter something, and to someone else, it makes absolutely no sense. So if that’s the case, lets blame the coaches as well for the injuries, not to metion the archers for not being able to understand what is being given them.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I think the ice packs have been explained:


Yes, they have - very well by Tyler as you pointed out. But if you read my question, you'd see I was asking whether Lloyd would care to comment on how common this was during his tenure at the OTC. I wasn't looking for another explanation. 

JDT, you seem too sensitive to the ice pack issue. It is something that has stood out in my observations while being around world class archers and students for the past 5 years. Nowhere else did I see huge bulging ice packs on archers shoulders. So while I did appreciate Tyler's explanation, I guess I'm wondering why I've only seen this practice at the OTC since the arrival of the BEST method. I wasn't at the OTC before then obviously, but there are those who were and they could comment on this. Lloyd said earlier that icing was common, but wasn't specific about whether it was used or was necessary at the OTC during his time there. That's all I was wondering. I'm not trying to accuse anyone of anything. Just trying to learn. If there has always been a pattern of icing archers shoulders at the OTC, even before the BEST method instruction, then that tells me that more archers need to consider this practice, and we need to get that information out there to the recreational archer who decides to train as hard as the RA's, if even for only a short while. In fact, it may be even more important to them.

During my instruction in the BEST method, the subject of icing never came up. The subject of injury almost never came up either, except to say that there should be fewer injuries using this method. However, both items are right there in front of us to either ignore or deal with.

So, that's why I think it's important to answer the question of whether this is a recent thing related to the BEST method, or if it was common before then. And if so, why aren't more archers learning and using this practice...

John.


----------



## 6X60 (Jan 5, 2009)

Until someone has some kind of injuries per training hours statistics to report then all we have is anecdotal evidence, which means very little.

Let me add a little more. 

It seems to me, as an observer not particularly close to the whole process, that one thing that hasn't been considered is whether or not total training hours are up. I'm guessing that RA's and JDT'ers are training much more under Coach Lee than they might have been were he not here. I know one young man local to me that is passing on shoots he normally attended to train at the OTC. From what I gather he's shooting a lot more there than if he had been at the shoots.

Anyway, if training hours are up injuries would surely be up as well.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

*But I did read the question*



limbwalker said:


> Yes, they have - very well by Tyler as you pointed out. But if you read my question, you'd see I was asking whether Lloyd would care to comment on how common this was during his tenure at the OTC. I wasn't looking for another explanation.


Actually I did read the question fully. I saw that Limbwalker wanted to compare ice pack use over time, presumably to see if one could make any conclusions about injury rates (present vs the past) from the use of ice packs. If that was not what Limbwalker was driving at, my apologies, it wouldn't be the first time I made invalid assumptions on AT.

I am just trying to point out that it would make no sense to study ice pack use over time because according to Tyler, the ice packs aren't directly related to injury. If most of the ice packs used at the OTC are for helping the body recover from exercise more quickly, how can we draw any conclusions about injury rates by studying the numbers of ice pack used? This just doesn't make any sense to me.

I also read Tyler's response to mean that ice pack use is being driven by the trainers preferences, and their desire to help the athlete recover from exercise more completely and quickly. I would welcome the input of a trainer in this discussion. Have the methods of helping athletes recover from exercise changed over time? I am not a trainer, so I don't know.

Just so everybody is on the same page here is what Tyler said:


tylerbenner said:


> Ice packs are suggested by all physical trainers to alleviate swelling and prevent injury. After an 8 hour day of shooting, it is a good idea to ice, even if you are not experiencing any pain or discomfort. Physical exertion builds up acid in the muscles and causes miniature tears. Icing helps neutralize swelling and flush out any contaminants. It is the job of the trainers at the OTC to remind athletes to take care of their health: hence, ice packs.
> 
> Nearly every athlete at the Olympic Training Center (of any sport) either uses the ice bath, ice packs, ice massage, etc.
> 
> Recovery is just as important an element of training as the actual training.


Here are Lloyd's comments on the topic:


Lloyd said:


> Archers have been icing their shoulders for as long as I can remember - part of preventative maintenance, as Tyler explains. *We have always had some injuries*, and many will just be from just repetitive use. I know some athletes that used Ibuprofen quite a bit. That's why I say it's important to make athletes aware and evaluate everything at the first sign of pain. Proper warming up and stretching before and after shooting is also often skipped even though it is critical for preventing injuries. Strength training is also very important.


Perhaps ice packs were not as common at the OTC several years ago, because the trainers at that time didn't prescribe ice for people who are not injured. Perhaps the trainers were pushing ibuprofen instead as Lloyd seems to indicate. Perhaps now its just common accepted practice to use preventative ice packs/baths for all sports as Tyler indicated.



limbwalker said:


> JDT, you seem too sensitive to the ice pack issue. It is something that has stood out in my observations while being around world class archers and students for the past 5 years.
> John.


Yes I am sensitive to this subject partly because I think far too many people reading posts about ice pack use are going to start equating ice pack use with BEST method injuries. All the evidence and experts so far says their use is primarily preventative. It is the implied, but unproven connection of increased ice pack use with BEST method injuries which is bothering me.

Most people on this board don't know me, but I have a stake in finding out if the BEST Method causes injuries. This is because my daughter attends training at the OTC. She is at the OTC as we speak for another 12 days of training. So if there were any truth to the ice pack story, lets just say I have a vested interest in find out the cold facts. I am certainly not interested in brushing this subject under the rug as it has real meaning to me. I just do not find the icepack story very compelling.

The ice story just needs to melt away (sorry about the bad humor).

I think the most efficient way to find out about injuries would be to simply ask the Aussies. They have the long term experience with Coach Lee's system which we in the US lack. How about it Limbwalker, do you have any contacts in Australia? Surely you must know someone who can answer these questions about injury rates. Lets see if we can get some real credible numbers behind all this talk.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

JDT_Dad said:


> I think the most efficient way to find out about injuries would be to simply ask the Aussies. They have the long term experience with Coach Lee's system which we in the US lack. How about it Limbwalker, do you have any contacts in Australia? Surely you must know someone who can answer these questions about injury rates. Lets see if we can get some real credible numbers behind all this talk.


Except that Lee's system is always evolving, so what they did and do right now isn't necessarily an analog. And in the US, USA Archery is trying to roll BEST out nationwide through multiple iterations of proxies--and all the evidence in this thread is that BEST isn't really an objective method that can be effectively taught through proxies but is, instead, includes rather nuanced application of Coach Lee's prodigious personal insight with individual archers, a skill that only a few other coaches can implement.

Whether or not anybody believes that BEST is causing, or will cause, more injuries to archers the fact is that possible injuries to our best Archers, and to our aspiring archers nationwide, is just too important an issue to ignore. USA Archery and the USOC need to look into this issue objectively, and should issue public findings because BEST is taught to the **public** and the issue is not just some private, inside baseball at the OTC.


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

limbwalker said:


> <snip> During my instruction in the BEST method, the subject of icing never came up. The subject of injury almost never came up either, except to say that there should be fewer injuries using this method. However, both items are right there in front of us to either ignore or deal with.


In one of your earlier posts, you mentioned a runner in an ice bath at the OTC. That is very common among distance runners, especially after a medium to long training run of 13 miles or more. The ice helps heal the microtears in the muscle fibers, cut down on swelling, and remove the lactic acid that builds up. It sounds awful but you only do it for 10-15 minutes. It feels pretty good after the initial shock and speeds recovery. Kind of like the bag of frozen peas, if you've been there done that. I wasn't aware that the 5K crowd did it though. I'm hoping the archers are using it as a preventative measure rather than as a remedy.

It would be nice to get some hard data on the injuries and either lay this to rest or have the issue elevated to a level that it deserves. Since long term data on B.E.S.T. won't be available for quite some time, at least here in the US, I think we should err on the side of caution when it comes to our future archers.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Warbow said:


> Except that Lee's system is always evolving, so what they did and do right now isn't necessarily an analog. And in the US, USA Archery is trying to roll BEST out nationwide through multiple iterations of proxies--and all the evidence in this thread is that BEST isn't really an objective method that can be effectively taught through proxies but is, instead, includes rather nuanced application of Coach Lee's prodigious personal insight with individual archers, a skill that only a few other coaches can implement.


Warbow, 
I'm not sure where you are getting this impression.
Even Limbwalker admits he believes that only an advanced archer making a run at international competition needs to seek out Coach Lee.

In a previous post I said:

"I just don't think those who are just beginning their journey into the sport and BEST system need to seek out Coach Lee. That IMHO is just silly. We have different levels of instruction and coaching for archers of different levels of skill. I think it is wrong to leave beginning level archers with the impression that they need to seek out Coach Lee. They don't, and they shouldn't fear injury either."

Limbwalkers reply was:


limbwalker said:


> When you qualify things that way, I agree with you. When I say that an archer would be best served (at the present time) by working directly with coach Lee, I mean those who are seriously training with international competition in mind and in their immediate future.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

JDT_Dad said:


> Warbow,
> I'm not sure where you are getting this impression.
> Even Limbwalker admits he believes that only an advanced archer making a run at international competition needs to seek out Coach Lee.
> 
> ...


I'll let John clarify what he means, since I can't be sure. I'm not sure that John is saying that beginning archers can't be hurt by the BEST system as taught by low level coaches trying to teach BEST, rather that only advanced archers will get the most benefit from personal instruction from Lee.

When BEST is rolled out to the nation through multiple iterations of proxies it would be extraordinarily foolish to put our heads in the sand and ignore potential injuries from the "improper" teaching of BEST, improper teaching which is *guaranteed* to happen given the many nuances of BEST.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

*This shouldn't be so hard....*



Warbow said:


> I'll let John clarify what he means, since I can't be sure. I'm not sure that John is saying that beginning archers can't be hurt by the BEST system as taught by low level coaches trying to teach BEST, rather that only advanced archers will get the most benefit from personal instruction from Lee.


Fair enough


Warbow said:


> When BEST is rolled out to the nation through multiple iterations of proxies it would be extraordinarily foolish to put our heads in the sand and ignore potential injuries from the "improper" teaching of BEST, improper teaching which is *guaranteed* to happen given the many nuances of BEST.


I have never suggested we put our heads in the sand and ignore any problems. I would rather see hard facts before people jump to any conclusions. Verifiable hard facts seem to be in short supply where the injuries are concerned and especially in this thread.

I think people are over thinking this whole issue. If you do something which causes pain, STOP. Your body is sending you a message. You are doing something wrong! If your coach can't help you eliminate the pain, find another who can help you. This needn't be so hard.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

JDT_Dad said:


> Fair enough
> 
> 
> I have never suggested we put our heads in the sand and ignore any problems. I would rather see hard facts before people jump to any conclusions. Verifiable hard facts seem to be in short supply where the injuries are concerned and especially in this thread.


That may not be your intent, but I think that is the effect of people who are poo pooing the issue. I'd like to see hard facts, too. But if people don't demand them then USA Archery isn't likely to ever cough any up.



JDT_Dad said:


> I think people are over thinking this whole issue. If you do something which causes pain, STOP. Your body is sending you a message. You are doing something wrong! If your coach can't help you eliminate the pain, find another who can help you. This needn't be so hard.


It is good advice, but that doesn't solve the problem if BEST is, in fact, likely to cause injuries to people, including JOAD kids, when rolled out nation wide. Many people will defer to their coaches, and it isn't always possible to detect the slow accumulation of chronic damage since the symptoms can take years to appear. And it isn't always easy to tell ordinary discomfort of exercise from pain, especially when the damage is slowly accumulating.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Warbow said:


> It is good advice, but that doesn't solve the problem if BEST is, in fact, likely to cause injuries to people, including JOAD kids, when rolled out nation wide. Many people will defer to their coaches, and it isn't always possible to detect the slow accumulation of chronic damage since the symptoms can take years to appear. And it isn't always easy to tell ordinary discomfort of exercise from pain, especially when the damage is slowly accumulating.


I think the issue here is whether BEST is any more prone to injury than what was taught before. People were injured using the classic American "T" form with a square stance and linear draw. I know of one very well known Olympian who hasn't shot a bow in many years due to the damage done using that method. Does it necessarily mean it is a bad method, no.

I am not sticking my head in the sand, and I am not poo-pooing the injury stories. I just want to understand the injury numbers and the cause before I say the sky is falling.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Anyway, if training hours are up injuries would surely be up as well.


6X, that's an excellent point too. I would hope an institution as respected as the OTC would be keeping track of all these statistics in each sport. 

JDT, I don't think you're going to get all the facts. And even if you do, they won't mean much to you until and unless (God forbid) your child is injured. I could put you in touch with plenty of parents who would tell you what exactly to watch for. I've been contacted by several parents and archers who provided first hand information to me since this thread began. I must say If what they are telling me is completely true - and I have no reason to believe it's not since I too have first hand knowledge to corroberate several of the stories - then it WAS a disturbing trend that HAS been already been reported to the NAA with little interest or result. Or perhaps we've just not been made aware of the result. I don't know. And perhaps the problem really isn't a problem anymore since the coaches and the method have progressed to the point where archers are no longer being injured? Let's hope so.

But let me be very clear about this point: Many archers were injured - At the OTC. Sure, this falls under the heading of "old news" to some and I'll probably hear that, but I didn't realize there was such a trend until I had a few conversations this year at tournaments I attended. So it is "new news" to me. I heard and saw firsthand several injuries when I was involved with the program. Some of those I attributed to improper interpretation by well meaning HP coaches, improper interpretations by personal coaches who were not properly trained to teach BEST, and possibly overzealous archers. I still can't believe some of the weird shooting techniques I saw following the first release of Total Archery - archers getting into positions that were found NOWHERE in that book! So I think there is plenty of responsibility to share for many of the injuries. I take some of that responsibility myself, since at least one of the Jr. Dream Team kids I was responsible for was injured. I can't be sure if the injury began at the OTC while I was working with her, or back at home with her personal coach, but it kept her from shooting for a good while and was very disheartening to a very talented young lady. Thankfully she was determined enough to recover and is back to shooting well, without pain.

So, I'm going to step away from this topic now as I think it's been beat to death and some folks are starting to put words in my mouth...

I will end by saying that I hope the coaches and the technique have progressed to the point where archers are no longer suffering injuries. For all the archers and parents out there considering training in the "BEST" or KSL method, I would encourage you -once again- to be very involved in the process and if at all possible be sure the archer is working directly with coach Lee or a VERY qualified coaching student of his. A coach that has been to a few seminars will not understand this method, I can assure you. There are too many subtleties and too much opportunity for injury if the method is interpreted incorrectly. 

And finally, and most importantly, if it hurts, STOP. I think that's been as much a part of the problem as anything.

John out.


----------



## tylerbenner (May 29, 2009)

Perhaps some of the best information that is coming out of this conversation could be summed up as this:

Archery is beginning to be treated as a sport.

In any other sport (baseball, basketball, football, running, weight lifting, gymnastics, swimming, etc etc etc), injury prevention is top priority. 

ANY time there is repetition, the possibility of injury is high, even if the technique is physiologically correct. Muscles wear out. People get tired. Mistakes happen. Ankles get rolled for no reason.

Runners do ankle stretches and exercises, ice bath daily, and stretch considerably in the evenings.

Weight lifters wrap their knees and wear weight belts when doing squats. They get deep tissue massages to work out knots and tightness.

Baseball pitchers wear jackets between innings to keep their throwing arm warm and immediately get their arms wrapped in ice after the game.

Football players practice weight lifting drills with their necks so the muscles are strong enough to withstand terrible impacts.

Basketball players do extensive ankle strengthening exercises to decrease the possible risk of rolling an ankle.

Obviously, the list could go on and on. Athletes across the board do extensive training to prevent injury, allowing them to reach higher levels of expertise, speed, strength, and control. The whole point of sport is to push your body to the limit: how can that be totally safe?

Archery, it seems, is stepping up to the plate and is assessing how, where, and why people get injured. Because, people get injured. Even when everything is being done correctly.

I hope the main message we all can take home with us is one of information. Now we are all thinking about injury prevention. Are we doing strengthening exercises to increase rotator cuff strength? (how many people even know the correct exercises to do?) How many archers stretch for 10 minutes before they start shooting? The world of sports science is very advanced these days. The use of ice packs, heat packs, electronic stim, magnetic resonance, lasers, ultrasound, stretching, stabilization exercises, key strengthening exercises, and many many more methods are used every single day, not just at the Olympic Training Center, but nationwide, and worldwide, in professional sports teams, college teams, and even many high school teams.

If you train hard for ANY sport, you are going to have to undergo an extensive strengthening, stretching, and rehabilitation program, not just to prevent injury, but to increase performance. Every other sport does this. Archery must too. It is unwise to think shooting a bow for 4 hours a day, every day, is enough to stay strong and injury free. Sometimes you sleep in your bed wrong and your shoulder hurts. If you do not stretch properly or get someone to massage out the knot, suddenly that knot gets bigger and deeper until it creates a real problem. Lack of knowledge is what drives a huge number of injuries. If athletes would only stretch, do weight training, and perform preventative measures at the end of practice (more stretching, ice, massage, electronic stim, etc), they will have massively lower amounts of injuries. It is not important to look just at archery for these numbers--look at any sport. How else have athlete's careers been able to stretch later and later into life? Obviously, the answer is better training, better eating, and better recovery.

The Olympic Training Center is one giant recovery center. Its entire purpose is to get you to train as hard as possible, and then build you back up over night to do it all over again. At the end of every day, Sports Medicine is the busiest location on campus. Injured or healthy, almost every single athlete stops in to talk to the trainers, work out some strategies for recovery if something is bothering them (many injuries start out as something small that could have been fixed had the athlete decided to try and treat it right away), and check in with a training report. All it takes is 20-30 minutes and athletes are out on their way to dinner. A quick massage, some stretching, maybe some ice if inflammation is high or the athlete feels soreness or tightness.

The point is, almost everyone stretches (at least a little bit) before jumping into a soccer game or playing some basketball. Maybe you wear an ankle brace or a knee brace. Try throwing a baseball as hard as you can without warming up--this is the best way to destroy your shoulder. Almost everyone knows this. The same methodology must be applied to archery.

I hope we all can urge our fellow archers to not be afraid of using an ice bag on a tired shoulder. "Are you hurt? What's wrong?!" (These are the kinds of questions that should be redirected with the correct information: "No, not really hurt. I am just a little stiff and want to feel at my best for tomorrow.") Don't be afraid of stretching. Seek out some people who can help archers strengthen their shoulders and arms. Just shooting archery isn't enough.

Wishing you all a strong, stretched out, and recovery filled evening,
--Tyler Benner


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

Great post. Thanks for reminding us that Archers need to treat their bodies the way any good athlete does. Nutrition, exercise, stretching, active recovery, psychology.....it's all important to achieve maximum performance.


----------



## HoytHelixBoy (Jul 8, 2007)

:set1_signs009:


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

tylerbenner said:


> The point is, almost everyone stretches (at least a little bit) before jumping into a soccer game or playing some basketball.


And sometimes common sense may be wrong:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/3374401/Stretching-before-exercise-can-be-bad-for-you.html



> Researchers say stretching, considered an important part of any athlete's warm-up routine, can actually weaken muscles.
> The habit of holding a stretch for 20 to 30 seconds, known as static stretching, has been considered benefitial for priming muscles. However, scientists from the University of Nevada Las Vegas say this should no longer be encouraged.
> Their findings highlight that the two common pre-running stretches - for the hamstrings and quadriceps - may actually reduce performance by weakening muscles in the leg.
> Kinesiology professor Bill Holcomb, who authored the report, said: "Developing flexibility is important for reducing sports injury, but the time to stretch is after, not before, performance."


And that, too, may turn out to be wrong. Which is why the OTC should keep data on injuries, data available to the public who are taught the BEST method.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

Tyler has again shed some important light on the subject, but we need more. In almost all sports there is a sports science. Exercise and activity is monitored and measured. Almost all sports measure and monitor frequency, intensity and duration. Do we do that in archery? Not always. In baseball, pitchers are put on a pitch count. We don't do that with young archers (or elite in many cases)

There is another aspect of elite sports that we don't seem to pay enough attention to in archery and that is overuse injuries. Even with proper form, an elite athlete can be broken down. One of the major hazards with elite athletes is overtraining. They will push themselves too far. Do we overtrain in archery? Sometimes. My brother, a collegiate athletic trainer, counseled me one time as I ramp up duration (number of arrows)and frequency (number of days per week) for my youth archers to only increase 10% a week.

I would hope that one of the things that comes out of the Dream Team and RA programs is some solid guidelines for how to increase frequency, duration and intensity (to an optimum level) , how to recognize overuse injuries, and how to mitigate them. It is the perfect laboratory for increasing the body of knowledge for archery injury prevention and mitigation as well as performance optimization.


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Not being argumentative here, but should weightlifters then ice themselves after a day at the gym? Because I've not seen that.


Since it is being argued again I will point out a quick google search turns up many links like http://www.owresource.com/recovery/icecontrastshower.php so, as it appears, yes. I never heard this before either - no one at college told us this and I always used a hot tub after lifting. Though, to be fair, I found I felt better if I stretched and alternated from the hot tub to the cool indoor pool as the article suggest with alternating temps - but I found this out on my own and never really thought about it afterward. I always figured it had more to do with me using the pool/hot tub to relax and goof off after lifting, it appears as if I randomly stumbled upon the best way to cool down.

Given that I would even say that more often ice packs is an *improvement* and shows a greater understanding of an athletes body than in the past - at the very least anything other than "the same" or "more" would need to be justified.

Of course, as my earlier posts indicated, I also agree that we *really* need data on injuries, both long term and short term. We also need that data for, lets say, both everyday coaches/instructors and OTC coaches. We need it for both short term (and I'm willing to bet someone somewhere has done this) and long term (not enough time since we started this to get). You can read my earlier posts to get my not so supportive posts of BEST.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

TomB said:


> Tyler has again shed some important light on the subject, but we need more. In almost all sports there is a sports science. Exercise and activity is monitored and measured. Almost all sports measure and monitor frequency, intensity and duration. Do we do that in archery? Not always. In baseball, pitchers are put on a pitch count. We don't do that with young archers (or elite in many cases)
> 
> There is another aspect of elite sports that we don't seem to pay enough attention to in archery and that is overuse injuries. Even with proper form, an elite athlete can be broken down. One of the major hazards with elite athletes is overtraining. They will push themselves too far. Do we overtrain in archery? Sometimes. My brother, a collegiate athletic trainer, counseled me one time as I ramp up duration (number of arrows)and frequency (number of days per week) for my youth archers to only increase 10% a week.
> 
> I would hope that one of the things that comes out of the Dream Team and RA programs is some solid guidelines for how to increase frequency, duration and intensity (to an optimum level) , how to recognize overuse injuries, and how to mitigate them. It is the perfect laboratory for increasing the body of knowledge for archery injury prevention and mitigation as well as performance optimization.


Well, it is interesting to bring up overuse. There is an entire section of Tyler's new book (with Coach Lee), Inside the Archer, justifying coach Lee's 1000 arrow challenge, where OTC RAs work up their training to a level where they attempt to shoot 1000 arrows in a single day.


----------



## Flint Hills Tex (Nov 3, 2008)

Tyler, thank you for your last post! I agree that it is great to see archery being treated as a true sport! I would think that the professional or aspiring professional athletes at the OTC should be aware of the importance of proper stretching and warming up prior to and after practice, in fact, I'm certain that the coaches demand this. 

My expectation is that a high-level archer may be more prone to injury than a recreational archer due to the intensity of training. On the other hand, wouldn't the recreational archer be more prone to injury due, for example, to a lack of discipline in proper warm up? That would be the equivalent of the pitcher throwing a fast ball without warming up beforehand.

I also wholeheartedly agree with the principle of ice bags (kryotherapy) being used preventatively. I'm not sure you could really correlate their use on archers' shoulders with the introduction of the BEST method. In my field of orthopedic and post-trauma critical care, we have found that moderate use of ice packs for limited time spans (10-15 min, 3 to 4 times a day) speeds recovery and reduces pain and swelling. But there are periodical trends in medicine, in which some forms of therapy go out of fashion. The current fad is using cooled milk curd packs for 1/2 hour daily instead of ice. I'm sure that physical therapy undergoes the same sort of trends as medicine.

What I'm trying to say is that the trend towards using ice packs on archers' shoulders might have nothing to do with the BEST method. It could very well be that both were coincidentally adopted at the OTC at approximately the same time.

Now, a higher injury rate among archers nowadays, if true, could be a sign of more intense training (a result of viewing archery as a serious sport), but I'd still like to know if other countries' olympic archers have similar injury rates. And I think that a high occurence of injuries among young, aspiring archers should be alarming us! Over here in Germany, I've heard of archers injuring their shoulders, but either they were over 40 years of age, or were overbowed. I haven't heard of any series of injuries among Germany's professional or aspiring archers.



limbwalker said:


> I could put you in touch with plenty of parents who would tell you what exactly to watch for. I've been contacted by several parents and archers who provided first hand information to me since this thread began... it WAS a disturbing trend that HAS been already been reported to the NAA with little interest or result. Or perhaps we've just not been made aware of the result. I don't know.
> 
> John out.


John, do you think it would be possible to somehow anonomously post those reports? Remove any names or details that could reveal the archer's identity (unless, of course, they wouldn't mind having their name mentioned), and share with us just "what exactly to watch for." 

I personally think that information would be of more use to each of us individually than any statistics on injuries before and after Coach Lee's arrival.


----------



## archerymom2 (Mar 28, 2008)

It sounds like there's a lot of interest out there about archery and potential injuries. 

Perhaps a more productive approach would be using a less politically-charged topic (i.e., without placing blame on the BEST method) of how to avoid, recognize, and measure archery-related injuries. Perhaps separated by "overuse" type injuries for the serious/continuously-shooting archer, and "lack-of-preparedness" injuries for the occasional/weekend archer. 

I'm sure existing archery books have information on this topic, but hearing from other archers and coaches would be helpful as well.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

archerymom2 said:


> Perhaps a more productive approach would be using a less politically-charged topic (i.e., without placing blame on the BEST method) of how to avoid, recognize, and measure archery-related injuries. Perhaps separated by "overuse" type injuries for the serious/continuously-shooting archer, and "lack-of-preparedness" injuries for the occasional/weekend archer.


In theory that would be great, unfortunately BEST claims to be part of the **solution** to reduce injuries, by being "biomechanically efficient." If, instead, poorly taught BEST is part of the problem then it isn't desirable to gloss over BEST for purposes of expediency. And as to over use injuries, I'll be interested in seeing coach Lee's justification of the 1000 arrow challenge in the upcoming book, _Inside the Archer_.


----------



## archerymom2 (Mar 28, 2008)

Point taken. So perhaps 2 threads -- one about injuries in general and how to avoid/treat (like the ice-on-shoulders discussion), and another on the BEST method and whether it causes injuries rather than preventing them.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

archerymom2 said:


> Point taken. So perhaps 2 threads -- one about injuries in general and how to avoid/treat (like the ice-on-shoulders discussion), and another on the BEST method and whether it causes injuries rather than preventing them.


Sounds good. I'll be interested to hear what people have to say


----------



## xcreek (Aug 31, 2007)

I would like to share my experience with switching to/learning the Best Method. One contributing factor that I experienced was being to impatient and rushing the process. And what I consider the biggest mistake was trying to implement the method at the same draw weight instead of backing off and understanding the form. I know in my case this was the source of minor strains and pains. To often my thoughts were on making the distance (90meters) and not going back to basics of learning a different form from what I was shooting, and maybe skipping that weekend tournament so I don't fall into mixing old form with new. I travel consistently and often will go weeks without shooting, get home and try to pick up where I left off. Again I am referring to my experience and not trying to suggest that others that have made the change have the same issues.

My son is coached currently by one of the JDT coaches and consistently when there is a form issue to work on, he hands Christopher the JOAD 15 pounder until a solution is found and then works back up. I think that Johns original post in my opinion was directed at the understanding, and teaching the method and not necessarily the method itself. I believe competitive archers are true athletes and need the guidance of coaches that understand and can teach the method to mitigate injuries that all athletes will experience. I also believe that Archery in the US is gaining ground by the proper coaching and use of the Best Method. This is supported by the recent records set by Brady at the World Team Trials. As to the injuries it would be hard to categorize as there are many variables that would be difficult to identify. In my opinion I would look at over use, or miss use as the contributing factor. 




Mark Luman


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

xcreek said:


> I would like to share my experience with switching to/learning the Best Method. One contributing factor that I experienced was being to impatient and rushing the process. And what I consider the biggest mistake was trying to implement the method at the same draw weight instead of backing off and understanding the form. I know in my case this was the source of minor strains and pains. To often my thoughts were on making the distance (90meters) and not going back to basics of learning a different form from what I was shooting, and maybe skipping that weekend tournament so I don't fall into mixing old form with new. I travel consistently and often will go weeks without shooting, get home and try to pick up where I left off. Again I am referring to my experience and not trying to suggest that others that have made the change have the same issues.


So, let me ask you this: take out your experience later on with people who truly understood the system - would you have done anything other than inure yourself or give up and go back if not for them? Was the same true for the older system?

I mean, lets face it, no other popular form requires you to go back to a 15 lb bow to avoid injury. Yes, they may do better doing that (I certainly agree and try and encourage everyone I teach to do so for form changes - yet even for myself I normally do not unless it is a major change), but that is a far cry from do it or be injured.

I think many of us - myself included - agree that incorrect usage results in a majority of the injuries associated with BEST. That being said the next question is how exact does one have to be? In my experience, and that includes reading and talking to others, it seems that small errors result in a great deal of pain and reverting back to their old form (which wasn't as exacting) doesn't have that issue. My further experience is that if you have the proper coaches (and those are current HP certified - still a fairly elite and expensive class of coach) you are a believer in it. But then only a VERY small amount of archers are going to be able to have access to said coaches - most likely none of my students will ever attend the OTC (indeed, I hope that any that would do so has moved beyond me by that point), none have the drive or the money to do so let alone be a part of the JDT (nor do I have the money or time to be certified to that level).

For anyone truly wanting to compete I would do nothing other than push them towards Lee's program. Indeed, for anyone truly wanting to compete much of what we say here is irrelevant - long term injury is part of it (see gymnast at 30 years of age), you just are not going to put your body through the tremendous amount of stress required and *not* end up injured (and parents who expect kids int their 30's and 40's to not suffer - you *really* need to think about that). As such unless we can compare to older statistics (which have not been taken) and adjust them for performance (which is tough to do) then the statistic is pretty much irrelevant. In every other sport on the planet the rush to gold is littered with the broken bodies of those that could not hack it and the broken bodies of those that peaked at the right time - that is the price for seeking that and as archery moves into a truly competitive sport science that will occur here too. Take two people with equal ability and the one that is willing to destroy themselves to win at that one meet (Olympic Gold) along with a program that systematically can make them physically peak at that point they will win. In fact that program will dominate - thus why so many programs in other sports really only care about short term injuries, not being able to compete into their 30's and 40's (you are already past most's physical ability to compete at any cost anyway).

What I personally care about is everyone else and I think teaching BEST as the standard method is going to cause MANY injuries that would otherwise be avoided. I think so because I note that outside of the current certified coaches we see many injuries. Yes, I will concede that those are due to misuse and not good coaching. However I note if the system requires Olympic Level coaches to teach worth anything or some prerequisite that is unrealistic that most will follow then the form is flawed for general use. I use the term "not good" vs "bad" because as far as I can see it takes a fairly high level of understanding to teach, a high enough understanding that it can not be expected that volunteer only coaches can teach (say level I's and maybe level II's - or whatever their current name is).


----------



## Paul Williams (Jun 18, 2006)

*injuries? what injuries??!!*

what is all this whinning about injuries?
man, you all are a bunch of sisses!!!
if this wasn't a public forum, i'd say it with big fat "P"!!
that's right, i said a "P" and it ends with a "Y"!!
if I knew how to say it in Korean, I’d say it that way too!!
you ought to be embarassed as to what your showing Coach Lee of Americans, don't forget we went over to his country and fought and died to help keep his family and friends free from North Korean Communism, and here goes the whinning about "oh Coach....my bobo hurts...i can't practice today..." 
bunch of snibbling whinners!!

now that you all are frothing at cake hole, listen up

for those of you who don't know me, you can just call me "SGT Williams".
and don't forget it:angry::angry::angry: all the athletes of the JDT and Coach Lee know exactly who i am and what i stand for. and i'll stand up for any one of them anytime anywhere. and don't you forget that either.:angry::angry::angry:

look all you sick lame and lazy, you all need to get off your blessed assurance and go down to Ft. Benning and get your Airborne Wings, then march your sorry ass *478 miles with a 70lbs ruck sack on your back* up to Ft. Bragg and go thru US Army Special Forces School and get a real Green Beret. or talk to SGT Faulks about getting his US Army Ranger Black and Gold Tab and getting a real Black Beret, the one that rightfully belongs to the US Army Rangers, and NO ONE ELSE!!. you'd find out first hand what it means to put up or shut up!! 

we had so many injuries that it seemed unthinkable to complete those courses. you wouldn't believe what we faced and had to accomplish with injuries. yes, that's right WITH INJURIES. and i'm not talking some stupid little blister on your toe that made you just a bit uncomfortable. SGT Lee had TWO BROKEN LEGS!!! that's right, TWO BROKEN LEGS each one of his SHINS!!!, and we had 1 more day to complete a 26 mile road march. do you think he wanted to quit or get out. not only NO but Hell NO. and we didn't want him getting jerked out either. so we did what anyone in that situation would have done, we literally carried him every step of the way, 26 miles, in addition to our 70lbs ruck sacks. were we uncomfortable? uh, slightly!!! but we didn't care!!! we did it anyway. i personally had plantar fasciitis in both feet at the time. The pain was excruciating with every step, but my personal pain was no match to SGT Lee’s, and you know what, we didn’t stop, we went on and did it anyway. ALL 26 MILES !!! do the math slick; that’s two men carrying 70lbs rucks each, plus SGT Lee at 165, plus his ruck sack at another 70lbs, that’s 375lbs or 187 ½ lbs each!!! 26 miles!!! I only weigh 165. of course we traded off, rotating the load, and we did it anyway and endured the pain. And how about getting a 3” gash in your leg that needed stitches; and no Nurse Goodbody anywhere in sight; try pulling out your personal sewing kit, bending the needle and sewing it up yourself with nothing to kill the pain, and then hauling ass thru the jungle at night to make your pickup point on time, or face getting tossed from SF School. Painful? Uh, slightly!! So what, do it anyway, suck it up and drive hard to the finish.

and on graduation day, with SGT Lee at our sides, when we stood to don our Green Berets..............*God what a feeling, and what a self knowledge *of what you could do and what you could overcome. You knew first hand that no matter what is set before you, and no matter how much others are telling you that “it’s impossible”, and no matter how much the circumstances say “its un-thinkable”, and no matter what your degree of personal discomfort is, that you not only can do it but you will do it, and you will go further and higher and beyond anyone that has ever done it before. You have a first hand knowledge of your ability to overcome anything anywhere in the world, no matter what. You have Pride, Honor, Incredible Sense of Ability to Accomplish the Impossible, Total Unwavering Devotion to Duty, An Unbreakable Spirit, an Inner Drive that is so far beyond the norm that it puts you miles ahead of mainstream humanity, you have a Meekness that cannot be matched. Pardon the diversion here, but do you understand what true meekness is? In ancient Greece, true meekness was a man that was strong and controlled in battle and rage yet showed himself to be as gentle as one with a small new born animal and always showed mercy when mercy was due. You know first hand the Self Confidence, Personal Skills, Vast Knowledge, Ability to work with all type of Foreign Nationals, and an extreme Sense of Family that can be had no other way.

It is thru hardship and enduring pain that these things are had. The camaraderie that is gained when a group of men and women go thru something so hard and so long and so enduring, that it makes you cry to God for mercy to take you away, “yet not my will but Thine be done”. This type of camaraderie is unmatched. This type of skill and ability that one gains is so far beyond the norm that it places you well beyond normal average humanity. Yet you never forget where you came from and you always seek to reach back and bring others into your leer. Always helping them to overcome and seeing great pride in others who overcome just like you did.

Pain? Oh yea. Lots of pain.
Look Einstein, nothing worth while in life comes easy!! The best things in life are the hardest to come by. But with patience, persistence, perseverance you can do extraordinary things. Never give up, never quit, and when you think you can’t go any further, go three times as far as you just did. You will look back when its all over and be full of self confidence and great pride knowing that you gave it all and put everything you possibly had on the field of battle. Even when you were behind and losing badly and in great pain, that’s right – I said even though you were IN GREAT PAIN, you persevered and finished the task. That, no one can ever take away from you.

When I see an athlete with ice pack or showing some sort of recognition of pain and discomfort, I smile deep in side and I see a great athlete in the making and growing into an extraordinary athlete. I see grit and guts and toughness, endurance and the scar of a real champion, someone with cuts and bruises and scars and sweat and blood running down their neck and arms and great big GOLD MEDAL around there neck and a sense of pride that no one else on earth has. That is what I see, and that is what they know they are.

Alright, now lets move on to Coach Lee and the BEST method. And all the injuries…………? I can’t speak for others, all I can do is speak for myself and any injuries that I may have had. Uh, lets see, hmmmmm, let me look around some, hmmmmm, wait I know there something around here, uuhhhhh, ……….hmmmmm
Sorry, I can’t find any!!!

I have had absolutely NO INJURIES from this BEST method at all!!!!!!!
And that is fact.
Now, listen up Soldiers of USA Archery, I HAVE HAD plenty of discomforts. But NO INJURIES. None at all. So I’m going to tell you about my discomforts. 
First of all, most people are pretty soft, and any discomfort at all is usually seen as and emergency injury that requires a trip to the ER. Good athletes take great pride in being tough, and they should because they are tough. Years of hard training, endurance, and a great diet makes thick tough leather out of your body, your bones, and your soul. They are the first ones to understand enduring pain to achieve greatness. A little discomfort does not equate to an injury. Got it?!

For the record, my personal journey with the BEST method is going to contradict almost everything you all have been fussing about on here. Ask anyone that knows me, including Coach Lee and Tom Parish, and they will confirm all that I am telling you. Anyone of you that have been to one of Coach Lee’s seminars lately has seen pictures of me in his presentation. It’s not by accident. Just ask Coach Lee why that picture is there. 

So stick with me here, you’ve made it this far and endured the pain, so dig a little deeper and dare to see the shocking truth. I started out shooting Olympic style by reading Rick McKinneys book over and over and over and over and over until it got it stuck in my head. It was a great start, and a particular style. Then I went on to Coach Alexander Kirrillov, Coach Kirrillov was great and a different style yet a lot of common elements. then thru a course of hardship and events in my personal and family life I could not continue to go to Tucson to see Coach Kirrillov and very fortunately I met and struck up a great friendship with Hardy Ward, while in Tulsa Ok at that time. Hardy began to coach me for a good long time, that was great and yet again a different style with common elements. All the while I’m still referring back to Rick McKinneys book. Then I went on into Coach Kisik Lee’s program of the BEST method when he got started here in the states. Here again a different style and yet common elements. And during all this time, I had no personal coach living near me that could watch me and help me to “get it right”. Each time I got help from Coach Lee and Tom Parish, I had to go home to Kalispell, Montana, way up here in the mountains where it snows in the summer and the winters are 20 to 30 below most all winter, and train myself, by myself, to do it correctly.

And guess what? According to Coach Lee, I got it correct. Nice, that was really nice to know. Especially training myself with no help. So here I am jumping thru all these different shooting styles, experiencing absolutely no injuries at all, and going on to the BEST method with no injuries. And with no at home coach!!! Why….., this is not possible….., according to many of the previous posts. Yet, I am living proof that it is highly possibly and very effective. 

And for the record, every time I ever came to the OTC, Tom Parish and Coach Lee were the most hospitable and pleasant people I’ve ever met. They treated me with total and unconditional respect and dignity. The staff at the OTC, the coaches, and all the RAs treated me as a guest of honor and I thoroughly enjoyed every minute every time.

Alright now on to the discomforts. There were times that the body positions that Coach Lee was asking me to do were highly uncomfortable. But in time, and with lots of stretching, I became very comfortable with it. Coach Lee made me a grip for my bow, and I didn’t like it at first, and told him so. But I also told him that I trusted him and would stick with it. I had some discomfort in my bow arm elbow and in the upper deltoids. But in time I became stronger and the discomfort ceased. The only other discomfort I experienced was on the inside of the “away” knee. Ok, so as your on the shooting line, one leg is toward the target, and one leg is away from the target. I’m talking about the inside of the knee that is away from the target. For the longest time this discomfort got worse, and pretty darn bad, so much so that it was getting troublesome to run up and down these 7000 foot mountains chasing elk at full speed. Well, I had to slow down to a jog, what can I say?!! Give the elk a break, don’t cha know. Just kidding…
But in all seriousness, it was becoming very painful to climb mountains while elk hunting. Not an injury, but definitely a concern to find the source. Now this took about 1 year to figure this out. It wasn’t anything Coach Lee had asked me to do, it was what I was asking myself to do. Get the difference? I was twisting the upper torso into the “in line” shot way to much and over doing it a ton!!!! And that excessive twisting was not producing any pain at “full draw resting”, but as soon as I would expand, then the excessive pressure was releasing into the knee area. And WOW, did it hurt!!!!!

But you have to understand, that wasn’t Coach Lee, THAT WAS ME OVER DOING IT. So I just toned it down to what it was supposed to be and the knee cleared right up and I’ve never had a problem with it since, about 8 months now.

Having extensive conversations with Tom Parish and Coach Lee, I needed to find a personal coach, as Coach Lee tells everyone to do. Coach Lee is my National Head Coach, he doesn’t have time to coach me personally. I understand that. So I selected Coach Lloyd Brown. Coach Lloyd Brown has been great in coaching me to understand Coach Lees BEST method and help me to really maximize it. he did find some problem areas that *I was doing*, and of course we addressed those areas and went to work immediately to fix’m, as any quality coach should be doing with the students. Coach Lloyd Brown understands the BEST method better than anyone I’ve ever met or talked to about it. And he has really helped me to capitalize on it. he is 100% behind it and if you need a personal coach i would highly recommend Coach Lloyd Brown. you can find him at his website www.archerycoach.com
in San Diego, CA. 

Still, to date, I have had no injuries from any of the switching techniques, or coaching myself, or directly or indirectly from Coach Lee and his technique. I have found it to be a really solid “feeling” and “ease” of controlling the shot. There are a few details that I had to customize for myself, but that ‘s how anybody is. Just read Rick McKinneys book.

One of the things that keeps me from having injuries is that I watch my diet really close always. And I mean always. I work out constantly to maintain strength and always stretch before shooting, during shooting, and after shooting. Look, I don’t care how old you are, I’m 49, if you don’t work out, stretch properly, and watch your diet, then your going to be a soup sandwich in time. And I strive to shoot 350 arrows every day and 500 arrows on Saturdays, and go to Church and worship God Almighty on Sundays. And God help you if you smart off to me on the shooting line!! Hahahaha

Discomforts and pain, yea, sure I still get them. But I don’t let them continue into an injury. I try to find what is causing the problem and fix it. I call my coach and we talk about it. And if I can, I talk to Coach Lee about it. And 100% of the time, the problem has been me doing something either wrong or overdoing it.

If your going to strive to achieve greatness in sports, then get ready for a lot of discomfort and pain. i hope i caused you to think really hard about all this. i'm living proof that switching techniques and no "at home" coach can work just fine. and next time you see Coach Lee, ask him about SGT Williams, at 49 years of age, if he can do the BEST method correctly. if i can do it at 49, anyone can do it at any age.

cheers,
SSG Paul Williams
US Army Special Forces
Airborne
aka "SGT Williams"
and don't you forget it :angry::angry::angry:


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

Now drop and give me 20, you maggot. Shazaaaam!!
Hey Sarge, 
If someone needs surgery, is that a good enough excuse?


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

midwayarcherywi said:


> Now drop and give me 20, you maggot. Shazaaaam!!
> Hey Sarge,
> If someone needs surgery, is that a good enough excuse?


I guess if we don't see bone sticking out you are not injured. If Sarge got rid of all the hyperbole in his post, he actually has a decent contribution, especially about stretching, diet, and finding someone that can explain the method properly. But, I fear the message will be lost with all the insults. Sarge, USA Archery is not a bunch of conscripts. We do this for fun and injury should not part of the game. In the military (I am familiar with the concept as the son of a career fighter pilot, who was "olympic caliber" in flying high performance aircraft. He defined the word sacrifice and I know the meaning of the word duty. BTW, thanks for your service. I really appreciate it.) there are acceptable casualties. There should be no acceptable casualties in archery. Your position is to paraphrase Tom Hanks in "A League of Their Own", "There are no injuries in archery." Saying so, doesn't make it so.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Paul Williams said:


> The only other discomfort I experienced was on the inside of the “away” knee. Ok, so as your on the shooting line, one leg is toward the target, and one leg is away from the target. I’m talking about the inside of the knee that is away from the target. For the longest time this discomfort got worse, and pretty darn bad, so much so that it was getting troublesome to run up and down these 7000 foot mountains chasing elk at full speed. Well, I had to slow down to a jog, what can I say?!! Give the elk a break, don’t cha know. Just kidding…
> But in all seriousness, it was becoming very painful to climb mountains while elk hunting. Not an injury, but definitely a concern to find the source. Now this took about 1 year to figure this out. It wasn’t anything Coach Lee had asked me to do, it was what I was asking myself to do. Get the difference? I was twisting the upper torso into the “in line” shot way to much and over doing it a ton!!!! And that excessive twisting was not producing any pain at “full draw resting”, but as soon as I would expand, then the excessive pressure was releasing into the knee area. And WOW, did it hurt!!!!!
> 
> But you have to understand, that wasn’t Coach Lee, THAT WAS ME OVER DOING IT. So I just toned it down to what it was supposed to be and the knee cleared right up and I’ve never had a problem with it since, about 8 months now.


First of all, thanks for a wonderful post! It really puts some perspective on what we archers perceive as hardships.

SGT Williams, I know you have already figured this out the hard way, but for all the other archers out there I would like to say a few things about the pain you experienced. The discomfort/pain you experienced is actually a sign that you have rotated your hips with (or in addition to) your upper body. If your hips stay over your feet as they are supposed to, and you rotate only your upper body to achieve alignment, you will not put any undo stress on the knee and you will avoid the discomfort (and eventual pain) which you experienced. The first several times you do this you should not do any damage which would cause pain, but obviously you are not one to fuss about a little discomfort, so you kept on doing it! :mg: 

My daughter was instructed to be aware of any tension or discomfort that she feels in the area of the draw side knee since as this is a warning sign that the hips are rotating too far during, setup and draw. She uses it as a kind of feedback system.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

TomB said:


> I guess if we don't see bone sticking out you are not injured. If Sarge got rid of all the hyperbole in his post, he actually has a decent contribution, especially about stretching, diet, and finding someone that can explain the method properly. But, I fear the message will be lost with all the insults. Sarge, USA Archery is not a bunch of conscripts. We do this for fun and injury should not part of the game. In the military (I am familiar with the concept as the son of a career fighter pilot, who was "olympic caliber" in flying high performance aircraft. He defined the word sacrifice and I know the meaning of the word duty. BTW, thanks for your service. I really appreciate it.) there are acceptable casualties. There should be no acceptable casualties in archery. Your position is to paraphrase Tom Hanks in "A League of Their Own", "There are no injuries in archery." Saying so, doesn't make it so.


Not to be argumentative, but I sort of took SGT Williams post to be an attempt to mimic the Gunny on the History Channel's Mail Call TV show. I really didn't find it to be offensive at all and as you said I think he made some valid points.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

JDT_Dad said:


> Not to be argumentative, but I sort of took SGT Williams post to be an attempt to mimic the Gunny on the History Channel's Mail Call TV show. I really didn't find it to be offensive at all and as you said I think he made some valid points.


Point taken. I just don't want the metaphor of acceptable casualties to creep into USA Archery. The road is lined with folks in Korea that could not make the cut in competitive archery. Recreational archery is an oxymoron there. My hope was/is that the BEST method is robust enough that anyone can do it.

SGt Williams approach is to just suck it up and get one with it. My point is that archery should not be like being accepted as a ranger or a seal where there is a 90% wash out rate. If what Coach Lee and the BEST method only applies to elite archers, the best of the best, and we loose the recreational archer that wants to improve his or her craft, then we loose our fan base. Imagine if the PGA or baseball saying their techniques are only for the very elite. The rest of you need not apply. The fan base would be lost. While I cannot compete at the level of a Tiger Woods or Nolan Ryan (my hero when I was pitching in college) I can still try and apply the same mechanics without being cast away as a wuss because I can't perform at their level.

SGT Williams post may have been tongue firmly planted in cheek, but it is hard to tell. It doesn't do much for credibility to tell an injured archer or their coach to just suck it up and quit whining.


----------



## skybowman (Jan 31, 2004)

TomB said:


> Point taken. I just don't want the metaphor of acceptable casualties to creep into USA Archery. The road is lined with folks in Korea that could not make the cut in competitive archery. Recreational archery is an oxymoron there. My hope was/is that the BEST method is robust enough that anyone can do it.
> 
> SGt Williams approach is to just suck it up and get one with it. My point is that archery should not be like being accepted as a ranger or a seal where there is a 90% wash out rate. If what Coach Lee and the BEST method only applies to elite archers, the best of the best, and we loose the recreational archer that wants to improve his or her craft, then we loose our fan base. Imagine if the PGA or baseball saying their techniques are only for the very elite. The rest of you need not apply. The fan base would be lost. While I cannot compete at the level of a Tiger Woods or Nolan Ryan (my hero when I was pitching in college) I can still try and apply the same mechanics without being cast away as a wuss because I can't perform at their level.
> 
> SGT Williams post may have been tongue firmly planted in cheek, but it is hard to tell. It doesn't do much for credibility to tell an injured archer or their coach to just suck it up and quit whining.


Excellent points Tom. I'd also add that many people might read the first two lines of his rant, get turned off, and never go on to the useful information.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

TomB said:


> Point taken. I just don't want the metaphor of acceptable casualties to creep into USA Archery. The road is lined with folks in Korea that could not make the cut in competitive archery. Recreational archery is an oxymoron there. My hope was/is that the BEST method is robust enough that anyone can do it.
> 
> SGt Williams approach is to just suck it up and get one with it. My point is that archery should not be like being accepted as a ranger or a seal where there is a 90% wash out rate. If what Coach Lee and the BEST method only applies to elite archers, the best of the best, and we loose the recreational archer that wants to improve his or her craft, then we loose our fan base. Imagine if the PGA or baseball saying their techniques are only for the very elite. The rest of you need not apply. The fan base would be lost. While I cannot compete at the level of a Tiger Woods or Nolan Ryan (my hero when I was pitching in college) I can still try and apply the same mechanics without being cast away as a wuss because I can't perform at their level.
> 
> SGT Williams post may have been tongue firmly planted in cheek, but it is hard to tell. It doesn't do much for credibility to tell an injured archer or their coach to just suck it up and quit whining.


I'm not sure just how SGT Williams really meant his post to be taken, but my own take is that he didn't mean archers should suffer through pain. At least I hope he didn't mean it that way! 

I took him to mean, hey guys, this is supposed to be fun sport and we are taking this way too personally/seriously. He may have been saying "JDTDad, lighten up, don't take this soooo seriously, there are always worse situations you can find yourself in". Maybe Sgt Williams can pop back in here and enlighten us.

BTW, I'm with you when you say we can't afford to loose the recreational archer because of injury. I personally haven't seen any serious injuries in *recreational* archers who are attempting to learn the system. That doesn't mean they aren't out there. I just haven't seen them myself.


----------



## Paul Williams (Jun 18, 2006)

JDT_Dad said:


> I'm not sure just how SGT Williams really meant his post to be taken, but my own take is that he didn't mean archers should suffer through pain. At least I hope he didn't mean it that way!
> 
> I took him to mean, hey guys, this is supposed to be fun sport and we are taking this way too personally/seriously. He may have been saying "JDTDad, lighten up, don't take this soooo seriously, there are always worse situations you can find yourself in". Maybe Sgt Williams can pop back in here and enlighten us.
> 
> BTW, I'm with you when you say we can't afford to loose the recreational archer because of injury. I personally haven't seen any serious injuries in *recreational* archers who are attempting to learn the system. That doesn't mean they aren't out there. I just haven't seen them myself.


absolutely 100% correct.
you don't have to suffer injury to have fun, be good, or strive to be great.
yes, there was alot of wash out in Special Forces, as there is in the Rangers, Seals, Parajump Rescue, and Recon. but there is a reason for it. some of it is attititude and some of it is that there bodies aren't ready to endure that much load yet. 

ok, so i wrote up another rather lenghty post to explain why my body can take such a heavy load and adjust to changes so easlie, as compared to most body types.

no offense intended earlier, just alot of smack talk making my point. but as one said, you can always find yourself in a much more difficult circumstance. and even in Special Forces with injuries, we immediately identified the cause and negotiated around it, so as not to drive discomfort into permanent injury.

please take some time to read my next "lengthy" post, it will help explain what i think are some strength / injury issues.

cheers,
SGT Williams
"Airborne"


----------



## Paul Williams (Jun 18, 2006)

*Handling the stress load on your body*

Ok, so now that I’ve had my usual bowl of rusty Constantine wire and Turpentine for breakfast. Lets tone it down a bit and look at something very key:

“Why can my body (me – SGT Williams, “and don’t you forget it”) handle so much more stress and load on the ligaments, tendons, and joints, than most people?”

Very simple answer.
Because ever since I was in grade school I’ve been working out and eating healthy. Its no more complicated than that.

When I was very young, in grade school, I had an older brother named Mark who was into body building and he was really great at it. He was exceptional in size and strength for his young age in the 7th grade. He was whipping the daylights out of 9th graders and going after the 10th graders. For real !! unfortunately he died at age 14 from a rare cancer. Never the less, he was a great inspiration to me for working out and keeping fit.

I was also really attracted to the great Sir Charles Atlas. I’d get my Boys Life magazine and read about Hardy Ward in the front and then go to the back and read about Sir Charles Atlas. Those were my childhood heros. Here was a guy, Sir Charles Atlas, in his 60’s that was in incredible physical condition. I read everything I could about him and his program. The basics were simple. At home calisthenics, a great diet, and hard work.

Unlike my older brother Mark, who targeted hypertrophy in his muscularity; I personally decided early on that the key to longevity was to target strengthening the attachment, support, and mobility areas of my own muscularity. So from grade school up, I have been targeting my tendons, ligaments, and skeletal joints and structure. And eating tons of fruits and vegetables and good quality proteins and carbs. MY ENTIRE LIFE!!! 

I’ve never liked Pop or any type of Alcohol, or smokes. I tried smokes in junior high but found that it quickly zapped my strength and ability to run long distances, ha that’s out!!!
I even tried getting drunk and smoked one “left handed” cigarette in high school, and didn’t like either in the slightest. Never touched it again.

My parents never had a problem with me finishing my green beans. I’d usually clean the serving bowl out and ask for more. For real. 

So, as my life went on, I found that I was able to endure much more stress and load on my body than most anyone around me. I was never really big or into the hyper trophy look. And I knew that I could out distance anyone in the gym on any given day. And looking back, I really believe that the key was in targeting the support for the physical body. Not in looking macho and big bulging muscles. The other key was diet diet diet!!! the body cannot grow strong if your not feeding it, especially the bones.

When I got into US Army Special Forces I noticed right away that the guys that excelled along side me had participated in a very similar diet and exercise philosophy since their own early childhood. And the guys that were into the hyper trophy look of size and shaped bulging muscles, just dropped like flies during the SF course. Those big guys were faster and much stronger than any of us, but they couldn’t go the distance at all. They really couldn’t. Its like they had developed white meat muscle tissue, while we had all develop dark meat muscle tissue and strengthened our support structure much much more than they had. If you think I’m kidding, I’m not. It was very noticeable. Again, go talk to SGT Dee Faulks and ask him about his time in the US Army Rangers, the ones with the real Black Berets, and ask him about those he served with and their body types.

Now look at archery in the same way.
Unarguably the greatest male archers the world has ever seen:
Rick McKinney, Darrel Pace, John Williams, Hardy Ward, Jay Bars
I cannot speak for them, but I can assuredly speak for what I observe.
Are they of the hyper trophy type or the endurance type? They all did it their own way, each a little different, yet common elements. Is the basis of their strength in their muscles or joints and support system? Those guys shot millions of arrows. I don’t care who you are, you can’t do that if you don’t have really strong ligaments, tendons, joints, and bones. Another key thing I noticed about those guys; very simply
Rick McKinney	HARD WORK
Darrel Pace HARD WORK
John Williams HARD WORK
Hardy Ward HARD WORK
Jay Bars HARD WORK
Butch Johnson HARD WORK
Vic Wunderley	HARD WORK
Justin Huish HARD WORK
Dennise Parker	HARD WORK
Jennifer Nichols	HARD WORK
Jim Easton HARD WORK
Don Rabska HARD WORK
Khatuna Lorig HARD WORK
Kisik Lee HARD WORK
Larry Skinner HARD WORK
Lloyd Brown HARD WORK
Alexander Kirrillov	HARD WORK
Guy Kruger HARD WORK
Jake Kaminski HARD WORK
Brady Ellison HARD WORK
Heather Khoel HARD WORK
Pete Carney HARD WORK
Johnthan Ohayon HARD WORK
Mike Gerard HARD WORK
All the RA’s HARD WORK
All the JDT HARD WORK
John Megara HARD WORK

You get my point, I wish I knew half of what they forgot.

Rick had an excellent post early on in this section when he observed the macho thing going on in the OTC gym. I’ve seen that same thing also, and as usual I just ignore it and continue on with what I know works well. Target the support to make it strong and the muscles will follow. And diet diet diet!!! But you can go to any gym in the world and see that. That’s nothing new. one time i was in the OTC gym and Khatuna Lorig was working out while i was over doing my workout. i noticed right away that she was working on core and support system strengthening; and look at how great of an archer she is. When it comes to something causing pain, you have to find the cause and not let that turn into an injury. As Rick said, look at the probable frustration that Coach Lee has in trying to explain something very complicated in a second language. Its hard enough in your own first language, much less a second. 

Could the injuries be related to lack of prior training and diet? That probably has something to do with it. When I first started in this sport 6 years ago, i made a decision to stick with 36# bow and learn the form first and allow those inner deep muscles, tendons, ligament, bones, and joints to strengthen slowly over the course of the first 4 years. At year 4, I was all the way up to 38#, that's right ONE HALF POUND A YEAR, and just starting to play with 40#. Man was I into macho or what? 2 years ago I went on into the 46# / 48# range and have been very comfortable with it. My hunting bow is an Avalon plus with 63# long limbs. I can shoot it just fine with no trouble at all, 60 arrows at a time.

So my contention is to look closely at what Coach Lee, Rick McKinney, and Lloyd Brown are saying. Start very light weight, even just stretch bands and straps with little training bows; for a very long time and give yourself time to strengthen properly. Coach Lee has been preaching that since the beginning. And you hear Rick and Lloyd say the same thing. But as all we good Americans want to do, we want to jump straight to the top and shortcut our way to success. “well, I’ll just go ahead and get a bow just like the top shooters have at 46…52# and just not shoot as much…….” Yea, what bologna!!! How about I just go ahead and call up the ER and tell them your on your way and will be there shortly.

Give me a group of youngsters that want to be archers, for the first year or more its going to be form only with straps and really lite weight training bows, like 10…15#. Lots of working out on joints, tendons, ligaments, and bone structure development; and learning to master their diet from the beginning. and little by little by little, year after year after year, we will squeeze the bow poundage up. By the time they are in high school I’ll give you some really good strong archers that can train long hours and look like endurance athletes, because they are endurance athletes. Also, they will be masters of their diets.

You might want to think hard about how you’re having your kids train and listen closely to what Coach Lee is saying and not what you want to be hearing. Same for listening closely to what Rick McKinney and Lloyd Brown are saying. Larry Skinner says the same thing, so does Alexander Kirrillov. And stop trying to be a microwave champion, and give yourself time to evolve in a truly great and very difficult sport.


P90X
This is a workout routine that I got from an info commercial, because it looked very similar to what we did in US Army and what Sir Charles Atlas used to preach. I’ve been on Tony Horton’s P90X “Lean” training program since last February and following his diet plan book like my Bible. It is a fantastic exercise program that you can do at home with no weights. It is giving me more strength for shooting than I honestly thought possible. His program targets the inner joints, ligament, and tendons, and lots of core!!! Let’s see, I believe that Coach Lee said “archers need a really strong core”. Yep, he did say that alright. Cool, as Tony’s program does just that. And for all you heroes out there, his P90X program is loaded with Yoga. Oh my gosh, I just said a dirty four letter word on a public forum. Hahahaha Now, look here Dip Stick, image is something we are all conscious about in the brotherhood. And Yoga doesn’t not help that at all !!! You know what I mean. But, I gave the Yoga a try and to my surprise, it was one of the physically most demanding workouts I’ve ever had, plus it loosened me up a ton. The Yoga has dramatically increased my ability to hold steady and balance during the shot, my breath control, and my ability to focus and concentrate. Just google P90X and you’ll find it. It’s only 144 $ and it is everything I wanted from the OTC weight room and nutrition staff but could not get. And its right in line with what Coach Lee is asking you to do.
Check it out.

Would love to stay and chat more but its time to go shoot. Maybe I’ll go all out and try to shoot “over” 2500 arrows in 24 hours and set a new record around here.

You should check out Scott Antczak on the Modern Traditional DVD, from Wisconsin, the new 2009 World Champion Barebow Recurve, IFAA Bowhunter World Champion. He deadlifts 700 lbs as training for his archery. well……….he has a real gold medal now and I don’t yet. 

Cheers,
Think hard, train hard, and consider a better way,
SGT Williams
“Airborne”


----------



## archerymom2 (Mar 28, 2008)

Sgt Williams -- I agree, P90X is great! Any recommendations on good diet books/programs?


----------



## Elk Crazy (Feb 18, 2006)

*handling the stress load*

Good post Sarge! I have been thinking about the P90x system also.
I personally know Sggt. Williams and he is the Most Dedicated archer I know.You might have noticed,he doesn't hold anything back... but pay attention, he has alot of sound advice to offer. -> Elk Crazy


----------



## sundevilarchery (May 27, 2005)

JDT_Dad said:


> I really didn't find it to be offensive at all and as you said I think he made some valid points.


I found it quite offensive... and continue to find the follow up post un-nerving as well. There are a lot of archers working their butts off on a multiude of levels... and while I have always been a fan of "suck up buttercup" and "quit your whining and do what you need to do"... I think the posts went too far.

IMO, the posts do more harm than good... and any possibile valuable points are lost and/or confused.


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

Holy buckets Paul! Happy Fathers day to you too 

As some of you may know, Paul and I are quite good friends, but he fails to realize that most of us will never be or ever have been Special Forces or Green Baret material. Guys like Paul are only a few in a million to say the least 

I've had just the opposite experience with the Best method and injuries. While none of them have been debilitating or required any sort of surgery, they have developed into the under recovery / overtraining syndrome that destroys the sport for so many.

Here's my take on the most common issues with the technique.

1. Transfer to holding as a concept leads to stress in the shot and rapidly deteriorates into the overtraining syndrome especially in lithe body type individuals. Most folks will not be able to use this concept without developing issues.

2. Rotation of the humerous to try to keep the bow arm elbow crease vertical is impossible unless you have the right body type. Trying to do this particular thing can destroy your bow shoulder in only a few days at any poundage.

3. Ratio of movement / Angular rotation of "lan2" to move through the clicker creates enourmous amounts of stress in the body. It is especially hard on the small rotator cuff muscles.

4. Curving over of the upper spine creates excessive stress in the neck and rhomboids, that leads to difficulty moving and again causing strain on the small rotator cuff muscles during the shot.

5. The rotation of the spine between the hips and shoulders again creates stress in the shot that is doesn't provide any benefit.

After having picked up some buddies in China in 2006, I found that these particular aspects of the BEST method or at least an earlier rendition of the method, were the leading causes of pain and stress in the shot. My Chinese buddies were causing a slight malnutrition no matter how perfectly I ate and had me on the razors edge for over 2 1/2 years. When you are right on the razor, you quickly realize what things cause overuse symptoms and pain.

For most of us, the most efficient shot is not the best method. Pain and sucking it up are not the goals. To prove that we can shoot over 2000 arrow in a day as I suspect Paul has is not the goal and yes I said that right 2000. I simply want to shoot 50 arrows three days a week and still shoot 640's at 70m or 290's on a vegas round.

What made my shot efficient in 2006 and what helped me to shoot nearly all my personal best scores as a 45 year old newbie to recurves was exactly what I went away from in the best method.

You can never underestimate the psychophysiological effect that stress plays in the developement of the under recovery/overtraining syndrome. Stress from life, family, a new shot process, a technique or what ever, all lead to the same result. When the mind doesn't like what the body feels it turns to a negative very quickly and the game is no longer fun or productive for anyone.

Just few random thoughts on the issue from someone who's been through a bit of all this 

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Pete, as usual I find myself agreeing with you almost entirely. Good post.



> I simply want to shoot 50 arrows three days a week and still shoot 640's at 70m or 290's on a vegas round.


This can be done. I have been able to do just that for at least the last 3 years (since recovering from the injury I incurred while trying to learn coach Lee's method). So while you may not be able to shoot 1330's, you can still manage to be very competitive with a minimum of training.

However, it takes an almost complete understanding of your equipment, a thorough foundation in proper technique (enough to know when you are deviating from something that works for you) and a committment to keep up a quality practice routine throughout the year. Lay offs will set you back further than you can recover without a significant increase in training.

Over the past two years, I've only shot when I feel like it - which fortunately is almost every day - but rarely do I ever shoot 100 arrows in one day. Any more than that and I worry that the tendonitis in my string arm will come back and I won't be able to shoot at all.

In that time, I've actually shot several personal bests (in competition) including a 576 indoor fita, a 1042 fita indoor barebow score, and a 299/42x NFAA indoor round. And I shot a 641 ranking round at Texas, tying the top ranked U.S. archer.  While these scores aren't world class, they are still very competitive in the U.S., esp. considering the number of arrows I shoot these days. So once you develop YOUR best technique and a complete understanding of equipment, you can maintain a decent level of proficiency with fewer than 200 arrows/week. 

A lot of this is just simply training smarter, not harder. I see some archers practically killing themselves physically, but no noticeable improvement in their competitive scores in years. Sometimes, even a drop in performance. I often think those archers need to take a step back and give their body a break, and spend some time working on the mental game more.

John.


----------



## Paul Williams (Jun 18, 2006)

*happy Fathers Day to all Fathers*

Holy buckets Paul! Happy Fathers day to you too 

As some of you may know, Paul and I are quite good friends, but he fails to realize that most of us will never be or ever have been Special Forces or Green Baret material. Guys like Paul are only a few in a million to say the least 

I've had just the opposite experience with the Best method and injuries. While none of them have been debilitating or required any sort of surgery, they have developed into the under recovery / overtraining syndrome that destroys the sport for so many.

Here's my take on the most common issues with the technique.

1. Transfer to holding as a concept leads to stress in the shot and rapidly deteriorates into the overtraining syndrome especially in lithe body type individuals. Most folks will not be able to use this concept without developing issues.

2. Rotation of the humerous to try to keep the bow arm elbow crease vertical is impossible unless you have the right body type. Trying to do this particular thing can destroy your bow shoulder in only a few days at any poundage.

3. Ratio of movement / Angular rotation of "lan2" to move through the clicker creates enourmous amounts of stress in the body. It is especially hard on the small rotator cuff muscles.

4. Curving over of the upper spine creates excessive stress in the neck and rhomboids, that leads to difficulty moving and again causing strain on the small rotator cuff muscles during the shot.

5. The rotation of the spine between the hips and shoulders again creates stress in the shot that is doesn't provide any benefit.

After having picked up some buddies in China in 2006, I found that these particular aspects of the BEST method or at least an earlier rendition of the method, were the leading causes of pain and stress in the shot. My Chinese buddies were causing a slight malnutrition no matter how perfectly I ate and had me on the razors edge for over 2 1/2 years. When you are right on the razor, you quickly realize what things cause overuse symptoms and pain.

For most of us, the most efficient shot is not the best method. Pain and sucking it up are not the goals. To prove that we can shoot over 2000 arrow in a day as I suspect Paul has is not the goal and yes I said that right 2000. I simply want to shoot 50 arrows three days a week and still shoot 640's at 70m or 290's on a vegas round.

What made my shot efficient in 2006 and what helped me to shoot nearly all my personal best scores as a 45 year old newbie to recurves was exactly what I went away from in the best method.

You can never underestimate the psychophysiological effect that stress plays in the developement of the under recovery/overtraining syndrome. Stress from life, family, a new shot process, a technique or what ever, all lead to the same result. When the mind doesn't like what the body feels it turns to a negative very quickly and the game is no longer fun or productive for anyone.

Just few random thoughts on the issue from someone who's been through a bit of all this 

Cheers,
Pete 
__________________



Happy Fathers Day to you too Pete. 
and good post :thumbs_up

Pete addresses some really good points. he and i have had many converstions about these points and others. and no one can argue with Pete on his results. he can shoot amazing scores on any turf. and he can tune a bow to maximum performance. so i listen to him alot. and very much respect his opinion, he has some really great advice.


the transfer to holding part was really hard for me. and i'm still not sure i have it like Coach Lee wants it to be. but i do the best i can and it works for me. i think alot of people come "holding" and stop, then restart. i will openly tell you that i cannot do that. for me, the holding is getting into position properly and set up to GO, so the "holding" seems like a change in direction much like a golf swing going back and then going forward. once i hit the set up and change gears to GO, baby its all 100% GO from there. and maybe that has helped me to not have an undue stress point in the shot.

but i know alot of people that have experienced exactly what Pete is describing. so he does have a valid point.

as for my spine, i try very hard not to twist or torque it around. as i have found that twisting and torquing it around causes me to become very unstable and it also causes me to have a really hard time with maintaining balance. i don't know why, but it does. so, here again, Pete has a very good point, which i lean towards what he is saying in my own shot.

its like i said earlier, some of the things in Coach Lee's system, i had to tweek for my own self. so i don't claim to be a perfect BEST method shooter. just like Rick McKinney said in his book, you will have to modify some things for yourself. so i'm doing the best i can, and that's all i can do.

cheers,
Paul
"SGT Williams"


----------



## Paul Williams (Jun 18, 2006)

*oops*

sorry, i didn't mean to put all of Pete's post in mine.
my apologies. gotta remember to do the quote thing properly.

so i dropped and gave you all 50!!

Paul


----------



## Jason22 (Aug 16, 2008)

Great comments Pete.

Limbwalker said - "training smarter, not harder" - I agree completely and this is the only option for most of the world if they want to compete with A) The Koreans and countries with similar programs and B) Young Athletes and those with few time consuming responsibilities.

Being an active father, providing for my family and keeping up with work, church and life leaves me ZERO option for shooting 1500 arrows per day right now. But I firmly believe Quality CAN BE a substitution for Quantity in many cases.

Right now I'm on the bench with a rotator cuff injury (Subscapularis). I can't and won't blame the BESTmethod or Coach Lee who I haven't met with in person but I am very pleased with his GENEROUS offering to the archery community right there on his website. I know of no other book author that gives you most of the book for free on their site like he has.

I blame my injury on my own ignorance, making a form change at the same time as doubling the number of arrows per end I was shooting from 6 to 12... then forcing myself to push through fatigue and pain in an effort to get into better shape. I now know this is the wrong way of doing things.

It seems the BEST method may have a "small window" to operate in correctly and if you deviate slightly from it, or attempt only part of it, you may have a higher than normal risk of injury. That has been my observation and personal experience, but I'm a newbie coming back to the sport. 

However, it is a system that has been proven to work for some very good athletes. Coach Lee's track record is hard to ignore. Look at Brady's recent FITA, and look at his work with the Aussies. Those guys were amazing and at least some of them shot incredibly high poundage with that form and to my knowledge, without injury. Granted I heard Brady hurt his bow shoulder before Beijing and had to come down in poundage but that is totally unconfirmed rumor mill fodder so I probably shouldn't even repeat it. Lee's efforts in the US seem to have been met with some resistance, and though it may be justified that is likely much of the reason more good things haven't yet happened here.

Whatever you do, *please be careful with your bodies*, work closely with a coach that knows their stuff and that listens to you. If your body says no, don't force it. Find out what is going on before continuing. 

I really thought I was in good shape and beyond an injury such as this. My bow shoulder has always been one of my stronger points and more solid aspects of my form due to early coaching that drilled into my head how important that is. I shoot a heavy setup very comfortably and my bow shoulder is seldom where I even feel fatigue... yet here I am in misery with ice packs and electric zappy medicine pad things in physical therapy and I can barely change a diaper, let alone pick up a bow. And it's been about 6 weeks since my injury.


----------



## Flint Hills Tex (Nov 3, 2008)

*Paul Williams, I respect you.*

Let me start this post by reiterating that I have great respect for any top notch archer, no matter what country he/she is from, or what shooting method he employs. In fact, it's one of the things that has really impressed me since taking up archery, the respect with which fellow archers treat each other, none of the haughtiness found among top performers in a lot of other sports.

That said, I will voice my opinion on your original post, Paul. At first I thought it was probably tongue in cheek, but towards the end, I had my doubts, and tended more towards being offended, as were a number of other posters here. 

No one, least of all me, will dispute that hard work and sacrifice are neccessary to win olympic gold. But there are two basic mistakes you've made. 

1. Olympic archery is a competitive, not a combat situation. You don't need the mettle of a Special Forces soldier to compete. Methods that CAUSE injury are detrimental to our sport.

2. It takes more than just HARD WORK to compete at the olympic level; you need TALENT as well. Just one or the other of these 2 elements will only get you so far, but both of them put together is what it takes to win!

Archery is a sport I hope to be able to pursue my whole life long (I often see guys in their 80s competing at shoots), but if I were to push myself past the point of fatigue to the point where I were causing myself injury, I just might as well sell all my equipment now and take up stamp collecting. I know enough guys in my club who injured their shoulders at work (iron worker, road construction worker) who'll never be able to draw a bow again. Imagine that happening because of practicing.

Recognizing, admitting to, and treating the causes of pain in athletics is not being a sissy, it's being SMART!


----------



## azarcherymom (Jul 13, 2004)

Jason22 said:


> Granted I heard Brady hurt his bow shoulder before Beijing and had to come down in poundage but that is totally unconfirmed rumor mill fodder so I probably shouldn't even repeat it.



Ahhhh, Gotta love that rumor mill fodder. Brady has NEVER had an injury due to the B.E.S.T system or by working with Coach Lee. Any injuries that Brady has incurred while being at the OTC, have been by non-archery related means ie: walking on ice (hip), body surfing (knee), bicycle (wrist), football (various sprains, scrapes and bruises). Archery is actually the safest thing Brady does


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Paul, thank you for serving. What it takes to achieve your level of tenacity is beyond my mental understanding, but it is definitely appreciated. 

As for comparing injuries, it is not the same. Fighting to survive a combat situation should never be compared to competing in archery as has been pointed out. However, I get your point. 

Archery is a very funny sport. It can cause more injuries and permanent problems for no other purpose than to be a good archer. I know, you have to suck it up and tolerate a bit of pain, but as the old weight lifting mantra goes, “No Pain, No Gain. Too much Pain, No Brain!” There is a difference between soreness for lack of using your muscles and potentially serious injury. Knowing the difference can lead to a long lifetime pleasure in the sport. 

As for who should really be using this program since it was designed for “elites”. Unfortunately we do not have a very deep base of good archers. There are many reasons for this, but since we have a very shallow base, many archers who would not even be considered to be an “elite” in another country is thrust into a very high intense regimen that they are not even close to being prepared for. Thus, they end up with injuries. Also, many do not know the difference between soreness and injury so they continue to injure themselves and end up with massive issues down the road. 

A few key points that Paul pointed out that I found interesting. First, is his on going physical training. Since he has been weight lifting virtually all his life, he has experienced few injuries, only soreness in muscles not used in eating snakes, crawling in the mud, running for miles with a human or two on his back. Different muscles thus the muscles needed to shoot had to be developed. I too started lifting at an early age for pole vaulting in Jr. High. The intensity of training and since I lifted throughout my shooting career I think there is some merit to what Paul is saying. I had so few injuries during my million plus shots at high poundage. Being in top physical condition could be the difference. 

The other is knowing and understanding his body. You can be assured that he was making slight modifications of his form as he was experiencing sharp pain. If it were a dull pain he figured that was ok. Or at least I would expect this to be the case. Being aware of your body is a key component. However, it does not guarantee success as has been pointed out. You could do everything right, have perfect form, train up to 1000 arrows per day and still not be able to achieve the “elitism” many seek. There is a small ingredient that is within the archer and although it can be taught, at this point of the USAA’s short life of 100+ years it is not taught. Either you have what it takes or you don’t. Eventually the mental game just might be a more important part of our archery programs, but as of yet, I do not see it. 

Now, on a side comment. At first, I busted out laughing of how Paul charged in and called most people wimps. For many years I would get quite angry about an archer (and there were many) who voiced that they would like to be a champion but they complained about a lack of time to train. I usually told them they did not have what it takes in a very “Paul like manner”. Archery was not the number one thought in their minds to be that champion and it was offensive to those who did put in their all. Those who complain may have a job, family, and other responsibilities and did not have their priorities right if they wanted to be a champion. Yes, it was just that simple. However, if you keep it this in perspective you might be one of the few who have the ability to achieve a very high level of success. But be realistic. Archery is only a sport with little financial rewards and for those who are getting some financial rewards, it will dry up rather quickly after you tumble a little. Very few can make a living at this game so keep that in mind. Enjoy your sport and if that means putting in 100% of what you have, then do so but consider the consequences. If it is considered a part time fun thing, then do that and enjoy it. Just keep things in perspective.

Great comments out there!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> There is a small ingredient that is within the archer and although it can be taught, at this point of the USAA’s short life of 100+ years it is not taught. Either you have what it takes or you don’t. Eventually the mental game just might be a more important part of our archery programs, but as of yet, I do not see it.


X2.

John.


----------



## Jason22 (Aug 16, 2008)

azarcherymom said:


> Ahhhh, Gotta love that rumor mill fodder. Brady has NEVER had an injury due to the B.E.S.T system or by working with Coach Lee. Any injuries that Brady has incurred while being at the OTC, have been by non-archery related means ie: walking on ice (hip), body surfing (knee), bicycle (wrist), football (various sprains, scrapes and bruises). Archery is actually the safest thing Brady does


Thank you for clarifying that, I was hesitant to say anything and glad you followed up. :thumbs_up


----------



## Paul Williams (Jun 18, 2006)

*Preparing for a hard task*

I want to be very straight forward about preparing yourself for a physically demanding task; such as US Army Special Forces School; or training to become a Champion in sports, like Rick McKinney said I his recent post. This has a lot to do with what you all are discussing in the column, so please take some time to read thru this and give yourself credit where credit is due, and be realistic where realism is needed in your own preparations, or the preparations of your archery students.

It may sound like I went through US Army Special Forces School easily. *That is not the case at all.* The first two times I attempted this feat, I failed to complete the “tryouts” course, called SFAS (Special Forces Assessment and Selection). The first two times (one year apart) I ignored some real pain issues that pushed myself into an injury with only two days to go on the first tryout. That’s three weeks of murder on your body, and I wasn’t smart enough to prevent myself from injury. And I stupidly did the *same exact thing *with only one day to go on the second attempt. Well….I’m a bit of a slow learner.

The first time, I was in no way ready physically or mentally to complete the course and be considered for selection into the SF school. The second time, I was definitely ready physically, but I had failed to “get smart” about my performance mentally; and once again made the same stupid mistake and pushed myself into an injury that placed me on a plane headed back to my unit in disgrace. Fortunately my unit Commander believed in me and signed off for me to try a third time. I will forever be grateful to him for that. 

Even in spite of my injuries, I had this inner drive, in the most insane way, to get a GOLD, SILVER, or BRONZE medal from Special Forces school. That is to finish 1st, 2nd, or 3rd in my class. Up to this point in my military career, I had never finished in the top three in any of my classes prior to Special Forces school. So it was a really hard challenge. And make no mistake about it; I was going up against the best athletes in the world, US Army wide.

So, here we go for a third try. Now this time I had been preparing my body physically for about three years now, and mentally for about 1 year. The third time I went through SFAS, I flew thru it with no physical difficulties at all. In fact, I excelled quite well – physically. And I made sure that I “stayed smart” every step of the way; and when I started to endure pain that could easily turn into an injury, I immediately adjusted myself so as not to allow an injury to occur. In doing so, I found that staying focused mentally during all this was more difficult than I had planned for. Never the less, I stayed focused to the end and persevered. 

I was selected from that SFAS class to attend the actual SF School. Now, I had an even more challenging task. I was faced with competing against 300 of the best most physically fit and mentally strong soldiers the US Army had. And I secretly wanted to beat them all and get one of those medals (gold, silver, or bronze). Out of the original 300 that began our SF class, only 65 soldiers graduated. Talk about “against all odds”. And I secretly wanted a medal?!?!?!? “Are you crazy”, “you might want to reprioritize some things”, “not sure you can do that”, “nice to have goals, but that might be a bit of a stretch”, “you know, there’s a job opening down at the ……” good Lord!!! on and on went the dribble from my own family!! and friends!! 

Wow, what a support base of people that actually believed in me, aye. Even though my own family and friends saw no greatness in me; I thought that I could do it and secretly I wanted to beat every soldier there and take one of those medals. Now technically, there are no medals to be had in the Army. It’s just the thing of being in the top three at SF School that is a personal Olympic medal. It goes back to the song by Barry Sadler, “Ballad of the Green Berets”, the words of the song go “100 men will test today, but only three win the Green Beret”. Hence, being in the top three at SF School is HUGE in the US Army.

And I knew fully what the odds were; and they were in no way favoring me!!! So I then applied the same tactics as I did in SFAS. I continued to train my body hard and continued to sharpen myself mentally for the task ahead. 

There were many times during the 8 months of torture in the SF School that I faced very difficult and painful circumstances both physically and mentally. However, each time I came up with pain I had to decide if it was injury prone or simply discomfort from under use or over training, or if the pain was from a not-yet-recovered state in my body. And I had to be very careful about this because of the tasks we were constantly faced with. Make no mistake about it, SF School is hard, it is extremely hard.

In the end, I made it and graduated Honor Graduate of my class. That is in Third place overall, or simply I won the Bronze medal in Olympic terms. No one can ever take that away from me. But what is more important is that I can give this Bronze medal finish away to everyone who is willing to listen and learn. 

I have seen Coach Lee’s training program up close and personal at the OTC, a lot. And I see nothing that is in any way forcing anyone into an injury. Coach Lee’s shooting system is a different system than others floating around the entire world. Have other shooting styles caused injuries? I’m not so sure that any one particular style has done in an athlete; *but I can guarantee you plenty of athletes have done themselves in. * just like I did myself in twice at SFAS. Until I got smart about it.

Coach Lee’s training program is high quality and intense. He fully knows what he is doing. If an athlete is going to the OTC to be an RA then they had better get themselves ready physically for the task. It is not an easy, lazy, slothful training program. “Getting yourself ready for the task” means preparing your body and mind for two years if that’s what it takes. 

Coach Alexander Kirrillov’s training program is high quality and intense. He fully knows what he is doing. If an athlete is going to Tucson to train with Coach Kirrillov then they had better get themselves ready physically for the task. It is not an easy, lazy, slothful training program. That means preparing your body and mind for two years if that’s what it takes. 

Same thing with Coach Lloyd Brown, and Coach Larry Skinner, and Coach Hardy Ward. 

When an athlete begins to experience pain, they must evaluate the pain issue and make decisions immediately; if it is injury prone or soreness. And if they are not sure, *THEN TALK TO YOUR COACH,* for goodness sake. You have to learn the difference, and there is no greater asset than your coach, no matter what shooting style you’re using.

“no pain no gain”, this is about soreness and under training or lack of use, and getting stronger with something your not used to using yet.

“more pain, no brain”, this is about a pain that is quickly going to turn into an injury. Be smart and talk to your coach.

Best to all in training yourself to accomplish what ever goals you have.
Be smart and learn what advances you towards your goal and what takes you backwards.
Utilize the great resources that are available.
If you’re not sure about something, ASK.

*Cheers,
SGT Williams
“Airborne”

“now drop and give me 50”*


----------



## Paul Williams (Jun 18, 2006)

*Winning the Bronze*

Let’s put this in pure Olympic archery terms.

During my time in the Army and prior to Special Forces School; I never won anything.
That is to say that I never placed Gold, Silver, or Bronze; more specifically I never finished in 1st, 2nd, or 3rd in any of my classes. And I tried really hard to finish in the top 3 in every one of them.

Distinguished Honor Graduate of the Cycle, 1st or Gold.
Distinguished Honor Graduate, 2nd or Silver.
Honor Graduate, 3rd or Bronze.

When I made the tryouts and was selected for SF School, I felt as if I had made the Olympic Team of the Army. And upon finishing as Honor Graduate, I felt that I had won a Bronze medal in the Olympics (of the Army of course). 

So, here is my point. 
First: this has nothing to do with glorifying myself. This has everything to do with sharing with everyone how hard it was and how it was so much more difficult than I ever imagined, and how I continued to believe in myself, even when everyone didn’t (except my Commander), and how I just kept trying and trying and trying. I just refused to quit. God granted me this journey in my life to share with others, to reach out and help others come into a leer of Champions. It’s very doable. The first step is to believe in yourself. If you believe in yourself and you see greatness inside yourself, then go for it with all you have. Train hard, be smart, and don’t listen to anyone that tells you that your lofty goals are too high. Stick with people who have like minds and strive just as hard to do the impossible. 
Secondly; if you have never placed in any major competition, so what, that does not exclude you from making the Olympic team in 2012 or beyond. You still have an open chance to make the team and you have just as good a chance at taking home one of those coveted medals. 

Believe in yourself.
Train hard and strength yourself more and more and more.
If you can’t do it, keep trying until you can.
Set your face like flint on the goal, just like Jesus did on the Cross.
When the pain comes, and it will, be mentally smart and advance yourself.
When the opportunity comes, enter into the competition as prepared as you possibly can be.
When the competition is on, go for it with all that you have, leave nothing left of yourself, put it all out there; win or lose you will forever be satisfied with yourself and how far you advanced.

*Cheers,
SGT Williams
“Airborne”*


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> First: this has nothing to do with glorifying myself. This has everything to do with sharing with everyone how hard it was and how it was so much more difficult than I ever imagined, and how I continued to believe in myself, even when everyone didn’t (except my Commander), and how I just kept trying and trying and trying. I just refused to quit. God granted me this journey in my life to share with others, to reach out and help others come into a leer of Champions. It’s very doable. The first step is to believe in yourself. If you believe in yourself and you see greatness inside yourself, then go for it with all you have. Train hard, be smart, and don’t listen to anyone that tells you that your lofty goals are too high. Stick with people who have like minds and strive just as hard to do the impossible.
> Secondly; if you have never placed in any major competition, so what, that does not exclude you from making the Olympic team in 2012 or beyond. You still have an open chance to make the team and you have just as good a chance at taking home one of those coveted medals.


Bravo Paul. I couldn't have said it better.

I'll add to that something I firmly believe - that training for competition (like other forms of hard work) is it's own reward. I believe that every person that shows up at a national competition has already won something. Because they no longer sit with all the timid souls who have to wonder if they have what it takes. 

John.


----------



## Flint Hills Tex (Nov 3, 2008)

c3hammer said:


> I've had just the opposite experience with the Best method and injuries. While none of them have been debilitating or required any sort of surgery, they have developed into the under recovery / overtraining syndrome that destroys the sport for so many.
> 
> Here's my take on the most common issues with the technique.
> ...
> ...


I talked through some of this with one of our physical therapists. I went through the motions of drawing, using a thera-band, then demonstrated the rotations you described. The PT's jaw hit the floor! She said that type of movement is absolutely destructive to the rotator cuff, in particular to the biceps and supraspinatus tendons. 

Paul & John, the area I excelled in in my younger days was music, and yes, if you want to excell and reach the top, you have to be prepared to make great sacrifices. There are plenty who will never try, for fear of failure. I failed to make All-State Choir at the last audition, and felt crushed. But I didn't stop trying! After high school, I tried out for and made the Houston Symphony Chorus. I was priviledged to work with some of the finest musicians in the country. 

Again, without trying to glorify myself, without a GOD-GIVEN talent, no amount of hard work would have gotten me there. But talent alone would not have gotten me there, either! Talent and hard work on my part helped me reach those goals. If you've got the talent, and are prepared to make the sacrifice, for goodness sakes, TRY! If you fail the first time around, step back, ask what can be learned, work on that, then TRY AGAIN! If you do not ultimately succeed, you are still not a failure, certainly not any poorer for having tried! If anything, you've learned to work towards a goal, to focus your talent and effort on achieving something worthwhile. Those are lessons that will serve you well your whole life long.


----------



## Huntmaster (Jan 30, 2003)

Flint Hills Tex said:


> I talked through some of this with one of our physical therapists. I went through the motions of drawing, using a thera-band, then demonstrated the rotations you described. The PT's jaw hit the floor! She said that type of movement is absolutely destructive to the rotator cuff, in particular to the biceps and supraspinatus tendons.


This is exactly what is hurting the reputation of the best method. Please don't shoot like you expressed to your therapist. They are correct. The reson is that you do not have a good handle on the BEST method. 

I am not trying to criticise you, in fact, I'm trying to help. The BEST method eliminates even use of the bicept, and the rotation of the shoulder in its socket. You need to go get some clarification on what you have learned, or try a different path. 

I'll agree with one thing. If the form is done incorrectly, it has potential to cause injury. If done correctly, it is quite sound.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> If the form is done incorrectly, it has potential to cause injury. If done correctly, it is quite sound


Which really gets back to my original statement: do this only under the watchful eye of a truly qualified instructor. (i.e., don't try this at home...  )

Hopefully book 2 will explain in better detail for the do-it-yourself crowd. 

John.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

*Another take*



limbwalker said:


> Which really gets back to my original statement: do this only under the watchful eye of a truly qualified instructor. (i.e., don't try this at home...  )
> 
> Hopefully book 2 will explain in better detail for the do-it-yourself crowd.
> 
> John.


I have a different take on this: "Don't take advise on BEST from the folks who don't support the method since they seem to know how to hurt themselves."

I also hope much of the incorrect information floating around out there will be addressed in the second book.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

Reminds me of this Chinese Proverb:



1. He who knows and knows not that he knows.

He is asleep... wake him.

2. He who knows not and knows not that he knows not.

He is a fool... shun him

3. He who knows not and knows that he knows not.

He is a child... teach him.

4. He who knows and knows that he knows.

He is a king... follow him.

The test for most of us is to know the difference.


----------



## Paul Williams (Jun 18, 2006)

*excellent*



Flint Hills Tex said:


> the area I excelled in in my younger days was music, and yes, if you want to excell and reach the top, you have to be prepared to make great sacrifices. There are plenty who will never try, for fear of failure. I failed to make All-State Choir at the last audition, and felt crushed. But I didn't stop trying! After high school, I tried out for and made the Houston Symphony Chorus. I was priviledged to work with some of the finest musicians in the country.
> 
> Again, without trying to glorify myself, without a GOD-GIVEN talent, no amount of hard work would have gotten me there. But talent alone would not have gotten me there, either! Talent and hard work on my part helped me reach those goals. If you've got the talent, and are prepared to make the sacrifice, for goodness sakes, TRY! If you fail the first time around, step back, ask what can be learned, work on that, then TRY AGAIN! If you do not ultimately succeed, you are still not a failure, certainly not any poorer for having tried! If anything, you've learned to work towards a goal, to focus your talent and effort on achieving something worthwhile. Those are lessons that will serve you well your whole life long.




Flint,
excellent post. congratulations on making the Houston Symphony. i'm jealous. i love classical music and choir so much. love opera too. it takes alot of courage to stand out there in front of millions and sing well. your right, its not a strength issue. its about trying and not giving up, believing in yourself; like you shared in your choir experience, and when the going got tough you studied more and stuck with it. no one can ever take that away from you. and now you can share that with everyone.

did you ever sing C. Orff's, Carmina Burana? part I, II, and III?
or Beethovens Sympony No.9 choral finale, "O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!"?
if you did, i'll bet it was good.

thanks for sharing,
cheers,
SGT Williams
"Airborne"


----------



## skybowman (Jan 31, 2004)

TomB said:


> Reminds me of this Chinese Proverb:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Absolutely Tom. And most young archers and Joad parents have a difficult time separating the wheat from the chaff. Unfortunately, the pretenders may not be readily apparent.


----------



## Flint Hills Tex (Nov 3, 2008)

Paul Williams said:


> Flint,
> excellent post. congratulations on making the Houston Symphony. i'm jealous. i love classical music and choir so much. love opera too. it takes alot of courage to stand out there in front of millions and sing well. your right, its not a strength issue. its about trying and not giving up, believing in yourself; like you shared in your choir experience, and when the going got tough you studied more and stuck with it. no one can ever take that away from you. and now you can share that with everyone.
> 
> did you ever sing C. Orff's, Carmina Burana? part I, II, and III?
> ...


Almost got to sing Carmina Burana, but our college choir director changed his mind...Did the "Freude, schöner Götterfunken" from Beethoven's 9th with the Symphony Chorus. Words cannot describe... And the feeling when we got a standing ovation... I consider myself very blessed.


----------



## Flint Hills Tex (Nov 3, 2008)

TomB said:


> Reminds me of this Chinese Proverb:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Okay, my fear is that with the success of USArchery team members using the BEST method, many young archers will want to follow their idols, but won't find the KING to follow at their level, and will end up injured and barred from ever shooting a bow again. We can't afford that! 

I, too, hope that the 2nd book will shed more light on the method, or that it has evolved to the point where it can be readily understood and taught at every level without the dangers imposed by a false grasp of the method.


----------



## spotted54 (Nov 18, 2008)

Never any problems with AUS David Barnes, Tim Cuddihy and the rest. But I suppose they were only average archers


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> "Don't take advise on BEST from the folks who don't support the method since they seem to know how to hurt themselves."


JDT, I think that statement is way off base. It seems there are always those looking more closely at whether someone does or does not "support" the method than the method itself. 

This is not an issue of loyalty - "Supporting" the method is not the issue and it matters little whether one "supports the method or not" when you consider the potential for injury. 

It has been proven several times now that the method works and works well for it's intended purpose, which is one reason I recommended to several of my personal students that they leave my tutleage and begin working directly with coach Lee. 

The answer, I think, to this question of injury is in working ONLY with qualified coaches who can teach this method without injuring archers, and NOT trying this without proper instruction/interpretation, unless you want to risk getting hurt. 

Unfortunately, where we are in the process of training qualified coaches is that there are very few that understand enough about the method to teach it without the risk of injury. Hopefully that number will grow as the understanding grows.

John.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

*BEST Method compared to manufactoring processes*



limbwalker said:


> The answer, I think, to this question of injury is in working ONLY with qualified coaches who can teach this method without injuring archers, and NOT trying this without proper instruction/interpretation, unless you want to risk getting hurt.
> 
> Unfortunately, where we are in the process of training qualified coaches is that there are very few that understand enough about the method to teach it without the risk of injury. Hopefully that number will grow as the understanding grows.
> 
> John.


I have to agree with this. There should be no issue of "with us" or "against" us regarding BEST. I'm for what ever works, which may or may not be BEST Method or aspects of BEST Method depending on who the coach and/or the student is.

I think there has been at least a casual consensus that BEST learned directly from Coach Lee and/or from a select few of his most learned coaches is safe, but that people can get injured from improper BEST Method coached from less learned coaches. But for those of us who will never see the inside of the OTC we have no ready way to tell the difference between the "safe" coaches and the "unsafe" coaches, all of whom are **certified** USAA coaches. That is a serious flaw in the BEST Method/USA Archery roll out of BEST Method that cannot (well, **should not**) be ignored. It is a fundamental process issue that no responsible entity can wish away.

Think about this from a manufacturing analogy. It isn't enough to have a good product, you need to be able to manufacture it reliably, and if you don't have a reliable way to mass produce a product then trying to mass produce it is a bad idea. Let's take Coca Cola in a hypothetical analogy. The syrup is made by Coca Cola, but individual cans and bottles are bottled by regional bottlers. Imagine if the bottles of Coke made by Coke corporate headquarters were tasty and safe, but that some of those bottled by regional bottlers tasted the same but because of a very tricky, hard to duplicate bottling process, had a slow poison in them that caused, say, shoulder injury, and consumers couldn't initially tell the difference until they were injured. The analogy is absurd, since consumers would not put up with such a danger, yet that is what archers may be putting up with with the attempt to roll out BEST Method nationally. I don't think BEST coaching would pass 6 Sigma scrutiny.

In the Coke analogy, supporters might say there is nothing wrong with the soda because product bottled at corporate HQ, which had mastered the bottling process, was just fine, and many of regional bottlers were fine and that the slow poison found in some of the regional distributors was not fault of the incredibly tricky Coke bottling process but of poor implementation and any and all critics were just Coke haters who only know how to injure themselves.

In that tortured analogy, it is pretty clear that we as consumers wouldn't put up with any excuses. We'd demand that Coke come up with a bottling process that was simple enough to be reliably and safely implemented to be easy and safe to bottle regionally. And, indeed, that is what coke does. Right now, BEST Method is too nuanced and tricky to roll out, AFIK, nationally in a way that insures that people will all be safely taught by the various iterations of proxies. That isn't a fatal flaw to BEST being taught at the OTC, not at all. But it is a real issue to the national roll out of BEST that must be dealt with dispassionately and realistically, and a "with us" or "against us" attitude by BEST Method "supporters" will not solve that problem any more than calling BEST bad for everyone would.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

There is a way to change and fix this, but nobody is going to like it.

Void all current coaching certifications. Re-issue new certifications to coaches who have undergone vigorous training and testing from the source method. After awhile, the process will grow and different levels of expertises will emerge. There will be a coach for coaches level and the knowledge will spread.

Just like religion. Kill all non believers first and then spread your new belief. Its the fastest and most efficient way to do it.

Existing coaches will not like it because all of a sudden, their coaching credentials just went down the drain. Maybe this is where all the resistance and sabotages are coming from. From people who fear change. We are talking about their bread and butter after all.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

Flint Hills Tex said:


> Okay, my fear is that with the success of USArchery team members using the BEST method, many young archers will want to follow their idols, but won't find the KING to follow at their level, and will end up injured and barred from ever shooting a bow again. We can't afford that!
> 
> I, too, hope that the 2nd book will shed more light on the method, or that it has evolved to the point where it can be readily understood and taught at every level without the dangers imposed by a false grasp of the method.


I don't think a mere book or 2, dvd or seminal is going to change the mentality of people who have their own agenda to go against this system of conformity. Its easy to find fault and make a big deal out of it by preying on the fearful and undecided in the crowd and clouding the advantages of this system.

Then don't forget about stupidity. There are many dump ducks out there who cannot follow instructions not because they dont want to, but because their brains are not capable of doing so. Never underestimate the power of stupidity. 

The worst kind are the ones who think they are smart! If they get hurt, it must be the system. They dont care if others have succeeded from it. Other people, other country. They are perfect, but because they cannot do it, it is the system that is flawed. And America is a country with many laws to protect the stupid among us.


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

ArrowNewB said:


> There is a way to change and fix this, but nobody is going to like it.
> 
> Void all current coaching certifications. Re-issue new certifications to coaches who have undergone vigorous training and testing from the source method. After awhile, the process will grow and different levels of expertises will emerge. There will be a coach for coaches level and the knowledge will spread.
> 
> ...


The problem with this is that there are many ways to teach. There is only one method currently taught RAs. 
To invalidate successful teaching methods is crazy. The sport needs more, not less participation. 
I like the idea of getting as many people to shoot a bow as you can. Take the most talented and let them work on a specific method of shooting a bow.
So let all coaches coach! It doesn't have to be method specific.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

midwayarcherywi said:


> The problem with this is that there are many ways to teach. There is only one method currently taught RAs.
> To invalidate successful teaching methods is crazy. The sport needs more, not less participation.
> I like the idea of getting as many people to shoot a bow as you can. Take the most talented and let them work on a specific method of shooting a bow.
> So let all coaches coach! It doesn't have to be method specific.


If there is a method that has been proven to give most people the edge to win, would you not want to implement it to everyone and increase your chances of finding the ultimate one? So there will be a few who will not do well with it and that is probably because their body structure and functionality is so different from everyone else. Let those slide and concentrate on the rest. They are probably not suited for this sport anyways. Now with a large number of students learning the same method, it is now easy to pick out the elite among the group. And that is how you find and develop your top olympic team time and time again.
By then, when you pick out your olympic hopefuls, you can concentrate of elite training since all their fundamentals are sound. You dont have to waste time and resources trying to custom fit training for each individual athlete. 

You will find a prodigy once in awhile in a whole country who shoots their own method, but you cannot replicate this success. You cannot win game after game, much less form a wining team less you so happen to have 3 prodigies from that generation.

Its a matter of what you want. Occasional success or world domination.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ArrowNewB said:


> They are smart! If they get hurt, it must be the system. They dont care if others have succeeded from it. Other people, other country. They are perfect, but because they cannot do it, it is the system that is flawed. And America is a country with many laws to protect the stupid among us.


Well, one needs to be very careful with questions of causality, both in presuming it, and in casually dismissing it. Only hard data of a large sample size can prove it one way or another, but cavalierly dismissing the idea that improper BEST Method coaching can cause injury is a bad idea. Also, it is a mistake to assume that just because some people succeed with something means it is a good best practice for people in general.

Archery is a **sport**, and we don't really need to make it into a Darwinian selection of injury resistant people, with other people all washing out with career destroying injuries. It is axiomatic that the people who succeed did so with whatever method they used, that doesn't mean that method is generally safe. People used to survive amputations performed with out antiseptic conditions or antibiotics, but that doesn't make such surgery a best practice. Many people died from sepsis. Let's consider your post with that as an analogy:



> They are smart! If they get hurt, it must be the system. They dont care if others have succeeded from it. Other people, other country. They are perfect, but because they cannot do it, it is the system that is flawed. And America is a country with many laws to protect the stupid among us.


Imagine all those whiners, dying from sepsis, blaming the surgery...how dare they blame the system instead of themselves! All the survivors are fine! So the system of surgery must also be fine...

We can see from that analogy that success stories are a select group and you can't judge the efficacy of a system by only looking at the success stories. One needs to look at more than just the survivors, at a larger population, including the people who **failed** using those methods to make such a determination, for that is where the whole story lies, in the ratios of success to failure, and of the metrics one uses to determine the said success. Same goes for BEST.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ArrowNewB said:


> You will find a prodigy once in awhile in a whole country who shoots their own method, but you cannot replicate this success. You cannot win game after game, much less form a wining team less you so happen to have 3 prodigies from that generation.
> 
> Its a matter of what you want. Occasional success or world domination.


You make it sound as if the choice is BEST Method or try to invent your own method. That is a false dichotomy and kind of ignores the rest of the World, who do pretty well in archery without the BEST Method.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

How would you collect such data? You will have to find a large sample size of people using the proper method as it was meant to be and then record their injury rate only while that method is in use.

If your group includes people of varying degree of understanding of the method, not you have to come up with a fair scale to measure this degree of understanding of the method to co-relate it to injury rates.

Who is going to fund such extensive and long term studies?

Raw data can be useful. But is can also be very dangerous when open to interpretation.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

Warbow said:


> Well, one needs to be very careful with questions of causality, both in presuming it, and in casually dismissing it. Only hard data of a large sample size can prove it one way or another, but cavalierly dismissing the idea that improper BEST Method coaching can cause injury is a bad idea. Also, it is a mistake to assume that just because some people succeed with something means it is a good best practice for people in general.
> 
> Archery is a **sport**, and we don't really need to make it into a Darwinian selection of injury resistant people, with other people all washing out with career destroying injuries. It is axiomatic that the people who succeed did so with whatever method they used, that doesn't mean that method is generally safe. People used to survive amputations performed with out antiseptic conditions or antibiotics, but that doesn't make such surgery a best practice. Many people died from sepsis. Let's consider your post with that as an analogy:
> 
> ...


Ok. Lets take your analogy and break it down. 

Back then when such amputations were conducted, there was no knowledge of what sepsis was, or what antiseptic or antibiotics could do. Their choices were simple. Die slow now, of give this amputation thing a try. The system was right for making amputation available, considering what your next best option was.

The way I see it, this system is proven. Why change it because a small group of people doing it wrong are bitc#ing about it


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

Warbow said:


> You make it sound as if the choice is BEST Method or try to invent your own method. That is a false dichotomy and kind of ignores the rest of the World, who do pretty well in archery without the BEST Method.


Be it whatever method. Let us stick to one so that we too can classify ourselves among this group of other countries who are also winning.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ArrowNewB said:


> The way I see it, this system is proven. Why change it because a small group of people doing it wrong are bitc#ing about it


What I think is proven is that Coach Lee is a fine coach. What isn't proven is whether BEST Method is robust enough to be taught en masse by proxies. In person with Lee, BEST is tailored to individual archers physiology. Outside of the OTC, BEST becomes more and more of a one size fits all cookie cutter approach, regardless of whether that is Lee's intent.

Your claim is like saying that Jaguar XJ12s are good cars so there is no reason the Yugo plant can't make them in mass quantities, just as good. There is a difference between having a product and having one that can be mass produced. Rolling out BEST across the nation is mass production.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

Threads like this one encourages everyone to complain about how this method is causing injuries and why it is not suitable for everyone. You have Tom, Dick and Harry writing in complaining how they got hurt when they tried following the method after reading a book. So now this method is so flawed because if everyone cannot learn it by reading about it, than what is the use of it?

It give everyone the impression that the system used in the past was perfect. Then someone will imply how change is bad if it is done just for the sake of doing it. Another will come in and say something like if its not broke, don't fix it, or keep it simple stupid.

How convenient is all this? This system is setup to fail even before it is given the chance to establish itself properly.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> This system is setup to fail even before it is given the chance to establish itself properly.


Even you yourself would consider this a naive statement if you know all the facts. Nobody wants the system to fail. I've not seen or heard that from anyone. What we all want is a great system with fewer injuries. We need to find a way to get both.

John.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

In my original post I said:"Don't take advise on BEST from the folks who don't support the method since they seem to know how to hurt themselves."

To which limbwalker replied:



limbwalker said:


> JDT, I think that statement is way off base. It seems there are always those looking more closely at whether someone does or does not "support" the method than the method itself.
> 
> This is not an issue of loyalty - "Supporting" the method is not the issue and it matters little whether one "supports the method or not" when you consider the potential for injury.
> John.


If taken out of context, I agree my original statement would seem way off. However, taken in context, I'll stand by the statement.

Initially C3hammer made some statements about "problems" he had with BEST. C3Hammer said "Rotation of the humerous to try to keep the bow arm elbow crease vertical is impossible unless you have the right body type. Trying to do this particular thing can destroy your bow shoulder in only a few days at any poundage." It's a statement I would have to agree with. You will cause problems for your bow shoulder if you try to force the elbow crease vertical. The Problem is, it is not a requirement of BEST as C3hammer suggests, but it is a common misunderstanding of the method.

Then Flint Hills Texas says: I talked through some of this (C3Hammers idea of rotating the crease vertical) with one of our physical therapists. I went through the motions of drawing, using a thera-band, then demonstrated the rotations you described. The PT's jaw hit the floor! She said that type of movement is absolutely destructive to the rotator cuff, in particular to the biceps and supraspinatus tendons. 

Again, I'll agree with the physical therapist. The way C3Hammer presented the idea of rotation of the humerous, can damage the joint, but it is not part of the BEST method.

So we have Flint Hills Texas quoting a BEST method technique stated by C3hammer (who from the sound of his post) is not a BEST supporter and the technique he describes causes injury, but is an inaccurate description of BEST. 

So I made the statement: "Don't take advise on BEST from the folks who don't support the method since they seem to know how to hurt themselves." 

It is not an issue of loyalty to a person or a system. If you are going to evaluate BEST, you must understand it. If you take the mistaken advise of somebody who doesn't support or fully understand BEST, you might get it wrong.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

JDT, I still fail to see the connection between support and understanding in any of your examples, so why bring it up unless you have another point to make? If you don't think someone understands the method, then just say that. Why bring their perceived "support" into it?

A person could support the system and not understand it, and vice-versa. Happens quite often come to think of it... Some of the people that understand it very well aren't ardent supporters of it. I know a few that fit that description. Likewise, some (even many who post here) are enthusiastic supporters of something they hardly understand... 

John.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> JDT, I still fail to see the connection between support and understanding in any of your examples, so why bring it up unless you have another point to make? If you don't think someone understands the method, then just say that. Why bring their perceived "support" into it?
> 
> A person could support the system and not understand it, and vice-versa. Happens quite often come to think of it... Some of the people that understand it very well aren't ardent supporters of it. I know a few that fit that description. Likewise, some (even many who post here) are enthusiastic supporters of something they hardly understand...
> 
> John.


John, this is very much like your assertions that to really learn BEST, you must go to one of a very few people like Coach Lee or perhaps Coach Guy. These are people who support the system, and because they support the system, they are actively using it in their day to day coaching. They are the experts in BEST.

Would you go to a Ukrainian coach if you wanted to learn BEST? I think not. I'm going to assume they wouldn't be supporters of BEST, and I suspect they might not understand BEST as well as coach LEE or coach Guy or a host of others at the OTC. Conversely, if I wanted to shoot like Victor Ruban, I would not ask coach Lee for advice. 

Generalizations are always dangerous, but if If I am going to try to learn what BEST is all about, I will ask a supporter of the system, not somebody who doesn't like or use the system.

I simply think that I am more likely to learn the correct way to execute a shot using the BEST method from supporters of the system than from those who don't support it. 

I accept the notion that some people who know the system quite well don't support it. That's fine, but I won't ask them for advice on how to properly execute the shot using BEST.


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

JDT_Dad said:


> Generalizations are always dangerous, but if If I am going to try to learn what BEST is all about, I will ask a supporter of the system, not somebody who doesn't like or use the system.


That is really terrible advice - support or non-support is irrespective of knowledge. I do not choose a coach or instructor based upon what they support but upon what they can teach well. Anything else and you are going to eventually hit some trouble - especially true if your kid isn't able to go to places like the OTC for coaching.

I'll take someone who thinks the system is going to cause long term fitness issues that can teach it well over someone who thinks it's the best things since sliced bread yet doesn't really understand it. Indeed, the first case is someone that *should* be listened too and thought about (even if later truly dismissed) and is why "support" of the program that comes from anything other than *actual knowledge* is dangerous. It isn't hard to find people in this thread that "support" the program and, because of that, are unable to take any criticism no matter it's validity. 

If we want to deduce which method is shooting is "best" (not BEST, but the standard definition) then adding in "support" renders such a thing to the level of who is the best team and should win: The University of Tennessee or Michigan state - that is it then becomes nothing more than a popularity test. I can understand why people who have a great deal invested in it (on both sides and that includes coaches, participants, parents, and certification orgs) want to reduce it down to that, but for most of us it isn't helpful.


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

ArrowNewB said:


> If there is a method that has been proven to give most people the edge to win, would you not want to implement it to everyone and increase your chances of finding the ultimate one?


Only if winning at any cost were my goal - since it isn't I like to know things like injury rates and severity of injuries and other such things. You may be willing to cripple yourself and cripple every archer on the planet, but I'm not.

As of right now all we do know is that if done improperly BEST causes injury. We know that the difference between "proper" and "improper" is fairly small if using the full method. We know that, currently, there are only a handful of coaches qualified to teach the full method and we know the full method doesn't have to be taught.

We do not know the long term health effects of it - it hasn't been around long enough even if a study has been in effect. We do not know how easy it is going to be for "lesser" coaches to learn to properly teach (though so far the difficulty there suggests it will be hard, yet it may also very well be a language issue).

Both those answers have a fairly strong impact on what a change to this method nationally will do to our archery base. Sadly I do not see much interest outside of what JDT Dad calls "non-supporters" and are, thusly, usually ignored or (as you do) ridiculed. 

I'm on the fence on long term consequences and think that most coaches/instructors will not have the time to devote to learn it well enough to teach without regularly injuring students. As such you can label me a non-supporter if you wish. If you have someone seeking to compete in the highest levels I think the program/style's success speaks for itself and it is where you need to be so I guess I can be a supporter too. Not sure exactly what that makes me on the whole "supporter/non-supporter" scale, I guess that will be up to the individual (my guess is that, as with sports teams, you are either all for it or on the other side). 

Before I run the risk of not being able to shoot past 40 or 50 years of age on something that even when done properly is seen as long term destructive by some that *do* know what they are talking about I would like to get a better consensus - as in an actual honest to goodness study instead of anecdotes and squaring off on "sides". But then my goal isn't Olympic Gold, it's to shoot for most of my life, generally not loose expensive arrows, and have fun.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

strcpy said:


> That is really terrible advice - support or non-support is irrespective of knowledge. I do not choose a coach or instructor based upon what they support but upon what they can teach well. Anything else and you are going to eventually hit some trouble - especially true if your kid isn't able to go to places like the OTC for coaching.


All, come on now. I never said one should choose a coach based on support of the system alone. I only said that I would pick a coach who is actively involved in coaching the system. I believe one has to be using the system and believe in it (ie a supporter) before I would ask their advice on how to shoot with BEST. Naturally, If a coach is a supporter, but does not know BEST I wouldn't be asking for their advice. That's just dumb.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

strcpy said:


> Only if winning at any cost were my goal - since it isn't I like to know things like injury rates and severity of injuries and other such things. You may be willing to cripple yourself and cripple every archer on the planet, but I'm not.
> 
> As of right now all we do know is that if done improperly BEST causes injury. We know that the difference between "proper" and "improper" is fairly small if using the full method. We know that, currently, there are only a handful of coaches qualified to teach the full method and we know the full method doesn't have to be taught.
> 
> ...


I wonder why America has hired a world class coach to lead their program? Apparently some people's goal here IS to achieve Olympic Gold some day. 

So you imply that a possible problem with this program is the language barrier. Are you saying that this coach lee, being a korean, has a communication problem with local American coaches? So maybe if America adopted a system from an American coach in the first place, this would not be an issue huh?

So you want to see specific injury data on this method to base your judgment on. What good is this data if you have nothing to compare it to? Do you have as good a quality of data from all past methods taught here to compare it to?


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

I have purposely stayed out of this fight but I have a few things to say on the matter and against my better judgment will throw this out there. First of all, after reading the posts, I think Limbwalker and JDT Dad are saying almost the same thing…”Be careful who you take BEST Method advice from.” That is pretty basic advice and should be a given in every aspect of your life not just archery. I know some of the posters on this forum personally but most of you I don’t know at all. Regardless of whom it is, I run the issues by Kiley’s coach before anything is changed or done.
I think this is a crazy topic. If we are going to find out about statistics of BEST Method injuries, then we would have had to of compiled the injury statics before the change to BEST Method and of those shooting other forms currently. My daughter has had different injuries throughout the last 6 years and most of them were prior to switching to the BEST Method. But a few while learning the BEST Method but not because of the BEST Method, rather because of incorrect instruction in the BEST Method and also incorrect interpretation of what was being taught to her. Kind of like in school the reason not all kids earn 100% on every test they take…is that because they did not go learn the material from the Principle of the school? Does not make much sense to me.
One of the first things we learned when we started shooting archery was not to listen to everyone out there, especially if they had a Level 3, 4 or 5 behind their name. We got more bad advice from those with that Level of Certification than anyone else. Now before everyone jumps on me, no I am not saying every Level 3, 4, and 5 coach is an idiot, far from it. I am saying that in the past USAA (the NAA back then) used to issue this certification to anyone that could pay their money and take the time off work to get it. That has since changed, thank God.
There are coaches out there that are getting a much better understanding of the BEST Method and I would say those that attend several camps a year and attend the various seminars repeatedly are the ones that are learning Best. It is also those coaches who take advantage of their access to Coach Lee to send video and get advice on how a fix a particular issue in an archer’s form.
Clearly you don’t have to shoot BEST to be in the Olympics, ask Vic, Jenny and Butch. But there are many archers out there who have chosen to make the switch and those with that level of commitment will seek out those coaches who have learned it and understand it. Will there be injuries, I am sure there will be. Everyone has a different body type and different muscle structure so I think no matter what you do there will be injuries. Personal experience is that it has been less since the switch to BEST then it was prior to BEST. But we have sought out coaches who understand the method and moved on when necessary. With the internet and email, you don’t have to live in the same location as a coach to get help. Skype has proven to be an invaluable tool to most of the BEST Method coaches. There are several US coaches coaching archers in other countries via Skype after those archers sought them out. So I really think you can argue till your blue in the face whether the BEST Method causes more injuries or not and there is no way you will prove that it does or prove that it does not.


----------



## Flint Hills Tex (Nov 3, 2008)

Okay, do I have proof that the BEST method causes injuries? No, but as many of you have pointed out, no one else does either, nor can the "supporters" prove the contrary. Call me a pundit, call me a witch hunter, call me a nincompoop. It just seems to me that some folks are such ardent supporters of the method that they _will not_ tolerate any doubts, _will not_ even allow others to ask honest questions (it's seen as defamatory). I still maintain that a method which could potentially be harmful if taught or practiced incorrectly (apparently BEST is extremely difficult to comprehend) is not suitable for introductory and youth archery programs.

I'm worried that young archers (and their parents) will not approach the method with a dose of healthy skepticism because they want to make the olympic team. 

Every couple of years you get a new fad that EVERYONE has got to try (like Frangilli's "Heretic Archer"). What works for one may not work for another. By rolling out the BEST program on a national scale, we very well may be robbing some talented young archers the chance of shooting for their country because they do not "comform". Since BEST is the method of the head coach, wouldn't shooting according to it _improve one's chances_ of making the olympic team (please note that I never wrote that it is a prerequisite)?

I'm an intermediate level archer and will never shoot at a pro level, but like most archers, I want to improve my performance. If a particular method will help me do that, then great. But I would approach anything new with a healthy dose of skepticism, trying to find out about as many other's experiences with it as possible.

I don't think anyone is trashing around about the BEST method here. Rather we are trying to find out more about it, to make informed choices. The way I understood Limbwalker's original post, I believe he wanted input on others experiences. Experience leads to an opinion, and that influences one's choices. Feel free to espouse the BEST method, if you so choose, but make an informed choice.


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

Flint Hills Tex said:


> I still maintain that a method which could potentially be harmful if taught or practiced incorrectly is not suitable for introductory and youth archery programs.


I don't think I fall into the category of a huge supporter of BEST so I don't think you mean me. But I will say this, based on the above quote, archery should not be taught to youth at all. Since archery, no matter what form, causes injuries if done improperly. Thus they should ban it from schools and make it against the law to teach to youth. Oh, and football, soccer, gymnastics, karate, track and field. Should I go on?


----------



## Miika (Jun 29, 2003)

Flint Hills Tex said:


> a method which could potentially be harmful if taught or practiced incorrectly


Many things in life are potentially harmful if done incorrectly.


----------



## TheShadowEnigma (Aug 16, 2008)

Miika said:


> Many things in life are potentially harmful if done incorrectly.


Amen.


----------



## DariusXV (Feb 18, 2009)

Maybe the issue is that some things can be potentially harmful if followed to absolute "biomechanical perfection" when the form isn't for everyone.

It's been said that many Korean archers don't follow the BEST system.

Maybe it's like the low-carb diet and is a trend.

Part of what I don't like about the Jenny Craig deal is that you have to buy their meals. 

For some people...biomechanical perfection isn't in the BEST system.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

*Science is a process, not an end.*



Flint Hills Tex said:


> I don't think anyone is trashing around about the BEST method here. Rather we are trying to find out more about it, to make informed choices. The way I understood Limbwalker's original post, I believe he wanted input on others experiences. Experience leads to an opinion, and that influences one's choices. Feel free to espouse the BEST method, if you so choose, but make an informed choice.


I think this is a point the "with us" or "against us" dogmatic "supporters" of BEST miss. I, too, am and intermediate level archer who wants to shoot better (and knows proper BEST method may be able to help with that), but more importantly, wants to be able to continue shooting injury free for as long as possible. Right know I have no way to tell the "correct" BEST instructors from the "incorrect" BEST instructors, since the difference is so minute and apparently nearly inscrutable as to be undetectable to the student until they are injured, so much so that Landed said there worst problems came from the coaches with the highest cert levels. That is a major, major impediment to a national mass roll out of BEST to beginning, intermediate and advance archers. BEST method lacks, it seems, check sums, quality metrics, error tolerance or what ever you want to call it that would make it robust enough to safely roll out on a large scale. It is highly subject, it seems, to catastrophic failure when transmitted through iterations of proxies.

BEST is supposed to be scientific which is part of what is supposed to make it so good. What isn't scientific is the blind loyalty to BEST that best "supporters" seem to be advocating, evincing a reflexive and dogmatic rejection of any critical examination of any area of the current BEST Method. That isn't science. True science is *objective*. Real science goes where the sound and tested evidence takes it. Knee jerk defense of BEST goes against the very scientific principles it claims to be founded on. Science is a **process** not an end, a never ending process of continual observation, testing and refinement. If BEST is to be considered scientific it is inherent that we *must* challenge and test its presumptions, methods and results. BEST supporters should **welcome** challenge to BEST so that it may be constantly improved and get better and better. The extent they reject challenge seems to show the extent to which they do not think BEST is actually scientific or can hold up to scrutiny.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

DariusXV said:


> Maybe the issue is that some things can be potentially harmful if followed to absolute "biomechanical perfection" when the form isn't for everyone.
> 
> It's been said that many Korean archers don't follow the BEST system.
> 
> ...


I guess everyone wants a diet that will work for everyone, allows you to eat whatever you want and most importantly is free huh!


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Miika said:


> Many things in life are potentially harmful if done incorrectly.


Hey, making nitroglycerin is probably perfectly safe when done exactly correctly, yet you wouldn't call it "safe" because the margin of error is so small and the consequences so catastrophic.

With BEST, the margin of error between perfectly safe and injurious seems to be very, very small. That speaks to a problem with the **system** and the way it is disseminated. It is sheer folly to ignore that.

Perhaps you also advocate that people where gloves when operating lathes? And wear open toed shoes on construction job sites? And that safety glasses at gun ranges are for wusses?

Me? I think that the future health of the youth who take up archery is too important to be cavalier about injuries. It isn't possible to make any sport 100% injury free, but it is just plain foolish to ignore possible systemic and injurious flaws in a program that will be rolled out to youth across the nation.


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

Warbow said:


> so much so that Landed said there worst problems came from the coaches with the highest cert levels.


Just want to clarify that I was speaking of the so called US form here and not BEST. But you are correct. You have to be careful to pick any coach, BEST or otherwise. Coaches don't seem to adapt any form they teach to the archer very well. Thus injuries occur. I think my first post clearly gave direction on where to find those that know the BEST method. 

Limbwalker does not shoot BEST but he has a very good understanding of it. He cured an injury my daughter had the very first time we met (1/2 hr after the SI Cup in 07) by changing her stance and footwear. He may not feel confident in coaching the BEST any longer since he has not been to any camps for some time. But he is an excellent coach, one of the best around and you don't see a Level 3, 4 or 5 behind his name. My point was not in support of BEST or in support of any other method. My point is only that you can and will get injured doing any form of archery incorrectly.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

Warbow said:


> Hey, making nitroglycerin is probably perfectly safe when done exactly correctly, yet you wouldn't call it "safe" because the margin of error is so small and the consequences so catastrophic.
> 
> With BEST, the margin of error between perfectly safe and injurious seems to be very, very small. That speaks to a problem with the **system** and the way it is disseminated. It is sheer folly to ignore that.
> 
> ...


Well poised. Its really hard for the opposition to argue once you bring in the word "injury" and "children" into the equation.

Anything else said will make them look like inhumane communist.


----------



## sundevilarchery (May 27, 2005)

Landed in AZ said:


> My point is only that you can and will get injured doing any form of archery incorrectly.


Actually, I would disagree with that. 

Archery is done "wrong" thousands of times a day in every shop and field around the world... and there are those who would argue that it has been done "wrong" by a large number of elite archers here in the US for the past 30years. I can tell you, I have certainly watched more than a few internationally competitive shooters that have made me cringe. Yet... no injuries, comparitively speaking. In fact, though there is no "evidence" that I can think of, just around the water cooler... until BEST, it was VERY rare to ever hear about an archery injury. That's significant to me.

The thing is, and this is just my observation, I see potential and actual issues with wrists and shoulders. Wrist growth plates in those under 18 are very fragile... and this type of thing will take awhile to recognize.

Everyone thinks I am "against" the BEST method and/or Coach Lee. Nothing could be further from the truth. Heck I'm going out in November to learn as much as I can. I watch training sessions here whenever I can (with those better than myself at teaching this method). And I am constantly watching the archers to help undertand the minute changes.

I think it's wonderful to see the progress that some folks are making. I see this form on some archers and think it suits their bodies and styles perfectly. It's wonderful to watch when that is the case and these folks are progressing by leaps and bounds. In fact, I have passed a couple of my JOADs over to better BEST coaches than myself because I thought it was the next right step in their development. I have also held on to a few because my gut told me it wasn't the way to go. No matter what a person decides, I have supported their decision wholly.

However, I am not blind to the archers that have been retired or frustrated to the point of quitting over it either... and there are more than a few.

Let's not forget, what has changed MOST drastically, IMO, is the focus and number of arrows shot by the RAs and JDTers. I think this is fantastic. It's GREAT to see talented folks adhering to strictly developed training programs instead of haphazzard arrow fliging. I think THAT has been the primary reason for most of the improvements we have seen recently. You've gotta shoot lots of arrows with a plan... and work out... etc... with any form... to be great. And that is what I see happening. And that's good.

And now I'll prepare to get yelled at from several different directions for expressing my opinion. One more decision with known consequences.


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

sundevilarchery said:


> The thing is, and this is just my observation, I see potential and actual issues with wrists and shoulders. Wrist growth plates in those under 18 are very fragile... and this type of thing will take awhile to recognize.


I guess I would have to agree that there are some pretty crazy forms out there that don't cause the archer doing it injury. So you got me there. But I can only comment from personal experience on the wrist and shoulder. Prior to BEST, wrist was the first injury Kiley incurred. Prior to BEST, shoulder injury was the second injury she incurred. Since BEST, no more wrist or shoulder problems. That is the only observation I can provide on that. I will say that the as far as injuries as a whole go for the archery community goes, I have not seen an increase in injuries but I have not seen a decrease either. I see just as many injuries outside of BEST as I have seen using BEST by comparison. I would say there are more outside of BEST but only because there are more archers not doing BEST. I cannot comment on the % of BEST archers incurring injuries as compared to % of non-BEST archers incurring injuries.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

tylerbenner said:


> Ice packs are suggested by all physical trainers to alleviate swelling and prevent injury. After an 8 hour day of shooting, it is a good idea to ice, even if you are not experiencing any pain or discomfort. Physical exertion builds up acid in the muscles and causes miniature tears. Icing helps neutralize swelling and flush out any contaminants. It is the job of the trainers at the OTC to remind athletes to take care of their health: hence, ice packs.
> 
> Nearly every athlete at the Olympic Training Center (of any sport) either uses the ice bath, ice packs, ice massage, etc.
> 
> Recovery is just as important an element of training as the actual training.


Good words Tyler. You-all need to take a trip to the CO Springs OTC. No matter what sport is training there, almost EVERY athlete will come into the dining facility with ice packs on the most stressed joints. Soes this mean that swimming and vollyball are ruining athletes and causing injury to everyone tha wears ice? No, they wear ice after a practice to reduce inflamation of the joints they excercise most during their sport.

BTW, I took an archer to sports med for some Aleive during the last JDT camp...because he had 4 wisdom teeth pulled 2 days before camp and forgot his medicine.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

TomB said:


> Point taken. I just don't want the metaphor of acceptable casualties to creep into USA Archery. The road is lined with folks in Korea that could not make the cut in competitive archery. Recreational archery is an oxymoron there. My hope was/is that the BEST method is robust enough that anyone can do it.
> 
> SGt Williams approach is to just suck it up and get one with it. My point is that archery should not be like being accepted as a ranger or a seal where there is a 90% wash out rate. If what Coach Lee and the BEST method only applies to elite archers, the best of the best, and we loose the recreational archer that wants to improve his or her craft, then we loose our fan base. Imagine if the PGA or baseball saying their techniques are only for the very elite. The rest of you need not apply. The fan base would be lost. While I cannot compete at the level of a Tiger Woods or Nolan Ryan (my hero when I was pitching in college) I can still try and apply the same mechanics without being cast away as a wuss because I can't perform at their level.
> 
> SGT Williams post may have been tongue firmly planted in cheek, but it is hard to tell. It doesn't do much for credibility to tell an injured archer or their coach to just suck it up and quit whining.


So, what is the acceptable casualty rate for say...football, gymnastics, tennis, soccer, weight lifting, track and field sports...? Just curious, in archery it's zero apparently. Archer whines, they get a day off. They whine loudly and they get a week off. If they cry they get a 7 page thread on AT.

We coaches were talking to a Dr. who specializes in sport-related injuries while we were at the OTC a couple of weeks ago. He said, "with the draw sequence you are using, you guys are going to really cut down on the injuries to the rotator cuff on the draw arm and bicep tendonitis and AC injuries on the bow arm side." he didn't say eliminate, he said cut down on. He also said that this method which uses larger muscles, lower traps and lats, to make the movements is the smartest way to shoot.

Folks, I have bicep tendonitis in my bow arm...from trying to jerk a box of books out of the back of my truck at the ATA Show 2 years ago. I have a rotator cuff injury in my draw shoulder, from hitting the ground on my shoulder after doing a forward roll over some concertina wire 20 years ago in the Army. Too bad I can't blame those on BEST Method. But, using BEST method does allow me to shoot my bow with less pain than I had before I started using it.

I'm not trying to be confrontaional, I just want to remind everyone of the principles of strengthening, Overload, Fatigue, Recovery and Supercompensation. It's hard to overload without some discomfort. You have to manage that and make a distinction between discomfort (muscle soreness) and pain caused by injury.

John, BEST Method didn't injury you. You injured yourself and got a bone spur. BeST Method showed you that you had an injury that you didn't know about. Some folks may not be able to perform the process "by the book" because of physique or pre-existing injury (like yours John), but that doesn't mean that you can blame the process. John, i believe you should be thankful that the BEST Method uncovered that injury for you.

LD out...


----------



## Archery Ang (Apr 24, 2006)

ldfalks said:


> So, what is the acceptable casualty rate for say...football, gymnastics, tennis, soccer, weight lifting, track and field sports...? Just curious, in archery it's zero apparently. Archer whines, they get a day off. They whine loudly and they get a week off. If they cry they get a 7 page thread on AT.
> 
> 
> LD out...



*Giggle*


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

ldfalks said:


> So, what is the acceptable casualty rate for say...football, gymnastics, tennis, soccer, weight lifting, track and field sports...? Just curious, in archery it's zero apparently. Archer whines, they get a day off. They whine loudly and they get a week off. If they cry they get a 7 page thread on AT.
> 
> We coaches were talking to a Dr. who specializes in sport-related injuries while we were at the OTC a couple of weeks ago. He said, "with the draw sequence you are using, you guys are going to really cut down on the injuries to the rotator cuff on the draw arm and bicep tendonitis and AC injuries on the bow arm side." he didn't say eliminate, he said cut down on. He also said that this method which uses larger muscles, lower traps and lats, to make the movements is the smartest way to shoot.
> 
> ...


Dee,
What I am asking for is the tremendous laboratory of archery experiences at the OTC to recommend to the rest of us in the wilderness what the appropriate frequency, intensity and duration is for archers. Also, how to recognize and mitigate overtraining issues. There have been some folks make some money on writing a book for baseball, track and field, cycling, and likely some other sports addressing this issue. Here is an opportunity for you Dee.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> John, i believe you should be thankful that the BEST Method uncovered that injury for you.


Yea Dee, I'm so thankful that happened. :embara: I hardly even know how to respond to a comment like that. I've thought long and hard about what to write, but it's probably better that I handle this in a PM...

John.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ldfalks said:


> John, i believe you should be thankful that the BEST Method uncovered that injury for you.
> 
> LD out...


Wow, BEST is so good that people should **thank** it when it causes injury or turns previously benign injuries into serious ones.

John was up front about the nature of his injury, so it isn't like you "discovered" something about it and are cleverly pointing it out.

Anyways, I don't think people are actually all that far apart, but one side seems to be vociferously defensive and closed to open inquiry of the facts. I don't think that is a healthy attitude. It certainly isn't a scientific one, an anecdote from a doctor not withstanding.


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

Warbow said:


> Wow, BEST is so good that people should **thank** it when it causes injury or turns previously benign injuries into serious ones.
> 
> John was up front about the nature of his injury, so it isn't like you "discovered" something about it and are cleverly pointing it out.
> 
> Anyways, I don't think people are actually all that far apart, but one side seems to be vociferously defensive and closed to open inquiry of the facts. I don't think that is a healthy attitude. It certainly isn't a scientific one, an anecdote from a doctor not withstanding.


Its like Newton's Law. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

The defense is only in response to it's attack. So is it's magnitude.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

ArrowNewB said:


> Its like Newton's Law. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
> 
> The defense is only in response to it's attack. So is it's magnitude.


Once again, you all don't read very well. John didn't know he had an injury until he "uncovered" it by tryig to change his technique. Changing to any other technique besides BEST may have uncovered it also.

I don't think I have been any more "vociferous" than anyone else. Less rabid maybe and most assuridly less vociferous. At least by "post count" anyway.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Okay, for the record, I'll speak for myself regarding my purported "injury."

At this point, we still do not know whether the unusual bone growth in my right forearm was ever the culprit when I attempted to use the "best" method. The facts are these: I had shot 65# longbows for almost 20 years prior to ever picking up an olympic bow, after which I shot probably 100,000 arrows with 50# recurves - still without a problem and never any pain. Within weeks of following the recommendation to switch tabs and the way I grasped the string - exactly as I and the other coaches were instructed to do - I started to feel pain in my right forearm. I re-checked that I was doing it right and was told that I was. 

Several weeks later I could not draw a bow without pain, and a few weeks after that I couldn't even rotate my right forearm enough to grasp a bowstring. This led me to seek out medical help from a qualified Ortho. surgeon who took x-rays. They revealed that I had a growth of bone on the radius of my right forearm. He suggested that that growth may be the problem, but he couldn't be 100% sure. Because he wasn't 100% sure that surgery to remove that bone growth would fix the problem, I did not want to take the risk and elected to not have surgery. I was instructed to not touch a bow for 4 months, and I didn't. Afterwards, I went back to my old Cavalier tab and began shooting the way I had previous to the BEST method instruction. Within a few months, I was able to shoot a decent weight bow again. But by then it was too late - the first leg of the '08 trials was quickly arriving and I was in no positon to participate because of this issue. I had considered the surgery as early as January of '07, and made a decision by March of that year. It wasn't until completly leaving behind the BEST method instruction in the fall of '07 that I was able to shoot decent scores again. 

I blamed the bone growth for the longest time, but now I'm not so sure. And especially since I've not experience any pain at all since returning to the Cav. tab and the way I had been shooting before. 

So draw your own conclusions. Some of you will toss out the B.S. flag, and that's fine. I struggled with this nonsense for about 2 years, trying my best to learn, coach and use the method I had been taught. Maybe I'm just a slow learner. Hopefully everyone else will be quicker on the uptake than I was and not experience any confusion or injuires... 

My guess is that those who want to support the BEST method will immediately blame the "pre existing condition." That would be a convenient explanation. However I don't think it's that simple. The one professional surgeon I dealt with wasn't sure, so how could anyone else be? I took his advice (to not have surgery and go back to shooting the way I had before), and I'm darn thankful that I did now. 

My story has always been out there for anyone to see. I do this in the hope that folks will see both sides of the story and will have enough information to choose what's right for them.

I strongly believe that anyone interested in learning the BEST method should be aware that there is the potential for injury. In my opinion, moreso than with other methods. I suggest they listen to their bodies, use caution and if it hurts, STOP doing it that way. Find another way to do it and seek professional help if you need to.

I don't think I've ever advised anyone against learning the method. I hope it works and works well for everyone who attempts to learn it. And I support a proven, consistent method of shooting instruction here in the U.S., whatever that is... Sure beats trial and error and having 100 different coaches teaching 100 different styles...

But I also support having several different proven styles to choose from, since some styles seem to work better for some archers, and some coaches will "gel" better with an individual than others will. So it's good to have choices, to a point. 

I think an archer with world class aspirations would be smart to spend a little time with coach Lee, Alexander Kirillov at PSE, and a few more traditional, well known U.S. coaches before they pick an option. And then once they make their decision on which coach and method to go with, commit 100% to that decision.

Shoot well.

John.


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

ldfalks said:


> Does this mean that swimming and vollyball are ruining athletes and causing injury to everyone tha wears ice? No, they wear ice after a practice to reduce inflamation of the joints they excercise most during their sport.


I have had 5 shoulder operations due to my Olympic pursuit in swimming. People often say to me "aren't you sorry you went through all that?" My answer is an absolute "No". While I sure wish there was better technology and a better way to control a 15/16 yr old so hungry for a goal that pain wasn't going to get in my way. We currently have archers that are the same way. I am constantly reminding my daughter of the long term goal and not the immediate future. We deal with aches and pains quickly and take them seriously. Ice is an instrumental part of her training if there is the slightest indication of an injury. She has shot pretty much injury free (knock on wood) for a couple of years (come to think of it, since switching to BEST). Her knee injury in the fall of 07 and surgery in Feb 08 was not archery related, but still required down time.


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

Warbow said:


> Wow, BEST is so good that people should **thank** it when it causes injury or turns previously benign injuries into serious ones.
> 
> John was up front about the nature of his injury, so it isn't like you "discovered" something about it and are cleverly pointing it out.
> 
> Anyways, I don't think people are actually all that far apart, but one side seems to be vociferously defensive and closed to open inquiry of the facts. I don't think that is a healthy attitude. It certainly isn't a scientific one, an anecdote from a doctor not withstanding.


That is a pretty amazing statement. So Coach Dee (or JDT Dad) should sit back and not put his two cents in on the subject because that makes him closed minded? I am shocked (but then I received three PMs after my post telling me that I would get blasted and for sure by Warbow) so I guess I shouldn't be. While you didn't blast me (at least not yet), I must say that it seems the one sidedness seems to be anyone that tries to put a different view point out there. Why is it that another position is thrown out and that person is suddenly on the defensive. Is that because everyone on AT should agree with you, who ever you are(since no one seems to know your name)?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Landed in AZ said:


> That is a pretty amazing statement. So Coach Dee (or JDT Dad) should sit back and not put his two cents in on the subject because that makes him closed minded?


Well, let's try and examine the situation objectively. What is your actual disagreement with what I said? The tone? Or my claims?

So, let's see the statement that I was responding to:



ldfalks said:


> John, i believe you should be thankful that the BEST Method uncovered that injury for you.
> 
> LD out...


Do you agree with that statement? Should John be "thankful" that taking up BEST lead to an injury that kept him out of the 08 season? An injury wich, fortunately, subsided by John staying away from archery for 3 months and subsequently staying away from the aspect of BEST that triggered it?

I disagree with Coach Dee's claim that John should be "thankful." I think John's subsequent post illustrates clearly why Coach Dee's claim is un-reasonable.

Do you think it is wrong of me to agree with John and disagree with Coach Dee?



Landed in AZ said:


> I am shocked (but then I received three PMs after my post telling me that I would get blasted and for sure by Warbow) so I guess I shouldn't be. While you didn't blast me (at least not yet)


I'm a little surprised that you got such PMs. I certainly can and do make strong cases for my position, but not randomly. I'd like to think my arguments are based sound reasoning but that I'm also open to sound counter arguments to change my mind, though I'm not going to change it at the drop of a hat. People need to make a sound argument to convince me, and people should expect no less of me when I make an argument to try and convince them of my position. It is the classic Hegelian Dialectic, where we test the validity of ideas by testing arguments against one another. The strongest argument may win, or a new combined truth, a synthesis, may be discovered in the process, but we can't get there through group think or going along to get along. At the foremost I think it is my willingness to be contrarian when the facts merit and my resistance to group think that ultimately garners the most push backs, though that isn't, I expect, the way my critics see their issues as lying.

So, do you think I've been unfair to you? Or to anybody in this thread? Or just that I've put a very strong argument forward that you disagree with?




Landed in AZ said:


> I must say that it seems the one sidedness seems to be anyone that tries to put a different view point out there. Why is it that another position is thrown out and that person is suddenly on the defensive. Is that because everyone on AT should agree with you, who ever you are(since no one seems to know your name)?


Why not take a look at what my thesis is, and tell me if you actually disagree with it?

One side seems to say "Don't question BEST." I think that such a position is contrary to the scientific method of study and inquiry that BEST is supposedly founded on.

I think that BEST Method when taught Coach Lee is one of the best archery systems out there.

I think that BEST Method is very nuanced and hard to teach to coaches and in its current form doesn't lend its self well to a mass roll out or safe instruction by multiple iterations of proxies.

I think that improper BEST Method coaching can lead to injuries, perhaps more so than the classic archery form the US used before BEST, but I also think it is an open question.

I think that only sound and systematic scientific analysis of large populations can answer whether BEST at the OTC and BEST as taught by low end proxies causes more injuries than previous methods of instruction, and that such a study should be undertaken.

And I think that many BEST "supporters" reflexively resist any critical inquiry to BEST method, a reaction that is insular, dogmatic, un-scientific and ultimately contrary to the best interests of US archers and USA Archery.

Do you agree or disagree with my positions? If so, which ones? And do you claim it is wrong of me to argue my position if you or others disagree with it? Because that seems to be what you are implying...


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

I am amazed at how this discussion has turned into “them against us” attitude. John, you have brought up some very valuable points and as I have stated all along, constructive criticism is to improve on this system so all can succeed and enjoy. This system is a good system (just like many others that have been used and still are being used) but it has flaws in it. John has pointed out issues that need to be addressed in order to make the system better. For those who feel he is bashing the system reminds me of the gay/lesbian movement here in California (get in their face if someone questions their beliefs). 

Warbow, you present some excellent points and your reasoning is so sound you scare me! Your reasoning makes them have to explain themselves a little deeper than they care to. :mg: 

archernewb, I don’t think it is a good idea to dump all of the good coaches we have here in the US just to satisfy one coaching system. That is not what America is and should not start now. We have many really good coaches although I do not agree with some of their theories, they have provided Olympic, World and National Champions with no injuries. :embara:

JDT, have you ever heard of “Group Think”. It is a system that essentially makes sure that everyone is 100% on board with the program which allows you to ignore anything negative of the system. It’s had some disastrous effects in the past. I encourage everyone try to make the system better, not fight to keep it as it is. :zip:

As for Idfalks, the gross motor movement is a great idea…if you are tossing a grenade, running the 100 meter dash, swimming the 100 meter whatever, playing soccer, football and other sports that require gross motor muscle movement! The fine accuracy of the execution of a shot requires fine motor movement. I had the same discussion with the so called “experts” years ago and they still have not changed their attitude about gross muscle mass is far better than the small muscles. I suggest they pick up a bow and learn how to shoot and then tell me if they still believe it. I seriously doubt that they would nor could. As for ice packs, I guess Darrell and I didn’t train hard enough since we never used ice packs. Maybe we were wimps….I don’t recall John Williams, Jay Barrs or Justin Huish walking around with ice packs either. As a matter of fact, when I was in Korea a few times with their top archers I did not see a single archer with an ice pack. Hmmmm…. Saying that this method found out John’s weakness reminds me of a coach of years ago. If the archer won, then they “listened” to the coach. If the archer lost, then obviously they did not “listen” to the coach. Great way to make sure the coach is always right…. ukey:

Landed in AZ. Sorry to read you had so many issues in your swimming training. Maybe large muscle mass causes lots of issues that archers normally do not experience if they use the correct muscles. I am still not convinced large muscle mass is the right way to go. :BangHead: 

I have been around coaches and programs since the 1960’s and have experienced many coaches and their philosophies. This includes the likes of Dave Keaggy, Al Henderson, Bud Fowkes, Darwin Kyle, Frank Gandy, John Williams, Dick Tone, Sheri Rhodes, Tim Strickland, Larry Skinner, Terry Wunderle and many, many others (this only includes US Coaches. I am very well aware of many international coaches and their philosophies too). All of these coaches have one thing in common. They have coached a successful international elite archer at one point or another. However, each have their own philosophy, each can prove that their methodology works. This is due to a champion archer working their way through the system of that coach’s program. None of these coaches EVER produced so many injuries as this program. We have lost some really talented archers during the last five years. Could it have been avoided? I guess we will never know. At least those like John are bringing up issues that will make some think about how to make the system safer and more enjoyable for all and not for just a few archers. If not and if we loose 99 out of 100 archers but still win the Olympic Gold, I guess that’s what it’s all about (tongue in cheek). Personally, I would rather have 99 really good archers who were able to continue and enjoy our sport than one winning and the rest quitting. :rant:


----------



## Teucer (Aug 19, 2007)

*Just a thought*

From what I know about BEST, it was defined as the Korean archery "method" by a Korean winning archer. Now don't y'all think that maybe some of us older folks trying to adopt a system that in Korea is started by youngsters whose bodies are easier to recover and adapt, is going to have some kind of injusry factor to older boys and girls. Especially older boys and girls used to shooting a completely different system.

I look at it like this, when I was in my twenties, I could throw a baseball all day. Now in my forties I need to really warm up. Imagine if I played wiffleball all my life and now decided to play hardball. Oh yeah I'm on injured reserved. 

Most of y'all have been shooting for a long time, and now you want to dramatically change you style and you don't think that there is some possibility of injury.

What's BEST for my is what feels natural for me, nothing else. Come on folks, we're supposed to have fun shooting arrows.


----------



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

Yes, BEST is taught by a Korean but it is not the Korean method.

Terry


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

Warbow said:


> Well, let's try and examine the situation objectively. What is your actual disagreement with what I said? The tone? Or my claims?
> 
> So, let's see the statement that I was responding to:
> 
> ...


What I disagree with is that you claim that each and every counter argument to your insistence that BEST is the cause of a bunch new injury over any other form taught is made by someone on the defensive. You have claimed that each and every one of them is some sort of "lover of BEST" and thus on the defensive and against any open discussion. Yet the discussion is not allowed to go in a productive direction as long as someone has a supportive position of BEST. I personally have found it to cause less injuries then prior to BEST. Do I think every archer will experience that success, no. Do I think that BEST has caused more injuries to the general population? Absolutely not. Do I think BEST has reduced the number of injuries out there, for my daughter yes, for the general population not necessarily. Do I think you can do your objective survey, no. There is nothing out there to be able to grasp that kind of data objectively. Yes you could track OTC injuries, Yes you could grasp some unobjective data on injuries in other forms of archers, but that won't give you "this form is better then another form" at preventing injuries. Most coaches have stayed out of this thread for the very reason you attacked Coach Dee. Regardless of the one comment, the objective, informative information that he tried to provide was immediately shot down. Whether that is because he is a JDT coach, whether it was because of one comment, whether it was because he coaches the BEST, I cannot tell. What I can tell is that no matter what objective information he attempts to put on this forum will be shot down by you and others. 

John tried to put good information out there for it to be discussed. I said it before, he is one of the best coaches I have had the pleasure of watching work with my daughter. He saved her from a very painful hip injury that she was fighting. But as soon as someone puts something on this forum about something against BEST it is pounced on by the masses. There are some that have tried to steer the matter to a productive conversation, but they get shot down and leave. As I am doing now...Good day and good arguing.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Landed in AZ said:


> What I disagree with is that you claim that each and every counter argument to your insistence that BEST is the cause of a bunch new injury over any other form taught is made by someone on the defensive.


Thanks for the reply. Based on what you write, I think your problem with me is a misreading of my posts rather than what I have actually written, perhaps colored by the dire warnings about me you received by PMs.

I don't know for certain that BEST Method causes more injuries than the previous method. Nor do I claim to. In such cases I try to avoid making absolute claims. To my knowledge I have made none. But there is sufficient anecdotal evidence to suggest that improper BEST Method instruction does cause injuries at a higher rate than previous instruction. I think that is sufficient to warrant an epidemiological investigation. We are talking about our entire national Olympic archery program, after all, and only USA Archery / USOC has the central ability to make such an investigation. Would you object to research that seeks to separate what causes injuries from what just seems to cause injuries?



Landed in AZ said:


> You have claimed that each and every one of them is some sort of "lover of BEST" and thus on the defensive and against any open discussion.


Again, I think you are responding to a perception of my posts rather than what I have written. Have I called you a "lover of BEST?" I think not. Your own experiences have been complex. But in any case, I've no problem with people "loving" BEST. I've repeatedly called BEST an excellent system when taught by Coach Lee. The issue I take note of is when BEST "supporters" make insular defensive statements about best, suggesting that you either accept BEST as is or you are an impediment to to the success of the Olympic program. 

Some examples of the with us or against us crowd:



JDT_Dad said:


> I have a different take on this: "Don't take advise on BEST from the folks who don't support the method since they seem to know how to hurt themselves."





ldfalks said:


> John, i believe you should be thankful that the BEST Method uncovered that injury for you.
> 
> LD out...





Paul Williams said:


> what is all this whinning about injuries?
> man, you all are a bunch of sisses!!!”....
> 
> Pain? Oh yea. Lots of pain.
> ...


(Note that Williams is a hard working tough guy who can handle pain, but he works directly with Lee and other top coaches, so the issue of possible improper BEST training leading to injury doesn't apply to him the quite way it does the rest of us not OTC mortals.)

I wonder why you think it is I who seeks to cut off the conversation rather than the above? Why do you single me out? What evidence you have that I'm attempting to squelch conversation rather _opening_ it up, including opening BEST Method up to objective scrutiny?

If BEST is scientific, then it should welcome scientific scrutiny, and it will either stand up to it, or adapt to new sound and tested evidence. But some supporters of BEST reject such notions. They seem to think BEST must be accepted "as is," implying that it is somehow perfect and unimproveable.



Landed in AZ said:


> Yet the discussion is not allowed to go in a productive direction as long as someone has a supportive position of BEST.


How have I some how manage to prohibit conversation? This is an open thread and people, including you, are free to ignore any points they don't wish to respond to?

But, to the issue of BEST. I don't criticize people who support best for supporting BEST. I do criticize people who insularly and reflexively support BEST and claim it should be exempt from scrutiny or similar. I think that BEST should be evidence based, not supported out of a cult-like insular loyalty to the creator.



Landed in AZ said:


> I personally have found it to cause less injuries then prior to BEST. Do I think every archer will experience that success, no. Do I think that BEST has caused more injuries to the general population? Absolutely not. Do I think BEST has reduced the number of injuries out there, for my daughter yes, for the general population not necessarily. Do I think you can do your objective survey, no. There is nothing out there to be able to grasp that kind of data objectively. Yes you could track OTC injuries, Yes you could grasp some unobjective data on injuries in other forms of archers, but that won't give you "this form is better then another form" at preventing injuries.


Nobody said it would be easy to definitively establish injury correlations, but *note what you and others are saying, that BEST reduces injuries. Well, if what you are saying is true, that it is impossible to gather objective data to bear that claim out, then it isn't a scientific claim and it shouldn't be stated as an official claim of BEST Method since such a claim **isn't proven***.

I'm not saying we can't discuss personal experience and anecdotes as suggestive, but I am saying you can't have it both ways. You can't say that we should support BEST because it reduces injuries but at the same time saying that same claim is untestable.




Landed in AZ said:


> Most coaches have stayed out of this thread for the very reason you attacked Coach Dee. Regardless of the one comment, the objective, informative information that he tried to provide was immediately shot down. Whether that is because he is a JDT coach, whether it was because of one comment, whether it was because he coaches the BEST, I cannot tell.


You characterize my post as an attack. Do you or do you not think that John should be "thankful" that taking up BEST led to an injury that took him out the 08 season? Before you continue to label my response to coach Dee as an "attack" I think you should give your opinion on that matter, since that relates directly to the appropriateness of my response to coach Dee based on your standards. Do you call coach Dee's posts to John "attacks?" Or is that a term you reserve just for me?

My post related to that claim and that only that claim of Dee's post (a claim by Dee that you have, so far, declined to endorse), so your attempt to conflate my specific response to that claim as an "attack" on the other content of his post is false.



Landed in AZ said:


> What I can tell is that no matter what objective information he attempts to put on this forum will be shot down by you and others.


That is false. As an example, I defended JDT Dad early on in this thread. I respond to the content of individual posts on a post by post basis. 



Landed in AZ said:


> But as soon as someone puts something on this forum about something against BEST it is pounced on by the masses. There are some that have tried to steer the matter to a productive conversation, but they get shot down and leave. As I am doing now...Good day and good arguing.


Shot down? Post aren't planes. Responding to a post with other than dittos and Hosanas does not equal "shooting them down." The post and the ideas in it remain part of the thread, they do not explode in flames when criticized. They remain in the thread, whole and undamaged, for people to agree with or disagree with on their own.

As to BEST, BEST is a disruptive and confusing change to USA Archery, so it is hardly surprising that it engenders some controversy. It is a major change. It would be foolish not to give it critical scrutiny, especially there is the possibility that it might lead to career ending injuries, which is yet to be determined. But what are people to do if they disagree with you or others in the forum? Nod politely and say nothing? That certainly isn't what you do, as evidenced by your extensive and interesting posts that assert your position. Why would you want others to do any anything less than you would?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

God bless America, and Rick McKinney for freakin' president! :darkbeer:

Ain't nothing left for me to say after that post...

Good night!

John.


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

Landed in AZ said:


> I personally have found it to cause less injuries then prior to BEST. Do I think every archer will experience that success, no. Do I think that BEST has caused more injuries to the general population? Absolutely not. Do I think BEST has reduced the number of injuries out there, for my daughter yes, for the general population not necessarily.


Okay, here is the Marine in me coming out and showing how stupid I am for even staying in this thread. But here I go again...

I don't know how to do the fancy, separating out quotes like all ya all do. So I put in the above from my previous post. I ask you exactly what scientific claim am I supposed to have been making in that statement? You claim I can't have it both ways. What both ways? Because I give my personal opinion on how it has helped my daughter and that I do not claim that it will help everyone else is somehow a scientific claim? I guess you are correct...I must be reading your posts incorrectly. 

Exactly what scientific evidence do you have about injuries prior to BEST? Exactly what scientific evidence do you have that BEST causes all these injuries? Where exactly do you expect that they can gather objective data on non-BEST shooters injuries? What coach out there boasts about the archers they have injured that will allow you to gather proper information regarding injuries of those outside the OTC? Can you tell me who out of the OTC has been injured? I know of one archer who claimed they were injured while shooting there under Coach Lee. I had a coach outside of the OTC training staff tell me that they talked to this individual and found out what caused the injury was something that the archer decided to change on their own. Now that is two different stories about the same injury. Which one is correct and how will YOU measure that scientifically? I certainly cannot answer those questions. If you can then more power to you. If someone else can then I will listen. I can only know for certain what our personal experience has been. Nothing more then that. Is our personal experience scientific, far from it. Never claimed it to be anything of the sort.


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

Rick McKinney said:


> None of these coaches EVER produced so many injuries as this program. We have lost some really talented archers during the last five years.


 I guess I am not privy to who they are. Sorry just have not seen this kind of turn over. That is not to say it has not happened. Just saying I haven't seen it. I also think there are more ARCHERY related injuries out there then we know about. Certainly my daughter's prior injuries were not noted by anyone and I am sure many JOADs out there don't report injuries to anyone either. And of course, Coach Lee has only been here for three years. So the BEST method cannot be blamed for the first two of five years of talented archers that have been lost.


----------



## tjk009 (Feb 15, 2007)

I agree with John, great post Rick. The best technique is the one that produces the highest scores for each archer. The one size fits all approach is good if we are all one size however some are old, young, skinny or chunky, long faces and short. Making matters worse the technique is constantly changing and one must consult the KSL website daily to keep up. Injuries and rates are non-existent, a guarded secret, something not talked about, or totally irrelevant to the mission depending upon the commentator. 

I'd love to spend time with Coach Lee but I can't imagine all of us can just pop in and get the help we need individually. Of course Paul Williams can parachute in and get help, "work with me or else." Personally I see no good reason to jump out of a perfectly good airplane. I'm in CA often and overhear the RA's talking about the latest "new" thing. 

The USA archery website provides little help about the "official" method advocated for us coaches to use with the kids. In this Internet age it would seem that more should be there, perhaps videos of the seminars can be uploaded so "all" of us can have access to information presented to the few who can travel around. This seems a cost-effective way to help provide information. It is sad to see all the conflict of us against us.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Landed in AZ said:


> Okay, here is the Marine in me coming out and showing how stupid I am for even staying in this thread. But here I go again...
> 
> I don't know how to do the fancy, separating out quotes like all ya all do. So I put in the above from my previous post. I ask you exactly what scientific claim am I supposed to have been making in that statement? You claim I can't have it both ways. What both ways?


It is a fair question. And I didn't mean to imply that _you_ had specifically made a scientific claim, but the claim of reduced injuries is one of the standard claims for BEST Method.

An example:



> Browse > Home / B.E.S.T. / Advantages of Applying Biomechanics in Archery
> Advantages of Applying Biomechanics in Archery
> 
> The advantages of applying Biomechanics to archery are numerous.
> ...


http://usaajdt.com/best/advantages-of-applying-biomechanics-in-archery/

So, if you are correct and it isn't possible to objectively research comparative injury rates between BEST and other systems then a claim of reduced injury rates should not be touted as an advantage of BEST Method.

That does not negate your personal experience and you, of course, are still free to relay anecdotes that may be suggestive, but if it isn't possible to **prove** injury reduction then that positive claim should be removed from the official claims and literature about BEST.



Landed in AZ said:


> O
> Because I give my personal opinion on how it has helped my daughter and that I do not claim that it will help everyone else is somehow a scientific claim? I guess you are correct...I must be reading your posts incorrectly.


I don't dispute your personal experience or that of your daughter. The question is whether your experiences are typical and can be extrapolated to a larger group, and I think the answer is no. They might be typical, they might not be. Again, that does not negate your personal experience.



Landed in AZ said:


> Exactly what scientific evidence do you have about injuries prior to BEST? Exactly what scientific evidence do you have that BEST causes all these injuries?


I do not have scientific evidence, nor do I claim to. What I do have is, IMO, sufficient anecdotal evidence to warrant further investigation.



Landed in AZ said:


> OWhere exactly do you expect that they can gather objective data on non-BEST shooters injuries? What coach out there boasts about the archers they have injured that will allow you to gather proper information regarding injuries of those outside the OTC?


I'm not an epidemiologist nor a sports medicine researcher, so I can't give you a comprehensive rundown of the methodology for a comparative study, nor, for that matter, can I tell you how to make a carbon fiber ILF recurve limb from scratch. Nor do I have to know, since that is the area of expertise of others. I do know that making carbon fiber limbs is possible even though I do not posses the expertise to do so and I know that there are many ways to perform epidemiological studies that study populations over time. I also think that to study the difference between BEST and other archery methods might require cooperation between two or more NGB's to have two separate populations to study--which might be a great political and logistical challenge. I never said it would be easy, but just because it might be challenging, is that a reason one shouldn't attempt it?





Landed in AZ said:


> Can you tell me who out of the OTC has been injured?


Nope. I can't tell you. But, if you've been following the thread you know that many of the allegations of injury relate to "improper" teaching of BEST, which apparently is all too common since almost nobody other than Coach Lee understands the system properly--which is a process issue that will be magnified as BEST is rolled out nation wide. So, the rate of injury at the OTC is not definitive of the overall issue.




Landed in AZ said:


> Which one is correct and how will YOU measure that scientifically?


That pertains to the degree to which BEST is scientific. If BEST is truely scientific in nature rather than intuitive then it should be easy to separate "proper" BEST from "improper" BEST by the objective metrics of BEST--unless, that is, BEST isn't completely scientific and is based on subjective criteria...



Landed in AZ said:


> I certainly cannot answer those questions. If you can then more power to you. If someone else can then I will listen. I can only know for certain what our personal experience has been. Nothing more then that. Is our personal experience scientific, far from it. Never claimed it to be anything of the sort.


I can't answer all of those questions either, which is why I'm hoping that qualified people who can will be enlisted to do so. Answering them would be of potential benefit to us all.


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

Rick McKinney said:


> As for ice packs, I guess Darrell and I didn’t train hard enough since we never used ice packs. Maybe we were wimps….I don’t recall John Williams, Jay Barrs or Justin Huish walking around with ice packs either. As a matter of fact, when I was in Korea a few times with their top archers I did not see a single archer with an ice pack.


Rick, it is very rare I ever question anything I see in one of your posts, so this one has taken me a while to digest. And I ask for clarification. John raised this question early and a sound (at least I thought so) reason was posted by two credible sources for it. Are you finding fault with the athletes and or the program for taking "preventative" measures towards injury? It is my understanding that this is not a Coach Lee and staff mandate, it is something that the OTC recommends and does. Is it wrong to take an extra measure to prevent injury?


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

I heard the best method caused divorces, student break ups and a rash here to for undiscovered. Oh yeah, heal spires too.:mg:

I too was injured using the best method...haven't shot a bow in Oly style for months....the cause, my fault. I didn't warm up properly even though warned to do so. And, Frankly, regarding guys like John and myself...I'm not sure at our age we should be fooling around with a style of shooting that stresses strong flexibility and new strong body movements. Well, may be John, but guys my age..probably not a good idea. Young people....well, I would bet the problem with most injuries were brought to the camp and not created there....most come from a training schedule that has virtually no actual physical training. 

At any elite level physical injuries are normal. Most young archers who make it to the OTC are more than likely not in good physical shape. It's more their youth that gets them through in the beginning than their actual physical condition. Archery is not a sport that breeds strong athletic ability...other training does, but not the act of shooting a bow.

There could very well be a good argument for any coach who wants to try teaching the Best Method get the best training he can before working with a young person. 

My two cents....I'm glad ya'll are working it all out,:secret:
Art


----------



## gig'em 99 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Are we off track here?*

We seem to have migrated away from what I believe was the original intent of this thread...which was basically "watch out who you learn BEST from." This is still a reasonable comment or general warning. This is why - 

The KSL shot cycle (aka BEST method) has been evolving for years...and from what I can tell, it still is. Maybe in the new book the final evolution has occurred? But you can look at coach Lee's Australian archers, and see videos on youtube that clearly demonstrate a difference in drawing technique, than say from Tyler Benner's most current video, or the few videos that you can find of Brady Ellison. Now once their anchor's are achieved, I'd say that there are far more similarities than differences in their respective forms, allowing for body type, etc. But a lot can happen from the time you nock an arrow until you hit the anchor or transfer/holding steps.

In the end, this is what is driving the majority of complaints...the fact that the form isn't locked down. But this is difficult to do. If you've actually read Total Archery, or been to and paid attention at a Coach Lee seminar, you'll know that the statements like "one form for all" are completely off base, and demonstrate a lack of knowledge about the technique. The book and the coach both allow for body types. But they also state that the coach must be able to recognize this, and have enough knowledge about biomechanics to do so. And this brings me to what I feel is the most important point. We, as coaches and instructors MUST know OUR own limits with regard to our understanding of the form that we're teaching. Anyone like me who's taken a Level 2 course knows that every intricacy of BEST is not taught. What is taught is basically classic T form. I've got the book, I know. I also just taught a Level 1 course 3 weeks ago...it’s still what's being taught. I'm not certified to teach anything beyone a level 2 instruction. The classic form is still the basis for this technique. But as you advance in the coaching world, you learn more and more of the details. This makes perfect sense to me. I would be irresponsible to say that I've read the book, therefore I'm qualified to teach this method.

The amount of misinformation out there is astounding. I can't believe that this is still being referred to as the "Korean Method." Just because Coach Lee is Korean, doesn't mean he's teaching the "Korean Method." What is even more laughable is that the Koreans shoot a very refined classic archery style...there's nothing wrong with the form they're arriving at. And the assertion that we Americans don't what to do what those Koreans are doing...well I'll just say comments like that are laced with more than just a bad attitude.

John is right regarding his bone spur, and perfectly qualified his statement. What he suspects is one thing, but he acknowledged that his doctor didn't know what caused it either...and there is no way to know for sure. But I do know this...bone spurs don't develop overnight..they take a while to grow. So was the duration of the switch to a BEST technique long enough? Who knows...the doctors don't. So it is what it is. A possibility, nothing definitive. But still worthy of this discussion. Just like Barb's experiences are also worthy.

On to the "science" of it...The OTCs employ real doctors...specifically doctors that specialize in sports medicine. They're not going to push a technique that would cause them liability. We're in a lawsuit era after all. And what we do have referenced in this thread are people of unknown qualifications demonstrating this to their doctors or physical therapists, and getting very unstudied opinions. So those statements need to be taken for what they are. Not to mention, just like global warming, there is science behind it and science against it. It ultimately seems to boil down into your own beliefs about it. Same goes for archery. So constantly asking for the scientific data and objective analysis to back everything up is a wasted effort on forums like this. Forums like this are a place for the anecdotes.

Regarding ice packs...a lot has been learned, even in the last 10 years about muscle recovery, injury prevention, etc. Wearing an ice pack is not a smoking gun, I'm sorry, it just isn't. Frankly, I don't see what the big deal about that is. It raises your suspicion, if you're suspicious.

Finally, why is everyone taking this personally? If you're going to post on AT, you have to know that there are those that want to do nothing more than argue, bash everything because on lack of "evidence" or "scientific analysis." And there are those that get so defensive about that type of "attack" that their own rationale is lost in emotion. We love a sport without a lot of funding, so don't expect to be able to have swarms of scientists and doctors evaluating and re-evaluation and prescribing, unless you want to make a donation of course. It's just not reasonable. Take the age old good advice...[patient] "Doc, it hurts when I lift my arm this way!" [Doctor] "Don't lift your arm that way." 

There are MANY great coaches and people out there, each with their own opinion. Listen, learn, read and draw your own conclusions. And don’t do something that hurts. To the coaches…be responsible. If you don’t understand it, seek advice from someone who does. After all, we’re the ones tasked with teaching this wonderful sport, and we all want it to continue. Any coach worth their salt should know when they can coach their student, and when it is time to allow them to move on and grow under someone else’s tutelage. And for goodness sake, don’t teach something you don’t thoroughly understand. 

Gig'em


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Warbow said:


> You characterize my post as an attack. Do you or do you not think that John should be "thankful" that taking up BEST led to an injury that took him out the 08 season? Before you continue to label my response to coach Dee as an "attack" I think you should give your opinion on that matter, since that relates directly to the appropriateness of my response to coach Dee based on your standards. Do you call coach Dee's posts to John "attacks?" Or is that a term you reserve just for me?
> 
> My post related to that claim and that only that claim of Dee's post (a claim by Dee that you have, so far, declined to endorse), so your attempt to conflate my specific response to that claim as an "attack" on the other content of his post is false.


If you're going to quote and then paraphrase my input please do it properly.

I said that John should be thankful that BEST Method *uncovered *an injury that he didn't know he had.

As far as taking him out of the '08 season...good luck in '12.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick McKinney 
As for ice packs, I guess Darrell and I didn’t train hard enough since we never used ice packs. Maybe we were wimps….I don’t recall John Williams, Jay Barrs or Justin Huish walking around with ice packs either. As a matter of fact, when I was in Korea a few times with their top archers I did not see a single archer with an ice pack. 



Landed in AZ said:


> Rick, it is very rare I ever question anything I see in one of your posts, so this one has taken me a while to digest. And I ask for clarification. John raised this question early and a sound (at least I thought so) reason was posted by two credible sources for it. Are you finding fault with the athletes and or the program for taking "preventative" measures towards injury? It is my understanding that this is not a Coach Lee and staff mandate, it is something that the OTC recommends and does. Is it wrong to take an extra measure to prevent injury?


Rick, back in your day they used to advocate eating hands full of salt tablets too. Thank goodness that changed. Maybe about the time they figured out that excess salt contributed to heat injuries, they also figured out that injury prevention (ice) was better than injury treatment.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ldfalks said:


> If you're going to quote and then paraphrase my input please do it properly.
> 
> I said that John should be thankful that BEST Method *uncovered *an injury that he didn't know he had.
> 
> As far as taking him out of the '08 season...good luck in '12.


Sorry, Dee, you misunderstand my point. It is not certain that the BEST Method archery merely "uncovered" a condition rather than caused it. And, while you can debate the culpability of BEST in John's individual circumstances, it isn't automatically better to have conditions "uncovered" if they are otherwise benign. How did John treat the condition that was exacerbated or, perhaps, even caused by his use of BEST Method? Surgery? No, he had to quit archery for 3 months. There was no upside that I'm aware of to "uncovering" the condition, only a downside. Do you still maintain that John should be "thankful" for BEST leading to him missing the 08 season, with no apparent upside to the injury? 

You have many good points to make, but telling john he should be thankful to best for his injury is not one of them. You can be excused for not knowing the full circumstances of his injury from his earlier post, but with his detailed follow up you no longer have that excuse. (And no, I'm not using your phrasing, but that is because I the the premise you base your claim on may be fundamentally flawed...)


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Landed in AZ. I stand corrected. Lee started the program in ‘06 which means nearly 4 years and the injuries are still the same just intensified since it is a shorter period. Thanks for pointing that out. I am not using scientific analysis here, just my observation. However, I still stand by my words. There are more injuries in this program than all others put together. It needs to be documented and there needs to be a way to figure out how to have fewer injuries and not just putting a band aid on it by using ice packs. 

As for the OTC and their suggestions. Recognize that the USOC is used to high intense physical sport such as running, jumping, kicking, boxing, etc. The shooting sports are an entirely different type of sport. It takes amazing mental toughness, not amazing physical strength. Since Lee has let the physical trainers decide what is best for the archers, I consider it an issue for both Lee and the OTC. 

The issue is not with top archers. Most are smart and cognizant enough to know what is good for them or not physically. They are not willing to risk their elite level status just to satisfy a coach who cannot guarantee even the same level of success. He can say he promises to make them better (like he did John, Jenny, Butch, Vic and others), but does he take full responsibility of an archer who ends up injured or devastated by the form changes. The elite archer will not chance it and rightly so. They will try it like all of them have, but most will go back to what works for them. The biggest concern is for the youth. They join this program with full excitement and total trust in the program. Thus, if they are told to do something they do it without question (except for the wimps). If pain happens they are told to suck it up and head to the OTC repair shop? This only encourages more injuries and total devastation of self image. I am NOT a supporter of this type of program if that is what happens. 

Idfalks. I find your comment about salt pills amusing. I guess you are about as old as I am….I don’t ever recall archers using salt pills; military maybe. :mg: I think archers were a bit smarter than that. Most of us laughed about the issue when other sports recommended it. I consider most archers a bit smarter than average. Look at most of the non-archer accomplishments by most of our top level archers. They are motivated, disciplined, logical thinking, manage their time extremely well and highly focused. These are not just your jocks who want to go out and smack someone or kick a ball or leap over the tallest building. These archers challenge themselves far above the average person and usually are active in more than one extra curricular activity. 

I could take your comment as me being out of touch and stuck in the old ways….however I am sure that is not what you meant. Since you did say that it is important to deal with injury prevention instead of injury treatment, why do you resist our concerns about injuries in this program? And since virtually all elite archers in the past did not use ice packs, it is highly presumed they did not need it since they did not have nor were getting injured during their practice session or competition. Hardy Ward was the last archer I am aware of having serious shoulder issues. It is well known why, but the rest of the elites did not experience this. Can you explain your position? Is it better to use ice packs to prevent something that should never occur in the first place if form is used correctly? Or are you suggesting that this new system will cause more potential injury with improved performance? I am not seeing it….You may have to enlighten me.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Rick McKinney said:


> Landed in AZ. I stand corrected. Lee started the program in ‘06 which means nearly 4 years and the injuries are still the same just intensified since it is a shorter period. Thanks for pointing that out. I am not using scientific analysis here, just my observation. However, I still stand by my words. There are more injuries in this program than all others put together. It needs to be documented and there needs to be a way to figure out how to have fewer injuries and not just putting a band aid on it by using ice packs.
> 
> As for the OTC and their suggestions. Recognize that the USOC is used to high intense physical sport such as running, jumping, kicking, boxing, etc. The shooting sports are an entirely different type of sport. It takes amazing mental toughness, not amazing physical strength. Since Lee has let the physical trainers decide what is best for the archers, I consider it an issue for both Lee and the OTC.
> 
> ...


Rick, you have proven to me and everyone else on this thread that you are as informed as you want to be and any additional enlightening on my part would be wasted. I'll save my fingers from corpal tunnel and prevent yet another senseless internet related injury that could have been avoided by not participating in the nonsense of trying to refute hearsay.

What I'm saying is that I think you need to define "injury" and then see if the reports actually are archery related "injuries". I've been a JDT coach for almost 2 years and I haven't seen what you are talking about. Some archers get sore and some use ice to aleviate the discomfort so they can go full speed the next day. Should we ban ice? Is it a placebo? Does it help the body or the mind? Who cares? If it helps, it helps.

I know you wre just kidding about the ice thing. Back in your day archers didn't need ice because sitting in a hot whirlpool was the treatment of choice for sore muscles, not ice. Bad move we know now. My remark about salt tablets was to make the point that sports medicine and recovery techniques have come a long way from since the invention of electricity when you and I were in our prime. Oh yeah, they even give anesthesia before surgery now.

Bye


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

The thread has mostly moved into a realm I feel I can only fantasize about - what an Olympic Hopeful has to worry about. IMO the only thing they have to worry about is can they win - for almost any other sport that is the primary thought and injury statistics are only relevant in can they make it to one or two Olympic Competitions. I have no students in that situation so, well I do not care.

I am a supporter in that I feel what the program is seeking to do they are on the right path. I also would *love* to have the instruction necessary to teach it effectively as I *do* believe that it is mostly less injury when applied to the training an Olympic Hopeful goes through. I perfectly believe people who say with the correct instruction it feels great. I'm still on the fence on long term for less than Olympic Hopefuls, but I'm also knowing I'm not qualified to say much more than that and give it as something I would like to see addressed in more than just "trust us". I know that some of the things I've read (from Lee no less) is no longer true, I will also chalk that up to a language barrier as I've dealt with non-English speakers and it is perfectly within that realm.



JDT_Dad said:


> All, come on now. I never said one should choose a coach based on support of the system alone. I only said that I would pick a coach who is actively involved in coaching the system. I believe one has to be using the system and believe in it (ie a supporter) before I would ask their advice on how to shoot with BEST. Naturally, If a coach is a supporter, but does not know BEST I wouldn't be asking for their advice. That's just dumb.


I do want to respond to this point though - you *are* predicating you choice of coaches on support. You can not say "I will only use supporters of the system as my ideas" without having the following be true too: "I will not use non-supporters for my ideas". 

You predicated you choice (and one anyone choice by suggestion) that they support the program. You then can not come back and say that non-support is irrelevant. You may not care what they think of it - maybe the neutral or whatever, yet your choice of coaches has totally to do if they support the program.

As such you are listening only to your echo chamber - only those that like the system can be listened too therefore all you listen to like the system. It then only follows that everyone that counts like it so it must be true. I think it was obvious that you would not like someone that knows nothing to coach you kid - yet why would you turn down (the hypothetical) most knowledgeable person on the plane because they didn't support BEST? You are predicating your choice of coaches on something that is irrelevant but totally social. Your reasons are your own and I'm sure I'm not the only one who has thought you are a parent that is rationalizing what your kid is going through (and were I your kids initial coach I would recommend the same path so, again, am I a supporter or not?) - but to give that advice to others will usually get some sort of response. 

It is irresponsible to predicate coaching credentials on support of the BEST system. It isn't hard even in this thread to find those like me that find something not so great there yet would push any kid truly interested in Olympic Gold into the program. It also isn't hard to find those that can teach it quite well that do not like it, it isn't hard to find most of those that will also push their students into the program even given their apprehensions. 

Heck without any studies how can *any* of us truly be supporters or non-supporters and it not just be a question of who is better: The SeaHawks or the Cowboys? What ever happened to, you know, making informed decisions based on the scientific method where we proposed a hypothesis, gathered data, and then looked at that data? I do not feel a supporter or non-supporter. I just want a decent answer to my questions, not just "trust me". Given that BEST "supporters" often seem to become offended that I have even stronger questions - however I note that most of those are what I would call "tertiary" people (parents and such) and people like Mr Faulks just do not answer. That sounds kinda slam against Mr Faulks (your ignoring my issues!!!!lol!!00!!) but I mean it more as a compliment to the system - in my own work there is no reason to be a yellow dog supporter, better to be silent or just post what can be substantiated and go from there. I suspect that these studies are going on too. 

I know those studies haven't been done, I know there hasn't been enough time to do them, and I know most of us really do not understand BEST so I'll leave it at that. I do know that bad BEST teaching causes injuries and, as such, I do not teach it. I would *love* to have a HP certified coach get me to where I could teach it (and personally shoot it). I do not know what the current shift towards BEST is going to do, mainly because I think that what a level I instructor now needs to know is MUCH less than a level I BEST instructor needs to know.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

strcpy said:


> I do want to respond to this point though - you *are* predicating you choice of coaches on support. You can not say "I will only use supporters of the system as my ideas" without having the following be true too: "I will not use non-supporters for my ideas".
> You predicated you choice (and one anyone choice by suggestion) that they support the program. You then can not come back and say that non-support is irrelevant. You may not care what they think of it - maybe the neutral or whatever, yet your choice of coaches has totally to do if they support the program. As such you are listening only to your echo chamber - only those that like the system can be listened too therefore all you listen to like the system.


Please be careful in what you read into my statements. I have never said I will not listen to those who don't support the system. Heck, I've been reading this thread! I not only listen to people who don't like the system, but I also believe there are many systems which work, and work very well. People using many different systems are successful on the international stage. I make it a point to learn what they have to offer. My hard drive if full of videos of various domestic and international archers using wildly different styles of shooting. I read all that I can and have studied many different approaches. I have learned much from proponents of different styles of shooting. You don't know me, so I don't expect you could have known any of this from my posts. I tend only to post when I see misinformation being propagated or conclusions which are not supported by data. My training and background is in engineering. In engineering, we pay allot of attention to the "scientific method" My first boss had a sign on his door which read "Facts without theory is trivia. Theory without facts is BS". People have interpreted my position on this thread as being one sided. So far, I have not seen any objective data to support many of the positions people have taken. I'm not inflexible, but if somebody takes a position which is in direct opposition to my personal experience I am going to need facts before I change my mind. Contrary to what people on this thread believe about me, I have tried to find out what is behind these stories of injury. I think I understand what happened, but since no details are forth coming from Limbwalker, I can't verify anything. It's quite frustrating.



> It is irresponsible to predicate coaching credentials on support of the BEST system. It isn't hard even in this thread to find those like me that find something not so great there yet would push any kid truly interested in Olympic Gold into the program. It also isn't hard to find those that can teach it quite well that do not like it, it isn't hard to find most of those that will also push their students into the program even given their apprehensions.


It would certainly be irresponsible to predicate coaching credentials on support of the BEST system and I have never advocated this.


> Heck without any studies how can *any* of us truly be supporters or non-supporters and it not just be a question of who is better: The SeaHawks or the Cowboys? What ever happened to, you know, making informed decisions based on the scientific method where we proposed a hypothesis, gathered data, and then looked at that data? I do not feel a supporter or non-supporter. I just want a decent answer to my questions, not just "trust me". Given that BEST "supporters" often seem to become offended that I have even stronger questions - however I note that most of those are what I would call "tertiary" people (parents and such) and people like Mr Faulks just do not answer. That sounds kinda slam against Mr Faulks (your ignoring my issues!!!!lol!!00!!) but I mean it more as a compliment to the system - in my own work there is no reason to be a yellow dog supporter, better to be silent or just post what can be substantiated and go from there. I suspect that these studies are going on too.
> I know those studies haven't been done, I know there hasn't been enough time to do them, and I know most of us really do not understand BEST so I'll leave it at that. I do know that bad BEST teaching causes injuries and, as such, I do not teach it. I would *love* to have a HP certified coach get me to where I could teach it (and personally shoot it). I do not know what the current shift towards BEST is going to do, mainly because I think that what a level I instructor now needs to know is MUCH less than a level I BEST instructor needs to know.


In many ways I agree with you here. We need objective studies before people can come to any meaningful conclusions. The frustrating part is, you will not get an objective study of current/past injuries becuse of a lack of meaningful data. Unfortunately, Limwalker will not or can not post more relavent information with respect to the BEST induced injuries. I for one would like to understand what types of injuries he is talking about. Are they all/mostly bow shoulder or something else? When did the injuries occur? I know coaches have changed how they coach the system over time. Were the majority of the injuries at the OTC incurred just after introduction of the system in the US? If so, this may be old data and the problems have largely been resolved. This is what several different sources within the OTC have told me. (Yes I do my homework and don't have my head in the sand). Limbwalker has not been to the OTC for several years, but he still could perform a service to the archery community using his experience with the JDT kids. Limbwalker has said that one of his JDT students was injured while training under his supervision. He could do us all a favor by discussing (without using names) the nature of the injury, what caused it and most importantly what can be done to minimize this type of injury in the future. Such a discussion would be truly useful to many archers and coaches, much more so than the endless and from what I can tell, meaningless icepack stories.

Many people have questions about the system, those who are closest to the system and know the answers to many questions will not post here because they are attacked immediately. Even Landed In Arizona's reasoned posts were met with a huge diatribe. I made a simple statement to the effect that "if it hurts stop". I was attacked for making that statement. Sorry, I still think that is good advice. The same advice given a few posts later by Limbwalker was not attacked. I have come to the conclusion that opposing viewpoints are just not welcomed here. I really question the "group think" label attached to me by Rick Mckinney. There seems to be a whole bunch of "group think" on both sides.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

JDT, I'm not sure why there even has to be "sides" in this discussion. Everything unfortunately seems to migrate toward that on these boards.

No, I'm not at liberty to post on this forum the information I've been given about injuries. People sent me those messages priately, and the information is not something any of the archers would want posted here anyway. It's really their business. I'm just making observations, along with others. I've not been around the sport of archery long enough to see trends, and certainly not long enough to have the breadth of knowlege that Rick has concerning training programs at the OTC. As far as I'm concerned, I doubt there is a greater authority on the issue of OTC programs than Rick, so I give what he says a lot of consideration. 



> I have come to the conclusion that opposing viewpoints are just not welcomed here.


I said when I began this (at other's requests, mind you) that I knew this would be controversial. There are SO many reasons coaches, parents, NAA officials and even some of the affected archers wouldn't want anyone to question the direction we've taken it's not even funny. Everyone has their own reasons I guess. I no longer have a dog in the fight, so if I observe something (like the first time I've ever seen ice packs on archers) or hear what seems to be a pattern of injuries associated with archers attempting to learn the BEST method, I feel the need to ask questions. Some of those questions have been answered to my satisfaction, some haven't. 

Something I've wondered lately with respect to Tyler's excellent explanation about the ice packs, is why we are seeing those on the shoulders, and not on the back (where the work is supposed to be going on)... Honest question, so don't flame me for asking it...

Dee and I had a good converstation off-line and I can assure you (as I did him) that I'm not out to get anyone, don't have a vendetta, am not the least bit bitter or have alterior motives when I offer these questions and observations. They are just that - one person's observations. My first and only interest is seeing archers stay healthy. Since the inception of the BEST method in the U.S., I most certainly have seen and heard of more archers getting injured (or injuring themselves, however you want to look at it) than I EVER heard of or saw before. Much of it, I think, is because of improper interpretation - which is why I caution folks to make sure they are working with someone who has a qualified track record of teaching archers without injury. I think there are a few of those out there now, or at least some coaches who have stayed with the system long enough to have worked through some of those early issues and now know how to properly instruct an archer without the risk of injury. 

I had hoped to be one of those coaches myself, but when all my vacation time ran out, I had no choice! You can't donate what you don't have! So unfortunately I fell behind in learning this method. One that I must say is far more complex, difficult to learn and difficult to teach than I had ever anticipated. Not saying that's good or bad, but it's what I found... For some, its obviously worth the extra effort. For most others, I'm of the opinion now that it probably isn't. I gave over a year of my time and energy trying to learn how to teach this method. I still feel that I only got 1/3 of the way through it after three seminars, two JDT camps, countless e-mails and video reviews, a trip to Turkey as the asst. coach, and countless discussions on the phone and in person with other coaches. By the end of the second year, I felt I hardly recognized the method we had been instructed to teach just 12 months earlier... For those of you who have been able to keep up, I say good for you. But until things settle out and the learning curve becomes a little easier and predictable, it's really going to be tough to "roll out" this method nationwide. 

In the future, I look forward to learning more about it, as well as other methods that are still taught in the U.S. I think the responsible coach should have an understanding of each of the methods that have proven to be successful over the years. And from where I sit, that's at least 3 and arguably more...

John.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

*Last Post*



limbwalker said:


> JDT, I'm not sure why there even has to be "sides" in this discussion. Everything unfortunately seems to migrate toward that on these boards.
> 
> No, I'm not at liberty to post on this forum the information I've been given about injuries. People sent me those messages privately, and the information is not something any of the archers would want posted here anyway. It's really their business. I'm just making observations, along with others. I've not been around the sport of archery long enough to see trends, and certainly not long enough to have the breadth of knowledge that Rick has concerning training programs at the OTC. As far as I'm concerned, I doubt there is a greater authority on the issue of OTC programs than Rick, so I give what he says a lot of consideration.
> 
> ...


Limbwalker, thanks for a reasoned response. I was one of the people who asked for you to re-post your concerns about injury after they were lost on the other thread. I was really looking forward to hearing a discussion of injuries and how to prevent them. I now believe I was naive to think such a discussion could be held on AT. Never-the less I think a discussion relating to archery injuries and how to prevent them would be good for the community as a whole. I was pretty sure I understood the specifics of what had happened in the past and what has been done to correct the problems, but I'm always up for learning something new. Never-the-less, If there are problems with BEST I don't know about, I will find them. 

I am glad to hear you had no ulterior motives in starting this thread. After seeing your previous posts calling for removal of funding from the OTC (and using the $$ for prize money) and hearing of your injury at the OTC which prevented you from making a run for another Olympic team, a reasonable person might draw very different conclusions about your motives in bringing up a controversial subject like "BEST Method Injuries". 

You and I have very different styles. I would have picked up the phone and asked somebody at the OTC what was going on with respect to injuries. Maybe you did, I don't know you didn't say. However, I did take the time to make that call and assure myself of what had happened and that all bases were covered. Since you have assured us that your motives were purely to help prevent injuries, and I'll take your word on it. We both want the same thing, but have very different ways of working to achieve it. I don't claim to have all the answers, but I find people are more willing to help you out if they don't feel threatened. That's just my style. I will continue to work behind the scenes to learn as much as I can about BEST's strengths and weaknesses. I really feel if people can cooperate without the trying to assess blame we will all be better off. Without an antagonistic point of view, information can start to flow both ways and that would be a very good thing for everybody concerned.

Now about those ice packs.....On second thought I'll leave that one alone.

FYI, this will be my last post on this subject as it has left a very nasty taste in my mouth. Unfortunately many knowledgeable coaches feel the same way.


----------



## tjk009 (Feb 15, 2007)

*how about a poll of known injuries?*

It seems archery results in injuries, some before BEST and certainly continuing after. I think many, if not most archers have tried some if not all the BEST components. Personally I know four adult archers who have been injured in the past year: one bow shoulder, two draw shoulders, one a chest muscle tear. Limbwalker a forearm several years ago. We have a large JOAD program and have yet (knocking on wood now wildly) to have any injuries other than scraped knees. We coaches have the information and know if someone is injured. And as a coach to admit an archer has become injured is a tough thing, but we do know when it happens. A poll might allow all of us to put the knowledge out there about what kind of injuries are more common. Getting the information "officially" isn't likely but everyone knows about injuries at the highest levels as well. Perhaps unofficial results might show areas which could benefit from those "with the knowledge" providing some guidance or preventative measures to help avoid injuries. Wish I knew how to make a poll.


----------



## archerymom2 (Mar 28, 2008)

JDT Dad and others: If you're interested in the more generic issue of injuries and how to prevent them, don't forget the parallel thread started a couple of weeks ago. There were a lot of constructive comments posted! I'll "ttt" it...


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Not one single person on this thread has stated that Lee’s program needs to be eliminated. Not one person has stated that this program is bad. As a matter of fact, virtually all comments have been positive about the program (other than the injury issue). The comments made were about what to do about the injuries, thus the program needs to be studied more and ways need to be found to correct the injuries. It appears this might be what is happening on the “QT” according to jdt dad. 

So, since one group of people are talking about the injuries and cannot talk about explicit injuries due to confidentiality while the other group are mainly arguing that these people do not know what they are talking about it makes it a very frustrating discussion. From what I gather from some (not all) that we should praise this program and ignore the injuries. After all, either the program was taught wrongly to the injured archer(s) by unqualified coaches or the archer(s) got it wrong and hurt themselves (that is what appears to be implied).

jdt dad. Thanks for clarifying your position. I stand corrected. I guess the “Group Think” position could be toward others who support a program blindly and try to discredit anyone who even questions the program. Your explanation of what you are seeking makes good sense and I like what I read about your efforts. Keep searching and hopefully YOU will help to make the program better. Getting facts can be a daunting task especially if there is resistance. Good luck.

Idfalks. Your cute comments are just what is not needed for a good discussion on injuries. I have stacks of research papers on the sciences in archery dealing with biomechanics, physiology, psychology, travel, nutrition, and many other issues including injuries from places like, Canada, USA, Sweden, France as well as other European and Asian countries. I have studied intensely about Olympic archery for virtually 30 years. Your efforts for “comedy” was not successful. I have dealt with lots of “politically” charged characters over the years. It is why I have stayed out of the USAA and FITA programs for such a long time and I see very little has changed since I have agreed to come back into the “fold” on a limited basis. 

When Yoshi Komatsu (a dear friend) and I started Archery Focus Magazine, our purpose was to educate all archers of all levels and all disciplines. When I ran the USAT training camps and was chairman of the Sports Medicine Committee of the NAA, it was for the express purpose to help the archers achieve a higher level in the US. After all, I was the number one archer in the world at the time so I had nothing to gain and everything to loose. The research we ran in the 1980’s had the largest impact in the archery world and still does. Unfortunately, the NAA board wanted to go a different direction (head in the sand philosophy) and let the program die. Going to 100’s of seminars all over the world giving lectures and listening to some of the greatest minds in archery has helped my understanding of archery. So when you do comment with humor, make sure it is not so condescending. 

tjk009. Good idea, but since most people want to keep so much confidentiality, it really does limit this discussion. However, the people I talked to about their injuries, had front or rear shoulder issues and another injury appears to be the bow arm elbow. The cause for the rear shoulder could be due to positioning the drawing shoulder blade out and virtually over the spine (this is extreme, but for imagination sake follow me on this). This requires a tremendous amount of stretching exercises unless you are very, very young….say in your early teens. As you get older and even in your early 20’s you could hurt yourself if this area is stressed too much, too soon, thus the pain. The front half of “rolling” that shoulder will cause some rotator issues. If the ligaments are stressed while rolling over the shoulder ball/joint it could cause inflammation and even some serious injury. Both of these type of injuries can be easily inflamed if you put stress on your draw before raising the bow. One of the easiest ways to eliminate rotator ball/joint injuries is to start with a high draw. Both shoulders are out of the cup and the ligaments cannot roll over the ball. However, the opposite is practiced. The effort is to use the large muscle mass instead of the finer muscles of the upper trapezius area. In the bow arm elbow, if you roll it around too far (for right handed archers going clockwise) this will put severe stress on the joint causing ligament issues and maybe even bone issues. Part of this elbow rotation could be caused by the new grips that are becoming popular. The extreme angle may help cut down torque, but helps put the archer into the elbow, shoulder rotation that is sought. In my opinion, many of these type of injures are caused by moving the archer along too fast and using too heavy of poundage bow. The quantity of repetition, the force of exertion and the lack of recognizing the difference between soreness and pain are probably the culprits. Learning these actions will take a very long time for archers in their late teen’s and older. If they are very young, their body can probably deal with the flexibility issue far greater than the older archers. 

I have felt (experienced) all of these potential injuries except the rear shoulder positioning. I started to work on getting in line when I was 11 years old and thus have had good flexibility in that area. However, when I did feel the pain in the other areas, I played around with it to find a way to eliminate the pain. In reality folks, increasing the archer’s poundage more than 3 pounds per year is really asking for injuries. I know that some coaches want to put archers on a fast track but it leads to a risky possibility of injury. Learning to do the shooting slowly and patiently helps the archer learn how to shoot well and mature mentally while they are learning. Unfortunately, everybody appears to want it now!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I am glad to hear you had no ulterior motives in starting this thread. After seeing your previous posts calling for removal of funding from the OTC (and using the $$ for prize money) and hearing of your injury at the OTC which prevented you from making a run for another Olympic team, a reasonable person might draw very different conclusions about your motives in bringing up a controversial subject like "BEST Method Injuries".


JDT, some will still not believe me when I say that. I have no way to convince them if they won't take me at my word... I really hadn't put the two things you mention above (OTC Funding and injury) together until I just read what you wrote. I suppose someone looking for a "motive" could have done that. I can assure you I did not have one in mind when I mentioned the other. 

I still think my idea of major prize money at USAT events is a good one, whether the money comes from the USOC or elsewhere. 

But that has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion about injuries. And to clarify, I didn't "get injured" at the OTC. Through the course of trying to make "BEST"-related adjustments - at home - I experienced an odd injury. Nobody - not me, not the ortho. surgeon - nobody can say with certainty that my issue was directly related to the change or the weird growth of bone in my forearm or both. I stated the facts in that case, and the most relavent point to me is that as soon as I went back to shooting the way I had before, the pain went away and has never returned... 

So, I think what I'm starting to see here is that maybe old dogs really can't learn new tricks. I think Rick's post sorta says that too. At least, not as easily as new "dogs" can 

But I wouldn't trade knowing what I know now for being a "new dog" anyway, so it's all good 

John.


----------



## gig'em 99 (Feb 1, 2008)

Nice to see this thread moving to a thoughtful discussion again, instead of the sarcastic bickering.

Great posts Rick and John. Thanks for contributing.

Gig'em


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Rick McKinney said:


> Not one single person on this thread has stated that Lee’s program needs to be eliminated. Not one person has stated that this program is bad.
> 
> Idfalks. Your cute comments are just what is not needed for a good discussion on injuries. I have stacks of research papers on the sciences in archery dealing with biomechanics, physiology, psychology, travel, nutrition, and many other issues including injuries from places like, Canada, USA, Sweden, France as well as other European and Asian countries. I have studied intensely about Olympic archery for virtually 30 years. Your efforts for “comedy” was not successful. I have dealt with lots of “politically” charged characters over the years. It is why I have stayed out of the USAA and FITA programs for such a long time and I see very little has changed since I have agreed to come back into the “fold” on a limited basis.
> 
> ...


If you can't tolerate a little levity in this discussion,maybe you're just what is not needed. You are not without a dog in this hunt Rick. You have published the McKenny Technique which is in direct competition with the KSL Shot Cycle. Maybe you should get down off your soap box and recuse yourself from this discussion. The JDT coaches are trying to limit the archer's increase in draw weights, but one of your hero coaches is jumping 14-17 year old kids up to 46-50 lb draw weights. He has 2 of them on the Junior World Team this year. Don't blame me when these kids blow their shoulders out. 

As for you strcpy, I've given you more of my time on this thread than you deserve. What do you expect me to answer? I answer questions honestly and get flamed as some kind of biased "supporter of BEST Method". I'm in Downingtown, PA right now for the JOAD Nationals. Are you going to be here? That was rhetorical because I know you won't be. There are those of us who are coaching and those of YOU who are not. When YOU, strcpy, coach any archer of any age to a national championship, or state championship for that matter, or to a position on a world team to represent our country then come talk to me. I have a couple of archers shooting in the JOAD Nationals this weekend. How many do you have? Don't strain yourself, I'll answer that...ZERO.

Until then shut the heck up and give the keyboard a rest. Maybe if you would start coaching as much as you type you would know the answer to some of these questions you are relying on those of us who are out here doing the heavy lifting to answer. As a matter of fact, I'm through with this thread and if you want answers try attending some seminars to further your education instead of insulting those of us who have been furthering ours.

OUT


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

I haven't noticed (and I haven't kept up on this thread) anyone mention the FITA "Sports Medicine and Science in Archery" book. I just noticed there is a New Medical Book out as well. The book has very good information from surveys done at major events documenting the occurrence of injuries of athletes at that level. There is a lot of interesting information - way too much to repeat here. 

It also discusses diagnosis, treatments, rehab, prevention and strengthening. 

It should be part of every advanced coaching course. 

Interesting notes:
Females more prone to injury (both compound and recurve). Recurve is more problematic.
2 out of every 5 senior archers may face an injury problem along their career. Half, or 1 out of 5 for Junior archers. (Possibly due to shorter careers-since they become seniors.)
The relative injury incidence per 1000 training hours is 0.2 for seniors, and triple that for Juniors at 0.6. They note that this number is relatively low for a sport.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Rick McKinney said:


> _One of the easiest ways to eliminate rotator ball/joint injuries is to start with a high draw. Both shoulders are out of the cup and the ligaments cannot roll over the ball. However, the opposite is practiced. The effort is to use the large muscle mass instead of the finer muscles of the upper trapezius area_. In the bow arm elbow, if you roll it around too far (for right handed archers going clockwise) this will put severe stress on the joint causing ligament issues and maybe even bone issues. Part of this elbow rotation could be caused by the new grips that are becoming popular. The extreme angle may help cut down torque, but helps put the archer into the elbow, shoulder rotation that is sought.


Your intel is dated Rick. You need to actually watch a properly excuted shot cycle to see what we are teaching the archers now. Now I understand why you all are so far off base. You have no idea what you are talking about.


----------



## sundevilarchery (May 27, 2005)

ldfalks said:


> If you can't tolerate a little levity in this discussion,maybe you're just what is not needed. You are not without a dog in this hunt Rick. You have published the McKenny Technique which is in direct competition with the KSL Shot Cycle. Maybe you should get down off your soap box and recuse yourself from this discussion. The JDT coaches are trying to limit the archer's increase in draw weights, but one of your hero coaches is jumping 14-17 year old kids up to 46-50 lb draw weights. He has 2 of them on the Junior World Team this year. Don't blame me when these kids blow their shoulders out.
> 
> As for you strcpy, I've given you more of my time on this thread than you deserve. What do you expect me to answer? I answer questions honestly and get flamed as some kind of biased "supporter of BEST Method". I'm in Downingtown, PA right now for the JOAD Nationals. Are you going to be here? That was rhetorical because I know you won't be. There are those of us who are coaching and those of YOU who are not. When YOU, strcpy, coach any archer of any age to a national championship, or state championship for that matter, or to a position on a world team to represent our country then come talk to me. I have a couple of archers shooting in the JOAD Nationals this weekend. How many do you have? Don't strain yourself, I'll answer that...ZERO.
> 
> ...


UM... WOW... :zip:

I just don't even know how else to react to a post like this.


----------



## tjk009 (Feb 15, 2007)

*there you have it....*

Mr. Falks states: You need to actually watch a properly excuted shot cycle to see what we are teaching the archers now.

Perhaps some video of the Dreamers in action this weekend can help us all. Post it to YouTube for the world, or maybe just to the NAA membership. Be a great deal as we don't get magazine anymore.


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Idfalks. I think I will leave your first comments alone. You appear to be a bit thin skinned, hot headed and very mean spirited. I hope you treat your kids a bit better than how you write on this board.

As for the outdated issue on your second post. It appears that anyone who has not been to the last seminar or camp would be out dated…


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

ldfalks said:


> As for you strcpy, I've given you more of my time on this thread than you deserve. What do you expect me to answer? I answer questions honestly and get flamed as some kind of biased "supporter of BEST Method". I'm in Downingtown, PA right now for the JOAD Nationals. Are you going to be here? That was rhetorical because I know you won't be. There are those of us who are coaching and those of YOU who are not. When YOU, strcpy, coach any archer of any age to a national championship, or state championship for that matter, or to a position on a world team to represent our country then come talk to me. I have a couple of archers shooting in the JOAD Nationals this weekend. How many do you have? Don't strain yourself, I'll answer that...ZERO.


Eh, what? I tried my best to point out that Lee's protoge's (and I actually had you as one in mind) could teach it well enough that a lot of my my gripes went away. Indeed, I still would like to attend a seminar that you teach as I understand you do a good job of teaching BEST - though I guess at this point I wouldn't mention my AT name. I also tried to make it clear that for Olympic Hopefuls I would push them towards that program, and - once more - you being semi-local to me would be one if I ran into such a student would be pushed towards. Guess that's pretty much a no-go then, shouldn't have asked any questions or had doubts about the system.

Having not asked you anything directly I'm not sure why you think I am demanding answers from you directly either. None of my general questions were directed at any individual and I think it is reasonable when a program claims "fewer injuries" to, well, ask how they arrived at that idea. I have two main gripes with the program - it is hard to teach coupled with small errors cause injuries and I have not seen any research done on long term effects of the form when done properly (indeed, I haven't seen short term ones listed anywhere). Other than that I've complained that labeling people as "non-supporters" and dismissing their arguments ad-hominem is wrong, I would as such also say labeling someone as a "supporter" and dismissing what they say is wrong too (and if doing one is correct then doing the other is too). Not sure where that was lost in the translation.

I would also say my not giving my keyboard a rest did send me through enough college to understand an actual study too - I can even read/understand even advanced statistics, research methods, and other such things (having written/published a number in Computer Science myself). So simply saying it is so, trust us, doesn't help me much. I *do* know what it takes to say it with authority and can read such a thing and understand it. As such I would like to see where that claim comes from - that isn't a terrible request of a program that makes such claims and I do not need to have a team at JOAD nationals to be able to read/understand such a thing.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

Lloyd said:


> I haven't noticed (and I haven't kept up on this thread) anyone mention the FITA "Sports Medicine and Science in Archery" book. I just noticed there is a New Medical Book out as well. The book has very good information from surveys done at major events documenting the occurrence of injuries of athletes at that level. There is a lot of interesting information - way too much to repeat here.
> 
> It also discusses diagnosis, treatments, rehab, prevention and strengthening.
> 
> ...


Thanks Lloyd. That is a useful bit of information for those of us in the wilderness.


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

ldfalks said:


> ...Until then shut the heck up and give the keyboard a rest...


Plonk !!!

There's another on the ignor list


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ldfalks said:


> If you can't tolerate a little levity in this discussion,maybe you're just what is not needed. You are not without a dog in this hunt Rick. You have published the McKenny Technique which is in direct competition with the KSL Shot Cycle. Maybe you should get down off your soap box and recuse yourself from this discussion. The JDT coaches are trying to limit the archer's increase in draw weights, but one of your hero coaches is jumping 14-17 year old kids up to 46-50 lb draw weights. He has 2 of them on the Junior World Team this year. Don't blame me when these kids blow their shoulders out.
> 
> As for you strcpy, I've given you more of my time on this thread than you deserve. What do you expect me to answer? I answer questions honestly and get flamed as some kind of biased "supporter of BEST Method". I'm in Downingtown, PA right now for the JOAD Nationals. Are you going to be here? That was rhetorical because I know you won't be. There are those of us who are coaching and those of YOU who are not. When YOU, strcpy, coach any archer of any age to a national championship, or state championship for that matter, or to a position on a world team to represent our country then come talk to me. I have a couple of archers shooting in the JOAD Nationals this weekend. How many do you have? Don't strain yourself, I'll answer that...ZERO.
> 
> ...


Wow. Those are some pretty intemperate remarks for a **kids** coach and a coach in a highly visible, politically sensitive position--the kind of remarks that in other professions could get somebody reprimanded or fired. I'm pretty stunned at them. Is that the kind of discourse you model to your kids, kids who may be reading those same remarks in this very forum? Ask yourself if Denise or Kisik Lee would write a post like that in a public forum? You already know the answer. I'd add that anybody who writes "Until then shut the heck up and give the keyboard a rest" should look at themselves, first, before hitting the "Submit" button.

You obviously have a lot if valuable things to say but you are being more than a bit presumptuous and intemperate in the above post. You may have a high position in the JDT but Rick has been there done that and then some, plus a lot more. If only you or Rick McKinney could post here, it isn't even close, I'd want to read posts by Rick McKinney.


----------



## oldreliable67 (Mar 24, 2003)

Well, jeez, this had been such a really good thread! The best in quite a long while, IMO. Kudos to Rick and John and TomB and Lloyd and the others who refrained from turning it into a sarcasm/one-upsmanship contest. 

Ok, now back to lurking and waiting for the next good thread!


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

Lloyd said:


> I haven't noticed (and I haven't kept up on this thread) anyone mention the FITA "Sports Medicine and Science in Archery" book. I just noticed there is a New Medical Book out as well. The book has very good information from surveys done at major events documenting the occurrence of injuries of athletes at that level. There is a lot of interesting information - way too much to repeat here.
> 
> It also discusses diagnosis, treatments, rehab, prevention and strengthening.
> 
> ...


Now see that is the kind of information that is helpful. Not some post that says no other National Head Coach has produced as many injuries. I and others have been accused here of not wanting anyone to question the BEST Method. That is not at all true. What we have asked is that you be fair and state the truth in your posts. In trying to point out errors in those posts, we are again accused of brushing it all under the rug. Again I find it interesting that only the BEST Method would cause so many injuries when I see that as not the case. Rick posted that none of his former team mates ever suffered injury. Yet he failed to mention one in particular that can't pull a bow any longer. Or a current Olympian that recently recovered from a shoulder injury. It is not that we want to sweep any injury under the rug, we want to be fair and post about INJURY not claim that only one method of archery causes injuries. 

It was funny today at JOAD National practice and the BBQ tonight so many were talking about this thread. People who don't post here mostly. And most felt that there was some sort motive behind it. If there isn't then let's discuss the injuries without accusing and pointing the fingers. Quit saying that we who shoot the BEST Method or have kids shooting the BEST Method are trying to make everyone LOVE the BEST Method. Shoot it or don't shoot it. We don't have a motive to try to convert people. Look at the form that won the men's Olympic Gold last year. 

Think about it this way, JDT Dad and myself have daughters who shoot the BEST method, so we don't want them to get hurt, obviously. But if we believed that the BEST Method was the only method that could make the Olympic team, then we would want to post negative on this thread about the BEST Method, since that would mean less competition in the years to come against our kids. So get off your high horses, and quit accusing us of things that are just not true and let's post some useful info like Coach Lloyd posted.


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Sigh....you guys win. I will happily step away from all form discussions. Not worth it to me. I wish you all the BEST!  For those who have personal questions use the PM.


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

Well, since all I can do is bang on a keyboard as an attack dog I guess I'll give er the ole college try again.



Landed in AZ said:


> Now see that is the kind of information that is helpful. Not some post that says no other National Head Coach has produced as many injuries. I and others have been accused here of not wanting anyone to question the BEST Method. That is not at all true. What we have asked is that you be fair and state the truth in your posts. In trying to point out errors in those posts, we are again accused of brushing it all under the rug. Again I find it interesting that only the BEST Method would cause so many injuries when I see that as not the case. Rick posted that none of his former team mates ever suffered injury. Yet he failed to mention one in particular that can't pull a bow any longer. Or a current Olympian that recently recovered from a shoulder injury. It is not that we want to sweep any injury under the rug, we want to be fair and post about INJURY not claim that only one method of archery causes injuries.


Where is that from? I see a quote from Lloyd that states injuries, not one separated out by method in any way at all (maybe the actual study does, yet the quote doesn't give us that). We see that they concluded archery to be a low injury sport compared to *other sports* - I really haven't seen that one argued against by anyone here. There is a LARGE difference between "low injury sport" and "lower injury compared to past performance". 

I will also note that Mr McKinney used the "compared" part and didn't claim no injury, he said (and this is from your very own post):



> None of these coaches EVER produced so many injuries as this program. We have lost some really talented archers during the last five years.


The quoted parts of the study do nothing towards that statement whatsoever. It doesn't help nor detract from it. I can't personally say, not in the position too (nor do I want to be, I'm happy doing what I currently do).

What I will say again is that the experience of those that are at the JDT and have access to Lee and his protoge's is a good one - I have no reason whatsoever to disbelieve that. I also note that almost universally those that do not have access to those resources have bad experiences. I also see no reason to disbelieve that (and I'm one that had bad experiences). In all of us posting here that is withing our own anecdotal experience - that is true for whichever side one wants to be on if the truly want to pick a side. I will further note that the older T method did not have this issue - even bad coaches seldom did physical harm to their student. However while I am not going to go look for studies on the latter statement I *do* think most of us will accept that as being something more than anecdotal.

Of course all of that is hearsay, to use JDT dad's saying it is BS - but then so is every single thing except BEST's record at winning. Some can not seem to be able to either understand that or accept it (and I assume various reasons). However as you position when you come on here and claim would dictate - at least try and hold yourself to the same standard you would any of us - really sit and try and hammer what you are saying here and *think* about it. I'm more than willing to say you are in the best place - I'm even willing to say you are in the spot to have the least injuries (after all you and your daughter are at the JDT wherin the needed magic can occur). I will quote JDT dad as what I see of the prevalent attitude of some one here:



> "Don't take advise on BEST from the folks who don't support the method since they seem to know how to hurt themselves."


Now, he says he didn't really mean that and - OK, I'll buy that for now. No reason to argue what he really meant as I can not be in his head. I do not mean this to argue with him but more that this is the attitude of a number here who feel jumped on. I'll also buy that many feel jumped on - after all you are getting hard questions. You are doing your best to explain too yet we aren't agreeing. You have put yourself out as a proponent of the system (I will say that is an elevation above supporter - one that understands it and can defend it) and are getting questioned as such. It's a hard transition to make, read it as you would any system you were skeptical but not against.

As an engineer also along with being an academic weenie (spent a number of years as research staff at Oak Ridge National Labs and publications in IEEE) I agree with JDT dad that opinions without fact are BS. I want to see fact and I haven't seen it. That leaves anecdotal and we all have tons of that.

Of the anecdotal evidence I see the same thing here and everywhere: people with experience with Lee and his protege's are happy, those without are not. Some have posited language barriers in teaching and that one was shot down hard a ways back [sarcasm]so he is obviously teaching it well to the masses[/sarcasm] (if you want my 70% answer this is it - I've incorporated a great deal of BEST into my own T form and been the better for it, nor do I expect a non-native English speaker to flawlessly tell us what he thinks on a complex system in his first year or so doing such a thing). Some have posited inferior coaches - I may agree there except the majority of them do quite fine with the older T method so that doesn't really address it. So that leaves little else other than inherent complications with the form outside of highly skilled professional archery coaches at an OTC - which 99.999% of archery isn't (my other 30% is here - the transfer/loading just seems too reliant on being exact for most to do, yet nearly everything else really cemented a lot of ideas for me and nearly all my students when I discussed it with them - I *really* like his breathing/shot sequence and explanation of the use of your core body muscles).

Ask yourself this (and try and be as honest as you can) - we say that BEST from two years is radically different from now. That those past injuries are not a concern now. If you had been in this exact same position would you have left and complained about the whole thing (after all it admittedly had major issues)? Stuck it through and assume it would get better? And if the answer to that was no (and realize that for us sitting here the message of "trust me, no injuries - those last year were a fluke" has been said for a number of years now) how would you think about the system? If "yes" would you defend it the same? And if you are going to say that two years from now how are you going to look back on now?



> It was funny today at JOAD National practice and the BBQ tonight so many were talking about this thread.


Aaaand see my reasoning there.



> And most felt that there was some sort motive behind it.


And, frankly - what is it? We know what Mr McKinny's is - Mr Faulks was more than happy to let us in on that one. But me? Limbwalker? Warbow? Or the myriad other posters who really do not have a dog in the fight over which one "wins".

I've been pretty frank (take that as an attack if you wish - at least I'm open about it) and in case you can't figure it out I think many/most parents are trying to convince themselves they made the right choice that a certain amount of logic they would apply on other things is thrown out the window. I think you guys made the right choice - same one I would have made and would push any of my students (I have no kids) into. Yet I think most want it to be the right choice so strongly that they do this kind of thing (not the first, last, or heck even strongest application of this I have seen). I also think it would have been the same thing for all these years if the older standard T method had this amount of controversy. So that part isn't anything against the current system.

So - please list our motives behind it?



> If there isn't then let's discuss the injuries without accusing and pointing the fingers. Quit saying that we who shoot the BEST Method or have kids shooting the BEST Method are trying to make everyone LOVE the BEST Method.


If that is going to be the case then quit telling me I have other motives to be a non-supporter. You can't accuse others left and right of all sorts of things and then get all huffy when someone thinks you have some other motive. At least state what mine is - I'm more than willing to tell you what yours is.



> So get off your high horses, and quit accusing us of things that are just not true and let's post some useful info like Coach Lloyd posted.


It is useful information for sure - it is interesting to know that the injury rate is low. It doesn't address the fundamental question here. In this case I'm mostly happy to ignore that this isn't realized as you aren't payed to write or do these studies, you stood up and did what you thought was right. There is something to be admired there and I do. No real reason for you to really stand here and defend them nor do I expect you to know the information (or even know where to look it up had it been done). 

I am, however, left wondering why those that *can* do so and *should* do so do not. Some things - such as long term injuries amongst Olympic Hopefuls to strictly amateur I do not expect, it hasn't been around long enough to do such a thing. But shorter term, especially given their claims, should have been done. That it is dismissed at the level of those that do (or should) understand the questions and where they are coming from is troubling. As I always felt when a vendor sidestepped similar questions at SuperComputing - why? What are they hiding? A lack of knowledge on the matter? The numbers didn't work out well? A general contempt for thier consumers? They didn't care and made claims and are afraid they will not be true? What? 

I'm not remotely the only archer interested that has a research background and can read research papers and critique them. As a computer scientist/software engineer I can not do much more than review their process and basic bio-engineering issues, yet there are many archers out there that are interested and have *both* backgrounds. Not only that but it *should* have been a part of any national roll out of such a system making the claims it is. They may be right, they may be wrong - heck they may be wholly understating their reduction in injuries for all I know. But until then as JDT Dad's quote said we are all spouting BS as there are no facts.


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

strcpy said:


> Ask yourself this (and try and be as honest as you can) - we say that BEST from two years is radically different from now. That those past injuries are not a concern now. If you had been in this exact same position would you have left and complained about the whole thing (after all it admittedly had major issues)? Stuck it through and assume it would get better? And if the answer to that was no (and realize that for us sitting here the message of "trust me, no injuries - those last year were a fluke" has been said for a number of years now) how would you think about the system? If "yes" would you defend it the same? And if you are going to say that two years from now how are you going to look back on now?.


And this is not the place to put my daughter's story out in the public eye. But if you knew her story, I guess you would not ask this question. So the answer is a resounding yes. She had every reason and right to walk away from BEST and the JDT program and stuck it out. Only time will tell if that was the right decision or not. But we think since she just made the Jr World Team for the first time that it was the right decision. I will not comment on that part again. Period.


----------



## Landed in AZ (May 11, 2008)

strcpy said:


> If that is going to be the case then quit telling me I have other motives to be a non-supporter. You can't accuse others left and right of all sorts of things and then get all huffy when someone thinks you have some other motive. At least state what mine is - I'm more than willing to tell you what yours is.


I guess I missed your post that BEST was the cause of more injuries then any other method out there. And since I don't have time to go look for it, I will take your word for it that you must have posted it somewhere. Since you claim that I was directly accusing you and others of that statement. I didn't mean that but if you did state it then I will say that I did mean it since no one hear has posted any facts to support that statement. Folks take the word of someone of authority and discredit everyone else even of that word of authority doesn't back it up with facts. 

Lloyd's post does not break it out by method and that was exactly my point. Injuries occur and to throw it out there that we have lost top level archers because of it is a mystery to those of us out here in the "wilderness". I know of a few injuries on both sides of the fence. But I don't know of mass injury by top level archers because of BEST. Rick's first post which he appears to have backed off from some what, says that even those working directly with Coach Lee are more prone to injuries. John's posts claim to work only with Coach Lee. 

All I am asking for is that we deal in facts and not some imaginary "stuff" thrown out for impact. Lloyd's post at least gave us something that had foundation regardless of what form it is. If there is an injury out there caused by the BEST Method then let's discuss those injuries not "mass injuries caused by BEST Method". John's injury was an uncommon one, that even his dr's were baffled by. So I don't think we can expect the masses to get that one. Let's discuss specifics, please.


----------



## OldSchoolNEO (May 11, 2009)

*Wow!*

Archers sure are a passionate lot!


----------



## rpdjr45 (Jul 28, 2007)

It's been entertaining. And the spelling has improved greatly. The passions run high. It's almost like listening to a religious debate. "My Invisible Friend is better than your Invisible Friend, and my way to paradise is better than your way to paradise." "Oh, yeah? Prove it!" I've switched to the long bow. One thing is clear, though, we really should keep a record of injuries and come as close as we can to the cause, but sometimes the cause is not as apparent it may seem. Some people complain about shoulder pain, but that bicep tendon is right up under the shoulder and it isn't really a shoulder injury. See my point? However, after months, and even years, a pattern ought to be obvious, and then we can really work on what to avoid to prevent the injuries. Meanwhile, do what we can, and try to do no harm. It is pretty rare for any athlete to pursue any sport without having incurred some injury somewhere along the way.


----------



## spangler (Feb 2, 2007)

*I can't believe I missed this whole argument*

Generally I'm involved in pointless arguments and when it starts getting inflamed and fingerpointy and yelling ensues I really SHOULD be there. 

I'm truly disappointed that nobody saw fit to send me an e-mail inviting me to the fray 

All that being said, I can attest that after attending Mr. Falks' training seminar for the community coach course I was able to better diagnose and fix my wife's shot and the shoulder pain she once had was eliminated.

Thank you Coach Falks.

-Andrew Spangler


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

Landed in AZ said:


> And this is not the place to put my daughter's story out in the public eye.


While I will agree with that, I do no more no more or less than requiring Limbwalker to post his full story on his personal anecdotes. As someone who is trying to get a grasp on the story, lets say after your complaints about those you see in opposition to this rings less than exemplary. I really can not see why you demand full disclosure on everyone else's behalf and not your own. This has, within this thread, been a large part of my complaint and more focused on the BEST "supporters" as they have consistently demanded full disclosure yet sidestepped around their own.



> But if you knew her story, I guess you would not ask this question.


Maybe so, I can not say anymore that Limbwalker's posts, in this case my personal experience more coincides with his and as such I will side with that, whatever "siding" that means. If you want to convince others of your ideas - and I assume you do given that you post - then vague posts are not useful. Yes, I will also point that at Limbwalker (who I also have a great deal of respect for and do not wish to argue with) too, I would also like a full story of injuries there but have accpeted that he can not do so (and if you had accepted that in others I would of you also - yet you do not). I understand why both of you are reluctant to post further, yet so far only one "side" is mostly honest (Limbwalker - and is also why I *really* do not want to argue with him - I can't).



> So the answer is a resounding yes. She had every reason and right to walk away from BEST and the JDT program and stuck it out. Only time will tell if that was the right decision or not. But we think since she just made the Jr World Team for the first time that it was the right decision. I will not comment on that part again. Period.


And, as such, I question your ability to look at the program as whole. If two years down the line you say the program is a flop now and causes injury (as you and many are saying now) you have said you will not agree you are currently wrong. I'll give you the benefit of doubt and assume you misunderstood my question and allow it to be fixed.

Further you still haven't told us what our ulterior motivations are. I do not agree with Mr Faulks idea of McKinney's motives and I do not agree with what I have read of mine (I am still banging away on the keyboard I suppose). Even then that still leaves a great many posters in this thread that you have accused of vague ulterior motives whilst complaining that some posit yours directly. Come on - please tell us the reasons! After all it was enough of a discussion at the JDT that you felt like mentioning it. Really, other than Mr Faulks who has been completely honest (and I do respect that) I see little from the JDT people along with carping that no one supports them - lets see you be honest as to what you think. 

All I'm asking is that instead of innuendo you felt needed to be posted you go ahead and fill us in on exactly what you think. I suppose I can fill in the blanks, but I suspect that isn't going to do you justice. If it was worth the innuendo then come clean with it or at least apologize (though even then I will point out that the text is already out there), if not then, well, I suppose that is another minus to put in your column. 



Landed in AZ said:


> I guess I missed your post that BEST was the cause of more injuries then any other method out there. And since I don't have time to go look for it, I will take your word for it that you must have posted it somewhere. Since you claim that I was directly accusing you and others of that statement. I didn't mean that but if you did state it then I will say that I did mean it since no one hear has posted any facts to support that statement. Folks take the word of someone of authority and discredit everyone else even of that word of authority doesn't back it up with facts. [/qoted}
> 
> Hmm? I haven't posted as such as the data is not there. I neither propose it is less harmful or more harmful - I simply do not know. I have my own personal experience with it but recognize that is different from others. I next posit that if anecdotal evidence is good enough (as you propose - after all your daughter's experience trumps everything else posted here) then the BEST method is not so good for most of us. I have no dog in this fight other than what I currently have in this thread - though that has been pushed towards the "non-supporter" against my will.
> 
> ...


Great, so lets quite doing so. When the proponents of BEST quit telling us it reduces injury and have no data to back it up other than anecdotal I will quit looking at only anecdotal evidence in support or non-support of it. As of right now anecdotal evidence is against the system for regular (or rather non-JDT) archers. I'm asking for said facts on what you propose - this is what, the third or fourth time I have done so and yet to receive them? At this point I rather assume you do not have them and are instead feeding (as JDT Dad's post would say) BS and expecting us to not know the difference. Though I will say this is the first time I have totally directly 100% asked it so maybe it was just ignorance.

Lloyds post gave us nothing in respect to BEST vs Non-BEST, foundation or otherwise. It gave is Olympic program vs Olympic program (and then only as single statement - were this to be accepted I would also want to see numbers but I will accept it). I do not think any here were surprised by what it showed (archery is a low impact sport and, thus, should be low injury compared to high impact sports).

Further we can see by posts on here that Limbwalker's Injury was *not* that uncommon - at least with respect to non-JDT archers. Though due to those being "non-supporter's" their input is irrelevant and some can go thier happy way and pretend those didn't happen. After all they were doing it as taught a few years back and are now wrong.

These are all relatively simple questions if the studies have been done to back your (and others) statements up, especially if we want to get past anecdotal evidence. 

So, I'll even help you and give you a nice quote to show me as a hack even if I do not support it any more than I do it's opposite: BEST causes more injuries than previous shooting methods. There - you can easily show me to be a hack right here and now with nothing more than a link. Please, show me a study that says otherwise. I've stated a hypothesis and, if you need JDT Dad understands the scientific method: you can go over performing and experiment/collecting data, analyzing said data, and interpret said data (steps 3-6 of the standard scientific method). Heck I'll even take another hypothesis as long as it addresses the same concerns. Since you have been asking that we only look at that, have at it - I'm sure the OTC people have been all over that. 

For the most part most the posters here want to be proven wrong as far as I can tell (I certainly do - show me a way to conclusively increase my scores and ability to shoot longer into my life and I'm a happy camper), but do not give me opinions without fact (to quote another poster that is BS) and expect me to not apply my nose, especially when you will not accept anything less yourself for the "other side" as you see them. It is all BS and and I can not see getting angry that yours is more/less smelly than the next.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> It was funny today at JOAD National practice and the BBQ tonight so many were talking about this thread. People who don't post here mostly. And most felt that there was some sort motive behind it.


Barb, first of all, I hope you and all those at JOAD Nationals are having a wonderful time. I wish I was there with all of you.

Now, if any of those folks at the BBQ that you speak of - the "most" you mention - do in fact feel that there was some sort of motive behind this thread, please ask them to contact me personally, either by PM here or by phone or e-mail. You have my phone numbers and e-mail address, so you have my permission to pass those along to any of those people who felt there was a motive behind this thread. In fact, I'm asking you to. I'd like to hear from them.

I probably know "most" of those folks at the BBQ, and I wish I was there. I was hoping to make it to Utah to see some old friends, but I just don't think I can afford to go. Pretty hard to justify spending $500-750 for a sightseeing trip to meet old friends when I don't have students or kids shooting in the event. 

But seriously, have those folks contact me if any of them think I had some kind of "motive". Because I can assure you Barb, I didn't. I was simply starting a new thread at the request of many folks who missed the discussion that was deleted from another thread. Simple as that...

Sorry if anyone is that dissapoints anyone.  ha, ha.

With all of today's crime scene, lawyer and cop shows, I'm sure there are plenty of folks who would hope that this forum leans towards high drama more often. Personally, I don't care for those shows, nor do I care for high drama (of this variety) here on AT. I have three kids (two teenagers) and a wife that teaches high school science. Just how much more "drama" could I possbily want in my life anyway???? !

John.


----------

