# "Timing" the shot



## unclejane

This is why I finally had to give up shooting a hinge. At the end of the day with it, I finally found that I was unable to completely eliminate anticipating the release - there was, for me, too much involved in actually making the thing go off. This is essentially timing the shot - my brain ultimately figures out after about 3 to 4 weeks when a hinge will go off in my hand with enough precision that I couldn't keep it in the subconscious or stop timing it. On a blank bale, it's fine, but as soon as I got reinvolved with a target, it was downhill from there.

With a pull-through release, the queues on when it's going to fire are vague enough that I can't learn them, at least not with enough precision to start anticipating it. So I never achieve the ability to time the shot.

It took about 6 or 7 months of hard trial-and-error with a hinge to figure out what was going on in my case. I kept going back to my Evo + to "reset" the surprise shot with my hinge anyway, so this last time when I got back into timing my shot, I just decided not to go back. So far so good at about a month out shooting only my Evo and Stan....

LS


----------



## Mahly

I developed a little coaching drill to help get the wife involved by "helping" me with my shooting.
I give her a shot window that starts when she hears the click of the hinge.
If the arrow isn't gone in that window, she calls the shot off.
We do keep score (as that is usually the only time I would find myself slowing down or pausing the firing engine), and any arrow released after she calls it off is an automatic zero.
The window I give her is slightly longer than I need for my best shots, so I don't feel too rushed. Keeping score also keeps me from just punching the arrows out just to beat the clock.
Let downs are also recorded and I look at every x (or 5/10) after a let down and figure what my score would be had I not let down (I figure it would have been a 4/9 if I would have forced it). This is positive reinforcement that let downs are a good thing, and also keeps me from feeling rushed.
If not using a click, have your "helper" start the count when you take your thumb off the peg, or some other cue that your engine is starting.


----------



## subconsciously

If you continue with the shot after your window then you are only reinforceing something you are trying to stop. Over aiming leads to a weaker shot or excessive tension. I refuse to shoot a marginal shot. Do they all go in the X. No. But far more hit the X than don't. 


.02


----------



## EPLC

Not talking "timing" with regard to shot window. It's about "timing" the execution to the sight picture. Rather than continuously pulling through the shot without hesitation. I find myself trying to be too careful before starting my firing engine, resulting in an effort to "time" the execution.

The fix is to set up quickly, preload and squeeze without stopping. It's just hard to do.


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> Not talking "timing" with regard to shot window. It's about "timing" the execution to the sight picture. Rather than continuously pulling through the shot without hesitation. I find myself trying to be too careful before starting my firing engine, resulting in an effort to "time" the execution.
> 
> The fix is to set up quickly, preload and squeeze without stopping. It's just hard to do.


You're actually describing a form of target panic here. The main diagnostic being the description of an involvement of the hesitation specifically with aiming - this is perhaps the canonical feature of TP.

I have this too and the way I treat my TP is what I described earlier, a combination of technology and technique. Both together effectively prevent me from being able to determine, with any sufficient precision, when the actual release is going to occur. Unfortunately, in my case, I ended up having to apply even more technology to the solution. I was unable to continue with a hinge because it didn't "disguise" the actual timing of the release sufficiently, even using the PBT release method. 

So I had to make it even more covert by going to a pull-through release. But the underlying problem is still there - I'm just simply treating it more aggressively.

LS


----------



## unclejane

PS: and speaking of timing the shot aka TP and the pull-through release, Alistair Whittingham addresses, not incoincidentally, all these in this video. Might be worth a look:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAyMA_VpgOo

LS


----------



## unclejane

subconsciously said:


> If you continue with the shot after your window then you are only reinforceing something you are trying to stop. Over aiming leads to a weaker shot or excessive tension. I refuse to shoot a marginal shot. Do they all go in the X. No. But far more hit the X than don't.
> 
> 
> .02


Agree; when it comes to aiming that's really where the rubber meets the road with respect to whether a shot engine is really working, in my opinion. That's where I finally started discovering my suffering with the hinge - when I was really trying to get it in the gold every time and really paying attention to my float. 

In fact, for me, it was ok how does my shot engine perform when I really *do* strain it? Say I actually *try* to break my shot engine by intentionally forcing my aim - what happens?

Sometimes forcibly trying to break things in my shooting can reveal a weakness, and in my case it ended up with me putting my Honey Do in the box. That's not what I'd prescribe for anyone else necessarily, but performing intentional quality assurance on certain parts of the shot if they're giving trouble can often speed up a diagnosis of a problem...

LS


----------



## swampy_44

Good topic, I do the same thing. I'm not sure I would call it target panic. I disagree that you "know when" a hinge is going to go off. I feel it's more of a window where it "should" go off. If you know your approaching your shot window and your pin floats off the target substantialy why would you continue the engine knowing your pin is off target? I am intermediate shooter looking to advance. But if your pin is not where you want your arrow to be, why, knowingly execute a bad shot? I used to shoot a thumb release. I used to shoot a thumb release. After awhile of using it I was making it go off. But I was scoring very high while doing so. After awhile my in head shot clock had a timer that went off and no matter where my pin was it was going off. So I switched to a hinge. So is it wrong to stop and start the fire engine knowing your pin is in the wrong spot? Great topic op.


----------



## Mahly

The stopping might not be so bad, but if you have to stop, it might be best to let down and start over instead of restarting 1/2 way through the shot.


----------



## Ned250

It's another argument of semantics, but I agree it's a mild form of target panic. It all stems from not having 100% trust in your shot.

I've been slowly battling my way out of this. It helps me a lot to remind myself that I know my shot works. Just shove the dot in the middle and SHOOT. No *****footin' around, no float analyzing....just SHOOT.

If you do freeze or hang up, abort _immediately_.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Ned250 said:


> It's another argument of semantics, but I agree it's a mild form of target panic. It all stems from not having 100% trust in your shot.
> 
> I've been slowly battling my way out of this. It helps me a lot to remind myself that I know my shot works. Just shove the dot in the middle and SHOOT. No *****footin' around, no float analyzing....just SHOOT.
> 
> If you do freeze or hang up, abort _immediately_.


HEY! That's my line, "just haul back and shoot." My Patient rights covers what you said


----------



## ron w

Eplc, 
I don't want to start a feud, but I can tell you what is going on, if you would like me to.


----------



## straight2it

EPLC said:


> Not talking "timing" with regard to shot window. It's about "timing" the execution to the sight picture. Rather than continuously pulling through the shot without hesitation. I find myself trying to be too careful before starting my firing engine, resulting in an effort to "time" the execution.
> 
> The fix is to set up quickly, preload and squeeze without stopping. It's just hard to do.


You are obviously panicked about missing as we all are. You can either let down and reset your mind, or work through it knowing the shot will be less than satisfactory. For me the key is simply to take the shot when my mind is still. You can watch your pin forever but one thing I noticed is even without a pin in the center, your mind is already there. It will actually correct the body.


----------



## unclejane

Agree that the nomenclature is probably debatable but I think the common element in timing the shot being a problem is the mental overload of having to multitask aiming and commanding the shot. In my view the treatment is the same whatever you call the malady: the decision to command the release has to made for you in a sense. A substitution of an action that can be multi tasked with aiming has to be made.

My finding is that it has to be totally dirt simple-pulling with the back and nothing more is about all I can manage. But for sure, if you're timing the shot you most definitely do have a problem cognitively executing it. Don't ask me why I have this Phd level understanding of all this.....

LS


----------



## subconsciously

There is target panic and then there is trigger panic. 

I suffered for about 2 years of "over aiming" and having lack of execution. My cure was changing the way I think about it. I had to changed the focus to my process and not where the arrow was going. I finally started getting my game back about 4 weeks ago. I used to have to struggle with the shot. Now I just relax and shoot the shot.

Granted if there is too much movement of the pin it is hard to process the shot. But that's another topic. 

The biggest things I did was finishing the process before going to the target.
It was a good day at state. When you reach a certain level. It's not who's the best. It's who makes the least mistakes.


----------



## Mahly

EPLC, are you still trying to achieve the subconscious aim? Or did you go back to subconscious release?


----------



## AzCharlie

Ron, if you can explain this for me I'm all ears, if you would rather PM me your thoughts please do. This is my biggest downfall.


----------



## unclejane

SonnyThomas said:


> HEY! That's my line, "just haul back and shoot." My Patient rights covers what you said


Yep, sorry but Sonny does hold the patent... it even has its own acronym now: HB&S, tho that's my invention....

LS


----------



## Ned250

unclejane said:


> Yep, sorry but Sonny does hold the patent... it even has its own acronym now: HB&S, tho that's my invention....
> 
> LS


The progression of this is fascinating to me. I've gone through these stages this season:

1 - my shot was a mess and inconsistent which fueled my anxiety about missing.
2 - documented my shot process down to minor details. I still find myself going back every once in a while tweaking small notes. 
3 - I started to notice my float was quieting way down, but I hadn't changed anything on my bow. I later realized I was starting to trust my shot. 
4 - I regressed a bit and later figured out that I was admiring my smoother float and was just watching it expecting my process to continue. That led to lots of hang ups. 
5 - today I'm trusting my float and trusting my shot. Set up, go through the steps, and shoot the friggin shot. Don't tap dance around being afraid of messing up the pretty float. It's still there if you let it. 

Today I'm at a crossroads where I think I'm afraid of succeeding. That may sound dumb, but that's where I'm at. I know I'm a 60x shooter. I just have to let myself go do it.


----------



## nochance

ron w said:


> Eplc,
> I don't want to start a feud, but I can tell you what is going on, if you would like me to.


Public forum Ron, Lets hear it. It may help others.


----------



## Rick!

Ned250 said:


> The progression of this is fascinating to me. I've gone through these stages this season:
> 
> 1 - my shot was a mess and inconsistent which fueled my anxiety about missing.
> 2 - documented my shot process down to minor details. I still find myself going back every once in a while tweaking small notes.
> 3 - I started to notice my float was quieting way down, but I hadn't changed anything on my bow. I later realized I was starting to trust my shot.
> 4 - I regressed a bit and later figured out that I was admiring my smoother float and was just watching it expecting my process to continue. That led to lots of hang ups.
> 5 - today I'm trusting my float and trusting my shot. Set up, go through the steps, and shoot the friggin shot. Don't tap dance around being afraid of messing up the pretty float. It's still there if you let it.
> 
> Today I'm at a crossroads where I think I'm afraid of succeeding. That may sound dumb, but that's where I'm at. I know I'm a 60x shooter. I just have to let myself go do it.


You hit the major points well and another poster mentioned an important one. It's pretty tough to run both ends of the shot at the same time. 

A couple questions EPL:
How many of your one shot ends feel the exact same in a 30 shot game? 

How many great holds do you have with "failure to launch"?" 

Feeder went off, time to practice shot quality on pigs.


----------



## EPLC

Rick! said:


> You hit the major points well and another poster mentioned an important one. It's pretty tough to run both ends of the shot at the same time.
> 
> A couple questions EPL:
> How many of your one shot ends feel the exact same in a 30 shot game?
> 
> How many great holds do you have with "failure to launch"?"
> 
> Feeder went off, time to practice shot quality on pigs.


1. I really haven't kept track but if I had to guess it would be about 33% 
2. I'm not sure I ever achieve a "great" hold. Although much better as of late, I'm still at my best when it stays in the gold which is quite often... but when I'm flirting with the 8 ring in a not so smooth motion it's hard to follow through. I've debated whether or not this is some kind of TP but for sure it is connected with the fear of missing. 

That said; I believe this entire issue is connected to hold, float or what ever you want to call it. It seems my execution is controlled by what is going on up front. 

3. I have no pigs, will a cat and a dog be Ok?


----------



## EPLC

Actually, after thing about your question #1 I lied about the 33%... in fact I'm not sure that every arrow doesn't feel somewhat different on every shot. The one thing I can claim consistency in is my inconsistency. I am working on a shot that matches up nicely with my Backspin so I'm in the process of bringing up that percentage. I think I'm probably closer than it sounds as I'm making some really nice shots.


----------



## unclejane

Ned250 said:


> Today I'm at a crossroads where I think I'm afraid of succeeding. That may sound dumb, but that's where I'm at. I know I'm a 60x shooter. I just have to let myself go do it.


It depends on what "succeeding" means, too, tho. Namely, in my view, everyone is entitled to his/her own idea of what success is - that's a good thing because it allows us to tailor our goals accordingly, without having to conform to someone else's idea of what success is.

For me, succeeding in general only means getting better than I used to be and that's more or less all. You'd be amazed at the pushback I've gotten on this, as if this isn't a lofty enough goal and I'm advocating being a quitter, etc. But it's true, at least for me. My goals have to be right-size according to my abilities at the time, the problems I'm having, and what I'm likely to achieve. 

To tie this back into the original topic: For example, is becoming a 60x shooter in the next month a realistic expectation for me? Not no, but h$$$ no. On the other hand, is reducing my anxiety about continuing a shot if the ring wobbles out of the gold a realistic expectation in the next month? Yes, that sounds reasonable. How I do that is I make the performance of a good shot a higher priority than that arrow going in the gold. I'd rather the arrow goes where the spot is, rather than holding the spot on the gold better than is currently possible.

All this is just a fancy way of saying that I try to keep my goals circumscribed and achievable, rather than unrealistic and too pie-in-the-sky. For me, success has to be something honestly based in my current abilities and therefore realistically achievable. 

LS


----------



## TDS

I think I suffer with a similar problem.. When I draw back and begin the separation of the draw to shot execution rite away I am able to execute a smooth shot sequence... Now If I draw back and wait for the float to be perfect before beginning the shot sequence it feels like I no longer have the correct muscles engaged to sequence shot execution. So for me the sooner I can separate the draw to shot execution the sequence flows.


----------



## unclejane

nochance said:


> Public forum Ron, Lets hear it. It may help others.


Agree, I'd value ron's ideas on this also.

LS


----------



## ron w

in all honest reality, despite everything we do to separate our execution from aiming, there is a solidly direct link between what we see and when we initiate our release execution, that cannot be denied or excused. we simply will not initiate the execution, unless and until the sight picture is right. 
the key, is to get the sight picture looking right with as little effort and time as possible, because there is only so long that we have to successfully execute the shot before things start breaking down,...... we simply cannot hold on the shot forever, waiting for the sight picture to be right. when we try to do that, we end running the shot in less than desirable conditions.
there is only a few seconds, in everyone's shot process, where sight picture and quality of execution overlap, to produce a shot that hit's the X.
this short span of time is called the "shot window". and it varies in time from anchor to the shot actually breaking for everyone.
the key to putting these two elements in the same time frame, is done by an organized administration of the elements of our shot. each element, has to know when to run, how fast to run, and how to get it's specific job, done in the time that is allotted for the specific task. when that organized administration doesn't exist, shot's simply don't go to the center on every shot. if one shot takes you 4 or 5 seconds to break off, and the next shot takes 6 or 8, the administration of the process is weak, hence your shot is weak and most likey not going to hit the center with real consistency.
so obviously, the solution, is to get the shot to break at very closely to the same amount of time from anchor to break, as possible. when there is a whole picture of what the administration has to accomplish, in a specific amount of time, the administration of the shot quits "fooling around" and gets the job done.
one of the key elements to this administration, is to coordinate the best period of float, to the best period of release execution timing. when that condition exists, the "shot window" becomes very consistent. 
so training the shot to break, in a time span that has the best, of both of the two main elements,....the good hold and float, and the good release execution, to happen at the same time, will produce the best shot.
this is a very "trainable partnership" and is actually easily done by a drill, called the "shot window timing drill". here's plenty of info about it from me and a few others (some of the country's leading pros) that taught me about it, on the forum. 
a short description......
essentially involves shooting several rounds while a buddy times your shots and makes note of the shot times, that hit the X. a pattern of time will begin to appear for the shots that produce good center hits. 
collect those times and establish an average time that you use to build the structure of your shot process around, by timing your shots and letting down on any shot that doesn't break before that time span elapses. that time span s your upper limit of acceptable shot process time, and refusing shots that go beyond that time element, trains your shot's administration, to be efficient and consistent, with getting the specific individual tasks done in a organized succession, that will be coordinated with the best running time for your execution, so that your execution can run continuously and smoothly from anchor to shot breaking. 
the better this condition exists in a consistent time element, the less effort a good shot will take and the better you will produce more center shots, because the shots will break at a time when hold, float and release execution are in their best condition, within the shot process.


----------



## AzCharlie

Thank you Ron, that is the explanation of the problems I experience. Also thank you for the explanation of the cure, I need to work on this.
This is one of the best threads in a while and is what this site is about.


----------



## Strodav

tagged


----------



## EPLC

I'm thinking that there are a lot of folks with this issue, or some variation of it. The shot window thing may help some but for me I'm not so sure about the shot window being a fix for this as the difficulty starts at the beginning of the shot sequence. Letting down seems to be a better solution as it does help more than anything... but there are times when this is not possible (such as in a timed event, etc.). That said; some of my best outings recently have involved letting down a huge amount of times. This has been true in both practice, league play and local shoots. The last few times I've struggled I've not let down as much. I've also messed with my head over the past few weeks with 8 different releases. Now that I've settled for one I need to continue to master the details and continue on my road that is still progressing nicely.


----------



## Mahly

I think you hit on part of your problem there.
You've changed your firing engine ( heck, your whole style of shooting for that matter) not too long ago, and changed your hinges quite a bit as well.
Some of it may be still learning your shot with your release.
I think I would do as you mentioned, focus on mastering your new shot, along with your new release.

That said, what Ron w said above likely could be looked at as well as s tool to master your shot/release.


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> EPLC, are you still trying to achieve the subconscious aim? Or did you go back to subconscious release?


I'm consciously centering my dot and then transferring my focus to the execution to finish the shot.



Mahly said:


> I think you hit on part of your problem there.
> You've changed your firing engine ( heck, your whole style of shooting for that matter) not too long ago, and changed your hinges quite a bit as well.
> Some of it may be still learning your shot with your release.
> I think I would do as you mentioned, focus on mastering your new shot, along with your new release.
> 
> That said, what Ron w said above likely could be looked at as well as s tool to master your shot/release.


Yes, I was making very good progress before I started messing with all the releases over the past few weeks. I need to go back to my float work as it was really helping. I truly believe this is a matter of how steady you are, and the steadier you are the easier it is to execute. I watched a 60X shooter last night at the shoot and he was very steady on the bow side. His execution was consistent but not one I would want to mimic. As mentioned I have a process that I need to develop. I'm apparently several thousand arrows from where I need to be with it right now.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> Letting down seems to be a better solution as it does help more than anything... but there are times when this is not possible (such as in a timed event, etc.).
> 
> Timed event? E, I know of no other timed event faster than the ASA DAIR Indoor event, 4 arrows in one minute.
> 
> That said; some of my best outings recently have involved letting down a huge amount of times. This has been true in both practice, league play and local shoots. The last few times I've struggled I've not let down as much. I've also messed with my head over the past few weeks with 8 different releases. Now that I've settled for one I need to continue to master the details and continue on my road that is still progressing nicely.


Yep, you have messed with a lot and releases also. Now, pick a release and put the others a way. You already know you'll be better for it. Want one for back up, pick one that makes you work harder....


----------



## ron w

one thing that read here, as posts come in response, is some mention of letting down, during a competitive round or a round of practice, being considered the same effectual tool, as the deliberate let downs during a drill that is constructed to make let downs the tool that trains a specific "aspect" of a shot process. the functionality is not the same. 
during a round, whether practice or competitive, a let down is more or less, a "reset" of the shot......a mild discipline that makes the statement , ' that's not right, lets try again". in a drill where the let down is a tool of instruction, the discipline is much more stern....."no, not that way, do it right or don't do it at all", more of a punitive rejection, that trains a specific element out of the process.
bottom line, if you are shooting for score, you should not be attempting to train any specific element out of your shot process, at that time, because it only works to confuse the internal administration of your shot. save the stern meanings of a letdown, for the short bale drills, where score means nothing. let downs during a scoring round should mean nothing more than the recognition that the shot, as whole, is not running exactly the way you want it to, and that's all. they should be considered, "positive reinforcement" for the shot to run right, not punitive action that stops a more or less, bad element in the shot process. the two aspects cannot be mixed, when scoring is present and scoring should not be involved, when short bale drills are being exercised.....because short bale drills are not about producing scores.


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> Yep, you have messed with a lot and releases also. Now, pick a release and put the others a way. You already know you'll be better for it. Want one for back up, pick one that makes you work harder....


Already sold them all... 



ron w said:


> one thing that read here, as posts come in response, is some mention of letting down, during a competitive round or a round of practice, being considered the same effectual tool, as the deliberate let downs during a drill that is constructed to make let downs the tool that trains a specific "aspect" of a shot process. the functionality is not the same.
> during a round, whether practice or competitive, a let down is more or less, a "reset" of the shot......a mild discipline that makes the statement , ' that's not right, lets try again". in a drill where the let down is a tool of instruction, the discipline is much more stern....."no, not that way, do it right or don't do it at all", more of a punitive rejection, that trains a specific element out of the process.
> bottom line, if you are shooting for score, you should not be attempting to train any specific element out of your shot process, at that time, because it only works to confuse the internal administration of your shot. save the stern meanings of a letdown, for the short bale drills, where score means nothing. let downs during a scoring round should mean nothing more than the recognition that the shot, as whole, is not running exactly the way you want it to, and that's all. they should be considered, "positive reinforcement" for the shot to run right, not punitive action that stops a more or less, bad element in the shot process. the two aspects cannot be mixed, when scoring is present and scoring should not be involved, when short bale drills are being exercised.....because short bale drills are not about producing scores.


I'm not seeing the need for any difference of approach. A let down is a reset, whether in practice or in competition. I let down quite often, always for the same reasons. Either the shot wasn't set up properly to begin with, or was breaking down. I'm not having any difficulties letting down so I see no value in "practice" of the let down process. I do see value in the understanding of the triggers that prompt a let down.


----------



## N7709K

it comes down to shooting careful and putting the gauge again on where the arrow impacts and not shot quality. The easiest way to shoot 10's is to shoot good shots; to shoot lots of tens you need to shoot lots of good shots. Shooting good shots needs to be the goal- not where they land, if that makes sense. So when the shot gets drawn out as the dot continues to move you are becoming careful and trying to place arrows in the middle instead of allowing them to find there way there with a correct execution. 

Blank bale to engrain the correct feel and rhythm of your shot coupled with working a target into the blank bale routine (hang a face; shoot one arrow blank bale, one arrow at the target, one arrow blank bale, one arrow at the target... etc working on making the shot duration and rhythm the same for both shots and bringing the shot of the two personalities closer together until there is only a single shot for any situation).


----------



## possum trapper

the really only thing that changes is how we think on a end by end basis or day by day.Even the very best are not 100%

practice what you need to but remember the very very best still struggle with this.

so when you center punch a target what do you tell yourself?was it that easy?how do you approach the next shot?The more even keel your mind is the better your outcome on shooting will be

the only thing that slows up the sub conscious is the conscious.Your never as good as you think you are and you are never as bad either.

positive thinking goes a long ways either by shooting for score or blank baling.either way negative thinking lets the conscious mind get involved and steers you where you don't wanna be.

its a never ending cycle that takes effort all of the time


----------



## possum trapper

I will say also that when your so called muscle memory is not having a good day the only thing that can bring it back together is your way of thinking.when you short bale shoot it goes back to how you think and your trying to change that by moving up and kinda steering it back on track


----------



## EPLC

N7709K said:


> it comes down to shooting careful and putting the gauge again on where the arrow impacts and not shot quality. The easiest way to shoot 10's is to shoot good shots; to shoot lots of tens you need to shoot lots of good shots. Shooting good shots needs to be the goal- not where they land, if that makes sense. So when the shot gets drawn out as the dot continues to move you are becoming careful and trying to place arrows in the middle instead of allowing them to find there way there with a correct execution.
> 
> Blank bale to engrain the correct feel and rhythm of your shot coupled with working a target into the blank bale routine (hang a face; shoot one arrow blank bale, one arrow at the target, one arrow blank bale, one arrow at the target... etc working on making the shot duration and rhythm the same for both shots and bringing the shot of the two personalities closer together until there is only a single shot for any situation).


I may have to try this now that I'm settled in to the new release/process. I've had difficulties with blank baling and short range shooting because I was never settled in to "one" shot. As mentioned above "change" was the only real consistency I could count on.


----------



## ron w

"blank baling", is not the only thing you can do at the short bale. it's actually only the most fundamental use of it and really only produces a tool, to use in all the other drills and exercises that are done there.
although the let down, has the same physical action at both the short bale and a scoring round at any distance, the functional purpose is considerably different. it's quite possible, that considering the let down the same , effectually, in both instances, is partially responsible for the reason people have problems with getting anything out of the short bale drills.
I could go on, but I am going to close my input into this thread here.


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> I'm thinking that there are a lot of folks with this issue, or some variation of it. The shot window thing may help some but for me I'm not so sure about the shot window being a fix for this as the difficulty starts at the beginning of the shot sequence. Letting down seems to be a better solution as it does help more than anything... but there are times when this is not possible (such as in a timed event, etc.). That said; some of my best outings recently have involved letting down a huge amount of times. This has been true in both practice, league play and local shoots. The last few times I've struggled I've not let down as much. I've also messed with my head over the past few weeks with 8 different releases. Now that I've settled for one I need to continue to master the details and continue on my road that is still progressing nicely.


The shot window "thing" is actually a constraint on all shooters; it exists at all times for all of us. All it really is is a statement of the time/strength/oxygen/etc budget available to you for the purposes of executing the best possible shot. The "shot window drill" that ron describes is simply a training regime for staying within that budget as reliably and repeatably as possible. It is not a method of bringing the shot window into being or anything like that - it's only training for optimizing the use of the hard-time-limited resources of time/strength/oxygen/etc. available to us in the shot.

As for whether or not a simple shot window budget overrun is the actual problem in EPLC's case is probably debatable. His description sounds more like target panic (or trigger panic/anticipation, etc) to me, than simply expiring after taking too long to execute the shot. I'm not ruling it out, since I overrun the budget sometimes when shooting in the wind so it's familiar in that respect. And ron does have a good point, I think, that there's an inextricable link between the sight picture and a decision to start the final execution.

Letting down half the time doesn't sound like an ideal, or even enjoyable, afternoon or evening, so that's another symptom that perhaps something else is wrong. The details of which, well, who knows.

But I agree the circle in this thread has about reached the full 360 degrees, so I'm about to bow out also. My money is on target panic, so I'll just roll the dice with that at this time.

LS


----------



## subconsciously

When suffering as EPLC is, my enemy was the lack of transfer in the shot. I would basically not finish my process before going to the target....This in turn would build tension in the back half and not let the shot flow as needed. Thus I would over aim and then everything would start spiraling down hill. It took me months to get over my ingrained habits. But I did, and it has paid off.

There is only one thing in archery you can control - that is you. 

If you are worried about the pin being perfectly in the middle - then you are worried about where the arrow is "going". Once it leaves the bow - you're done. The archer has to focus on himself. I believe a change of mind set is needed. EPLC has enough archery knowledge to work though any bow/physical attribute of the shot. He needs to work on his mental game.

That's my .02


----------



## Rick!

N7709K said:


> it comes down to shooting careful and putting the gauge again on where the arrow impacts and not shot quality. The easiest way to shoot 10's is to shoot good shots; to shoot lots of tens you need to shoot lots of good shots. Shooting good shots needs to be the goal- not where they land, if that makes sense. So when the shot gets drawn out as the dot continues to move you are becoming careful and trying to place arrows in the middle instead of allowing them to find there way there with a correct execution.
> 
> Blank bale to engrain the correct feel and rhythm of your shot coupled with working a target into the blank bale routine (hang a face; shoot one arrow blank bale, one arrow at the target, one arrow blank bale, one arrow at the target... etc working on making the shot duration and rhythm the same for both shots and bringing the shot of the two personalities closer together until there is only a single shot for any situation).


EPL, Here is a post that ties this into a practice session.

Field14's book has an exercise that helps promote shot quality tracking.

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1072353344


----------



## EPLC

subconsciously said:


> When suffering as EPLC is, my enemy was the lack of transfer in the shot. I would basically not finish my process before going to the target....This in turn would build tension in the back half and not let the shot flow as needed. Thus I would over aim and then everything would start spiraling down hill. It took me months to get over my ingrained habits. But I did, and it has paid off.
> 
> There is only one thing in archery you can control - that is you.
> 
> If you are worried about the pin being perfectly in the middle - then you are worried about where the arrow is "going". Once it leaves the bow - you're done. The archer has to focus on himself. I believe a change of mind set is needed. EPLC has enough archery knowledge to work though any bow/physical attribute of the shot. He needs to work on his mental game.
> 
> That's my .02


Absolutely agree 100%. During the months that you got over your ingrained habits... what exactly did you do to overcome this? I truly believe this is the one hurdle that is holding me back.


----------



## ron w

"needs to work on his mental game".....( not referring to EPLC, specifically)...... what do you think is going on when you realize and acknowledge that a let down, in a scoring round, has a different value, than a let down, in developmental drill, at the short bale ?.


----------



## subconsciously

EPLC said:


> Absolutely agree 100%. During the months that you got over your ingrained habits... what exactly did you do to overcome this? I truly believe this is the one hurdle that is holding me back.


It just clicked one day. N7709K's verbiage of "soft hands" help me the most. Every time I would come to full draw I would tell myself - "strong back and soft hands". Keep the back holding the weight and keep the arms relaxed. I beat this into my brain until it stuck. Sure makes shooting a lot more enjoyable.

Everyone is different and I don't know what's going on between your ears, but "You" are going to have to convince yourself that it is o.k. to start the motor and leave it running. Of course excessive movement will not allow the shot to process - but you know that as soon as you come into the spot if something wrong.

The conscious mind can be your best friend or your worst enemy. It is your mind so you have to take control of it. If you can visualize it, you can do it. You can read all the books, watch the videos, change firing engines and releases - but until you change our mind - your stuck.

You have been on AT a long time and have a lot of years experience. There is nobody in this forum that can give you any advice on how to get better - except you.


.02


----------



## subconsciously

ron w said:


> "needs to work on his mental game".....( not referring to EPLC, specifically)...... what do you think is going on when you realize and acknowledge that a let down, in a scoring round, has a different value, than a let down, in developmental drill, at the short bale ?.


There is no difference in value. A shot that runs "off process" - should always be let down. But we are human and everything looks good on paper.


----------



## Padgett

The better I get as a shooter the more trust I am gaining in my execution, I don't produce very much rotation when I am shooting really good and I really can't even feel it but it is there so for me I am finding that by working on my hinge speed by moving the moon i get way better results. When I try and produce more or less rotation to dictate my shot end up having problems. But when I make a simple decision to just come to anchor and run my little firing engine and if it doesn't fire during my optimal time frame I just let down and if that is happening to much I just speed it up a little. If I find my hinge firing to early then I slow it down a little. Simple and easy to regulate.

By doing this I remain the same all the time and my efforts don't change which I love and it keeps me really even keel compared to coming to anchor and wondering if I should do something extra or more or add pressure or more rotation or more back tension or ten million other things. I just come to anchor and run my little engine and it either fires or I let down. Nothing more or less. When I do this I rarely miss, when I do any of the other things I miss on a regular basis.


----------



## ron w

yes, an "off process shot", should always be letdown....refused to be allowed to run. nowhere in my post, did I suggest that an "off process" shot should be allowed to run.... but, you're not "eliminating bad habits", when you're shooting a scoring round, like you are when you're shooting a short bale drill of some type. the intrinsic value of a letdown, changes from scoring round to short yardage drill....the physical process is the same , but the intention is different. 
consider the goal of shooting a short bale drill, compared to the goal of shooting a scoring round. 
it is this confusion, that stops people from getting anything out of doing short bale drills that we read about so often.....ie..how often do you hear someone say,..."10 yard rounds", just doesn't seem to do anything for me.
you might not see it that way, but that's how I see it.


----------



## subconsciously

ron w said:


> "needs to work on his mental game".....( not referring to EPLC, specifically)...... what do you think is going on when you realize and acknowledge that a let down, in a scoring round, has a different value, than a let down, in developmental drill, at the short bale ?.


Not sure if this was meant for me?
But if it was your preaching to the choir.


----------



## cbrunson

I’ve given you my opinion on this before. Don’t time your shot. Learn your release execution by shooting….. a lot. Be patient. It takes time. You’ve only been shooting the new release a few weeks, right? 

The concept of not aiming is so misconceived around here that I don’t think two guys here really see the same thing when they are talking about it. And way too much focus is being spent on the back end, when it should almost be taking care of itself.


----------



## ron w

this idea of the shot time window, is not new and it is not my idea, it was brought forth in the old forum, by either Griv and/or Jim Despart, and/or Feild14. 
by "timing your shot", you aren't looking to make your shot break in any specific amount of time, other than the amount time that your natural cadence provides, (that cadence which produces the best results) and then just training all your shots to happen in that "best natural cadence". what it does, is as I said,....applies an order to the administration of the shot's process of commands internally, so that the commands that run the shot, happen in an organized and consistent sequence.
as far as the confusion about aiming, I don't see what you're talking about, there. to me it's pretty clear when we should be aiming and when we don't have to be concerned about aiming. and as far as the back end goes, it can't take care of itself, if it is not taught to take care of itself and the best way to teach that to your shot process, is to do in some way that you don't have to be concerned about aiming, at the same time you're working on teaching your back end.


----------



## ron w

subconsciously said:


> Not sure if this was meant for me?
> But if it was your preaching to the choir.


 maybe I misunderstood your post....sorry if I did !


----------



## cbrunson

If you make it as generic as "whatever fits your natural cadence", then it becomes as simple as just getting out of it when it starts to break down regardless of the elapsed time. Why add that another element to the thought process, when ultimately you are just looking for a good sight picture and a smooth release?

Regardless, we've been through this before and it serves no benefit to debate. I've presented my thoughts and will move on. It is for the OP to decide whether or not it is something he may consider.


----------



## Lazarus

There's been a lot of refinement of technique since then.


----------



## unclejane

cbrunson said:


> If you make it as generic as "whatever fits your natural cadence", then it becomes as simple as just getting out of it when it starts to break down regardless of the elapsed time. Why add that another element to the thought process, when ultimately you are just looking for a good sight picture and a smooth release?


Well remember: our cadence (aka "rhythm") is an effect, not a cause. It's just a gauge of how well we're setting up and executing the shot and nothing more than that - what the "shot window drill" does is simply confirm that your current cadence/rhythm fits within your oxygen/strength/etc budget. If it yeilds a negative result, it only means your control of the shot isn't what it could be. 

It is not the same as timing the shot. It's really just an additional application of some quality assurance on your shot routine to see how well it's going. Or, think of it as tool for adjusting your execution, that's another way to think about it.

I'm going through this drill myself, having gone to a different release type about a month ago has changed my rhythm so I'm using what ron describes here to help me get back on track. 

LS


----------



## unclejane

Lazarus said:


> There's been a lot of refinement of technique since then.


I see. Could you go into some detail on these refinements in technique? I'd be very interested in exactly how the shot window idea has become outdated.

LS


----------



## cbrunson

unclejane said:


> Well remember: our cadence (aka "rhythm") is an effect, not a cause. It's just a gauge of how well we're setting up and executing the shot and nothing more than that - what the "shot window drill" does is simply confirm that your current cadence/rhythm fits within your oxygen/strength/etc budget. If it yeilds a negative result, it only means your control of the shot isn't what it could be.
> 
> It is not the same as timing the shot. It's really just an additional application of some quality assurance on your shot routine to see how well it's going. Or, think of it as tool for adjusting your execution, that's another way to think about it.
> 
> I'm going through this drill myself, having gone to a different release type about a month ago has changed my rhythm so I'm using what ron describes here to help me get back on track.
> 
> LS


Do whatever you choose to. I have no intention on arguing whether one way is wrong or another is right. I truly wish you the best of luck. 

Some food for thought as you progress - Everything changes. Your strength, your nerves/anticipation, the lighting, temperature, etc., etc. All of the time and practice trying to get everything to fit exactly into a mold of repitition, is lost when you have any of those elements move to the extreme, or sometimes even just a little. How that change affects you has a lot o do with the kind of person you are both physically and emotionally. It may not effect you all, but it will affect someone else. We could assume that the person affected by it may be interested in knowing how others have learned to deal with it.


----------



## unclejane

cbrunson said:


> We could assume that the person affected by it may be interested in knowing how others have learned to deal with it.


Ditto. We all have the potential to improve, not just some of us.

LS


----------



## ron w

cbrunson,
no-one is asking you to argue about anything. some of us are simply asking you to expand, on the information you set forth, to a post you so condescendingly rebutted. if anyone is getting argumentive, with a reply such as yours above, it is certainly you.


----------



## unclejane

Agreed, I'm not among the upset ones either. But there does seem to be some bristling from brunson and Laz both, for no apparent reason. Please note I'm not instigating those reactions.

LS


----------



## Lazarus

unclejane said:


> I see. Could you go into some detail on these refinements in technique? I'd be very interested in exactly how the shot window idea has become outdated.
> 
> LS


I didn't say the shot window idea had become outdated. But related to this idea of shot window, the "let it float and shoot your shot" philosophy is totally outdated. Most top level shooters don't think in terms of "float" in this era. This is just one example.


----------



## Lazarus

unclejane said:


> Agreed, I'm not among the upset ones either. But there does seem to be some bristling from brunson and Laz both, for no apparent reason. Please note I'm not instigating those reactions.
> 
> LS


Not upset here either. And not bristled. 

This is a fact. There are qualified people on here that disagree with the same old, sale ole, "theories" that were floated (pun intended) as fact in the early days of hinge and trigger shooting. I have just pointed out one here as it relates to the topic at hand. Another that relates to the topic at hand is the mythical idea of "perceived" movement. If it's moving, it's moving, it's not a perception of movement.


----------



## unclejane

Lazarus said:


> This is a fact.


No, it isn't, here's why:



> There are qualified people on here that disagree with the same old, sale ole, "theories" that were floated (pun intended) as fact in the early days of hinge and trigger shooting. I have just pointed out one here as it relates to the topic at hand.


No. Simply disagreeing with something doesn't automatically establish your alternative contention as a "fact". All you're doing here is labeling something a "same old, same old theory". That in no way overturns what you're disagreeing with.



> Another that relates to the topic at hand is the mythical idea of "perceived" movement. If it's moving, it's moving, it's not a perception of movement.


Another contention that's nothing more than a disagreement over a label. Again, that doesn't establish what you're proposing as the new fact, overturning the factual status of the "same old, same old" knowledge you're disagreeing with.

I don't mean to quibble here, but this is important. Please understand this in the spirit in which it is given: you're saying something wrong here and all I'm doing is correcting it. That's all. 

LS


----------



## unclejane

Lazarus said:


> I didn't say the shot window idea had become outdated. But related to this idea of shot window, the "let it float and shoot your shot" philosophy is totally outdated. Most top level shooters don't think in terms of "float" in this era. This is just one example.


Please be more specific. What has replaced "float" or "let it float and shoot your shot" and in what way does it describe a substantive difference in the way we aim and shoot?

LS


----------



## rn3

unclejane said:


> Please be more specific. What has replaced "float" or "let it float and shoot your shot" and in what way does it describe a substantive difference in the way we aim and shoot?
> 
> LS


I think what he means is if you are letting it float you are not really aiming. Lazarus good shooting over the weekend.


----------



## unclejane

rn3 said:


> I think what he means is if you are letting it float you are not really aiming.


Of course, we don't know what Laz meant until he clarifies  

In the meanwhile, addressing your statement, describe what "really aiming" refers to. In particular, what distinguishes that description from "let it float"? What new information does "really aiming", whatever it is, convey that "let it float and shoot the shot" does not?

LS


----------



## rn3

unclejane said:


> Of course, we don't know what Laz meant until he clarifies
> 
> In the meanwhile, addressing your statement, describe what "really aiming" refers to. In particular, what distinguishes that description from "let it float"? What new information does "really aiming", whatever it is, convey that "let it float and shoot the shot" does not?
> 
> LS


A very good shot once told me when you learn to aim you will know it.


----------



## unclejane

rn3 said:


> A very good shot once told me when you learn to aim you will know it.


I appreciate that, but that's not what I asked you or Laz. I asked you guys what exactly is this alleged revolutionary change you have discovered, described by "really aiming" that *isn't* described by "let it float and shoot the shot" (such that the latter label is "outdated")? Please be specific and detailed.

LS


----------



## Lazarus

rn3 said:


> I think what he means is if you are letting it float you are not really aiming. Lazarus good shooting over the weekend.


Thanks m3. It was fun. Wish I hadn't spent so many years away from it. :thumbs_up

As for the aiming, I think you clarified it very well. Thanks! :thumbs_up again

As for the above discussion. I'm out.


----------



## unclejane

Lazarus said:


> Thanks m3. It was fun. Wish I hadn't spent so many years away from it. :thumbs_up
> 
> As for the aiming, I think you clarified it very well. Thanks! :thumbs_up again
> 
> As for the above discussion. I'm out.


Sooo, based on our non-answer here, it sounds like neither "let it float and shoot the shot", nor our fellow AT-er who describes it and other items like the shot window, are actually "outdated" after all, doesn't it? Hint: yyyyep.. 

LS


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> I’ve given you my opinion on this before. Don’t time your shot. Learn your release execution by shooting….. a lot. Be patient. It takes time. You’ve only been shooting the new release a few weeks, right?
> 
> The concept of not aiming is so misconceived around here that I don’t think two guys here really see the same thing when they are talking about it. And way too much focus is being spent on the back end, when it should almost be taking care of itself.


Yes, new release, old problem. When I "learn" a release things start going down hill. I have the same issue with thumb buttons... shoot them really good for a period of time and then I "learn" it and the down hill slide begins. The only release I have found that keeps this issue at bay is the Sweet Spot. I "could" go back to shooting it but I've peeked with it and would really like to try and break this cycle with either a button or a straight hinge. Shooting "lots" of arrows isn't a problem. I need something to break the cycle.

P.S. I leave you guys alone for a few hours and a perfectly good thread goes to hell.


----------



## Mahly

I'm not 100% convinced the Sweet Spot is why you peaked.
The subconscious aiming vs subconscious firing may just have needed a little more time with that release.
Of course, you should be able to adapt it to a straight hinge, either way, I think you'll continue to improve.... I just wouldn't get rid of the Sweet Spot just yet (if you haven't already).


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> I'm not 100% convinced the Sweet Spot is why you peaked.
> The subconscious aiming vs subconscious firing may just have needed a little more time with that release.
> Of course, you should be able to adapt it to a straight hinge, either way, I think you'll continue to improve.... I just wouldn't get rid of the Sweet Spot just yet (if you haven't already).


I still have them...


----------



## N7709K

you'll break the cycle when you change how you shoot the release. a new release is a reset button for the process; once it becomes "learned" there is no longer a reset but a repeat of where you were. Changing the release will only bandaid the issue for so long before it no longer does any good, when you "peak out" at the same level with numerous releases its a sign that change to the process is needed. 

Get a release that you haven't shot before and learn a different method while learning to shoot that release... while learning the release don't shoot careful, don't get tentative and delicate. The shot timing/rhythm will take care of itself as the process behind the shot is brought to where you want it to be; as consistency develops with the new technique things will come together and different aspects of the process will then be able to be addressed.


----------



## ron w

amazing,....all sorts of disagreement and when a request comes to substantiate it, the people who disagreed, drift the thread off to someone's problem with a new release.


----------



## ron w

the issue of "shot window timing drills", is exactly and directly related to the issue of overcoming an overly cautious aiming process and/or excessively long hold, or timid execution,..all elements that produce a shot that doesn't go to the middle.....if one would make the effort to learn what the shot timing drill is and how it applies to the shot process, instead of immediately dismissing it, one can not deny that there is not any other dedicated exercise that applies better. it is specifically designed to strengthen the occurrence of the right quality of hold, at the right time and the right quality of execution, while the former is present in the shot process, that produces the right results. how much better can a drill or exercise apply itself, to specifically that area?.
people claim that the redundant nature of a post is "tired" or "obsolete" and then they step up to a line to do what is probably one of the oldest sports in history.... over and over and over.
some are still waiting to hear what substantiates all the unfounded disagreement over the effectual function of the shot timing window drill. there seems to be a deliberately certain avoidance, to the request.
it's only fair to the general membership of this forum, that disagreement of substantiated information, contains as much substantiation, as a post that promotes a particularly positive view.


----------



## EPLC

I


ron w said:


> the issue of "shot window timing drills", is exactly and directly related to the issue of overcoming an overly cautious aiming process and/or excessively long hold, or timid execution,..all elements that produce a shot that doesn't go to the middle.....if one would make the effort to learn what the shot timing drill is and how it applies to the shot process, instead of immediately dismissing it, with unfounded reason and thread drift, one can not deny that there is not any other dedicated exercise that applies better. it is specifically designed to strengthen the occurrence of the right quality of hold, at the right time and the right quality of execution, while the former is present in the shot process, that produces the right results. how much better can a drill or exercise apply itself, to specifically that area?.
> people claim that the redundant nature of a post is "tired" or "obsolete" and then they step up to a line to do what is probably one of the oldest sports in history.... over and over and over.
> some are still waiting to hear what substantiates all the unfounded disagreement over the effectual function of the shot timing window drill. there seems to be a deliberately certain avoidance, to the request.
> it's only fair to the general membership of this forum, that disagreement of substantiated information, contains as much substantiation, as a post that promotes a particularly positive view.


Three questions:
1. Have "you" ever done any shot timing drills?
2. If so, how much actual time did "you" put into this?
3. How much measurable improvement did you see in "your" shooting?


----------



## EPLC

EPLC said:


> I
> 
> Three questions:
> 1. Have "you" ever done any shot timing drills?
> 2. If so, how much actual time did "you" put into this?
> 3. How much measurable improvement Jane did you see in "your" shooting?


Unclejane: same three questions?


----------



## nochance

Three questions:
1. Have "you" ever done any shot timing drills?
yes I have, quite often
2. If so, how much actual time did "you" put into this?
I do it a lot at short yardage(blank baling), over the past week i spent most of the past week working on this and this alone. 1st BB, then 5 yards aiming at a spot, then 10 yds., then 13 (the most i can get in my basement).
3. How much measurable improvement did you see in "your" shooting?
define measureable, while i didn't set no records last night in our 5 spot league, the shot was happening much more consistently and my groups were noticeably tighter than they have been. A couple flyers on the shots where my brain took a break but much happier with my shooting.

Thanks for asking.


----------



## ron w

this drill is specifically responsible for my improving enough to want to go to Vegas to experience shooting the tournament. and i'm quite sure it is also responsible for my shooting my personal best Vegas score there at the tournament and shooting my personal best 300-56 x round back about 2003 or 4. as for the amount of time I spent doing the drill, I have no idea, other than it was not just a "few" times. 
you don't place a "time limit", or "time constraint" on this type of drill, they are a developmental work in progress, that you do, either as a regular scheduled exercise, until you are satisfied with the results of your shooting, and/or as occasional maintenance in development of your shot process and consistency. to consider regulating the amount of time it takes, and put restraints on the effectual results, is simply asking for failure.
the point is that they are a structured purposeful exercise, that develops shooting skill, better than simply flinging arrow at a target, which we all know does practically no good, developmentally. I think we all agree that you have to approach "practice" with some form of constructive intention, this drill is simply one way to do that, that is known to work.
the real question to consider, is this,.... as long as you are asking this kind of rhetorical question is, can you name a drill, or practice methodology, that has the potential to be as effective in the same areas of development ?.
again, the request arises,.....if there is so much disagreement and skepticism about the process involved, where is all the substantiation that supports the disagreement and skepticism ?.
I never seem to see any reasonable evidence from anyone detracting from the drills effectiveness, that supports any reason for the disagreement. the only thing I see, is that disagreement is because of who the advice comes from.
in closing, EPLC, I ask you, what have you done to demonstrate any major improvement in your shooting over the past 15 or so, years ?.


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> I
> 
> Three questions:
> 1. Have "you" ever done any shot timing drills?
> 2. If so, how much actual time did "you" put into this?
> 3. How much measurable improvement did you see in "your" shooting?


1) yes
2) just started with them in the last couple weeks after switching to a tension-style release
3) there's a noticeable reduction in the number of bad shots caused by exhaustion. The energy budget with a tension-style release is reduced over what you have with a hinge; you can creep a bit and hoist the shot off with a hinge when you're collapsing, but heaving off a shot with a tension-style is quite a bit more violent with all the little muscles in the arms. It's a nasty affair so you want to cut the shot off at the pass earlier.

So I'm learning to stay further within the budget with this drill and let down earlier if my form breaks down.

LS


----------



## unclejane

ron w said:


> people claim that the redundant nature of a post is "tired" or "obsolete" and then they step up to a line to do what is probably one of the oldest sports in history.... over and over and over.
> some are still waiting to hear what substantiates all the unfounded disagreement over the effectual function of the shot timing window drill. there seems to be a deliberately certain avoidance, to the request.
> it's only fair to the general membership of this forum, that disagreement of substantiated information, contains as much substantiation, as a post that promotes a particularly positive view.


We just saw Laz and brunson duck my requests for support for their "tired" and "outdated" claims, so, in my view, it's safe at this point to simply dismiss those statements with no further consideration. If archery's upper crust really had discovered some revolutionary new way to shoot a bow and arrow that we, the great unwashed, were unaware of or unable to fathom, I think they both would have been able to present it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.



In general, human beings haven't changed much in our history with the bow and arrow so what has been learned in the past about how to shoot one, and how not to do so, still tends to apply today. We should always beware of claims of revolutionary overturns in this body of knowledge and, in my view, it's always right to request substantiation of any such claims.

LS


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> this drill is specifically responsible for my improving enough to want to go to Vegas to experience shooting the tournament. and i'm quite sure it is also responsible for my shooting my personal best Vegas score there at the tournament and shooting my personal best 300-56 x round back about 2003 or 4. as for the amount of time I spent doing the drill, I have no idea, other than it was not just a "few" times.
> you don't place a "time limit", or "time constraint" on this type of drill, they are a developmental work in progress, that you do, either as a regular scheduled exercise, until you are satisfied with the results of your shooting, and/or as occasional maintenance in development of your shot process and consistency. to consider regulating the amount of time it takes, and put restraints on the effectual results, is simply asking for failure.
> the point is that they are a structured purposeful exercise, that develops shooting skill, better than simply flinging arrow at a target, which we all know does practically no good, developmentally. I think we all agree that you have to approach "practice" with some form of constructive intention, this drill is simply one way to do that, that is known to work.
> the real question to consider, is this,.... as long as you are asking this kind of rhetorical question is, can you name a drill, or practice methodology, that has the potential to be as effective in the same areas of development ?.
> again, the request arises,.....if there is so much disagreement and skepticism about the process involved, where is all the substantiation that supports the disagreement and skepticism ?.
> I never seem to see any reasonable evidence from anyone detracting from the drills effectiveness, that supports any reason for the disagreement. the only thing I see, is that disagreement is because of who the advice comes from.
> in closing, EPLC, I ask you, what have you done to demonstrate any major improvement in your shooting over the past 15 or so, years ?.


So if I read your answer correctly you haven't actually spent any significant amount of time on this drill. I ask because you have been bludgeoning us with this over and over again since forever, hence an honest question. 

As far as to your question: In 2002 I won the NESFFA 3D sectionals with a 642 for 60 targets over 2 days, by far the highest score in the entire tournament. I've been, and still am RI State Champion and hold the RIFAA State indoor senior record with a 300 47X. In August of 2002 I developed a tremor that I fought for more than six years that almost took me out of archery. During that 6+ years I tried everything that was suggested here on AT... many threads and posts and failures. Eventually I went to see George Ryals IV for a weekend of professional coaching. George told me I needed to see a doctor... I left that weekend feeling pretty low but came home with a Morin Trainer that I started shooting LH with and found I had no tremor. Since that time I've had to completely rebuild my shot shooting from the left side. That state record was set left handed and I currently shoot as good or better than I did right handed. I recently shot a 300 NFAA in competition. At the top of my current game I can still shoot 440+ on the Vegas face and shot a 297 just the other day. This year has been a rebuilding year so my scores (when I have scored) have been up and down. To insinuate that I don't work on my game or that I have not progressed is not only just plain wrong it is laughable. Add to all of this the fact that I turned 69 in November would seem to answer your question.

And I found this 2006 quote by you interesting:



ronw said:


> i have a fairly large range of movement. on my best days, it's more than most good shooters' bad days. i need to constantly work on a steady hold, and i have, but it always seemed that it never improved.i always knew the back end of my shot is well enough dveloped that when i get those rare good, steady days, i can pound x-ring out of the target, but they just never seemed to appear often enough to say i'm getting better. allot of my "training" involves experimentation. last night i discovered that i needed more weight on my stabilizer than i've been using. i added about three ounces to the end of it and my movement all but dissapeared. i realize this isn't really training, but unless you are set up to work right, all the training in the world won't help, so don't be afraid to try things that can be done without going to the doodad book. i went for months, not adding weight because i thought the bow was getting too heavy, adding that weight didn't amount to a hill of beans as far as holding the bow up, but it sure made i difference in my sight picture, where it counts. i added the weight and gave the upper limb a 1/4 turn to keep the bow from sagging and it was like majic, the back end of my shot worked so much better and good shots( inside outs) became almost automatic. i think this is an area (properly balanced equipment) where allot of people( evidently, myself included) fail to make training and all the effort come to fruition because there are times where it might just not be," the guy pulling on the string" all the time.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Yes, new release, old problem. When I "learn" a release things start going down hill. I have the same issue with thumb buttons... shoot them really good for a period of time and then I "learn" it and the down hill slide begins. The only release I have found that keeps this issue at bay is the Sweet Spot. I "could" go back to shooting it but I've peeked with it and would really like to try and break this cycle with either a button or a straight hinge. Shooting "lots" of arrows isn't a problem. I need something to break the cycle.
> 
> P.S. I leave you guys alone for a few hours and a perfectly good thread goes to hell.


What you're talking about is anticipating the shot. That's not a release problem, it's a brain problem you are trying to fix with a mechanical device. As discouraging as this may sound, you literally have to work through it. Jacob is correct in saying that you are just trying to band-aid it. You will get past it with time and learning to put more focus on the front end where it belongs.


----------



## nochance

Seriously, most of you have a lot to offer but this bickering BS is getting old. Please take it to the intermediate and advanced bickering forum. Give us your guidance, opinions and tips. Its ok to disagree with someone but you guys turn it in to pages and pages of bickering. 

Not a moderator


----------



## TNMAN

N7709K said:


> you'll break the cycle when you change how you shoot the release. a new release is a reset button for the process; once it becomes "learned" there is no longer a reset but a repeat of where you were. Changing the release will only bandaid the issue for so long before it no longer does any good, when you "peak out" at the same level with numerous releases its a sign that change to the process is needed.
> 
> Get a release that you haven't shot before and learn a different method while learning to shoot that release... *while learning the release don't shoot careful, don't get tentative and delicate. The shot timing/rhythm will take care of itself as the process behind the shot is brought to where you want it to be*; as consistency develops with the new technique things will come together and different aspects of the process will then be able to be addressed.


Amen.


----------



## Mahly

A public service message:
If you notice your post has been edited or deleted, chances are you:
A) were making remarks that did not add to the discussion
B) were making remarks that could better be saved for a PM (stay on topic)
C) were making insulting remarks
D) quoted someone who's post was edited or deleted due to A B or C

Further digressions will result in punitive action

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.


----------



## subconsciously

If you don't like the way you shoot - change the way you practice.

I did.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> I’ve given you my opinion on this before. Don’t time your shot. Learn your release execution by shooting….. a lot. Be patient. It takes time. You’ve only been shooting the new release a few weeks, right?
> The concept of not aiming is so misconceived around here that I don’t think two guys here really see the same thing when they are talking about it. And way too much focus is being spent on the back end, when it should almost be taking care of itself.





cbrunson said:


> What you're talking about is anticipating the shot. That's not a release problem, it's a brain problem you are trying to fix with a mechanical device. As discouraging as this may sound, you literally have to work through it. Jacob is correct in saying that you are just trying to band-aid it. You will get past it with time and learning to put more focus on the front end where it belongs.





subconsciously said:


> If you don't like the way you shoot - change the way you practice.
> I did.


I've been around the block on this more than a few times. The problem is some sort of anxiety, performance related issue. I hate missing so it has become too important to me. I know that switching my thoughts from performance related to process related is the fix and I have been moving in that direction. It's not as easy as I thought it would be. While I have made progress I seem to be taking three steps forward and two back... sometimes three or four back. 

My one arrow drills have helped more than anything I've tried so far but even with those performance issues have crept in. As a result I've thought about what needs to be done and have a plan. Thanks for this input as it has helped as well as some other input to this thread and others.

Once committed to the shot and the firing engine has started, IT CANNOT STOP, and if it does, LET DOWN! Starting that firing engine and continuing through to its conclusion is the hardest thing I do. It's just not an easy thing for me to do consistently. Today I shot for a couple of hours with this specifically in mind. This is what I worked on and this is all I worked on. To finish out today's session I shot my 10 end 1 arrow drill. I forced myself to execute each shot to conclusion without stopping. It wasn't easy but I did shoot my 10 arrows without stopping. I missed one each on the 7th and 9th end because they became a little more "important"... I'm going to work this routine every day until it becomes second nature. I figure it's going to take a lot of commitment (and arrows) on my part.


----------



## N7709K

doing that drill will only keep you where you are at- knowingly shooting weak shots won't EVER advance your game, you need to address the weak shots and not allow them to progress to fruition. There is a difference between shooting every shot just to shoot every shot and pat yourself on the back for not "needing" to let down, and shooting every shot because there was no need to let down. 

your hangup is in your lack of trust with the process; continuing to shoot scores and base progression off of scores won't ever build that trust...


----------



## EPLC

N7709K said:


> doing that drill will only keep you where you are at- knowingly shooting weak shots won't EVER advance your game, you need to address the weak shots and not allow them to progress to fruition. There is a difference between shooting every shot just to shoot every shot and pat yourself on the back for not "needing" to let down, and shooting every shot because there was no need to let down.
> 
> your hangup is in your lack of trust with the process; continuing to shoot scores and base progression off of scores won't ever build that trust...


I'm actually working toward that goal. I'm not knowingly shooting bad shots. Not saying I don't shoot any but it certainly isn't my intention. Right now my first priority is to either execute without stopping or let down. Trust just isn't something you do, it must be earned by developing something that is trustworthy. For the most part I am not scoring in practice although there is the goal of shooting clean in my little drill. Depending on how many arrows I shoot I do understand what "score" would have been produced but that isn't my goal. With the one arrow drill I've been able to focus on process more than in the past, which has to be a step in the right direction.


----------



## N7709K

if you can't differentiate between the good and the bad you are still putting the cart infront of the horse... there is a point when you step back and self evaluate- am I at the point within learning process "x" to be able to tell if it is working? is my rubric for how well it works the correct one to be using? 

when learning a technique score isn't what you wanna use; you need to stop incorrect shots before they break.... when you cannot differentiate between good and bad, maybe 40%, 60%, 75% of the shots that are scoring tens are executed incorrectly. Just because an arrow hits in the middle doesn't mean it was a good shot; all it means is it hit in the middle. You are basing everything off of the numeric score value of each shot arrow- base the value of each arrow upon correctness of execution... thats how you are going to build trust in your shot; when you know that a good shot will be a 10, its easy to shoot good shots... when you hope that each arrow is a 10 and try to place them in the middle you lose all that trust; you are putting the process in the background and taking control because you don't think your process is capable of putting arrows in the 10 on its own.


----------



## EPLC

All I can tell you is I am working toward that goal. I've made a lot of changes over the past few months, some at your suggestion, and they are taking time to settle in. I am seeing progress. It's not as easy as having a good coach to point you in the right direction when you have multiple and sometimes opposing views on what to do. What happens is you are forced to make decisions based on a multitude of data and use what seems to fit best. Granted it's a crap shoot but here we are...


----------



## Brad Rega

I believe the topic of this thread is the most important aspect of shooting. This is the one thing that the people who shoot a perfect 900 in Vegas get that the others don't. I bet all the guys who were in the shoot off all of a sudden had this issue.

I know for sure this is why one day everything can go right and the next everything can go wrong. If I get that timing right I can shoot over a 550 field round. If it's not right I'll be in the 530's. But I found the more I shoot the more consistent I become. Even without practice, there is still potential for me to shoot great scores. This is why I still go to major competitions without practicing. I've broken 550 on a field round and had two 16's. Sometimes you just get that one target or end where things just don't click no matter how much you try. When I went to vegas I had shot a total of 60 arrows out of my bow since December 7. The first day I lost all my points on the first two ends until I finally got that timing correct. I tend to do my best in the middle of a round. Several ends to warm up and get that timing correct, then at the end I start to get fatigued. This is when my aiming goes downhill and messes up that timing. The last day I shot a 299 missing my 29th arrow due to fatigue. There would be much less perfect scores should we shoot a 450 round. 

Overall there may not be an answer to solve this issue. It may just be a matter of you either got it or you don't. This part is all mental. This is the difference between almost making it to the top and making it to the top. Not everyone can get this timing right every time. As we know all it takes is a single shot to screw things up. For many it's on the first end or last where most people overthink and don't truly trust the shot. You can't fear missing, or try to hit the center. You just have to trust the shot and it will go where it needs to go. 

It's so so hard to get the front half and back half to cooperate and work together but when it happens, it feels so so good. Overall it all comes down to the mental game. I find that singing a song in my head while holding helps me block out thoughts such as aiming and just let's the shot happen. 

Some people are just able to get this to happen consistently and others not so much. If you're practicing a lot and still have a great deal of trouble with this, maybe sports psychology may be something to try. 

While there are physical ways to "fix" this problem, it's not full proof. What I do is have my release set slow enough where it forces me to really focus hard on continuous pulling. If my release is set too light, my "firing engine" would stop if there was too much movement. The harder I work for the shot, the better I shoot. If I don't work for it, something usually goes wrong with the bow arm. I think I would probably make a better recurve shooter than compound.


----------



## ron w

as Michelle Raggsdale used to say, (not in direct quotation).... one of the most detrimental things you can do to your shot, is to have a release set so hot and light, that you are afraid of every little movement you make. you have to be able to grab a handful of the release and not worry about it going off.
she said that most people who tried her releases, would hand them back to her, saying they couldn't get it to fire.
it all part of that "aim hard" philosophy, that she cultivated. the release being so set, allowed you to put all of your focus on aiming, letting the execution of the shot run itself, without attention. this, of course, required that the execution was taught to run by itself.
more of that "old and tired" redundancy, but still as true and applicable today, as back then.....things in this arena, have not changed. we shoot our bows, exactly the same today, as they were shot 30 years ago.
the difference, is that there are simply so many more shooters today, that don't realize, or refuse to recognize, that things are still the same.


----------



## EPLC

An observation, not aimed at any one individual. Those that think this game has to be done a certain way haven't a clue what they are talking about.


----------



## unclejane

N7709K said:


> you'll break the cycle when you change how you shoot the release. a new release is a reset button for the process; once it becomes "learned" there is no longer a reset but a repeat of where you were. Changing the release will only bandaid the issue for so long before it no longer does any good, when you "peak out" at the same level with numerous releases its a sign that change to the process is needed.
> 
> Get a release that you haven't shot before and learn a different method while learning to shoot that release... while learning the release don't shoot careful, don't get tentative and delicate. The shot timing/rhythm will take care of itself as the process behind the shot is brought to where you want it to be; as consistency develops with the new technique things will come together and different aspects of the process will then be able to be addressed.


This is exactly what I found in my case when shooting a hinge, for what it may be worth. After about a month, I'd end up in a strange corner with it with a wierd, almost indescribable anticipation issue. I could reset the situation in two ways: a week or so with my trusty Evolution + or I could change the heat setting on the hinge itself. Wash, rinse, repeat - It was great for another 3 or 4 weeks and it was back to the allen wrench or the Evo.

Fortunately, I'm pretty good at recognizing a failure so after about 7 months of this I decided something was wrong. Technology came to the rescue again and I just didn't leave the Evo this last time. 

I'm right at the time period where I normally start to have problems with a hinge, but so far no sign of a return of the previous anticipation problem. The shot engine is just different enough (slightly simpler) with a pull-through that it seems to be keeping that problem at bay. The compromise is additional effort when I begin to tire, but the payoff is it's easier to maintain a good form and a good pull all the way through the shot for me.

This was a surprise for me, since things initially appeared to be going so well with the hinge. 

And of course, my tension releases will have to prove themselves to me for a while longer before I reach any firm conclusions LOL. But the trust in my shot is already vastly firmer with my pull throughs than they ever were with my hinge. Mental or physical? who knows, or who knows whose fault it is. I only know that sometimes you have to make a major change to work through something....

fingers crossed,
LS


----------



## Padgett

Eplc, hey I actually got to shoot with my local pro shooter at a shop the other day and I think now that I went back and read your original couple posts in this thread what I experienced is basically something you might consider.

I was nervous the moment I entered the shop and sit my bow case down and when I got it put together I went over and got a arrow loaded and I could feel the anxiety. I drew back and my pin was a nervous one and I watched it and let down taking a few breaths and I remember saying to myself "REALLY".

So now for the important part, right then I made a good decision to just shoot the old 5-spot target until my nerves settled and just run my engine. So yeah it sucked to miss some x's for the 30 or so minutes it took me to settle down but as time went by I could feel it draining from my body and then all of a sudden there it was, My Normal Float. From that moment on I shot like I always do and we played my little match play game and I was shooting inside out most of the time, not as much as sam but i'm not a pro indoor guy either.

Now why was this so important to me to be able to do this, because during that 30 minutes my float was big and nervous but there were times where it would pause dead center within the x and then after a second or so it would bounce around again. Right there was a chance for me to go ahead and try and time my shot to that moment when the pin paused, in fact couldn't I have been ready with my hinge and the moment that it paused I could have done something to try and fire? Sure I could have.

Instead I reminded myself that I have done nothing but shoot by myself basically all winter and I haven't been on the line with other people let alone a top indoor pro, so by me being patient I was able to enjoy my evening.

Did it suck to have to be nervous in front of sam and my other buddy, hell yes. Was I able to enjoy my shooting by the end of the evening, yes.


----------



## Padgett

For me the reality right now is that if I am under control mentally from the time I come to anchor to my hinge firing my float is inside the x, so for me my current goal is to group my arrows inside a x at all times when shooting indoor. 

If your float is not within the x at all times then don't be making this your goal and don't be disappointed when you miss the x from time to time, if your natural float is within the white then your current goal should be to just stay in the white and when you get x's enjoy the fact that your arrow hit it.

The moment that you feel the urge to force the pin to do something out of your ability level you are asking something to do something stupid that is going to ruin your shot.

I talk about it all the time and I am 100% sure that I am disconnected from my pin, my pin does its job and I fire the hinge and they have nothing to do with each other. Now that doesn't mean that i don't watch my pin and I evaluate it over time and right now I see that I am approaching pro quaility float in the first few seconds of my shot window and I am just a above average shooter in the second half. This is why I work hard on my timing of my shot to insure that most of the time I am shooting in that first part of my shot window where I am a good shooter. To me this is what shot timing is and should be.


----------



## cbrunson

I'm getting a lot better perspective as to why so many believe certain thought processes need to be believed to prevent stress at the shot. Mis-interpretation across the broad spectrum, may prevent some people from progressing. One example being each individual's perception of float size.


----------



## Lazarus

cbrunson said:


> I'm getting a lot better perspective as to why so many believe certain thought processes need to be believed to prevent stress at the shot. Mis-interpretation across the broad spectrum, may prevent some people from progressing. One example being each individual's perception of float size.


Totally agree!! No lie, for several years I practiced religiously but my "HOLD" wasn't what I thought it should be. But I had read on here that if I just "let my pin float and shoot the shot" I would be a top notch shooter. Don't get me wrong, I was decent, just not top level. But this held me back; *I constantly thought I had to work on a better "process" to SOMEHOW fire the shot while it was in the middle!* because of this "let it float and shoot the shot" _idea_!!

Ok..........so about two years ago I started working with several different things to achieve a good hold. Some of it was me, some of it was getting the best set of rods made, (thanks Damien.) Guess, what, I have achieved what a lot of the AT _members here_ don't think is possible. Dead hold. I will quantify, sometimes it does move slightly late in the process. But if I do my job it stays in the middle. I'm not very good at listening to people tell me that it can't be done......so I did it. 

This leads me once again to that saying "perceived movement." There is no such thing. If it's moving, it's moving. 

I bought into all this for quite a while, thank God I no longer do and have really *refined* my shot. :thumbs_up (But I still have a ways to go!)


----------



## EPLC

Lazarus said:


> Totally agree!! No lie, for several years I practiced religiously but my "HOLD" wasn't what I thought it should be. But I had read on here that if I just "let my pin float and shoot the shot" I would be a top notch shooter. Don't get me wrong, I was decent, just not top level. But this held me back; *I constantly thought I had to work on a better "process" to SOMEHOW fire the shot while it was in the middle!* because of this "let it float and shoot the shot" _idea_!!
> 
> Ok..........so about two years ago I started working with several different things to achieve a good hold. Some of it was me, some of it was getting the best set of rods made, (thanks Damien.) Guess, what, I have achieved what a lot of the AT _members here_ don't think is possible. Dead hold. I will quantify, sometimes it does move slightly late in the process. But if I do my job it stays in the middle. I'm not very good at listening to people tell me that it can't be done......so I did it.
> 
> This leads me once again to that saying "perceived movement." There is no such thing. If it's moving, it's moving.
> 
> I bought into all this for quite a while, thank God I no longer do and have really *refined* my shot. :thumbs_up (But I still have a ways to go!)


With the exception of a few rare occasions that I really didn't know what to do with I've never been able to achieve "still" during my shooting. Recently I've been making headway in this area but still "float" so to speak. I firmly believe the steadier you are the easier it becomes to coordinate the front and back halves of the shot as it is excessive movement that causes the back end to pause. I am absolutely convinced that this is the issue that holds back so many and you won't find any answers to this seeking the "conventional wisdom" route.

So, is there a solution you care to share with us... ?


----------



## Mahly

I guess everyone interprets "float" differently. 
I have heard top pros referring to "float" and "everyone moves", or "Float and execute", so what one calls float you may call dead still. 
I wouldn't get TOO hung up on who uses which term.

I recently have advanced in my hinge shooting to a point that the execution is nearly automatic, and I can just focus on the X, or just sit back and watch the shot happen. This has helped a LOT with the starting/stopping/starting. I do still need to work on MY float to improve it (I don't think anyone would call MY float dead still LOL!). But having an engine that doesn't take much thought to run, is now letting me pay more attention to what my float looks like at the shot, and compare it to when I am not running an engine....Having great rods does seem to help ;-)


----------



## ron w

to put this in perspective,....for all practical purposes, with the diameter of an X-ring, on a blue face target, being approx. 1.125 " and the typical focal distance with the sight extended,.024" (24 thousandths of an inch) movement, sweeps the dot or pin, all the way across the X-ring's diameter at 20 yards. magnification doesn't actually matter, because it magnifies the movement proportionally, to the magnification of the x-ring. it is however "perceived movement", because what we see isn't really what is going on. if see the dot sweep all the way across the X-ring, we have not actually moved the dot that 1+ inch. at the scope. .020" is about the thickness of the cardboard from a typical book of matches. i'm mic'ing one right now, as I type this.....so just barely more than that thickness, in scope movement, moves the dot completely across the entire X-ring. this is hardly seeable from a spectator's point of view, even if up close and might as well be called "dead still".
if you can hold that steady, you are one lucky spot shooter !. there's no way I can !!


----------



## subconsciously

I usually hover over the center of the white. In and out of the X but mostly in the middle. Monday while practicing at the shop I pulled back came into the target and the pin froze on the X. I'm talking just sat there. Freaked me out so bad I shot a 5.


----------



## cbrunson

Mahly said:


> I recently have advanced in my hinge shooting to a point that the execution is nearly automatic, and I can just focus on the X, or just sit back and watch the shot happen. This has helped a LOT with the starting/stopping/starting. I do still need to work on MY float to improve it (I don't think anyone would call MY float dead still LOL!). But having an engine that doesn't take much thought to run, is now letting me pay more attention to what my float looks like at the shot, and compare it to when I am not running an engine....Having great rods does seem to help ;-)


Now you're on the right track. Understanding what that movement is telling you, helps you learn to minimize it to the point we are talking about.


----------



## cbrunson

subconsciously said:


> I usually hover over the center of the white. In and out of the X but mostly in the middle. Monday while practicing at the shop I pulled back came into the target and the pin froze on the X. I'm talking just sat there. Freaked me out so bad I shot a 5.


I hate it when that happens too. I much prefer to fight it in, giving my body time to settle in with it.


----------



## Mahly

subconsciously said:


> I usually hover over the center of the white. In and out of the X but mostly in the middle. Monday while practicing at the shop I pulled back came into the target and the pin froze on the X. I'm talking just sat there. Freaked me out so bad I shot a 5.


I love it when that happens. Sometimes I just wanna stop and sit there watching how nice that looks LOL!


----------



## unclejane

Lazarus said:


> Padgett, I just want to point something out. If you can hold (assuming a 4x lens or larger) your "float" inside the x ring, that isn't float. Let me be clear, I believe you do hold inside that x ring, I personally do so I know it's possible. That is an inch and three quarter circle 20 yards away, you are not "floating" if you are staying in that x ring. For all practical purposes that is dead still. I'm not splitting hairs here. Frankly, I believe I could help you overcome your line fear but I haven't been asked to. But I will say this, it starts with the way you talk and the things you say. :cheers:


In my view (mods please do me the courtesy of an email if you delete this so we can discuss):
- yes it is still "float", no matter how still you think you're holding, you're still "floating".
- this most certainly is splitting hairs, in fact, an instance of the "word-smithing" you describe others as doing, to simply re-label something and then claim that you're referring to something entirely different when you do so. 

In fact, you have not made a revolutionary discovery of something new here - you're only describing a very good and controlled float, but it's still a float.

Nobody is physically able to stay "dead still" on the X, even inside of one's shot window (that's why Hooter Shooters sell at the rate that they do LOL). This is a myth that shooters shouldn't try to get married to - even top level shooters know and understand that this isn't an accurate description. Just a Caveat Emptor to anyone who may be hopeful about this. Don't be, let it float and shoot the shot like you always do.

LS


----------



## stoz

Put an 8x lens in and tell me you dont move or "float". Not trying to be argumentative but come on.


----------



## unclejane

stoz said:


> Put an 8x lens in and tell me you dont move or "float". Not trying to be argumentative but come on.


Exactly. This is important because it's an expectation issue. If you truly try to pursue a "dead still" hold on the X, you're going to waste a lot of time pursuing what is essentially an unachievable goal. 

Instead, minimizing it and getting as good at it as possible is the more realistic option. I'm just sayin'... don't buy this one without doing a thorough background check 

LS


----------



## cbrunson

.........


----------



## EPLC

The topic of this thread concerns execution without interruption; while "float" is an interesting discussion and certainly something that "can" impact the subject of this thread, we are going down a bunny trail. I personally would like to hear more on how people have achieved firing engines w/o interruption.


----------



## unclejane

cbrunson said:


> If I see no movement with my dot, for all intents and purposes, it is not moving.


But it is still actually moving. That's why you're still describing a "float" and are propagating a myth that you've conquered it and accomplished something that's actually impossible. 

Meanwhile, I agree with EPLC that we're drifting OT, tho, so I'll end my comments on this here. You may PM me if you like; neither here nor there to me.

LS


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> The topic of this thread concerns execution without interruption; while "float" is an interesting discussion and certainly something that "can" impact the subject of this thread, we are going down a bunny trail. I personally would like to hear more on how people have achieved firing engines w/o interruption.


Better float creates easier execution. When you trust too much movement and miss, you lose trust. When you hold solid and execute with little effort, you don't miss.


----------



## EPLC

N7709K said:


> if you can't differentiate between the good and the bad you are still putting the cart infront of the horse... there is a point when you step back and self evaluate- am I at the point within learning process "x" to be able to tell if it is working? is my rubric for how well it works the correct one to be using?
> 
> when learning a technique score isn't what you wanna use; you need to stop incorrect shots before they break.... when you cannot differentiate between good and bad, maybe 40%, 60%, 75% of the shots that are scoring tens are executed incorrectly. Just because an arrow hits in the middle doesn't mean it was a good shot; all it means is it hit in the middle. You are basing everything off of the numeric score value of each shot arrow- base the value of each arrow upon correctness of execution... thats how you are going to build trust in your shot; when you know that a good shot will be a 10, its easy to shoot good shots... when you hope that each arrow is a 10 and try to place them in the middle you lose all that trust; you are putting the process in the background and taking control because you don't think your process is capable of putting arrows in the 10 on its own.


You have said this or a variation of this several times. I'll be honest, it confuses me. If hitting where you intended isn't a good measure of a good shot then what is?


----------



## Mahly

My engine has started to become somewhat subconscious.
What I have gotten to now is that I draw with what I feel is even pressure on all fingers and thumb.
At anchor, I release the thumb, but I make myself aware of the transfer of tension to the index finger (holding more static where I was a little more neutral a short time ago).
Now I don't think about yielding, I don't actively relax the index, nor add the the other fingers. It has simply become a change of attention from being aware of the pressure on the index, to focusing on something else. Sometimes I focus on the X, sometimes I notice my float. It's when I stop being aware of the index that the engine runs on its own.
I still maintain back tension... That part has been ingrained. But as my attention drifts from being aware of pressure on my index, to NOT being aware, it seems the fingers balance the weight out without my paying it any attention... When they do, the hinge must rotate.
The benefit here as it relates to the OT, is the engine runs without input. There is no conscious thought to rotate the hinge, eliminating the "gas pedal". 
The brakes can be hit if needed, but that requires a new thought, and consciously adding tension to the index.
Where I think many are stopping there engine, is more of letting up in the throttle than hitting the brakes. This engine is more on cruise control, and takes a whole new step to stop it, vs letting up on the throttle.

Too many car analogies I know. But I hope that makes sense.


----------



## Padgett

I hit x's when shooting indoor all the time when my shot doesn't feel right but almost all of my misses come from these executions. When my shot is a good one it hits every time and I think this is a indoor thing.

When I am shooting 3d everything is freaking different because there are times when we are checking our guess after everyone shoots with a range finder and I totally smoked the 12 ring and I missed the yardage by 3 or 4 yards. Well sure it was nice that I got a 12 on that target but in all reality it was a 37 yard target that I shot for 34 yards and i should have shot out the bottom by at least a inch and a half but I guess I got lucky.

Indoor is just a different creature than 3d, in indoor shooting if you shoot a 5-spot round and lets say 35 of your shots were really solid then you sent 20 average shots and 5 bad ones. More than likely most of your 35 good ones were solid x's but out of the 20 average ones you missed lets say 6 of them and then out of your really bad ones you missed 4 of them but one of them you were lucky. That is where a guy who shoots a 295 40x lives most of the time. When a guy makes some changes to his shooting and then he can produce over 50 good shots per 60 arrows then there will be only 10 possible misses. Obviously once you get to the point where you can crank out nothing but good shots then you reduce the chance of missing.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> Better float creates easier execution. When you trust too much movement and miss, you lose trust. When you hold solid and execute with little effort, you don't miss.


No doubt, but a debate on whether or not someone can or cannot hold to a certain degree of steadiness serves no purpose in this discussion.


----------



## Padgett

I forgot, lazurus I don't mind listening to anything you have on what you hear me saying. I know that I am my own worst enemy when it comes to indoor nerves and for me the only way I have found that I can get on top of them is to compete at local indoor leagues on a regular basis and then after a few weeks I can shoot my normal scores without any anxiety.

I don't mind if you do it here or a pm, I offer to much to archery talk when it comes to opinions on a variety of topics to be afraid to talk about things in the open. I actually love talking about how the brain works in a variety of things that come up in life.


----------



## EPLC

EPLC said:


> You have said this or a variation of this several times. I'll be honest, it confuses me. If hitting where you intended isn't a good measure of a good shot then what is?


I want to add to this: I do understand that there are poor shots that find the middle on a regular basis and those shots should be recognized that for what they are, regardless of where they land. I believe I'm doing that. But what about those good shots? Currently my definition of a good shot is the shot that has no hesitation in the execution. Coincidently, those also seem to find the middle. Occasionally some of those don't but I still consider them "good" shots as they were executed correctly and missed for some other reason.


----------



## jim p

If you are holding center, I am guessing that you don't stop your firing engine. You could probably shoot a 6" dot all day long and never stop your firing engine.

When you are floating in and out of the x and trying to time your shot aren't you just doing drive by shooting.

If you ask you body to do something that it can't do aren't you subject to TP because the subconscious mind wont fire because it can't accomplish what you are specifying.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> No doubt, but a debate on whether or not someone can or cannot hold to a certain degree of steadiness serves no purpose in this discussion.


I certainly agree and apologize for getting sucked into that trap. Check your PMs


----------



## EPLC

jim p said:


> If you are holding center, I am guessing that you don't stop your firing engine. You could probably shoot a 6" dot all day long and never stop your firing engine.
> 
> When you are floating in and out of the x and trying to time your shot aren't you just doing drive by shooting.
> 
> If you ask you body to do something that it can't do aren't you subject to TP because the subconscious mind wont fire because it can't accomplish what you are specifying.


This is an interesting perspective. I'm not sure if this would actually be TP, but I can identify with this happening. I've felt that it may actually be the subconscious stopping the shot... or as someone said, not actually stopping but working like cruse control.


----------



## ron w

it doesn't start out as target panic, but most drive by shooting is certainly target panic, although, I don't really think that what EPLC is relaying as "timing the shot", is either "drive by shooting" or any form of target panic causing drive by shooting. it's more an issue of generating the release engine to run in coordination to his least amount of float period. even when float is 'big", by definition to a target shooter, it's not really subject to being truly "drive by" shooting. 
many times a target shooter may say something like, "man, i'm drive-by shooting, today"..... the reality of that statement, is that the dot just won't settle down as well as the shooter might want it to, at that time, or for some reason, on that particular day, he might be having a hard time "trusting his float" so the execution ends up feeling like it is being snapped off, instead of smoothly built.
again, risking the potential to be chastised,......that condition is exactly what the shot window timing drill works on to eliminate.


----------



## N7709K

EPLC said:


> You have said this or a variation of this several times. I'll be honest, it confuses me. If hitting where you intended isn't a good measure of a good shot then what is?


what specifically confuses you- overall what I'm putting out there or how to apply it to your shooting?



EPLC said:


> I want to add to this: I do understand that there are poor shots that find the middle on a regular basis and those shots should be recognized that for what they are, regardless of where they land. I believe I'm doing that. *But what about those good shots?* Currently my definition of a good shot is the shot that has no hesitation in the execution. Coincidently, those also seem to find the middle. Occasionally some of those don't but I still consider them "good" shots as they were executed correctly and missed for some other reason.


what about them? You know a good shot when it happens; more over you know when you don't shoot a good shot as good shots are the more prevalent of the two- or should be. Again; do you base your rubric truly upon how the shot progresses or where it lands? 

here is where my issue comes in- at the level of progression for a new process that you are at you are trying to implement the information and techniques that require the mastery of the process; and that isn't there. You can't side step the pre-req's and get what you want from it. Learning the process takes diligence; throwing down scores doesn't. If all you are after is putting arrows in the ten (which is fine, but put forth that your goal is just to shoot tens...) you have different approaches for the short term ends of things and the mindset is geared towards the short term. If you want to learn process you look ahead farther and set the stage for upcoming seasons; so you put the time into learning process so that next season you can work on the next stage after have your shot mastery at a level in which you can implement the techniques you are wanting to with success. 

you gotta learn the back half and learn it well enough that it is isolated from the rest of the platform and can be trusted to do its own deal... then you can fix the front half... then you can marry the two together and put the final shine on the system. Trying to work on all of them at the same time will only keep you in stagnation.


----------



## jim p

Try this put up a blank paper plate. The objective is to only hit the plate not the center. Take some shots and see if your firing engine sputters and pauses. I think that you will not have any problems.


----------



## EPLC

N7709K said:


> what specifically confuses you- overall what I'm putting out there or how to apply it to your shooting?
> 
> 
> 
> what about them? You know a good shot when it happens; more over you know when you don't shoot a good shot as good shots are the more prevalent of the two- or should be. Again; do you base your rubric truly upon how the shot progresses or where it lands?
> 
> here is where my issue comes in- at the level of progression for a new process that you are at you are trying to implement the information and techniques that require the mastery of the process; and that isn't there. You can't side step the pre-req's and get what you want from it. Learning the process takes diligence; throwing down scores doesn't. If all you are after is putting arrows in the ten (which is fine, but put forth that your goal is just to shoot tens...) you have different approaches for the short term ends of things and the mindset is geared towards the short term. If you want to learn process you look ahead farther and set the stage for upcoming seasons; so you put the time into learning process so that next season you can work on the next stage after have your shot mastery at a level in which you can implement the techniques you are wanting to with success.
> 
> you gotta learn the back half and learn it well enough that it is isolated from the rest of the platform and can be trusted to do its own deal... then you can fix the front half... then you can marry the two together and put the final shine on the system. Trying to work on all of them at the same time will only keep you in stagnation.


While I was working on my float, I've had to put that off as I'm learning a new release. As a result I'm actually working on my execution right now. My goal is to execute without hesitation. My release is set very slow and is making me really work. I shot my league tonight (450 Vegas) and my 436 16X was a real workout. My goal was simply to execute without hesitation. It was a struggle but I managed to get through each shot. I felt only one shot the entire evening was the one that I want to develop. I did let down quite often during the first half but got smoother as the second half progressed.

My first arrow gave me trouble for a while and then I started nailing it (lower left). Target two started off really well but dwindled as the night went on (top) and number 3 was about the same, off and on all evening. I really didn't care about arrow placement (as best as it is possible for me) but I like to see the patterns.


----------



## EPLC

jim p said:


> Try this put up a blank paper plate. The objective is to only hit the plate not the center. Take some shots and see if your firing engine sputters and pauses. I think that you will not have any problems.


I shot a 60cm face yesterday for a while. My firing engine sputtered...


----------



## N7709K

couple things...

by working the release; are you having to consciously roll through a bunch of travel to get the release to fire or is it simply you need to stay positive in the shot to make it go? setting a release overly heavy can/usually will lead to snapping the release....

execute without hesitation in only good shots? or in that the release doesn't hang up? or getting to having the release fire every time, and then working on making each cycle the same?


----------



## jim p

But were you just trying to hit the 60 cm face or were you trying to hit the center? Try a blank plate and the whole plate is the x ring.

BTW your shooting is better than mine.



EPLC said:


> I shot a 60cm face yesterday for a while. My firing engine sputtered...


----------



## ron w

as far as a shot being a "good shot" based on whether it hits where it was intended to go or not, is a false security, at best. there's no difference between that and not hitting your mark, when you think you are executing good shots. something is wrong somewhere in your shot process, that is causing the false readings and as long as that condition exists, you're not shooting good.
we all know that a shot can be forced and hit it's mark....I think I can safely say, that we've all done this a time or two at least. that does not, in any way, make it a good shot, actually just the opposite is more accurate/honest. a "bad shot that got lucky", is about the best we can say about it.
those shooters, who might consider a shot like that, "a good shot", are exactly the source of all the confusion about what is "good shooting" and what us not.


----------



## stoz

All I can say is usually the more you run your firing engine and train it so it runs wo r eguard for movement the more you trust it and the steadier you will hold. Am I at that point now.no but I've been there and it didn't matter if I was nervous or not my shot ran and I know there was movement sometimes a little sometimes more. If you relax and trust the float you can shoot inside of what you perceive your movement is. When I won the states and many other tournaments with many clean rounds I literally said as long as my float was in the yellow I am going. It took a ton of work which I have not done but its getting better. Shot 298/20 and 300/24 last nite in league. My goal on all shots was to execute in my comfortable shot window.


----------



## bgviii

I really believe if you try to hard to time your shot to go at your best float you are command shooting and I think when big pressure hits target panic will raise its ugly head. I also believe that once you start your shot or firing engine as everyone is calling it, you cannot stop the process. If you do, you will never let it work on its own and it will be a constant battle. I think the key here is to increase your stamina to allow a greater window for optimum hold or float. As you relax and become more confident that you can wait out your firing process and just let it happen, the groups will tighten and more energy goes into aiming and less with the release. If you are putting enough into practicing the firing engine on its own, then when on target this become a quite satisfying shot. I still like the one blank bale shot and then immediately follow with a bulleye shot drill. This allows you to assimulate the feeling of the blank shot immediately to the target while the feeling is fresh in your mind. When the two are the same, the blank bale shot and bulleye shot, you will find something very effortless and rewarding shooting.


----------



## stoz

bgviii said:


> I really believe if you try to hard to time your shot to go at your best float you are command shooting and I think when big pressure hits target panic will raise its ugly head. I also believe that once you start your shot or firing engine as everyone is calling it, you cannot stop the process. If you do, you will never let it work on its own and it will be a constant battle. I think the key here is to increase your stamina to allow a greater window for optimum hold or float. As you relax and become more confident that you can wait out your firing process and just let it happen, the groups will tighten and more energy goes into aiming and less with the release. If you are putting enough into practicing the firing engine on its own, then when on target this become a quite satisfying shot. I still like the one blank bale shot and then immediately follow with a bulleye shot drill. This allows you to assimulate the feeling of the blank shot immediately to the target while the feeling is fresh in your mind. When the two are the same, the blank bale shot
> 
> and bulleye shot, you will find something very effortless and rewarding shooting.



I agree this is a good drill, also if you can't achieve the same feel go to a distance and target sixe that can feel the same shot.and slowly work back


----------



## ron w

it's a matter of details....there's no command process going on. you're not really "timing" your shot to go at a particular time, you are training all the elements to manifest at the same time, by their own generation, naturally. the "timing element" involved is simply the condition that all three elements,...good float, sight alignment and break of the shot..... show up to the game, at the same time within your shot process. when that happens, the potential to hit the center, is at it's highest point, so that's when you want the shot to break.
the actual chronological manifestation of this event, is of no concern, only that all three elements appear at the same time, every time. when this condition exists, it actually eliminates the potential for having to "command", anything because each element knows exactly when it should perform and when it is "it's turn" in the shot process.
that is the " internally organized administration" of the shot I talk about.


----------



## EPLC

N7709K said:


> couple things...
> 
> by working the release; are you having to consciously roll through a bunch of travel to get the release to fire or is it simply you need to stay positive in the shot to make it go? setting a release overly heavy can/usually will lead to snapping the release....
> 
> execute without hesitation in only good shots? or in that the release doesn't hang up? or getting to having the release fire every time, and then working on making each cycle the same?


I think the answer to part 1 of your question is "both" as I have a lot of travel and I need to stay positive to get it to flow. With regard to part 2, I find having the release set too fast, or finding the edge, promotes snap shooting. Setting it slow doesn't create this for me.



stoz said:


> I agree this is a good drill, also if you can't achieve the same feel go to a distance and target sixe that can feel the same shot.and slowly work back


Here's my current plan: I'm working on a firing engine that does not stop or hesitate during the execution phase of my shot. I have found that I need a target face, combined with aiming to accomplish this goal as it is the combination of aiming and execution that gums up the works. I have also been doing some blank baling in combination with this exercise. As mentioned many times I'm doing a one arrow end drill to work these issues. Currently my release (Scott Backspin) is set very slow, perhaps a little too slow, but I want to have to really work it during my practice sessions. I've only been working with the new release for a very short time so just getting it set and understanding it is taking up some of my energy. While I do not have any belief that a new release is the answer to my issues, I wanted to get away from the safety style. This necessitated going through a learning curve which I'm still on... although getting better.

I do like the suggestion of alternating blank and target faces and need to think about how I will implement this.


----------



## bgviii

ron w said:


> it's a matter of details....there's no command process going on. you're not really "timing" your shot to go at a particular time, you are training all the elements to manifest at the same time, by their own generation, naturally. the "timing element" involved is simply the condition that all three elements,...good float, sight alignment and break of the shot..... show up to the game, at the same time within your shot process. when that happens, the potential to hit the center, is at it's highest point, so that's when you want the shot to break.


What happens when this doesn't happen? Are we suddenly thinking that my release didn't fire and we should set down? Sometimes the hold is still pretty good. Once this thought or even "looking" or "expecting" the release to go is exactly how TP starts. Plus we really want to put everything into aim. Sure we all love it when its pure and everything goes as planned..but when the tournament is on the line and we are oh so close and the feeling that we all love is in our stomachs, its really nice to fall back on our basics and wait it out...confidently. We know we have the stamina to do so and our process is sound. No fear. No expectation. Just trust execution.. Repetition leads to timing on its own. I don't believe it can be manufactured completely under pressure, consciously, and be reliable when we want it to be the most.


----------



## subconsciously

There shot execution and there is command shooting. There is also waiting and hoping it goes off while the float is at its best.

I prefer shot execution.

When you watch Reo at the 80 meters with a cross wind - He is executing. He might hold 4 seconds, he might hold 8 seconds. The sight picture is good - it is time for the arrow to go. He does not know the exact split second, but he is executing the shot.

Semantics. Maybe.


----------



## cbrunson

subconsciously said:


> There shot execution and there is command shooting. There is also waiting and hoping it goes off while the float is at its best.
> 
> I prefer shot execution.
> 
> When you watch Reo at the 80 meters with a cross wind - He is executing. He might hold 4 seconds, he might hold 8 seconds. The sight picture is good - it is time for the arrow to go. He does not know the exact split second, but he is executing the shot.
> Semantics. Maybe.


Excellent description of how it should work. :thumbs_up


----------



## EPLC

subconsciously said:


> There shot execution and there is command shooting. There is also waiting and hoping it goes off while the float is at its best.
> 
> I prefer shot execution.
> 
> When you watch Reo at the 80 meters with a cross wind - He is executing. He might hold 4 seconds, he might hold 8 seconds. The sight picture is good - it is time for the arrow to go. He does not know the exact split second, but he is executing the shot.
> 
> Semantics. Maybe.


Agreed, but float has to be good enough or it interrupts the execution, or at least that's what happens with me. This morning was a fine example of what happens to my shot when all I care about is execution and don't care about shot placement. I "was" working on my float and seeing progress but that work was interrupted by a period of experimentation and selection of a new release. The selection has been made and my focus has shifted to the execution of that new release. When I focus on execution only without regard to arrow placement my arrow placement goes to pot as you can see below. 

I believe "my" best path, although many will say I am working backwards, is to build the float first and then find, invent, discover a firing engine that doesn't interferer with that float. I was making some good progress along that path before getting distracted with the release quest.


----------



## subconsciously

EPLC said:


> Agreed, but float has to be good enough or it interrupts the execution, or at least that's what happens with me. This morning was a fine example of what happens to my shot when all I care about is execution and don't care about shot placement. I "was" working on my float and seeing progress but that work was interrupted by a period of experimentation and selection of a new release. The selection has been made and my focus has shifted to the execution of that new release. When I focus on execution only without regard to arrow placement my arrow placement goes to pot as you can see below.
> 
> I believe "my" best path, although many will say I am working backwards, is to build the float first and then find, invent, discover a firing engine that doesn't interferer with that float. I was making some good progress along that path before getting distracted with the release quest.


Just curios - if you put a white piece of paper on the bale the same size as the 10 ring - can you hit it without interruption?


----------



## Padgett

What I find interesting in all of the discussions that we have is how we find a way to justify our misses, right now you are going through the same thing I went through all winter where I set my hinge slow and I had to really focus on executing a nice long smooth effort to fire the hinge. I did it because I kept hearing that it was a good thing but after a couple months of commitment to it I had found myself with these justifications that I was making to my misses.

Now don't get me wrong, I still miss from time to time but it is different and the misses are for different reasons. What that gives me is the chance to choose how I am going to miss because I have spend the time shooting both methods and seeing how they react.

Slow hinge: 

1. very safe and easy to draw with no anxiety

2. my firing effort will have much more steady movement in it which must continue without interruption

3. I can start the engine before the pin is totally settled because I already know it is going to take longer 

4. I end up shooting later in my shot window knowing that my window on the first half is way better than the second half.

5. I know my shots that end up happening in the first half are guaranteed x's where the ones in the second half are more iffy.

6. I know that I have to be very aware when I have held to long and must down draw because i am at the end of the shot window on a regular basis.

7, I know early on if my engine is running very smoothly I will shoot super strong and if it is running slower I am going to have to really stay focused late in the shot window to shoot well.

Fast hinge:

1. I know that I need to be careful drawing the bow 

2. I am going to be shooting in the first half of my shot window.

3. I know that all I have to do is settle in and release my thumb peg smoothly and I am guaranteed a x.

4. The only misses I will have will probably happen when I am not focused as I release the peg and I get a slight misfire as I begin my firing engine.

5. If I go past the half way point of my shot window I know I am right on the edge of firing and don't need to apply any extra pressure to the engine.


So, when I look at those two approaches that I have spent months shooting with both methods I choose the fast one. I think one thing that really helps me is the fact that I set one hinge slow on purpose as a training tool and I shoot with it all the time right along with my competition hinge and it gives me a constant reminder of which one is the better choice for me. I can't tell you how important I believe this to be as a daily shooting drill.

In fact one thing you must consider is that what you consider to be your slow setting could be very well faster than what I consider to be my fast setting, talking about slow or fast when you are talking about hinges is pretty much impossible. What I do is I find what I consider to be my best competition setting and then I set my other hinge up to a slower speed than it, so that way I can train with both. In fact I actually think that my really fast competition hinge is actually slower than it used to be in years past because of the slower hinge training because it has developed my ability to easily produce a ample amount of rotation and I don't need that really stupid fast setting anymore.


----------



## ron w

no matter how wuch we tell ourselves and how hard we try to "believe" in the separation of the shot's progress and our aim, being independent of each other, it is impossible to deny that there is a direct link between what we see as we aim and whether or not our shot process initiates the release execution and proceeds to run through to the shot breaking.
if our sight wanders off bad enough, we abort the execution with a let down.....or at least we should.
when we don't, we are "forcing the shot". that "forcing" has now become "command shooting".
the whole initiative, behind applying the release process to subconscious administration, is so that we know it will run reliably by itself, given the sight picture looks good. in this condition, we don't have to think, "execution", we only have to evaluate the shot's progress as a whole and and focus on aiming, while make a decision to either let it run or refuse to let it run.
the better the hold....(lesser the float range movement), the easier it is to make either decision and the less distracting , making that decision is to our focus on aiming. 
it is actually exactly opposite of "justifying a miss" the only justification for a miss, is a let down...or the refusal to let a bad shot progress. the better the hold, and more reliable the subconscious release execution, the easier, justifying a let down becomes, because the let down has now gained the same value as a shot that goes right, in that it prevents a miss from a shot that is not going right.
in this light, there is no justification for a miss and there is a drill that teaches our shot process exactly that.


----------



## Padgett

So ronw, If I already know that the first part of my shot window for the first 3 to 4 seconds is pretty much pro quality and I choose to allow my shot to continue on into the second half of my shot window and continue on with the shot am I not justifying something?

How about knowing that the first part of my shot window is really good and I set up my hinge so that almost none of my shots happen in that part of the window and are happening in the later half?

I can totally allow my shot run for a long time and just watch the float get worse and worse and worse and I can continue my engine until it fires without commanding or forcing anything, I just don't see why this is a good idea.

Why shouldn't a guy pay attention to what he is good at and then try and use those areas as building blocks that add up to a strong shot, for me one of those building blocks is the first half of my shot window. For me to ignore it and continue on into the second half over and over just because just doesn't sit well with me.


----------



## Padgett

I have also weighed the difference between having a relatively slow hinge and trying to shoot in the first half of my shot window, to me this creates and very aggressive rotation where you have to allow things to do their job quickly to make up for the extra slack in the hinge to be taken up before it fires. I don't like this feeling of starting something that is moving quickly because it becomes very hard to shut it down when something isn't working out. 

I much prefer being able to be very subtle with my actions where the rotation is constant but very very smooth and short.

Don't get me wrong I shoot just fine with both methods and enjoy them but I like discussing them like this so that guys can hear what I have experienced and try it and make their own choices.


----------



## ron w

so Padgett, what part of what I posted don't you get ?.
the idea is to train your entire shot to have the elements that produce the preferred results, happen at the same time, on their own. whether you are holding off on one or another element, while/and/or, waiting for another element to show up, you are either commanding things to happen, or commanding things not to happen, aren't you ?.
what is so hard about that to understand ?.
I don't understand your question about "justifying something". I don't know what you'd be "justifying" by commanding the progress of your shot.
if you deliberately, want to watch your float, OK fine, that is another issue, the justification is then in being able to study your float, for developmental reasons, I suppose......typically, that doesn't happen in the progress of, "a normal shot" ,...does it ?..... and when you do hold off on the progress of a shot's development, things usually change and aren't necessarily a good representation of what happens during, "a normal shot".
the other thing that puzzles me, is what is with this " first half" and "second half" of your shot window. I have never heard of it being referred to like that before and never considered the shot being constructed of "halves", or any other portion......only as a whole function or process, that is either 'wholly allowed to run to fruition" or "wholly disallowed to run to fruition".....you don't/can't let down on half of a shot and let the rest run, as far as I know. I would think it would be pretty hard to do,.....don't you ?. once you let down, the shot is over, isn't it ?. not just the first half, nor just the second half....the entire shot is over....isn't it ?. you can't pick back up, where you left off,.....can you ?.
maybe you can explain this all to me.
again, there is no justification for a missed shot.....every shot that misses, is a shot that we could have decided to let down on, just as easily as we decided to let it run and miss. the only justification is the obvious, something that interfered with arrow's trajectory, mid-flight and we can't do much about that.
justifying a miss, is saying your shot or form has something wrong with it, but that's OK, don't bother fixing it.


----------



## EPLC

subconsciously said:


> Just curios - if you put a white piece of paper on the bale the same size as the 10 ring - can you hit it without interruption?


Never tried it, but from past experience I can hit just about anything I can see. Since our bales are white I'm not sure a white dot would show up. What's your point?


----------



## jim p

When the pressure is on I like a fast release that I don't have to worry about holding too long. I will hold too long sometimes with a fast release but not often. With a slow release in a pressure situation I don't know if I would ever get a shot off.

I am going through the same things that you guys have gone through. I am trying to build up stamina. When I am fresh I try to shoot for 10"s. Once I get to tired to hold the bow up I start just shooting for just a paper plate. When I am shooting at target so big that I can't miss Then I can really relax and work on my execution.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> no matter how wuch we tell ourselves and how hard we try to "believe" in the separation of the shot's progress and our aim, being independent of each other, it is impossible to deny that there is a direct link between what we see as we aim and whether or not our shot process initiates the release execution and proceeds to run through to the shot breaking.
> if our sight wanders off bad enough, we abort the execution with a let down.....or at least we should.
> when we don't, we are "forcing the shot". that "forcing" has now become "command shooting".
> the whole initiative, behind applying the release process to subconscious administration, is so that we know it will run reliably by itself, given the sight picture looks good. in this condition, we don't have to think, "execution", we only have to evaluate the shot's progress as a whole and and focus on aiming, while make a decision to either let it run or refuse to let it run.
> the better the hold....(lesser the float range movement), the easier it is to make either decision and the less distracting , making that decision is to our focus on aiming.
> it is actually exactly opposite of "justifying a miss" the only justification for a miss, is a let down...or the refusal to let a bad shot progress. the better the hold, and more reliable the subconscious release execution, the easier, justifying a let down becomes, because the let down has now gained the same value as a shot that goes right, in that it prevents a miss from a shot that is not going right.
> in this light, there is no justification for a miss and there is a drill that teaches our shot process exactly that.


This assumes a conscious aim while executing a subconscious execution. I'm one who is working from the other direction simply because I've never been able to let go of the back end. I simply got tired of fighting it and have moved on to something that is more fitting of my nature. When I do it the other way I tend to over aim.


----------



## Padgett

Ronw, with our stormy past few months I just want to say that I am really enjoying these few posts you just made and they are making me think really hard to find a way to explain what I am trying to get across and I have failed. I pretty much agree with what you are saying in your posts but I am simply trying to look at a this timing the shot question and express how I am doing things.

First, I SEE RISKS THAT MUST BE TAKEN

If you choose to shoot a slow hinge you are choosing to more than likely to shoot a relatively slow shot that is going to take a few extra seconds if you do a good job of executing your shot and it is going to send you later in your shot window. If you take a little long to fire then you will be running out of breath or your eyes will start to blur. You may have to produce a extra amount of rotation that varies from shot to shot, and that bigger amount of rotation required can cause you to pull the pin right off the target.. You are taking the risks of shooting later in the shot with a slow hinge.

If you choose to shoot a fast hinge you are taking the risk of the hinge firing just as you start to release the peg and if you aren't on the spot you will miss. This is a risk along with freezing up because you are scared of the hinge firing early.

I am just choosing one set of risk over another.


----------



## Padgett

You also brought up a question about me talking about the first half of my shot window and the second half of my shot window, I really do study my float by doing down draw drills and for me I have decided that I have about 8 seconds where my shot is acceptable from the time I begin floating for me to shoot a good shot. But during that 8 seconds there is a big difference between my first 4 seconds and the last 4 seconds, basically when I come to anchor my pin is lets say 5 inches from the spot I want to shoot so I settle into my anchor and get my nose on the string and as I start looking through the peep the pin is almost to the spot I want to hit and it begins to settle in. Now once my pin reaches the spot and settles in it can float well within a 5-spot x for the first 4 seconds and many times it will just sit in the center of the 5 spot x. Then it will begin to float during seconds 5 and 6 and by seconds 7 and 8 it is still floating ok but I can feel my vision starting to strain and my breath is running out and the feeling of desperation is on its way to screw things up. After second 8 the desperation feeling that I need to help the pin stay still because it is starting to jump around is really bad.

Now the first 4 seconds of my float pattern are pretty predictable, once my pin settles in on the spot the first second or two the pin is moving a little and then usually if it is going to pause and sit perfectly still it will happen during second 3 and 4 of the float, it isn't guaranteed that my pin is going to be perfectly still but more than half of the time this does happen.

During the second half of my window during seconds 5 - 8 my pin rarely ever sits still and even though it is within the x it is on the verge of getting worse the closer to 8 seconds I get.

So there you have a good look at my personal float pattern that i see virtually every day and during my 3d competitions, if I attend regular leagues and get used to shooting with other people I can see this same pattern during indoor also. This is why I don't just execute a smooth shot that can fire anytime during my shot window, I work really hard to insure that it is firing during the first half and I am ok with the second half but I am just not as good a shooter back there.

So there is the justification, if I choose to shoot a slow hinge and shoot in the second half of my float pattern then I am going to have to live with shooting with a bigger float and there is more risk that I am going to miss. If I choose to shoot in the first half I am going to shoot much stronger unless I have a early misfire as I release the peg.


----------



## EPLC

Padgett said:


> Ronw, with our stormy past few months I just want to say that I am really enjoying these few posts you just made and they are making me think really hard to find a way to explain what I am trying to get across and I have failed. I pretty much agree with what you are saying in your posts but I am simply trying to look at a this timing the shot question and express how I am doing things.
> 
> First, I SEE RISKS THAT MUST BE TAKEN
> 
> If you choose to shoot a slow hinge you are choosing to more than likely to shoot a relatively slow shot that is going to take a few extra seconds if you do a good job of executing your shot and it is going to send you later in your shot window. If you take a little long to fire then you will be running out of breath or your eyes will start to blur. You may have to produce a extra amount of rotation that varies from shot to shot, and that bigger amount of rotation required can cause you to pull the pin right off the target.. You are taking the risks of shooting later in the shot with a slow hinge.
> 
> If you choose to shoot a fast hinge you are taking the risk of the hinge firing just as you start to release the peg and if you aren't on the spot you will miss. This is a risk along with freezing up because you are scared of the hinge firing early.
> 
> I am just choosing one set of risk over another.


Isn't there one scenario you are overlooking such as somewhere in the middle between really fast and really slow? Realistically speaking one would think the sweet spot would be somewhere within that in between setting.


----------



## N7709K

setting the release excessively slow just for the hell of it doesn't get you anywhere.. if you really have to work to get the shot to go off, its too heavy. Float will open up as the halves (probably only back half...) struggle to reach the point the shot can break. Setting the release hot and shooting careful isn't good either... there is a difference between staying positive with the shot and having to work the release to get it to fire; working the release isn't a route i would go.... working the release introduces an imbalance in the halves and will add movement into the sight picture.

I prefer to build the "shot window" around the natural rhythm that is developed when the release execution is mastered; you know how long it takes to shoot a good shot and what goes on during that time. That is the timeframe you are given to work with if you want to marry the two aspects; the shot should dictate what you are given to aim with so to speak. But to get this to work you need to master the shot and then introduce aiming into an already learned and working system.... trying to learn both at the same time and being tethered to POI as a gauge of progression will greatly slow the process


----------



## ron w

yup, that's what I was just going bring up, in response.
the ideal condition, should be somewhere in between. I worked long and hard at figuring all this out several years ago, taking what I know about the shot process and applying it to my own shooting in a step by step and part by part methodology that got to the best shot timing for my shooting. 
we all have to do this, if we want to get past that next step. it really doesn't matter if that next step makes us the best shooter or not, the simple fact is that in order to take that next step into shooting as good as we "personally" can our shot has to be taken apart, studied and reorganized to the point that we understand exactly what we are doing, and why we do it.
exactly as you say, finding out whether the risk of a long shot time, is where our shot window is, or not.
an analogy that my son and I went through in kart racing......
during practice laps, we were cutting good times, but I knew he could do better. I just had the feeling that he was holding back just a pinch, to keep from spinning out and having the whole pack fly by him in a second or two. 
I told him, "now that you know what you're doing out there, you have to go out and find your "limits". find out how hard you can run in before you loop it ("loop" is kart speak for spinning out) I knew we had the kart to go to the front every race, I just felt that he was holding back just a bit, to be safe....."you can't win, if you don't finish" sort of thing. I admit that when he was starting out, I pounded that into his head, because I watched so many kids give away a good lead by, should we say "driving a bit too enthusiastically".
over the next couple race weekends, I noticed that he was studying the track allot more intently, when not driving and driving somewhat faster inplaces where everyone was generally slowed down, every time he went out. at the track we raced at, there was one large turn off the end of the main straight,that was long enough and wide enough to easily get through, two karts wide. but no-one ever tried it.
well he figured it out.... he went out for practice laps got on the outside, drove into that turn wide open and kept it there, staying on the outside all the way through the turn. 
come his first heat race, he drew a position at the end of the starting grid. when the flag dropped, he got to the outside going onto that turn and flew past the entire pack, wide open through that whole turn!.
coming out of the turn he was in front and checking out on the race. he finished that heat half way through the pack working on putting a lap on the whole field !.
you gotta find your limits ! you may know what to do, but until you know what you can do, you can't do your best.


----------



## ron w

Padgett, thanks for that !....
believe me, never, in any of my posts have I deliberately tried to antagonize. my goal has always been to make people think and maybe make them think "outside their own box", so to speak. I truly believe that everyone has the potential to be better at what they do,....they just have to think about it a little differently than they do, sometimes.....I always try to catalyze that different thinking by just throwing a spark or two, into the kindling, rather than just throwing the whole book of matches at it ! I believe that when you come to a conclusion by yourself, it "sinks in" better , if you know what I mean.
I was lucky to have been taught by the same method.....one that makes you think about what you're doing....by stepping back and looking at what's going on, rather than just getting told how to do something and doing it. sort of being given the right guidelines, that allow you to figure it out correctly, for your self. 
I think the "lesson learned", becomes a lot more clear, that way.


----------



## EPLC

I


N7709K said:


> setting the release excessively slow just for the hell of it doesn't get you anywhere.. if you really have to work to get the shot to go off, its too heavy. Float will open up as the halves (probably only back half...) struggle to reach the point the shot can break. Setting the release hot and shooting careful isn't good either... there is a difference between staying positive with the shot and having to work the release to get it to fire; working the release isn't a route i would go.... working the release introduces an imbalance in the halves and will add movement into the sight picture.
> 
> I prefer to build the "shot window" around the natural rhythm that is developed when the release execution is mastered; you know how long it takes to shoot a good shot and what goes on during that time. That is the timeframe you are given to work with if you want to marry the two aspects; the shot should dictate what you are given to aim with so to speak. But to get this to work you need to master the shot and then introduce aiming into an already learned and working system.... trying to learn both at the same time and being tethered to POI as a gauge of progression will greatly slow the process


Let's look at this from a different perspective. I've been shooting a hinge for most of my shooting life. Yes, I have a new release but that doesn't really change the basics of my shot. I have no issues with execution on the bale. There comes a point where you need to develop the front end to work with the shot. Assuming that we are at this point, what path would be taken to meld the front end into the process?


----------



## ron w

the problem most of us have, is that we are too anxious to start seeing a score be produced, from the efforts we made, working on our shot execution.], so we tend to short cut the shot development, in favor of pinning up a "real target". 
most guys move to 20 yards way too soon ....long before their shot is developed enough to not allow "score", start antagonizing the process being worked on. 
you really can't tell, when the right time arises, all you can do, is keep an attitude that, if you need to abandon the score oriented part of the process, do it immediately when you recognize it's not going as well as it should. your execution will let you know if it's ready or not, in very few shots, once you put a target up.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> the problem most of us have, is that we are too anxious to start seeing a score be produced, from the efforts we made, working on our shot execution.], so we tend to short cut the shot development, in favor of pinning up a "real target".
> most guys move to 20 yards way too soon ....long before their shot is developed enough to not allow "score", start antagonizing the process being worked on.
> you really can't tell, when the right time arises, all you can do, is keep an attitude that, if you need to abandon the score oriented part of the process, do it immediately when you recognize it's not going as well as it should. your execution will let you know if it's ready or not, in very few shots, once you put a target up.


Shot development is absolutely useless if you can't meld it into the real world of actually shooting something. I think it is safe to assume that by now we do have an understanding of the execution phase, it has been talked to death and worked to death and it is time to move on. I would find it helpful to move away from this endless loop and start discussing the next phase of the development... the front end. My difficulties do not stem from the execution side of the shot. On the contrary, my issues are on the front end. The front end, if not steady within reason prevents the shot from being executed smoothly, regardless of how much work you've put into it. I think altogether too much emphasis is put into shot development and very little is ever discussed on how shot development is implemented in a manner that does not mess up the front end. I believe this is the root of the problem which feeds "timing the shot"... and if not addressed, all the execution work in the world won't fix it.


----------



## ron w

you miss the point of what I said. 
most times we move to stage of applying the development to our score oriented shooting too soon. By "score oriented shooting", I mean reference to anything "aiming related". simply put....our shot execution, is simply not developed enough, fundamentally and internally, to move on to the next, phase of our shot development....people don't spend enough time, ingraining the execution, to the point that it will reliably run by itself, when we go to work on applying it as an established element of the whole shot process. we work on specific elements of our shot, and as we develop those to be reliable and run by them selves, we apply them and move to work on another element. hopefully the element we just worked on is ingrained well enough to be reliable as we divert our attention away from that element and focus on some other , or the next element, in the sequence. 
if it isn't solidly ingrained, that element suffers the damages of being forced to run instead of self generating it's own internal administration. then, not only does the developmental process break down, but the development of what we just worked on, is confused about what it should be doing and when it should do it.
much of this happens as a lack of basic fundamental learning of the shot process when we just get started shooting, or learn a new shot process. 
as I've said many time before, the fundamentals, cannot be disregarded and you can never work on them too much. it might sound somewhat juvenile in accomplishmentory terms to some, but the fact is, that the better the fundamentals are established internally speaking, the easier anything we want to learn outside that parameter, will be. you have to have an absolutely solid core, for your shot to fall back on, when you attempt to abandon something that you are currently using and work on something new.
believe me when I say I understand what you are saying about your front end. I have a decidedly large float range. it's been that way all my life, regardless of what and how I worked on it's development. I have literally had to learn to "trust my float" and run my execution. it (that large float range of movement) is mostly responsible for what I know about the shot process, because it was absolutely important that I understand that the float can be large without losing trust in it and falling prey to over controlling it. If I didn't learn that fundamental aspect well and clearly understand it's properties, I probably would have given up on shooting spots a long time ago.


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> My difficulties do not stem from the execution side of the shot. On the contrary, my issues are on the front end. The front end, if not steady within reason prevents the shot from being executed smoothly, regardless of how much work you've put into it.


To me, that's practically the *definition* of a fundamental execution problem. If it works great at the blank bale but fails on a target, it's an execution problem. I think it ultimately doesn't matter how good it is at the blank bale (for example); if it breaks down when aiming it's a failing of the execution. It's not working.

So I agree with the others, and disagree that EPLC is describing merely an isolated fault of the "front end". We got what we got there and only what we got. A Man's Gotta Know His Limitations... So the rest of the shot, the whole thing, has to work with what we got.

Reason I know this: I too have a fairly wide float. I'm hopeful that eventually I can steady it up with more strength training and practice, but it's possible I'll never achieve a really good one. So in the meanwhile my attitude is, that's down the list on my priority of worries. My shot engine, along with the entire rest of the routine, has to work with what I got. So I'm training mine that once I release the safety, its running.... And where she goes nobody knows... LOL. "let it float and shoot the shot", despite the protestations of some, is still a quite serviceable, and still modern, rule of thumb, in my personal experience.

Same with shooting in the wind. I have to hold as best I can, but the rest of the performance has to run like always to get the best results.

LS


----------



## unclejane

ron w said:


> the problem most of us have, is that we are too anxious to start seeing a score be produced, from the efforts we made, working on our shot execution.], so we tend to short cut the shot development, in favor of pinning up a "real target".
> most guys move to 20 yards way too soon ....long before their shot is developed enough to not allow "score", start antagonizing the process being worked on.
> you really can't tell, when the right time arises, all you can do, is keep an attitude that, if you need to abandon the score oriented part of the process, do it immediately when you recognize it's not going as well as it should. your execution will let you know if it's ready or not, in very few shots, once you put a target up.


I have a confession to make in this regard. I've not scored a target yet since coming back to archery this past summer. I did introduce a target fairly early, though it's gone up and down due to equipment changes and my gearhead-like endless fiddling with my tune, but the main attention has been developing my routine only. And I did move back to 20 yards a couple months into it.

But still, I'm only now at the point where my score is a measure of is it in the gold or not and what is the general group size I'm shooting at that particular time. After I think what is it? 6 or 7 months I think..... PS: I did sight in my PSE at 30, 40, 50 and 60 yards at our range a couple weekends ago. Ok, so I'm maybe stretching out a little bit.

Just by way of example, that's how much time I've had to put into my execution/strength training/equipment setup etc. this second time around in shooting compound. Like I said earlier A Man's Gotta Know His Limitations, which in my case are a general lack of strength and talent over against most shooters LOL. I'd love to get to a competitive level, but the only way there for me is to start by competing with myself and ironing out the basics first. 

So is that an unusually long time to build a good foundation? Perhaps. An overly pessimistic assessment of my progress? Maybe. But for me, it takes what it takes and as long as it's fun..... 

LS


----------



## ron w

well, the majority of what I spoke to, is targeted towards developing that precise spot shooting accuracy level that produces high x-count rounds.


----------



## ron w

unclejane said:


> To me, that's practically the *definition* of a fundamental execution problem. If it works great at the blank bale but fails on a target, it's an execution problem. I think it ultimately doesn't matter how good it is at the blank bale (for example); if it breaks down when aiming it's a failing of the execution. It's not working.
> 
> So I agree with the others, and disagree that EPLC is describing merely an isolated fault of the "front end". We got what we got there and only what we got. A Man's Gotta Know His Limitations... So the rest of the shot, the whole thing, has to work with what we got.
> 
> Reason I know this: I too have a fairly wide float. I'm hopeful that eventually I can steady it up with more strength training and practice, but it's possible I'll never achieve a really good one. So in the meanwhile my attitude is, that's down the list on my priority of worries. My shot engine, along with the entire rest of the routine, has to work with what I got. So I'm training mine that once I release the safety, its running.... And where she goes nobody knows... LOL. "let it float and shoot the shot", despite the protestations of some, is still a quite serviceable, and still modern, rule of thumb, in my personal experience.
> 
> Same with shooting in the wind. I have to hold as best I can, but the rest of the performance has to run like always to get the best results.
> 
> LS


 exactly.....
it doesn't matter whether it's the front end or the back end of your shot, the development has to be addressed for either end and except for a few small instances, the development entails the same process. very rarely, do we , as archers, isolate one end from the other completely. either end supports the other to a large degree and in this respect, the entire shot process needs to be worked on as a whole, as well as an individual aspect.
when application of individual ends eventual comes around, we are then working on the whole picture, because it takes the whole picture to produce a good shot.


----------



## Mahly

I can see both sides here, on one hand, you want to spend enough time on the bale to make the shot automatic. Were told you need to blank bale until this happens, and sometimes to continue it once past that step.
We're told to shoot the short game, were we "can't miss" and slowly move back.
And that all makes good sense.
On the other hand, one doesn't want to make archery and endless exercise in front of a blank bale.
I see 2 choices.
1) go the conventional wisdom route. There is a reason it is conventional wisdom. Learn the execution till its ingrained in your subconscious, then add a target at close range and work your way back.
2) Continue learning to be a subconscious aimer. This is a little more "on your own" as most follow the conventional wisdom route.
I can't say what that process is with much confidence. I would guess instead of firing drills, you add aiming drills. Draw and study your float without firing. Or maybe continue with the spectator shooting, even though you might not shoot as well that way yet. Perhaps focusing on doing that every shot may help.

I can see how it must be frustrating to hear the same advice repeated endlessly.

Your shooting better than most right now, but you know it can be better. It's just getting the 2 halves to work together.

I would recommend picking one of the 2 and devoting your practice to it (genius right? LOL). Find someone who had some experience with the path you choose to follow, and work with them.

I know you've put a lot of time into the conventional ways, and have not been happy with the result. I can see why you would want to go another route. Hopefully that route works better for you, and I know it sucks to hear it, but that's gonna take time as well.

One thing I don't think will be of much help is asking those that chose the other path, how to get there.


----------



## EPLC

Since neither one of you have yet mastered a good hold, perhaps it might help if you turned off expert mode for a day of so and try to listen instead. Perhaps you may actually learn something instead of monopolizing a topic that your practical application is weak. I'm not trying to be insulting, but for once I would like to hear from someone that has had and actually addressed this issue successfully without you two sucking the energy out of a topic. TIA


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> Since neither one of you have yet mastered a good hold, perhaps it might help if you turned off expert mode for a day of so and try to listen instead. Perhaps you may actually learn something instead of monopolizing a topic that your practical application is weak. I'm not trying to be insulting, but for once I would like to hear from someone that has had and actually addressed this issue successfully without you two sucking the energy out of a topic. TIA


You have, and multiple times. 

To me, I have to be honest - you don't sound like you're as far along as you think you are. I don't mean that as an insult, but you can't even recognize that you're describing a basic execution problem or that you might have an issue as simple to diagnose as target panic. Even I can recognize that in my routine at a pretty decent level of reliability.

So I think you're rejecting advice that's closer to the level of the issues you're having than you realize because of that. Not necessarily mine, but you regularly argue with ron, Shawn's and 90K's advice, which in my view is a mistake.

I think you could do with some improved listening skills too; You're the one asking the questions after all. And that's probably why you're having so much trouble with this. 

JMHO,
LS


----------



## Lazarus

EPLC said:


> Since neither one of you have yet mastered a good hold, perhaps it might help if you turned off expert mode for a day of so and try to listen instead. Perhaps you may actually learn something instead of monopolizing a topic that your practical application is weak. I'm not trying to be insulting, but for once I would like to hear from someone that has had and actually addressed this issue successfully without you two sucking the energy out of a topic. TIA


No lie. 

I chimed in the other day briefly and would have gladly explained some of the steps I achieved to get to a point of almost zero movement. 

But, for all practical purposes I got called a liar twice in the next few minutes so I'll be danged if I'm gonna share anything. 

carry on


----------



## montigre

Lazarus said:


> I chimed in the other day briefly and would have gladly explained some of the steps I achieved to get to a point of almost zero movement.


I would like to hear it either openly or by the ever-growing-in-popularity-here PM route.... I'm looking to nail down the hold part of my shoulder rehab and would not mind hearing from others who have accomplished steadier holds without the incumberance of a prior injury.


----------



## stromdidilly

montigre said:


> I would like to hear it either openly or by the ever-growing-in-popularity-here PM route.... I'm looking to nail down the hold part of my shoulder rehab and would not mind hearing from others who have accomplished steadier holds without the incumberance of a prior injury.



+1 for the openly option...


----------



## Lazarus

unclejane said:


> Well I think that's ron's point and I agree with it - you shouldn't feel like you can't counter a response in the way you choose simply because you fear censorship of your post. But clearly you do, which I think is the downfall of the deletions and editing of the content on this forum, and not (necessarily) the content of what you post itself.
> Sensitivity to criticism is one thing (that's your fault, not AT's), but fear of censorship is another matter entirely (not your fault, but AT's).
> 
> Ok, I promised to cease and desist, so back to my ceasing and desisting
> 
> LS


I fear nothing shadow. And your post is exactly 180 degrees off base. 

But I won't put up with being called a liar. Or tolerate someone telling me I'm wrong (someone who's doing it) by someone sitting on the bench. OR someone telling me what I KNOW that I'm doing is impossible, (again, from the sidelines.) 

carry on


----------



## cbrunson

It's not fear of censorship. It's lack of desire to continually argue at the level the arguments go to every time.


----------



## Lazarus

stromdidilly said:


> +1 for the openly option...


I'll be glad to post up anything I know as soon as this place (the forum, not this topic) gets cleaned up. 

I know there are others wishing/waiting for that day too.


----------



## TAIL_CHASER

I don't know any of you. And not just putting my opinion this thread. It seems like a lot of threads that I go to read " read is mostly what I do on hear, not into argument " I just seems like a lot of threads turn into the Jerry Springer Show. But just IMO. Its hard to find a good thread to read, kinda takes the fun out of the sport. Does that make many bad sports? Or is it I'm looking at it wrong. Again IMO.


----------



## Lazarus

TAIL_CHASER said:


> I don't know any of you. And not just putting my opinion this thread. It seems like a lot of threads that I go to read " read is mostly what I do on hear, not into argument " I just seems like a lot of threads turn into the Jerry Springer Show. But just IMO. Its hard to find a good thread to read, kinda takes the fun out of the sport. Does that make many bad sports? Or is it I'm looking at it wrong. Again IMO.


Nope. You're spot on. 

Sucks that it has to be that way.


----------



## cbrunson

TAIL_CHASER said:


> I don't know any of you. And not just putting my opinion this thread. It seems like a lot of threads that I go to read " read is mostly what I do on hear, not into argument " I just seems like a lot of threads turn into the Jerry Springer Show. But just IMO. Its hard to find a good thread to read, kinda takes the fun out of the sport. Does that make many bad sports? Or is it I'm looking at it wrong. Again IMO.


A lot of differences in opinions, which is okay. That's not a bad thing. It brings out ideas, or practices that some may not have known about, or tried seriously themselves. When the 'my way is right and his is wrong" arguments come out, is when it goes to hell.


----------



## EPLC

unclejane said:


> You have, and multiple times.
> 
> To me, I have to be honest - you don't sound like you're as far along as you think you are. I don't mean that as an insult, but you can't even recognize that you're describing a basic execution problem or that you might have an issue as simple to diagnose as target panic. Even I can recognize that in my routine at a pretty decent level of reliability.
> 
> So I think you're rejecting advice that's closer to the level of the issues you're having than you realize because of that. Not necessarily mine, but you regularly argue with ron, Shawn's and 90K's advice, which in my view is a mistake.
> 
> I think you could do with some improved listening skills too; You're the one asking the questions after all. And that's probably why you're having so much trouble with this.
> 
> JMHO,
> LS


My only question for you is: How can you possibly distinguish what is right and what is wrong for "you" from your current skill level due to the many contradictions that are placed on the table, let alone know what is good for me or anyone else for that matter? 

Also, I have made my shooting level, skills and accomplishments quite public as I have no need to hide from reality like some. And yes, I don't accept everything that is written, sometimes by folks that shoot better than I do, but I also have a very good understanding of this subject and can make my own decisions based on the material that is presented. I been around the block with this stuff enough times to know what has worked and what hasn't, and who knows what they are talking about and who doesn't. This is the only response you will get from me.


----------



## N7709K

EPLC said:


> I
> Let's look at this from a different perspective. I've been shooting a hinge for most of my shooting life. Yes, I have a new release but that doesn't really change the basics of my shot. I have no issues with execution on the bale. There comes a point where you need to develop the front end to work with the shot. Assuming that we are at this point, what path would be taken to meld the front end into the process?


To get ANYTHING out of the front half you need to trust the back half... you don't trust the back half, so the effort needs to be put into mastery of the back half. Getting the front half to work is easy once you can devote your attention to it; if you are splitting your efforts trying to keep a dot still in the middle and work the release you are only going to stagnate. 

hypothetically speaking- if its time to get the two halves to work together you start by shooting at a color contrasted medium and just watch what your dot does as you run the shot. After you get an idea of what your dot does then work a target into the mix and tune bars; get the platform set to that you are required to stay positive in the shot to keep the dot still in the middle. Now that a baseline has been established shoot games and see how groups jive with the movement of your dot; discount where weak shots hit at this point. make the needed adjustments to DL, HW, bars to get float to where you find you like and then start shooting close games. There should be only one hole slightly larger than the arrows you are shooting in the middle of the spot- its not a game of shooting 30x's up close its a game of putting every subsequent arrow into the same hole; buy a case of faces and shoot through the case. At that point work the shot back to distance gradually over another case of faces. When back to 20yds get some inner face and reinforce aiming at the middle of the yellow and not the x. 

Getting a dot to sit still is easy if you can isolate one half from another for tuning purposes... if you can't, you will fight getting things still because the halves don't have consistency.


----------



## SonnyThomas

TAIL_CHASER said:


> I don't know any of you. And not just putting my opinion this thread. It seems like a lot of threads that I go to read " read is mostly what I do on hear, not into argument " I just seems like a lot of threads turn into the Jerry Springer Show. But just IMO. Its hard to find a good thread to read, kinda takes the fun out of the sport. Does that make many bad sports? Or is it I'm looking at it wrong. Again IMO.


Agreeable me is.....


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> yes, I don't accept everything that is written, sometimes by folks that shoot better than I do, but I also have a very good understanding of this subject and can make my own decisions based on the material that is presented. I been around the block with this stuff enough times to know what has worked and what hasn't, and who knows what they are talking about and who doesn't. This is the only response you will get from me.


E, that's just it. You start a subject and it's like you're wanting something, but 99.99% of the time is seems you're going to do it your way no matter who replies. Either that or you start a subject to just be starting a subject. So why ask? Who is here that is all great and knowing?

As for the timing thing, yes, I believe in timing. You get in time with yourself, your float, your breathing. When and where do you start the execution of the shot, at the bottom, top or sides of your float? Only you can determine what gives the best results for you.


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> My only question for you is: How can you possibly distinguish what is right and what is wrong for "you" from your current skill level due to the many contradictions that are placed on the table, let alone know what is good for me or anyone else for that matter?


Because I've already worked with both of the issues you're describing in my own shooting - that's why I recognize them. Note also that I never wrote you any prescription for fixing them; only noted that you can't seem to see them in your own descriptions (and that that may be why you're suffering so much). 



> Also, I have made my shooting level, skills and accomplishments quite public as I have no need to hide from reality like some. And yes, I don't accept everything that is written, sometimes by folks that shoot better than I do, but I also have a very good understanding of this subject and can make my own decisions based on the material that is presented. I been around the block with this stuff enough times to know what has worked and what hasn't, and who knows what they are talking about and who doesn't. This is the only response you will get from me.


I have no interest in, and am not impressed by, your credentials or what you may think mine are or what you think about them. Those are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. However, the problems that you're describing still seem to be central and I've given you my input on them. You're free to take or leave it as you see fit.

LS


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> E, that's just it. You start a subject and it's like you're wanting something, but 99.99% of the time is seems you're going to do it your way no matter who replies. Either that or you start a subject to just be starting a subject. So why ask? Who is here that is all great and knowing?
> 
> As for the timing thing, yes, I believe in timing. You get in time with yourself, your float, your breathing. When and where do you start the execution of the shot, at the bottom, top or sides of your float? Only you can determine what gives the best results for you.


On average the topics that I have started get about 2700 hits. There must be some interest. No, I do not take everyone's advise but I do listen to everyone (with a couple of exceptions) and I take what I feel is helpful. To do anything but would be very frustrating due to the many contradictions that are put out there. For those that believe there is a certain common wisdom that should be followed, I don't put much credence in what they have to offer as this so called common wisdom will only take you so far. If your aspirations are to be a 50X shooter, that is fine, go with the common wisdom. If you want more than that then you need to think more out of the box. What you continually fail to see is that I've been doing this for a long time, BEEN THERE, DONE THAT. I know what has and hasn't worked for me through countless "common wisdom" drills, efforts, arrows, short range training, etc. To say that something that is considered "common wisdom" doesn't work for you is like the kiss of death around here with some of the more narrow minded contributors.


----------



## montigre

Sometimes it is not the process that is flawed, but how the process is being worked. 

Many archery theories have been around for longer than some of us have been alive and aside from occasional tweaks due to the modernization of equipment used, remain essentially valid over a period of decades (or longer). I'm not saying that some of these tested methods will not work for some individuals, to do so would be very shallow minded and unrealistic; however, I do have to question whether or not a shooter is causing some of their own problems when the majority of the long-standing methods are found to be useless or severely flawed.


----------



## cbrunson

I believe he's looking for something more, not something less.


----------



## EPLC

montigre said:


> Sometimes it is not the process that is flawed, but how the process is being worked.
> 
> Many archery theories have been around for longer than some of us have been alive and aside from occasional tweaks due to the modernization of equipment used, remain essentially valid over a period of decades (or longer). I'm not saying that some of these tested methods will not work for some individuals, to do so would be very shallow minded and unrealistic; however, I do have to question whether or not a shooter is causing some of their own problems when the majority of the long-standing methods are found to be useless or severely flawed.


I think if you were talking about non compound bows your statement would be more appropriate as the technology and methods have been developed over thousands of years. The compound bow and the mechanical release have really only been around for 50 years or so. The release has only gained popularity over the past 40 or so years. To assume anything has been carved in stone with regard to this fairly new technology is a stretch. For years we heard how back tension was the best method yet many of the best shooters along the way contradicted this method, and still do. When these "common wisdom" methods fail it's ALWAYS the fault of the archer, never the process.


----------



## va MTN MAN

EPLC I mean no disrespect but if you really want to find what works for you to get you to the level you want to reach, by now you know all the methods that have been put forth here on At. I would suggest that you take the hours and hours that you spend on here debating and put them to shooting and finding what works for you. I can pretty much guaranty you the shooters at the top of the game didn't get there by reading something on a archery forum and suddenly have all the answers. That being said thank you for some of the discussions you have started as they have brought forth info and inspired thought.


----------



## ron w

I believe Adam and Eve, had the potential to develop "back tension", had "sight", the ability to ingrain a muscular action into their sub conscious, and the ability to use "concentric perspective".
whether compound or recurve, "back tension", is "back tension", it's descriptive term that refers to the activity that the rhomboids play in shooting a bow, it existed as far back as bows existed, whether the shooters of the first bows realized the theory existed, or not. 
you cannot draw a bow, with some input of "back tension".
the theoretical aspect of using finger relaxation was well discussed in a previous thread, that brought forth an article about shooting a hinge in the mid seventies, some 40 years ago.
the only severe flaw or uselessness, of any method, is determined by the person using the method. if he/she cannot do the specific method, it doesn't validate an opinion that "the theory" is useless, severely flawed, or ineffective.


----------



## EPLC

va MT MAN, no disrespect taken... Just for the record, I'm not spending my days here on AT, unlike some, I actually shoot... My wife claims it's 4-5 hours a day but I think it's closer to 3. I will admit she is right on some days. 

ron w, I agree that back tension has been a necessary ingredient since the bow was invented... Had you been paying attention you would have seen several posts where I have said this. 

Where we part ways is in the application. I'm on the side of the mid 70's post that you mentioned assuming the one by Bob Jacobsen was your point of reference.


----------



## stoz

Imo Jacobs advice is spot on. If you want to get to another level take the time . Could be months and do not shoot at 20 yards go up close and work back slowly and I mean slowly. Most people want a quick fix. There isn't one. I do what he says every year in our off season and it works well.


----------



## ron w

yes, his article. 
as far as the application, everyone has to apply what works in their own way, all anyone can do is suggest methodologies that have either past or present, worked for them, or are universally known to work with the majority of people. where have I not done that ?.
it seems that when someone mentions a particular method , it gets dismissed as, "obsolete", or "archaic", and then in the same breath, someone comes along and promotes an application that is from 40 years ago (or there about), while stating that theories have changed considerably in recent years. the reality, is that they haven't changed on little bit and because one person or group, prefers to do something else, doesn't negate the validity of any other method that exists. 
the plain and simple truth, is that despite the obvious advances in equipment, compared to that of 40 years ago, the methods and theories that apply to using the equipment, has not changed one bit.
case in point, everything I know about the shot process today, I learned and knew 40 years ago, when I was taught to shoot correctly. much of it is exactly the same as what was being set forth by people like Griv and the other top pros that frequented this site in the late 90's and early 2000's. this and the reality that 40 years is but a snap of the fingers in relative terms, concerning the use of a bow and arrow.
the almost unanimous refusal to acknowledge this relationship and reality, is what confuses me the most, when people start saying that what I post is "tired" and/or "narrow minded". as I see it, the dismissal isn't based on value, just on source. it's like not believing a history teacher, because he wasn't around, when what he speaks about happened. the difference, is that I was around , same as many other people on here, that dismiss these posts, so the idea that what is being spoken, but not acknowledged, tends to make me think the dismissal is oriented around who is speaking, rather than the value of what they are setting forth.
and then the circle revolves as the next post in the thread, is about some method that has been exclusively brought to attention in a magazine, from 40 years ago. and the next post states that things have changed a lot since then.


----------



## ron w

Had you been paying attention you would have seen several posts where I have said this. 
[/QUOTE]
there's absolutely no reason to get sarcastic and condescending, as in the above,.....comments like this are what cause all the turbulence that exists in these threads. if I were to post a comment on that same level, 
you insist that "my ways' are tired and obsolete, yet you are using a method that is fully documented to be as old as the methods I talk about.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> On average the topics that I have started get about 2700 hits. .


Mostly repetitious and arguments, big deal. Just like this thread, 193 posts and mostly all useless. You're right where you started, you doing what you're gone do.......


----------



## montigre

EPLC said:


> I think if you were talking about non compound bows your statement would be more appropriate as the technology and methods have been developed over thousands of years. The compound bow and the mechanical release have really only been around for 50 years or so. The release has only gained popularity over the past 40 or so years. To assume anything has been carved in stone with regard to this fairly new technology is a stretch. For years we heard how back tension was the best method yet many of the best shooters along the way contradicted this method, and still do. When these "common wisdom" methods fail it's ALWAYS the fault of the archer, never the process.


Actually, the basic methods of firing a bow are fairly consistent between a compound and recurve/longbow with the differences being primarily based upon the fact that one platform allows for letoff while the other does not. Those differences have led to the development of a core set of fundamentals over the years to allow shooters to gain the most from their chosen platform. A competitive archer then takes these core fundamentals and through dedicated practice over thousands of arrows, molds them into something their body type, their psyche, their manner of executing can begin to internalize and make their own. The elite shooters are able to hone this further to the point where they can strip away the fundamentals and just "be" the target, the bow, the arrow, the shooter. 

When I watch the sport's top shooters in competition or when they are in a serious practice session, I do not necessarily focus on every mechanical nuance of their shot process, but what I do always see in them is an extreme level of confidence that allows them to fully own that moment when their arrow is readied to hit the target. The arrow has no choice but the land squarely in the center and the shooter has no doubt that it will do otherwise. It is a very powerful experience. This, I believe, is what is achieved when the core fundamentals have become fully internalized and this cannot be learned from any outside source.


----------



## ron w

sometimes people look at posts from specific people for the entertaining element of ,"what's the latest dilemma this or that guy has, now". that will obviously drive the hit numbers up. there are many people who monitor this forum with no desire to add input,.....they speculate, just for the entertainment. I overhear this general comment, in the local archery population around me, almost daily from all levels of archers.
i'd wager that a lot of the reason this site has no real professional contingency any more, is largely due to this lack of willingness to hear peoples' advice by certain members. no-one appreciates their input being dismissed for no other reason that who they are.
it seems, obvious to me, that there are certain people that have privilege above others,.....possibly, because of paid sponsorship. it might be that paid sponsorship, is the only way they can maintain their presence, on a largely free membership forum. 
in the last few post, there seems to be a pattern developing, that is directed at certain people . this pattern seems to have a universal attitude or message. just like a unanimous vote,.... it projects the opinion of the majority.
the problem with that, ... is that people who might be potential members, read these posts and get a sour taste in their mouth, about giving advice and contributing to threads , when it just falls on deaf, arguementive, condescending and dismissive ears.
this is exactly what happened back when all the "real pros", either pulled out, or were ousted from the forum, several years ago. what we have left, is hardly the quality source of intelligent advice, that once was this site's reputation.


----------



## unclejane

montigre said:


> Actually, the basic methods of firing a bow are fairly consistent between a compound and recurve/longbow with the differences being primarily based upon the fact that one platform allows for letoff while the other does not. Those differences have led to the development of a core set of fundamentals over the years to allow shooters to gain the most from their chosen platform.


I can actually contribute a small amount to this, having shot both bow types personally. This is true. The common elements for both are, in my view:
- the use of back tension throughout the shot. There's more common ground here than not, except that the compound can be more easily shot without a total reliance on the back muscles (BT is basically mandatory on the recurve due to the colossal holding weight in comparison). But it's a good Best Practice on both bow types all the same.
- the issues of setting up the sight picture and initiating the "firing engine" at that point are essentially the same (harkens back to the original topic), with virtually the same types of problems when the execution isn't working right. With a recurve, the only large difference is that the pull through the shot has to be a non-stop fluid motion. With the compound, this isn't nearly as important. But with both, getting the right sight picture --> start the final "firing engine" are basically the same thing, in my experience.
- use of the surprise shot. The main difference being the clicker making the decision vs the release aid making the decision. But the oly recurve follows essentially the same principle of a surprise shot - the skill of relaxing the fingers when the clicker goes off is something that needs to be practiced, but that's about the only difference.
There may be others, but those are some of the major ones off the top of my head.

So to me, this reinforces the notion of a "common wisdom" and the tendency of diverging from it producing good results more rarely than converging on it. The fact that "common wisdom" actually crosses the boundary of bow types, in my view, demonstrates how wise it most likely is. That's not to say that diverging from it should never be considered, but it does indicate it should be given an exhaustive trial before it's abandoned in favor of something else.

I have to say in my return to compound this time around, the "common wisdom" has worked for my particular problems more often than not. Now, I do also admit to having departed the beaten path on a few things - going fulltime on the tension-style release being one of those items. But the rest, I'm finding the common best practices to work more often than they fail.

LS


----------



## ron w

I've known this all my shooting life. "core set of fundamentals"....hhhhmmmm, watch out, there, you might be saying something that is contradictory to the opinions of few that really matter !.


----------



## EPLC

montigre said:


> Actually, the basic methods of firing a bow are fairly consistent between a compound and recurve/longbow with the differences being primarily based upon the fact that one platform allows for letoff while the other does not. Those differences have led to the development of a core set of fundamentals over the years to allow shooters to gain the most from their chosen platform. A competitive archer then takes these core fundamentals and through dedicated practice over thousands of arrows, molds them into something their body type, their psyche, their manner of executing can begin to internalize and make their own. The elite shooters are able to hone this further to the point where they can strip away the fundamentals and just "be" the target, the bow, the arrow, the shooter.
> 
> When I watch the sport's top shooters in competition or when they are in a serious practice session, I do not necessarily focus on every mechanical nuance of their shot process, but what I do always see in them is an extreme level of confidence that allows them to fully own that moment when their arrow is readied to hit the target. The arrow has no choice but the land squarely in the center and the shooter has no doubt that it will do otherwise. It is a very powerful experience. This, I believe, is what is achieved when the core fundamentals have become fully internalized and this cannot be learned from any outside source.


I guess it just depends what your definition of "core set of fundamentals" is and at what level the core is set? At some basic level we are in 100% agreement. If there actually is a "core set", it would not include "every mechanical nuance of their shot process". I believe things such as BT as a firing engine (and all firing engines for that matter) fall into the category of "mechanical nuance" and should be not part of any core fundamental set. "Core Fundamental" for me means "Universally Applied" yet there are those that loosely use terms such as these at a level of detail that is just another way of saying "my mechanical nuance method is the best way... or the only way". Training methodology can also fall into a broad spectrum that allows for a wide range of opinion... and choice. Same rules apply, although should one have the luxury of finding a really good coach, following that coaches core set would be the best approach. On the internet we have a lot of "coaches", each with their own core set of ideas and opinions. It does force you to make decisions though. Some will agree with those decisions, some won't... I guess it depends on their definition of "Core Fundamentals" on who agrees and who is offended...


----------



## EPLC

Now, back on topic. I did some work on my stabilizer setup last evening that included a 20 degree offset on my front bar and some addition and rearranging of my weights (thanks Laz)... This resulted in an improved hold and a smoother execution. As mentioned the steadier the bow becomes the easier it is to execute. I've made the decision to continue working on my front end as I build a firing engine that is complimentary to it and with the least disturbance. My path forward will be a continuance of my one arrow drill to accomplish these goals. For those that do not support this type of direction, I respect that, but at the same time I have to make decisions both on the material I can gather here and my past experience working the various methods of training. I have found the one arrow drill one of the most helpful methods I've tried and therefore I will continue along that path. I have also found that BT is a great method to hold the bow steady but not so much as a firing engine. My firing engine requires a certain amount of hand manipulation combined with the holding power of back tension to be effective. As someone said... your results may vary.


----------



## ron w

"core set of fundamentals"....
every sport has a "core set of fundamentals'....the basic movements and universally accepted knowledge about that activity, that teaches those basic movements.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> "core set of fundamentals"....
> every sport has a "core set of fundamentals'....the basic movements and universally accepted knowledge about that activity, that teaches those basic movements.


The devil is in the detail. At some level I totally agree. It's when things that are not truly "universal" in application get tagged as such we disagree. For example; back tension could be reasonably stated that it is used universally in archery, but when BT as a firing engine is claimed to be a core fundamental we are not in agreement. While there are some coaches that have added this to "their" core set, the practice is certainly not one that is universally accepted. There is an entirely different point of view on this which has been well documented by many of the world's best archers that supports back tension as the method to hold, not as the method to execute. Since the practice is not universally accepted, things such as this would only be a part of a core set strictly based on opinion. To some executing with back tension as the firing engine "is" a core fundamental, to others it is not. Like I said many times, archery isn't an exact science. Believe what you want to believe, just don't portray what you believe as universally accepted by everyone.


----------



## Mahly

By definition, if there is disagreement, something is not universally accepted.
There are many styles of shooting archery, and there are people better than us shooting several different styles.
Bruce Lee once said "it's not what (style) you do, it's how well you do it." Or something very close to that.
He also said something to the effect of " before I learned martial arts, a punch was just a punch, a kick was just a kick. When I started learning martial arts, a punch was much more than just a punch, a kick was much more than just a kick. Now that I have mastered martial arts, a punch is just a punch, and a kick is just a kick"
These are how he saw fundamentals. Each style taught them them a little differently, but they still were building blocks that in the end, served the same purpose.

Timing the shot is different things to different people. A large window, a cue to fire a release, or something in between.
Learning ONE style and mastering it would seem to be key.
The hard part is finding someone who teaches the style your interested in. X10 when your trying to develop your own style.
Learning a little from every style, and keeping what works for you, and forgetting the rest is what Bruce Lee's embraced. Seemed to work out for him.
Finding parts of different styles and keeping what works for you will be key to making your own style work for you. Might not work for everyone, but if it works for you, that's all that really matters. 
So find what DOES work for you and keep it, find what doesn't, and chuck it.
For those that truly wish to help, tell us what worked for you, and what didn't.
Don't tell us what or who you disagree with. All that does is thin the pool of ideas.
Just because it doesn't work for you, doesn't mean it can't help someone else.
Would you take things off of a pot luck table because you didn't like them, or just add your pot to the table and let others decide what to partake?


----------



## EPLC

Excellent post Mahly!


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> "core set of fundamentals"....
> every sport has a "core set of fundamentals'....the basic movements and universally accepted knowledge about that activity, that teaches those basic movements.


Since the possibility exists that in the not so distant future someone may again use this "core set" to support their argument I'm curious to know the point of reference. So... where does this core set of archery fundamentals exist? Is it a publication, a list of some sort or perhaps contained within the deep sea scrolls?


----------



## ron w

deep sea scrolls...... the only way you get to know them is if Neptune himself, bestows them upon you. 

too bad, huh ?.

do you seriously think you're contributing to this thread with posts like that ?.


----------



## montigre

EPLC said:


> Since the possibility exists that in the not so distant future someone may again use this "core set" to support their argument I'm curious to know the point of reference. So... where does this core set of archery fundamentals exist? Is it a publication, a list of some sort or perhaps contained within the deep sea scrolls?


Now you're just being obtuse and argumentative. 

Have you ever taught another how to shoot a bow? If so, what initial methods did you use to convey to the new student how he/she should go about nocking an arrow, setting up to the target, preloading their bow arm to lower their shoulder, raising the bow to target, drawing, anchoring, basic t-form, basic aiming, basic execution of the shot, and follow through. Those are the core elements that are taught almost universally. 

When the student becomes more advanced, then you teach methods to assist them to personalize the core elements based on their body type, their personality type, the type of shooting they are interested in pursuing, and the amount of time they are willing to devote to their own improvement. This is when the core fundamentals are personalized to the shooter. 

When they reach the intermediate level, they usually begin adding to or modifying their equipment in order to optimize their shooting, they pick and choose other facets such as method of execution they wish to incorporate, or active aiming versus subconscious aiming, all while beginning to internalize the methods they have chosen to retain. They have also, around this time, started actively dabbling in the mental aspects of the game. 

When reaching the advanced levels, most of the problems the student faces are now mental and this is where hundreds of hours of practice, detailed and honest self-evaluation, and "letting go" of the learned methods to fully run their process in the subconscious takes place. This is where a specialized coach can assist them greatly.

No Dead Sea scrolls...just proven methods that get proven results.


----------



## ron w

i think teaching someone else how to shoot, is the problem here. there are those who think they are qualified coaches, but have no credential. 
in their teachings, they use what they think is the right way, or their way and then when someone comes along and says something that makes more sense and they get called out about it by their "students",..... they get their feathers ruffled and take it out on the person that made a more sensible contribution to the thread. they have to "save -face", somehow.


----------



## EPLC

Here's my point as obviously you have missed it. To use some basic fundamentals to teach a new archer, or get one headed in what one perceives is correct is one thing. But to use this term in support of argument here in what is supposed to be an intermediate to advanced forum is another thing. When used in that context it is only fair to question the source.


----------



## ron w

as in some people's world as usual, everyone's knowledge is misguided, if it doesn't comply with theirs. I guess all the sports activities that exist are just based on some un known, and unestablished ideas of how things should be taught. the only real knowledge can come from the pros that are in the sport.
hhhhmmmm, wait a minute, how the heck did they learn and get to be a pro ?. blind luck, I guess.


----------



## EPLC

So, I can assume the core set of archery fundamental learning that you refer to in many of your arguments does not actually exist? If so, why is it so upsetting to those that support this non existent set of "rules" when someone strays from the rigid, but non existent path?


----------



## montigre

ron w said:


> i think teaching someone else how to shoot, is the problem here. there are those who think they are qualified coaches, but have no credential.
> in their teachings, they use what they think is the right way, or their way and then when someone comes along and says something that makes more sense and they get called out about it by their "students",..... they get their feathers ruffled and take it out on the person that made a more sensible contribution to the thread. they have to "save -face", somehow.


You may be right here. It is flaw in the instructor's approach if they are unable to agree that there exists other ways of reaching a common goal. I don't believe any successful instructor or coach worth their salt sticks to only one method and demands that all of their students, regardless of their physical/mental abilities, be molded into that type of cookie cutter form. 

However, I feel it is just as much of an error for a shooter to abjectly dismiss the majority of proven methods simply because a few of them did not work out for them. Find the method that works and build upon it, it is that simple. But if it is not working for you, there is no need to degrade anyone using another method simply because it does not jive with your own sense of reality. Perhaps it is not working because the shooter's approach to the problem is not correct. 

No, it is not always the shooter that is flawed, but by the same token it is not always the method that is flawed...


----------



## ron w

EPLC,.....you are amazing....that's for sure !.


----------



## montigre

EPLC said:


> So, I can assume the core set of archery fundamental learning that you refer to in many of your arguments does not actually exist? If so, why is it so upsetting to those that support this non existent set of "rules" when someone strays from the rigid, but non existent path?


Is it even possible for you to make a comment that is not condescending or sarcastic??


----------



## ron w

certain sanctions of sports activities, have coaching requirements that must be met in order to gain credential as a coach in that sport. most of these requirements are founded by an established standard that is set by the sanctioning body, to ensure that people who want to coach, are teaching fundamentals that are applicable to the sport's sanction, safety and sound reason. it is exactly what World Archery is doing, with their coaching program. 
there are others, the Olympic Committee, USTA, the NRA are a few that i'm familiar with, as being actively involved in sports that are geared towards "national" levels of competition, personally. no doubt, there are more.
the point is, that there has to be some sort of basic ingredient of the sport, that is universally taught, so that the fundamental elements of the sport are preserved. with out it, any yahoo, that thinks he knows what he is talking about could call himself a "coach"......and sponge money off of people for no good or productive reason. of course, there are others who do it, for their own narcissistic ego, too. 
when people do this, they run the risk of being called out for "less than certified" coaching methods, theories and activity, when their students discover information that might be somewhat contrary to what they are being taught as the way it's done today.. 
the only recourse a "coach", or "instructor' of that self-assigned capacity can do is argumentively challenge the scource of contrary information, to save his or her source of morally illegitimate income and self absorbed fame.


----------



## Mahly

Alright, let's get back on topic.
If we want to get into the debate of what fundamentals to teach new archers, start a new topic in the coaches corner.


----------



## ron w

_Wanted to post something here, but it was off topic and not helpful to anyone so it got edited._


----------



## unclejane

I say let Gail post some more first - I cut-n-paste-n-save as much of her posts as I can along with rons, shawns and 90K - then yeah probably time to shut 'er down. I think we went past 360 degs quite a while back....

LS


----------



## EPLC

montigre said:


> Is it even possible for you to make a comment that is not condescending or sarcastic??


My question was an honest inquiry about a statement that used constantly around here to support conflicting views or positions. No more, no less. And btw, your posts always have a certain tone so perhaps you should look within. It would seem that you and others think opposition, regardless of how it is presented is somehow insulting or condicending. It is not.


----------



## N7709K

Do you agree that there should be a mastered release process? an aiming process? and a meshing of the two? within that set you have more or less the core fundamentals- how you get there depends on whom you have guiding you and how receptive you are to the information you receive. Whether or not you choose to believe it, there is a core set of fundamentals... there are aspects that all teachings recognize as incorrect and ones that they all utilizes in some manor. 

Its pretty safe to say that all upper level shooters have faced gauging the information they receive against what they have tried, what they have heard, etc... depending upon where the information comes from its a bit easier to gauge the validity of it; for the most part not many agree on the fine points of how the actual process goes, but they agree on the broader aspects or see why one would push method "y" over method "x" and method "z". At a point who is putting the information forth speaks a little more loudly that the number of times it comes up...


----------



## ron w

I think it's safe to say that basically, if it weren't for "core sets of fundamentals", we as a society, no matter what the activity, would be carrying clubs and dragging women by the hair, yet.

excellent point about "upper level shooters", I agree completely and will add,.....it is exactly that comparison that established those "core sets of fundamentals", as such. we tend to retain the bits of information that works best for the largest group and compile them into a set of "universally accepted knowledge, or methods", that pertain, or apply to the different specific activities they fit into. 
ironically, when an individual or group, refuses to observe these "sets of universally accepted knowledge", that individual or group struggles to either obtain the accepted level of expected behavior, and/or goes for long periods of time, as an outcast to the society or group the sets of universally accepted knowledge applies to.
simply demonstrated....the fact that they exist, is proof that they have been applied.


----------



## EPLC

N7709K said:


> Do you agree that there should be a mastered release process? an aiming process? and a meshing of the two? within that set you have more or less the core fundamentals- how you get there depends on whom you have guiding you and how receptive you are to the information you receive. Whether or not you choose to believe it, there is a core set of fundamentals... there are aspects that all teachings recognize as incorrect and ones that they all utilizes in some manor.
> 
> Its pretty safe to say that all upper level shooters have faced gauging the information they receive against what they have tried, what they have heard, etc... depending upon where the information comes from its a bit easier to gauge the validity of it; for the most part not many agree on the fine points of how the actual process goes, but they agree on the broader aspects or see why one would push method "y" over method "x" and method "z". At a point who is putting the information forth speaks a little more loudly that the number of times it comes up...


I totally agree with this post. You will find nothing that I have posted that is contradictory to it. It is when those finer points that have differing points of view get argued as part of a core set, as some continually try to do, I take an opposition position. There are those that have lumped you into a group that I mostly take issue with. I can only assume this is due to a perception issue on their part as I find much of your stuff interesting and helpful. 

That said; thinking out of the box is taboo in the eyes of some.


----------



## pwyrick

"Timing the Shot", I'm not sure the topic has been addressed very well. We certainly have addressed other things, many of which have value for me. For in the reading, I am challenged to re-examine my own beliefs about form/technique. But with regard to timing, ELPC raised an issue that gets into fundamentals and their application. It is my belief that the point in our shot sequence when we start to aim (aiming being a fundamental) is critical for timing. I am from the school of thought that aiming should not begin until everything else in the shot is at the "ready-to-fire" point. Then aim. If the float settles satisfactorily, then engage whatever engine and let the arrow go when it wants to. If the float doesn't settle, let down and start over. From the beginning of aiming until release happens is inside a 4-6 second window for me. The timing issue for me is addressed at the point of go or no-go. Is the float acceptable? Yes-then go. No-then no-go. I decide to back out of the shot prior to final engagement. (For this discussion, I'm not trying to get into all the details of the back tension, etc. I'm specifically addressing timing.) For, I'm not a skilled enough athlete to be able to turn my firing engine off once engaged. And for me, in order to turn off once engaged, I have to reserve too much of my consciousness looking for indicators that I should get out of the shot. That gets way too difficult for my simple requirements. Part of the basis for my theory and application is that there are the masses and then there are "those others." I'm one of the masses. With study and practice, I can be very good. But, "those others" have something that allows them to rise to greatness. They are able to do things that I can't. Maybe they can turn their firing engine off a thousand of a second before the arrow is released. Maybe their senses are so advanced that they can feel things that are wrong that I can't feel. Man, are there days that I wish I could be like them. But I'm not. So, I need to apply the fundamentals in a way that is applicable to being a member of the masses. Timing? I need a way out before I get to my point of no return.


----------



## EPLC

J


pwyrick said:


> "Timing the Shot", I'm not sure the topic has been addressed very well. We certainly have addressed other things, many of which have value for me. For in the reading, I am challenged to re-examine my own beliefs about form/technique. But with regard to timing, ELPC raised an issue that gets into fundamentals and their application. It is my belief that the point in our shot sequence when we start to aim (aiming being a fundamental) is critical for timing. I am from the school of thought that aiming should not begin until everything else in the shot is at the "ready-to-fire" point. Then aim. If the float settles satisfactorily, then engage whatever engine and let the arrow go when it wants to. If the float doesn't settle, let down and start over. From the beginning of aiming until release happens is inside a 4-6 second window for me. The timing issue for me is addressed at the point of go or no-go. Is the float acceptable? Yes-then go. No-then no-go. I decide to back out of the shot prior to final engagement. (For this discussion, I'm not trying to get into all the details of the back tension, etc. I'm specifically addressing timing.) For, I'm not a skilled enough athlete to be able to turn my firing engine off once engaged. And for me, in order to turn off once engaged, I have to reserve too much of my consciousness looking for indicators that I should get out of the shot. That gets way too difficult for my simple requirements. Part of the basis for my theory and application is that there are the masses and then there are "those others." I'm one of the masses. With study and practice, I can be very good. But, "those others" have something that allows them to rise to greatness. They are able to do things that I can't. Maybe they can turn their firing engine off a thousand of a second before the arrow is released. Maybe their senses are so advanced that they can feel things that are wrong that I can't feel. Man, are there days that I wish I could be like them. But I'm not. So, I need to apply the fundamentals in a way that is applicable to being a member of the masses. Timing? I need a way out before I get to my point of no return.


Another great post! I really like the idea of setting up properly before commitment. I know I have difficulty in this area of my shot.


----------



## Mahly

I think that is an important part of shooting. I probably spend a little TOO much time doing this. Once I start my engine, it's a relatively small window that the shot fires. But setting up to that point, I wish I could do it a little faster. For me, I think it's just a matter of getting in enough practice. 
I'd like to hear what other shooters feel about the amount of time it takes them to set up their shot...how much effort goes into checking "all systems go" before starting their engine.

EPLC, would you consider that to be on topic? Or are we looking only at timing your engine when the pin is good/bad/good?


----------



## ron w

as I mentioned earlier, it really des no good to know or state what amount of time it takes to arrive at your shot. what matters is that all the elements that produce the good shot, arrive and exist long enough, at the same time, to result in that good shot.
training your internal process to administer the commands that guide this to happen, is what "shot timing" is all about. 
of course, given enough samples, an "average amount of time" will eventually appear, but as for the application of this time to some comparative benchmark, it makes no substantial influence. either sooner or later in time, does not matter what so ever, in respect to the all important aspect of the elements being in place at the same time. 
the known average is, I think, around 5-8 seconds. it's impact on shot timing is simply a statistic, gathered by those who need to have statistics. 
this average reveals a three second window, that simply implies that everyone is slightly different in their development of good shots and really not much else, because your shot window time, is your natural development that produces the elements to be in the right place at the right time....and...at the same time, which is what the shot window timing drill is intended to do.


----------



## unclejane

Mahly said:


> I'd like to hear what other shooters feel about the amount of time it takes them to set up their shot...how much effort goes into checking "all systems go" before starting their engine.


Speaking for myself, since I've relearned an entirely new shot and only since last summer, the setup is still obviously the part with the most still-cognitive bits to it. But in general and this is just for me, if the time span between when I come to full draw and when I release the safety is longer than about 4 seconds, I consider that having goofed around a little more than is normal. Monkeying around looking for my target in the scope, for example.... yeah something like that... that indicates I didn't setup the shot as well as I probably should have to say the least, and departed my routine somehow. Or being picky about the float before releasing the safety; that can add on to that 4 or so seconds needlessly since for me all I have to do is plop it on the gold and that's good enough to initiate the final sequence.

I'm generally doing ok once my firing engine starts, and drawing the bow is not bad now either. The setup, tho, is where the bulk of my practice is starting to drift these days. 

One o' these days I'm going to actually get a good routine and score a target LOL...

LS


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> as I mentioned earlier, it really des no good to know or state what amount of time it takes to arrive at your shot. what matters is that all the elements that produce the good shot, arrive and exist long enough, at the same time, to result in that good shot.


Agree 100%

It may take me 4-7 seconds, or it may take ten. I only get out of it when I feel it breaking down. Worrying about time during the shot process only adds an element that doesn't need to be there.


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> I think that is an important part of shooting. I probably spend a little TOO much time doing this. Once I start my engine, it's a relatively small window that the shot fires. But setting up to that point, I wish I could do it a little faster. For me, I think it's just a matter of getting in enough practice.
> I'd like to hear what other shooters feel about the amount of time it takes them to set up their shot...how much effort goes into checking "all systems go" before starting their engine.
> 
> EPLC, would you consider that to be on topic? Or are we looking only at timing your engine when the pin is good/bad/good?


Definitely. If the shot isn't set up properly, everything else after that seems to break down rather quickly. I actually worked on this today and found my better shots were the ones that were set up correctly.


----------



## ron w

there is however, some substance in the arrival being close to the same time for each individual shot. the closer that arrival from shot to shot, the more internally organized the administration of the shot process is. the more organized that is, the better those elements know what to do, when they should do it and the clearer the messages they run on, are.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> there is however, some substance in the arrival being close to the same time for each individual shot. the closer that arrival from shot to shot, the more internally organized the administration of the shot process is. the more organized that is, the better those elements know what to do, when they should do it and the clearer the messages they run on, are.


You are relentless, I'll give you that... but, I assure you that horse is dead. I'm not letting down unless the shot is breaking down or has not set up properly. With me it isn't a matter of how much time has taken place, it either sets up or it doesn't. If it doesn't I let down. If it does I don't.



ron w said:


> I think it's safe to say that basically, if it weren't for "core sets of fundamentals", we as a society, no matter what the activity, would be carrying clubs and dragging women by the hair, yet.
> 
> excellent point about "upper level shooters", I agree completely and will add,.....it is exactly that comparison that established those "core sets of fundamentals", as such. we tend to retain the bits of information that works best for the largest group and compile them into a set of "universally accepted knowledge, or methods", that pertain, or apply to the different specific activities they fit into.
> ironically, when an individual or group, refuses to observe these "sets of universally accepted knowledge", that individual or group struggles to either obtain the accepted level of expected behavior, and/or goes for long periods of time, as an outcast to the society or group the sets of universally accepted knowledge applies to.
> simply demonstrated....the fact that they exist, is proof that they have been applied.


Could you list your conception of those core fundamentals so we have some context to the rest of your comment?


----------



## Mahly

Better yet, start a new topic on the subject.
We seem to go off on tangents quite a bit here.


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> Better yet, start a new topic on the subject.
> We seem to go off on tangents quite a bit here.


Good idea.


----------



## ron w

EPLC said:


> You are relentless, I'll give you that... but, I assure you that horse is dead. I'm not letting down unless the shot is breaking down or has not set up properly. With me it isn't a matter of how much time has taken place, it either sets up or it doesn't. If it doesn't I let down. If it does I don't.
> 
> 
> 
> Could you list your conception of those core fundamentals so we have some context to the rest of your comment?


 most of us in this forum, being that it is an "advanced forum", have a fairly good understanding of what those fundamentals are. if you don't and you need to learn what they are, there's plenty of information available using the search engine. 
are you an advanced shooter?.
i'm glad to see that you're learning to let down on shots that don't set up, instead of forcing them to proceed...... that's never a good thing to do. it's one of a few a relatively fundamental elements of the production of a good shot !. you probably know them and don't realize it.


----------



## EPLC

Here's what I've concluded in order to resolve the "Timing The Shot" issue: First, you have to build a process around your strong point. There are those that say you need to build and maintain a strong execution first and then build everything else around that aspect. I think this is a great idea and plan for those that have a strong hold, either naturally or one that has been built. I say this because there are shooters that just find it easy to hold on target. They seem to be just naturally comfortable in the middle and it's not been an issue for them. That is their strong point and they should build a strong execution around it. Then there are those that do not naturally possess a strong hold, such as myself and I'm sure many others. For years I've worked on various aspects of my execution. It has become my strongest point. But this strong point can be easily messed up by a weak hold. You may ask, "If this is your strong point, how can it get messed up so easily?". To answer this question I suggest that no matter how good your execution is it can and will be interrupted by a poor hold. The subconscious will not allow a bad shot to proceed so it halts the progress. In my case it results in "Timing the Shot"...

What I'm doing about this is building my shot process around my strong point, which is execution. I'm strictly working on my hold, which in turn is helping my execution. I came to this conclusion while shooting the blank bale. I was not having any issues with execution on the bale. After 100's of arrows, not one hang-up, not one problem but introduce a target and the execution regresses. So, the problem can not be execution. I could work on this until the cows come home and nothing changes. Now that I've been looking at this from a totally different perspective my shot has improved. I'm still in the building phase and making progress. I feel this is the correct path for me to take and very secure in this decision.

My only question now is: Do the cows really ever come home?


----------



## cbrunson

Yes. 

Now if we could just have a civil discussion about aiming.


----------



## ron w

your problem lies, not in your execution and not in your aiming, but internally trusting what your aiming sees. as long as it "thinks" your not going to stay on the center, it won't send it's approval to continue the execution of the shot to it's end.
blank baling will do nothing for this.


----------



## cbrunson

As far as the execution of the shot while holding goes, you are 100% correct Ron. But what good is a perfect shot execution with a poor hold? His problem isn't with trust. It's knowing he can get a better hold (float), and not wanting to continue executing a poor shot. That causes a lot of issues with trying to time it, if it won't settle in.

This is probably a better subject for a different thread.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> your problem lies, not in your execution and not in your aiming, but internally trusting what your aiming sees. as long as it "thinks" your not going to stay on the center, it won't send it's approval to continue the execution of the shot to it's end.
> blank baling will do nothing for this.


I agree on the blank baling not helping. I also believe this may also be the reason that short range shooting hasn't helped either. I'm not so sure this isn't an aiming problem though, as aiming and holding are so closely connected. I do know this; I've never really tried to reduce my range of motion (float) by any other means other than equipment adjustments. I've really never tried to fix me, always the equipment. While equipment adjustment can help, in order to get the most out of those adjustments, the platform needs to be as best as it can be. Recently I've been working on that platform and my hold is about as good right now as it has ever been. I'm currently introducing my firing engine into that platform with some very good results. Although this is still a work in progress I'm very encouraged with what I am seeing. 



cbrunson said:


> As far as the execution of the shot while holding goes, you are 100% correct Ron. But what good is a perfect shot execution with a poor hold? His problem isn't with trust. It's knowing he can get a better hold (float), and not wanting to continue executing a poor shot. That causes a lot of issues with trying to time it, if it won't settle in.
> 
> This is probably a better subject for a different thread.


Not sure why you think this is a different topic? In my mind this is key to the "Timing the Shot" issue...


----------



## cbrunson

Good point


----------



## ron w

the reason I suggest trust as the problem, is that I have spent a lifetime , more or less, of shooting with a float range that would have most shooters, pulling their hair out. not shakes and tremors, or anything radical like that, just a plain old large and relatively lazy float range. I literally had to learn to trust it, or it would stop my shot. 
consequently I did a lot of research on the entire so-called, "second half" of the shot process, including specifically, the release execution and it's influence from an active sight picture.
what it boils down to is that although, large, if you have trust in your float and a decent release execution, even of the movement is comparably large by comparison to typical shooters, the arrow will indeed, go where you want it. I now, have a relatively larger float, due to that stroke, and my scores reflect it, unfortunately, but I know it is not because I don't trust what's going on, it's actually the opposite. I trust my float explicitly, and very ever have a problem with letting the shot progress, despite the lack of a steady hold.
they may not all go in that little circle any more, they actually never di all go there to begin with, but only if I don't stop a radically bad float ,do they leave the big circle. 
I would imagine that if I would "practice my own preaching" and let down on more of those real "wanderers" I could improve that score some. possibly getting front of the short bale, doing "let down drills" would do me some good as well. the assumption there, is that I would be letting down on every set up!....comically,...no need for a bale !.
for time, i'm happy to be able to shoot, yet,....so the scores, although I would like them to be as good as possible, aren't the major concern to me, that they used to be.
it almost seems that, the more I understand what is going on, the less important what is going on actually seems to be. that might also be because of the fact that I know I would never try to really be competitive any more,....my shooting has evolved to being completely enjoyment.
one thing that bothers me about this site today, is that in years past, on the old forum, there was so much more information about the shot process from the top pros that used to frequent AT daily. we no longer have the luxury of that source, unfortunately.
that , however, does not change what I know about the whole picture.


----------



## cbrunson

Big difference between "improving some", and getting it.

Improving your hold (float), coupled with a strong release execution is the next logical step. I understand if you can't physically get any better, you must just accept your limitations, but discouraging others from focusing on getting their hold as minimal as possible is wrong. 

You can not fix issues on the front end with a perfect release.


----------



## ron w

EPLC, 
it's not the connection between aim and holding, it's the connection between aiming and the internal administration that allows the shot to proceed. the float can be large, but if it is trusted internally, it gets permission to proceed and the release execution doesn't stall.
as I've suggested before, several time, no matter how strong that "by-stander" relationship is, there is still a conscious link between aiming and the shot progressing smoothly. if the dot doesn't behave, the shot will stop. what is necessary is a element of trust that assures the internal administration, that the dot isn't actually so bad, that the shot won't go where it should. 
one might say that the spectrum of float limits have to wider apart that what is currently considered acceptable. the less you trust the flat, and the more you try to control it, the closer together those limits get and the vicious circle starts defining those limits clearer and clearer, every time you refuse a sight picture that wanders just that little bit more.
if someone has shot a long time refusing to let the sight picture be anything but rigidly, on the center, that internal acceptable spectrum becomes so narrow, that forcing a shot to proceed happens fairly often. 
the only remedy, is to learn that a let down is as valuable as a good shot. once that value is known and trusted to be true, the shot process proceeds without fear of having to say "no" to a shot. at that point, trust can them be built on a float range that is reasonably acceptable and the internal desire to produce good float is positive, not operating out fear of being shut down.


----------



## ron w

cbrunson,....where have I discouraged others to focus on getting a better hold ?.


----------



## nochance

EPLC said:


> You are relentless, I'll give you that... but, I assure you that horse is dead. I'm not letting down unless the shot is breaking down or has not set up properly. With me it isn't a matter of how much time has taken place, it either sets up or it doesn't. If it doesn't I let down. If it does I don't.


If your executing your shot and its taking longer than usual when it starts to break down and the release goes off before the brain was signaled to let down there could be a problem. If your timing your shot and it goes longer then you know to let down before the hold or float starts breaking down.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> EPLC,
> it's not the connection between aim and holding, it's the connection between aiming and the internal administration that allows the shot to proceed. the float can be large, but if it is trusted internally, it gets permission to proceed and the release execution doesn't stall.
> as I've suggested before, several time, no matter how strong that "by-stander" relationship is, there is still a conscious link between aiming and the shot progressing smoothly. if the dot doesn't behave, the shot will stop. what is necessary is a element of trust that assures the internal administration, that the dot isn't actually so bad, that the shot won't go where it should.
> one might say that the spectrum of float limits have to wider apart that what is currently considered acceptable. the less you trust the flat, and the more you try to control it, the closer together those limits get and the vicious circle starts defining those limits clearer and clearer, every time you refuse a sight picture that wanders just that little bit more.
> if someone has shot a long time refusing to let the sight picture be anything but rigidly, on the center, that internal acceptable spectrum becomes so narrow, that forcing a shot to proceed happens fairly often.
> the only remedy, is to learn that a let down is as valuable as a good shot. once that value is known and trusted to be true, the shot process proceeds without fear of having to say "no" to a shot. at that point, trust can them be built on a float range that is reasonably acceptable and the internal desire to produce good float is positive, not operating out fear of being shut down.


Ron, while I truly believe you are trying to help, I've been down the trust your float road. You forget I also have a physical problem shooting from the RH side. I fought this for 6-7 years and "had" to trust my shot or I couldn't hit anything. I actually learned how to shoot proper form, perfect DL, relaxation, etc. during this very discouraging time. While I agree trust can make up some ground for a poor range of motion or float, it can not replace a good hold. When my float went south, so did my scores. I went from NE Champion to a very mediocre shooter over night. Trust me on this; a good hold is better than a bad hold, and is more trustworthy. While my hold from the left side hasn't been bad, I have never really worked on improving it either because I was totally sold on the trust idea. I believe this has held me back because my float can be made better with training. Because of this new found knowledge I "have" made some improvement in my float as of late and as a result my execution is better. As I continue down this path I believe my trust in the entire process will improve as a result of what I'm doing is more trustworthy. 



ron w said:


> cbrunson,....where have I discouraged others to focus on getting a better hold ?.


I think I can take a stab at this one as well. See above.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> cbrunson,....where have I discouraged others to focus on getting a better hold ?.


That's for anyone that discourages learning how to aim. If the shoe fits........


----------



## ron w

what ??... hoe does that apply to what I posted ?. 
so now....where have I discouraged anyone to learn how to aim ?.
I don't understand how you guys get this out what I posted. I've read over my posts several times and cannot for the life of me, even begin to interpret some sort of discouragement, as you suggest I have.


----------



## Rick!

ron w said:


> what ??... hoe does that apply to what I posted ?.
> so now....where have I discouraged anyone to learn how to aim ?.
> I don't understand how you guys get this out what I posted. I've read over my posts several times and cannot for the life of me, even begin to interpret some sort of discouragement, as you suggest I have.


Your "ron goggles" keep you from hearing what your message is. You've consistently said that "your float is what it is", paraphrasing the tomes you've written here. 

For EPL, it's good you're working on your hold. You now have completed the circle of fundamental practices needed to make improvements in your shooting.

All's that's left is you and perfect practice.


----------



## ron w

well, if I think it, that's what Griv thinks it, as well, because that's where it comes from.
"ron gogles", that's a funny one right there !.
I tell you what,...I invite you to technically dispute what I posted. come up with reasonable argument with explanation and reason in a sensible format,... not just, "i disagree"...., but,... "i disagree, and (the following is) specifically why". and you have something. without it, you guys are just saying that you're doing something, but you don't know why you're doing it.....just disagreeing because you don't understand what is posted.
it's real easy to say and think, "do what works best for you", when you have no idea what works or what doesn't. I don't see anyone saying what they know works, only what they do for their own shooting.

there it is,... there's your invitation to prove me wrong or prove I don't know what i'm talking about.......have at it, i'm all ears. here's your opportunity to shut my "ron goggles" down.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> well, if I think it, that's what Griv thinks it, as well, because that's where it comes from.
> "ron gogles", that's a funny one right there !.
> I tell you what,...I invite you to technically dispute what I posted. come up with reasonable argument with explanation and reason in a sensible format,... not just, "i disagree"...., but,... "i disagree, and (the following is) specifically why". and you have something. without it, you guys are just saying that you're doing something, but you don't know why you're doing it.....just disagreeing because you don't understand what is posted.
> it's real easy to say and think, "do what works best for you", when you have no idea what works or what doesn't. I don't see anyone saying what they know works, only what they do for their own shooting.
> 
> there it is,... there's your invitation to prove me wrong or prove I don't know what i'm talking about.......have at it, i'm all ears. here's your opportunity to shut my "ron goggles" down.


It's not a question of being right or wrong, it's a matter of interpretation. I interpret what GRIV is saying (and a whole host of others) as trust your float... when you have built a float that is trustworthy. If you have a float that can't be trusted, you need to work on it. Just prior to my switching to LH I went to see George Ryals IV for a paid professional coaching weekend. I went there for the specific purpose of having him help me with my "float"... When he was given a demo of what was going on he did not tell me to trust it. What he said was I needed to see a doctor.


----------



## cbrunson

Nobody's saying your wrong about needing a good shot execution Ron. 

We're just saying you need to be able to hold really well in addition to a good release. If you want to be competitive anyway. 

BTW, I really like the Ron-goggles thing. Can we keep it?


----------



## ron w

this is the advanced forum, right ?.....am wrong to assume that something said about float assumes that your float is at least decently developed?. you really can't be considered an advanced shooter, if this basic element of the shot process isn't at least developed to the point that you would want or need to work on making it as good as you can. 
I would think, being that this is the advanced forum, there's not much need to discuss the importance of a good hold and a good execution, that , as far as i'm concerned, is a "given", in an advanced forum. am I wrong here, or are there a bunch of people that are in over their heads, in this forum ?. 
keep whatever you want, but if I see it being used, I know where the little triangle is.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> this is the advanced forum, right ?.....am wrong to assume that something said about float assumes that your float is at least decently developed?. you really can't be considered an advanced shooter, if this basic element of the shot process isn't at least developed to the point that you would want or need to work on making it as good as you can.
> I would think, being that this is the advanced forum, there's not much need to discuss the importance of a good hold and a good execution, that , as far as i'm concerned, is a "given", in an advanced forum. am I wrong here, or are there a bunch of people that are in over their heads, in this forum ?.
> keep whatever you want, but if I see it being used, I know where the little triangle is.


Actually this is an intermediate/advanced forum. That said, you have actually touched on what has become obvious to me recently. You really have to understand the level of the source providing the information to understand what that source, because of their level of skill, may be taking for granted that you know or can do. Many advanced shooters give advice based on their personal experience as to what they have had to work on to raise their competence. They simply may be taking for granted that hold isn't an issue so execution, or trust, or something else needs work. They just do not have to deal with the issues that some of us have.

To simplify, an advanced shooter giving advice may well be giving advice to their peers so we have to be careful not to misinterpret their recommendations as intermediate shooters.


----------



## ron w

what ????.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> what ????.


Exactly!


----------



## montigre

EPLC said:


> Actually this is an intermediate/advanced forum. That said, you have actually touched on what has become obvious to me recently. You really have to understand the level of the source providing the information to understand what that source, because of their level of skill, may be taking for granted that you know or can do. Many advanced shooters give advice based on their personal experience as to what they have had to work on to raise their competence. They simply may be taking for granted that hold isn't an issue so execution, or trust, or something else needs work. They just do not have to deal with the issues that some of us have.
> 
> To simplify, an advanced shooter giving advice may well be giving advice to their peers so we have to be careful not to misinterpret their recommendations as intermediate shooters.


This is very true and a good point to make here. I'll share a little back story on the subject.

When I was a rank beginner, I wrote to George Ryals asking if it would be appropriate for me, at that time, to attend one of his seminars as I had just been told by my local mentor it was time for me to find my own way in the sport. I let him know my current level of shooting and that I had recently competed in my first nationals and what I was interested in improving. He agreed and I booked the weekend seminar. Much of the information provided was well above my head, but I took copious notes, asked a few questions and made every effort to get the most from the experience. George was also kind enough to provide me with his notes for future reference at the end of the session. 

Over the years that followed, I had referred back to those notes and presentation when I would find myself stuck on a shooting issue and each time that I did, I was able to pull more information from those original notes as my shooting and understanding of my shot process had evolved and deepened. 

I recently went back down for a weekend post-surgery tune up and was pleased to discover that since I had spent several years practicing and competing since our first meeting, there were no longer any foreign ideas or concepts presented, and we were able to work solely on the shooting process as I had internalized it. I was able to comprehend the information presented from a level that was much closer to his own and the experience I took away was much more precise for my current and future goals.


----------



## ron w

gee, let me see,.... if a forum says "intermediate-advanced" it includes both levels, so the assumption that it includes "advanced" shooters is just as legitimate as the assumption that it includes, "intermediate", shooters, isn't it ?.
do you expect advanced shooters to state that their posts, are not intended for intermediate shooters, (or for that matter, the beginners that happen to be on the forum) to read, before posting ?.
I can assume that your insight refers to the idea that you seem to think you are an advanced shooter and your posts are not for "just anyone" to read then, right ?.


----------



## montigre

No, that's not it at all. If an advanced shooter makes a post on this forum, those who read it will most likely be able to comprehend what was posted from their level of shooting experience. Granted, the beginner or intermediate shooter may have one of those ah-ha moments and be able to bridge a gap between their level of shooting and that of the advanced shooter, but for the most part, the information will be probably be stored away until their shooting catches up and they are able to make use of it. 

What the beginner or intermediate shooter should not do; however, is crucify the advanced shooter who posted his/her opinion simply because it does not make sense to the novice/intermediate. 

Sometimes it is just far better to keep the trap shut and take in the info.


----------



## ron w

my point is that it is absolutely impossible to control who will read the post, so the only thing to do is give information as accurately as you can, and let whomever reads it , read it, interpret what they get out of it, and ask questions if they don't understand something. 
which, for all practical purposes, is exactly what you did with George's seminar. 
my point is that it doesn't hurt for intermediate or even beginning shooters to hear advanced theories, it stimulates the thought process that advances the shooter. the problem lies where a shooter hears or reads something that isn't immediately understood, but fails to ask further questions.
the fact is that most shooters do understand advanced ideas and work to eventually come to the level of that advanced thought. if they hadn't been able to hear or read it, they would not have a reason to work on getting better.
because a entry level shooter criticizes an advanced shooters' advice or knowledge, is of little concern in the aspect of whether the advanced shooter should not submit the advice or information because someone might criticize him for doing it, or criticize the information's content.
what would you thought if George sai, " nah, don't bother coming to my seminar, you'd be wasting your time" ?.

the whole reason all the pros have left this forum is exactly because people criticized their charity.


----------



## cbrunson

montigre said:


> No, that's not it at all. If an advanced shooter makes a post on this forum, those who read it will most likely be able to comprehend what was posted from their level of shooting experience. Granted, the beginner or intermediate shooter may have one of those ah-ha moments and be able to bridge a gap between their level of shooting and that of the advanced shooter, but for the most part, the information will be probably be stored away until their shooting catches up and they are able to make use of it.
> 
> What the beginner or intermediate shooter should not do; however, is crucify the advanced shooter who posted his/her opinion simply because it does not make sense to the novice/intermediate.
> 
> Sometimes it is just far better to keep the trap shut and take in the info.


Excellent post!!!


----------



## montigre

Ron, isn't that what I said???? :dontknow:


----------



## SonnyThomas

montigre said:


> No, that's not it at all. If an advanced shooter makes a post on this forum, those who read it will most likely be able to comprehend what was posted from their level of shooting experience. Granted, the beginner or intermediate shooter may have one of those ah-ha moments and be able to bridge a gap between their level of shooting and that of the advanced shooter, but for the most part, the information will be probably be stored away until their shooting catches up and they are able to make use of it.
> 
> What the beginner or intermediate shooter should not do; however, is crucify the advanced shooter who posted his/her opinion simply because it does not make sense to the novice/intermediate.
> 
> Sometimes it is just far better to keep the trap shut and take in the info.


Nice one, Gail.


----------



## ron w

if it is "what you said"...why the post #259, in response to my post #258 ?. because all #260 does is expand in #258. makes no sense to ask me "isn't that what I said ".


----------



## Mahly

A reminder:

"Differences of opinion relating to all things archery are expected, however, *blatant disrespect, arguing, trolling*, name calling, and bashing are against the rules and will result in infractions. This applies to everyone no matter their status on the forum, i.e. banner sponsor, regular member, SMR, etc. 

Questioning or bashing AT moderators and administration or their actions (including asking why a thread/post was removed) on the forum will be enforced with a zero tolerance policy and may result in a ban. Should you feel a post is inappropriate or in violation of AT rules, please bring it to the attention of staff by using the report button (triangle with exclamation point) in the lower left corner of that post. 

Thread removal is not due to favoritism, its due to post behavior. Going forward, *those who continually derail threads will be infracted*."

-Admin


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> if it is "what you said"...why the post #259, in response to my post #258 ?. because all #260 does is expand in #258. makes no sense to ask me "isn't that what I said ".


I will attempt to make the reason for Gail's post a little more clear, and how it applies to you. 

That was a very respectful way of pointing out the fact that you may not accept some things as possible solutions for other people, because you are not, and have never been at the level in your shooting, where it would make sense to you. You may be able to grasp the concept, and reason with it as words on paper, but you can't fully appreciate it until you see the benefit from actual experience. I have had the light come on several times and have had to eat crow over a few things that I'd previously considered irellevant. 

When you start to break down your hold (float) and actively seek ways to improve it, you will have many of those moments where things just work exactly like someone said they would, if you'd just listen. It doesn't have to come from a pro or a coach either. There are some pretty amazing shooters out there with day jobs. 

The problem is that there are probably more different ways to get the dot to sit still than there are ways to work a hinge. With each comes a person that will swear their way is the best. Add to that, the camp that believes you shouldn't even be concerned with it. 

Have you ever shot a 300-25x or higher Vegas game? Do you not see the difference in what it takes to shoot at that level regularly, vs. the things you believed when you were still trying to beat 295-10x ? I can say that not much has changed in my release execution from that level to the level I'm at now, but a lot of things have changed with my float. I know exactly what those things are. Do you? I don't think you do. Someone may be appreciative of me sharing some of those things if it would help them, but the message gets lost every time it becomes a dispute over basic principles.


----------



## EPLC

It's a simple matter of the possibility of misinterpretation due to the skill of both the poster and the reader being at different levels. It's also quite possible that an advanced shooter may not fully understand that things he/she takes for granted may be a problem for someone with a lesser skill. "Just trust your float" is just one fine example of taking for granted a steady hold. "Just put the pin in the middle and shoot" is another more obvious example. I'll bet that many that make that statement take it for granted that this is an easy assignment.


----------



## ron w

cbrunson said:


> I will attempt to make the reason for Gail's post a little more clear, and how it applies to you.
> 
> That was a very respectful way of pointing out the fact that you may not accept some things as possible solutions for other people, because you are not, and have never been at the level in your shooting, where it would make sense to you. You may be able to grasp the concept, and reason with it as words on paper, but you can't fully appreciate it until you see the benefit from actual experience. I have had the light come on several times and have had to eat crow over a few things that I'd previously considered irellevant.
> 
> When you start to break down your hold (float) and actively seek ways to improve it, you will have many of those moments where things just work exactly like someone said they would, if you'd just listen. It doesn't have to come from a pro or a coach either. There are some pretty amazing shooters out there with day jobs.
> 
> The problem is that there are probably more different ways to get the dot to sit still than there are ways to work a hinge. With each comes a person that will swear their way is the best. Add to that, the camp that believes you shouldn't even be concerned with it.
> 
> Have you ever shot a 300
> 
> i see,..... I can write pages about the shot process, but I have no idea what i'm writing about.
> I've never once proclaimed "my way" is the best. and yes, by golly, I actually have shot one 'dem 'dare 300's, I also won my division in the very first tournament I was ever in, have you ? and it wasn't a small "local tournament" have you ever done that ?. it was a tournament of the size and notoriety of Vegas and Cobo Hall...... long before you were so much as gleam in your daddy's eye.
> I have no idea what these specifics about scores, have to do with what a person knows, but if that's what it takes to make you happy, i'll play along, just fine.
> by the way, when was the last time you shot Vegas, being that you know how to shoot so much better than most of us on this forum ?.


----------



## ron w

trusting your float, is exactly opposite of "taking for granted a steady hold".


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> This has been a longstanding issue for me, one that continues to raise its ugly head, especially after I've been shooting at the top of my game. The issue is "Timing" the shot execution. Instead of a continual shot execution, I become too cautious with my aim and things go bad quickly. I know that you are supposed to not allow sight movement stop your firing engine but I continually find myself doing this. And the difference between my really good shot and whatever this is isn't much, it's vey subtle. I believe this is a problem that, if corrected, could be a major step forward with my shooting.


11 pages later and what?


----------



## nochance

SonnyThomas said:


> 11 pages later and what?


same old same old!


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> cbrunson said:
> 
> 
> 
> I will attempt to make the reason for Gail's post a little more clear, and how it applies to you.
> 
> That was a very respectful way of pointing out the fact that you may not accept some things as possible solutions for other people, because you are not, and have never been at the level in your shooting, where it would make sense to you. You may be able to grasp the concept, and reason with it as words on paper, but you can't fully appreciate it until you see the benefit from actual experience. I have had the light come on several times and have had to eat crow over a few things that I'd previously considered irellevant.
> 
> When you start to break down your hold (float) and actively seek ways to improve it, you will have many of those moments where things just work exactly like someone said they would, if you'd just listen. It doesn't have to come from a pro or a coach either. There are some pretty amazing shooters out there with day jobs.
> 
> The problem is that there are probably more different ways to get the dot to sit still than there are ways to work a hinge. With each comes a person that will swear their way is the best. Add to that, the camp that believes you shouldn't even be concerned with it.
> 
> Have you ever shot a 300
> 
> i see,..... I can write pages about the shot process, but I have no idea what i'm writing about.
> I've never once proclaimed "my way" is the best. and yes, by golly, I actually have shot one 'dem 'dare 300's, I also won my division in the very first tournament I was ever in, have you ? and it wasn't a small "local tournament" have you ever done that ?. it was a tournament of the size and notoriety of Vegas and Cobo Hall...... long before you were so much as gleam in your daddy's eye.
> I have no idea what these specifics about scores, have to do with what a person knows, but if that's what it takes to make you happy, i'll play along, just fine.
> by the way, when was the last time you shot Vegas, being that you know how to shoot so much better than most of us on this forum ?.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe I shoot better than most here. You completely missed the point.
Click to expand...


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> HEY! That's my line, "just haul back and shoot." My Patient rights covers what you said





SonnyThomas said:


> Yep, you have messed with a lot and releases also. Now, pick a release and put the others a way. You already know you'll be better for it. Want one for back up, pick one that makes you work harder....





SonnyThomas said:


> Agreeable me is.....





SonnyThomas said:


> E, that's just it. You start a subject and it's like you're wanting something, but 99.99% of the time is seems you're going to do it your way no matter who replies. Either that or you start a subject to just be starting a subject. So why ask? Who is here that is all great and knowing? As for the timing thing, yes, I believe in timing. You get in time with yourself, your float, your breathing. When and where do you start the execution of the shot, at the bottom, top or sides of your float? Only you can determine what gives the best results for you.





SonnyThomas said:


> Mostly repetitious and arguments, big deal. Just like this thread, 193 posts and mostly all useless. You're right where you started, you doing what you're gone do.......





SonnyThomas said:


> Nice one, Gail.






SonnyThomas said:


> 11 pages later and what?


I believe your total contribution to this thread may answer your own question.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> cbrunson said:
> 
> 
> 
> I will attempt to make the reason for Gail's post a little more clear, and how it applies to you.
> 
> That was a very respectful way of pointing out the fact that you may not accept some things as possible solutions for other people, because you are not, and have never been at the level in your shooting, where it would make sense to you. You may be able to grasp the concept, and reason with it as words on paper, but you can't fully appreciate it until you see the benefit from actual experience. I have had the light come on several times and have had to eat crow over a few things that I'd previously considered irellevant.
> 
> When you start to break down your hold (float) and actively seek ways to improve it, you will have many of those moments where things just work exactly like someone said they would, if you'd just listen. It doesn't have to come from a pro or a coach either. There are some pretty amazing shooters out there with day jobs.
> 
> The problem is that there are probably more different ways to get the dot to sit still than there are ways to work a hinge. With each comes a person that will swear their way is the best. Add to that, the camp that believes you shouldn't even be concerned with it.
> _*
> Have you ever shot a 300*_
> 
> i see,..... I can write pages about the shot process, but I have no idea what i'm writing about.
> I've never once proclaimed "my way" is the best. and yes, by golly, I actually have shot one 'dem 'dare 300's, I also won my division in the very first tournament I was ever in, have you ? and it wasn't a small "local tournament" have you ever done that ?. it was a tournament of the size and notoriety of Vegas and Cobo Hall...... long before you were so much as gleam in your daddy's eye.
> I have no idea what these specifics about scores, have to do with what a person knows, but if that's what it takes to make you happy, i'll play along, just fine.
> by the way, when was the last time you shot Vegas, being that you know how to shoot so much better than most of us on this forum ?.
> 
> 
> 
> I think if you quote someone you shouldn't edit the question before answering. The original question was, "Have you ever shot a Vegas 300 25X or higher?"
> 
> 
> 
> ron w said:
> 
> 
> 
> trusting your float, is exactly opposite of "taking for granted a steady hold".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You missed the entire point.
Click to expand...


----------



## Mahly

Here's a solution to most of this bickering.
Post what you believe it true and what worked for you.
Do not post to correct someone else, or tell them that they are wrong/mistaken/ignorant.
I understand sometimes we wish to counter what we might think is "bad" advice, but as mentioned before, this is intermediate-advanced competition archery. We should be able to trust readers to sort the good from the bad without us deciding what is good or bad for them.
State your case/technique/advice, but quit "correcting" the other guy.
Pretty sure most here have at one time or another agreed there is more than one way.


----------



## ron w

you better look again , on my screen it asks exactly ...."Have you ever shot a 300",....that is word for word what I see in his post, on my screen.
I've had enough of this, it's not going to work you guys, i'm not getting banned because of protectionism again. you win, i'm the dummy, ha ha ha . and there's no point in this senseless twisted "discussion" to miss.
when has some camp said you shouldn't be concerned with it ?.


----------



## AzCharlie

When this thread started I was excited thought I would learn how to correct my problem of hanging up, not shooting a strong shot. Now I think I have "thread panic"because I'm afraid to click on this thing. You people have alot of great knowledge and would really be able to help people if you would quit turning everything into an argument.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> I will attempt to make the reason for Gail's post a little more clear, and how it applies to you.
> 
> That was a very respectful way of pointing out the fact that you may not accept some things as possible solutions for other people, because you are not, and have never been at the level in your shooting, where it would make sense to you. You may be able to grasp the concept, and reason with it as words on paper, but you can't fully appreciate it until you see the benefit from actual experience. I have had the light come on several times and have had to eat crow over a few things that I'd previously considered irellevant.
> 
> When you start to break down your hold (float) and actively seek ways to improve it, you will have many of those moments where things just work exactly like someone said they would, if you'd just listen. It doesn't have to come from a pro or a coach either. There are some pretty amazing shooters out there with day jobs.
> 
> The problem is that there are probably more different ways to get the dot to sit still than there are ways to work a hinge. With each comes a person that will swear their way is the best. Add to that, the camp that believes you shouldn't even be concerned with it.
> 
> Have you ever shot a 300-25x or higher Vegas game? Do you not see the difference in what it takes to shoot at that level regularly, vs. the things you believed when you were still trying to beat 295-10x ? I can say that not much has changed in my release execution from that level to the level I'm at now, but a lot of things have changed with my float. I know exactly what those things are. Do you? I don't think you do. Someone may be appreciative of me sharing some of those things if it would help them, but the message gets lost every time it becomes a dispute over basic principles.





ron w said:


> you better look again , on my screen it asks exactly ...."Have you ever shot a 300",....that is word for word what I see in his post, on my screen.
> I've had enough of this, it's not going to work you guys, i'm not getting banned because of protectionism again. you win, i'm the dummy, ha ha ha . and there's no point in this senseless twisted "discussion" to miss.
> when has some camp said you shouldn't be concerned with it ?.


Thank you, I did. 



AzCharlie said:


> When this thread started I was excited thought I would learn how to correct my problem of hanging up, not shooting a strong shot. Now I think I have "thread panic"because I'm afraid to click on this thing. You people have alot of great knowledge and would really be able to help people if you would quit turning everything into an argument.


Wouldn't it be nice... I've asked several times for people to post the things that have helped them and some have responded well. Then there are those that continually offer opinion that is not based on their own personal experience. This type of response can be very opinionated and therefore subject to debate. I would hate to think that these opinionated posts could not be challenged by a reasonable argument. A healthy debate, regardless of the subject is educational and worthy of discussion. Unfortunately there are some that take challenge of their ideas and suggestions personal. I don't know how to fix that one...


----------



## EPLC

EPLC said:


> Here's what I've concluded in order to resolve the "Timing The Shot" issue: First, you have to build a process around your strong point. There are those that say you need to build and maintain a strong execution first and then build everything else around that aspect. I think this is a great idea and plan for those that have a strong hold, either naturally or one that has been built. I say this because there are shooters that just find it easy to hold on target. They seem to be just naturally comfortable in the middle and it's not been an issue for them. That is their strong point and they should build a strong execution around it. Then there are those that do not naturally possess a strong hold, such as myself and I'm sure many others. For years I've worked on various aspects of my execution. It has become my strongest point. But this strong point can be easily messed up by a weak hold. You may ask, "If this is your strong point, how can it get messed up so easily?". To answer this question I suggest that no matter how good your execution is it can and will be interrupted by a poor hold. The subconscious will not allow a bad shot to proceed so it halts the progress. In my case it results in "Timing the Shot"...
> 
> What I'm doing about this is building my shot process around my strong point, which is execution. I'm strictly working on my hold, which in turn is helping my execution. I came to this conclusion while shooting the blank bale. I was not having any issues with execution on the bale. After 100's of arrows, not one hang-up, not one problem but introduce a target and the execution regresses. So, the problem can not be execution. I could work on this until the cows come home and nothing changes. Now that I've been looking at this from a totally different perspective my shot has improved. I'm still in the building phase and making progress. I feel this is the correct path for me to take and very secure in this decision.
> 
> My only question now is: Do the cows really ever come home?



A review of why this went south:

On March 20th I posted the above statement. It was a conclusion based on my own assessment of this issue after examining the suggestions presented along with my personal experience and judgement. This was challenged with the suggestion that the issue was simply a matter of trusting the execution. Myself and others tried to respectively take an opposition position to this challenge. This was apparently taken personally and things went south from there. I think it is safe to conclude that many a worthy topic has gone sour down this very similar path. When every opposing view is taken personal instead of opening the door to healthy discussion, this is the result.


----------



## va MTN MAN

My only question now is: Do the cows really ever come home?
No EPLC I dont think the cows will ever come home to you, maybe get halfway to the barn at best. I will give you my opinion which is based on my personal experience of 35 plus years of target archery. I have always had a bad hold compared to most and many things tried helped a little or a lot for certain lengths of time but the less than steller hold was always there. for years I accepted the hold as it is what it is and worked my executionn down to where I hardly ever made a bad shot but the arrow landed where the pin was when it went off or in many casses a lot closer to center than I felt it should have. Many many people that I shot with over the years said I dont know how you shoot as good as you do with your bow wandering all over like that. I could shoot in the low 540s on a good day on a nfaa field round and 300s with low 50s spots on an indoor. Bottom line is I HAD (have) a form of target panic same as you. The only difference is I accepted it and worked with what I had and got the best results I could with it and you are jumping from thing to thing (releases, hold,execution etc) which puts your mind on something else for a short time until the panic takes back over as soon as you get slightly comfortable with the new process. 
That said there is always hope and I hope you find it.
I have taken the last year to tear myself down and start over. complete make over with large draw length changes, stance, left arm, the works. I now know that I started off wrong 35 years or so ago and have been dealing with it ever since. I now can shoot in the high 540s on my field range on a average day at age 56 with a lot less effort than a lucky low 540 on a great day. I may be to old but I think I am on my way.I will give a thumbs up to RON in this asspect I think by perfecting my exacution so well over thr years and trusting the shot now that I can hold I have no hang ups even when the pin is just sitting.
I truly hope you find a way to get there but I am afraid that there are only 2 possible ways. 1- the way you are doing it now by searching for a way on your own which may or may not work or paying a good coach which may or may not work. I think you may have trouble with a coach as you seem to be like a lot of us archers, opionnated and hard headed! If you try a coach you need to go with an open mind and put your trust in him or her to do what they say and not what you think. I wish i had taken this route 30 years ago. I love to shoot so I dont regret a minute of it but I realize it could have been much beter.

I feel I have walked the walk now it is time to talk the talk. LOL Dont ever get where it is no longer fun.

Ricky


----------



## ron w

funny thing about blind baling, it's purpose, is so commonly misunderstood and mis-used. ....you cannot have hang ups and stalls when you blind bale, because you are not seeing any sort of disassociation between the intention of the shot to proceed, and the lack of controlled float, that it takes for the shot to proceed. that link is eliminated because your eyes are closed !. 
that's why "blind baling" doesn't do anything for development of the shot process. it is only for building "tools" that you use in the development of the shot process.


----------



## EPLC

va MTN MAN said:


> No EPLC I dont think the cows will ever come home to you, maybe get halfway to the barn at best.


I think you may have read more into my posts than was my intention. Further explained below. 



va MTN MAN said:


> 1. I will give you my opinion which is based on my personal experience of 35 plus years of target archery. I have always had a bad hold compared to most and many things tried helped a little or a lot for certain lengths of time but the less than steller hold was always there. for years I accepted the hold as it is what it is and worked my executionn down to where I hardly ever made a bad shot but the arrow landed where the pin was when it went off or in many casses a lot closer to center than I felt it should have. Many many people that I shot with over the years said I dont know how you shoot as good as you do with your bow wandering all over like that. I could shoot in the low 540s on a good day on a nfaa field round and 300s with low 50s spots on an indoor.
> 
> 2. Bottom line is I HAD (have) a form of target panic same as you. The only difference is I accepted it and worked with what I had and got the best results I could with it and you are jumping from thing to thing (releases, hold,execution etc) which puts your mind on something else for a short time until the panic takes back over as soon as you get slightly comfortable with the new process.
> That said there is always hope and I hope you find it.
> 
> Ricky


1. While I do very much identify with your scores and your experience (18 for me), my float is such that people would not comment negatively on it. From an outsider's perspective I look fairly steady so nobody's asking those stupid questions anymore. I do share this experience shooting from the right side where people have posed these same questions many times. For this reason I shoot LH and have been for about 7 years. While I mostly shoot half rounds I still shoot 270+ on my better days. While I haven't seen 50X this year I also haven't been scoring any of my practice rounds. I feel I am quite capable of shooting 50+X within my current skill level. 

2. Do I have a form of target panic? Not sure on that, but I haven't ruled anything out so we'll just have to see if what I have been working towards since October will stick.



va MTN MAN said:


> 1. I have taken taken the last year to tear myself down and start over. complete make over with large draw length changes, stance, left arm, the works. I now know that I started off wrong 35 years or so ago and have been dealing with it ever since. I now can shoot in the high 540s on my field range on a average day at age 56 with a lot less effort than a lucky low 540 on a great day. I may be to old but I think I am on my way. I will give a thumbs up to RON in this asspect I think by perfecting my exacution so well over thr years and trusting the shot now that I can hold I have no hang ups even when the pin is just sitting.
> 
> 2. I truly hope you find a way to get there but I am afraid that there are only 2 possible ways. 1- the way you are doing it now by searching for a way on your own which may or may not work or paying a good coach which may or may not work. I think you may have trouble with a coach as you seem to be like a lot of us archers, opionnated and hard headed! If you try a coach you need to go with an open mind and put your trust in him or her to do what they say and not what you think. I wish i had taken this route 30 years ago. I love to shoot so I dont regret a minute of it but I realize it could have been much better.
> 
> Ricky


1. I've also written off this season and everything I have done since October has been a learning experience. While only 5 months into my rebuild, I am seeing progress. Your story and mine, right down to the learning wrong part, is very similar although I actually did learn good form during my shaking period because I tried just about every fix known to man without success. At 56 you're just a kid, hey at 56 I was only shooting a total of 4 or 5 years, not counting what I did as a kid. Btw, you haven't said what you have been doing to rebuild. I'd be interested in hearing that side of your story.

2. I can't disagree with this statement. Unfortunately I have not been able to find a good coach in this area but I've just learned about some possibilities not far from here. We'll have to see about that because I am the way you say I am, and have a lot of experience identifying things that haven't worked out for me. The road I've chosen seems to be producing results, although I'm still rebuilding... only time will tell. 



va MTN MAN said:


> I feel I have walked the walk now it is time to talk the talk. LOL Dont ever get where it is no longer fun.
> 
> Ricky


I believe I'm doing exactly that... and if this wasn't fun I would still be bowling.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> funny thing about blind baling, it's purpose, is so commonly misunderstood and mis-used. ....you cannot have hang ups and stalls when you blind bale, because you are not seeing any sort of disassociation between the intention of the shot to proceed, and the lack of controlled float, that it takes for the shot to proceed. that link is eliminated because your eyes are closed !.
> that's why "blind baling" doesn't do anything for development of the shot process. it is only for building "tools" that you use in the development of the shot process.


We seem to be stuck in an endless loop with this. I believe we have established that the shot has been developed to the point where it can now be melded into a process. That process must include some reasonable ability to hold steady. Since I have found that my holding ability can be improved with proper training, which I think we can agree would not include blind baling... 

That said, I would prefer moving on with the current train of thought rather than continuing on with the endless loop about execution. Thank you in advance.


----------



## ron w

you're the one that mentioned you were blind baling, not me. I know what it does. considering you're mentioning that you were recently blind baling, and taking in consideration of your last post that , in your typical condescending way, belittling my mention the effective purposefulness of blind baling, it's reasonable to question whether you actually know what it is for, or what t can and cannot do for your shot.
in that you are , in your own words, "building your shot around your best asset,...your execution", I would think blind baling is not of much help to you,...just as you've stated in the past.
you realize, it's not always "all about you". there are other people that read these posts and sometimes it beneficial to relay information that might be helpful to others. it seems as though you have everything all figured out, and there's really no need to for someone(anyone) to volunteer any suggestions to you, despite the fact that you've ben posting about "the developmental problems with your shot for about 15 years now".
and yes I agree, the attributes and effective purpose of blind baling is some what fundamental in the scope of this forum, but when someone doesn't understand its value in the foundation of a shot execution, there just might be room to consider learning the basics.

just thinking out loud, in an objective voice.


----------



## Pete53

here`s another small twist i do blind bale some and should do more but i am lazy with a bad shoulder too and always shoot a hinge for target .i have shot plenty 300`s and many 299`s "dang it !" i am a type A person i do know i will never being a great archer but i do ok , have alot fun with archery and put venison in the freezer too. i also help alot of young people get better in archery. i have a son who never ever practices shoots always 300`s 55 x or higher and the release does not matter either, but he kinda just likes his carter thumb release ,he has perfectarchery form too,has won many state titles been to nationals always in at least the top 5 in past 600 110 x`s in his class my son is a type B person with ice in his blood veins. some may think i am brag`n or lying but really many of us just will never be that good or even better,so why argue with some of these good people like ron w. trying to help many of us who are trying to get better ? so from me i thank you all who posted positive things ! us type A`s need all the help we can get ,thanks,Pete53


----------



## cbrunson

I will admit that I misunderstood the point of this thread earlier on. I thought the question was about timing the shot window at first, which is very pointless in my opinion. 

Now I believe I understand it to be about timing the release to fire when the hold is best. If that is the case, it is 100% a holding issue and NOT an execution issue. There are many correct answers to solve the hang up with following through the shot while it is holding well. It all depends on your sight picture. And yes, it can also be a slight target panic issue. 

The best thing would be to give a description of your sight picture as detailed as possible, and include the part of the release process where it goes south. Does it hold well until you decide to execute the shot? Does it only hold well for a very short time, making you want to time the release? Does it open up when (if) you start pulling to fire the release? Or does it open up when you start to relax your hand? (Yield)

There are solutions to each of those things. You do need to be looking at a target.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> I will admit that I misunderstood the point of this thread earlier on. I thought the question was about timing the shot window at first, which is very pointless in my opinion.
> 
> Now I believe I understand it to be about timing the release to fire when the hold is best. If that is the case, it is 100% a holding issue and NOT an execution issue. There are many correct answers to solve the hang up with following through the shot while it is holding well. It all depends on your sight picture. And yes, it can also be a slight target panic issue.
> 
> The best thing would be to give a description of your sight picture as detailed as possible, and include the part of the release process where it goes south. Does it hold well until you decide to execute the shot? Does it only hold well for a very short time, making you want to time the release? Does it open up when (if) you start pulling to fire the release? Or does it open up when you start to relax your hand? (Yield)
> 
> There are solutions to each of those things. You do need to be looking at a target.


Actually, I can think of times where all three happen but things have changed for the better recently so I really need to step back and do another assessment of what is happening now... I'll get back to you on that as it may take a few days to get a proper assessment.


----------



## montigre

cbrunson said:


> The best thing would be to give a description of your sight picture as detailed as possible, and include the part of the release process where it goes south. Does it hold well until you decide to execute the shot? Does it only hold well for a very short time, making you want to time the release? Does it open up when (if) you start pulling to fire the release? Or does it open up when you start to relax your hand? (Yield)
> 
> There are solutions to each of those things. You do need to be looking at a target.


For me, at the beginning of this indoor season, I found that my sight picture would open up as I pulled into the wall and would actually get considerably worse the harder I pulled. I made quite a few tune changes to the bow (thanks Jesse B) and now it seems to be opening up when I relax my hand. I'm thinking I may just have to find that delicate balance between pulling and relaxation to get it all to gel. 

Hoping I can find the key before outdoor is in full swing....


----------



## cbrunson

montigre said:


> For me, at the beginning of this indoor season, I found that my sight picture would open up as I pulled into the wall and would actually get considerably worse the harder I pulled. I made quite a few tune changes to the bow (thanks Jesse B) and now it seems to be opening up when I relax my hand. I'm thinking I may just have to find that delicate balance between pulling and relaxation to get it all to gel.
> 
> Hoping I can find the key before outdoor is in full swing....


You may have solved your own issue. With a yield execution, that balance is critical if your execution is slow. That's one reason many learn how to dump it with a more static load. I think Lazarus has a good grip on this one. Hopefully he'll chime in. It would be mostly theory for me because I don't use that method. I do know the effects of changing holding pressure though.


----------



## jim p

I have heard that we all try to shoot at full distance and learn there when we should shoot up close and move back. So today I am moving up to 4 yards for a session. I will be using a vegas type target and trying to keep them in the 10 ring.

my hold is not rock solid so maybe this will help.


----------



## jim p

9 baby x's from 5.5 yards. I will have to try 10 yards later.


----------



## EPLC

Here's a couple of videos that I shot today. The first is my release and the second shows the range of motion I'm working with. Or at least what I had today, not one of my best.

http://youtu.be/BUGxhq_Sf_E
http://youtu.be/3XnnZVZimZc


----------



## jim p

The first video looked good to me. A longer d loop might get your draw forearm down some and more behind the arrow. This might help if you are having a problem with the sight wanting to drop low.

My 10 yard test showed that I can't keep all arrows in the 10 ring from 10 yards. So 10 yards or closer will be my firing line for a while. 

I need to take a video of my shooting to see if I am holding with my draw forearm high.

The second video was private so I couldn't view it.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Here's a couple of videos that I shot today. The first is my release and the second shows the range of motion I'm working with. Or at least what I had today, not one of my best.
> 
> http://youtu.be/BUGxhq_Sf_E
> http://youtu.be/3XnnZVZimZc



Can't see the second video.


----------



## cbrunson

jim p said:


> The first video looked good to me. A longer d loop might get your draw forearm down some and more behind the arrow. This might help if you are having a problem with the sight wanting to drop low.
> 
> My 10 yard test showed that I can't keep all arrows in the 10 ring from 10 yards. So 10 yards or closer will be my firing line for a while.
> 
> I need to take a video of my shooting to see if I am holding with my draw forearm high.
> 
> The second video was private so I couldn't view it.




Shooting the short game will help you learn to trust your release execution, but it will not help you hold better at 20 yds. Shooting longer distances is more beneficial for that.


----------



## EPLC

It works on this end but try this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XnnZVZimZc&feature=youtu.be


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> Can't see the second video.


I reformatted the video like the first one. http://youtu.be/FJLtl1EsnZg


----------



## jim p

The second video is playing now. I didn't see anything that I can comment on.


----------



## EPLC

jim p said:


> The second video is playing now. I didn't see anything that I can comment on.


I'm seeing a querky thing with the release side elbow that I don't like and some instability that followed. I'm going to continue with the video as I had not been using it lately. I also noticed I'm not staying with the shot long enough after the release but I don't want to turn this into a "how's my form" thing.


----------



## jim p

If you have some way to do a frame by frame of the video use it to check out the instant before the release breaks. I don't know if it makes a difference or not but you are releasing your pinky finger when you come to anchor. Keeping the pinky finger on the release should help it fire.


----------



## cbrunson

I'm not sure what you were wanting to show with the videos, but a really good description of your sight picture from the point it becomes the best hold, to the moment it fires, or when you decide to let down would be more beneficial for discussing holding issues.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> I'm not sure what you were wanting to show with the videos, but a really good description of your sight picture from the point it becomes the best hold, to the moment it fires, or when you decide to let down would be more beneficial for discussing holding issues.


I think the best description of what it is has been highlighted. My intention was to provide a view of my float through the point of execution. This was not a good example of my "best" hold but is typical for much of the time. I've picked up on a few things that I want to work on today and see if I cam make some improvements. Today I'm going to produce 3 separate videos.

1. No sight on the bow, or sight blocked out.
2. With the sight on the bow, aiming without firing.
3. Another from start to finish.

Of course I'll warm up properly before starting the project.


----------



## EPLC

jim p said:


> If you have some way to do a frame by frame of the video use it to check out the instant before the release breaks. I don't know if it makes a difference or not but you are releasing your pinky finger when you come to anchor. Keeping the pinky finger on the release should help it fire.


It's a 3 finger release.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> I think the best description of what it is has been highlighted. My intention was to provide a view of my float through the point of execution. This was not a good example of my "best" hold but is typical for much of the time. I've picked up on a few things that I want to work on today and see if I cam make some improvements. Today I'm going to produce 3 separate videos.
> 
> 1. No sight on the bow, or sight blocked out.
> 2. With the sight on the bow, aiming without firing.
> 3. Another from start to finish.
> 
> Of course I'll warm up properly before starting the project.


I meant with regards to what the dot is doing.

Is it slowly floating mostly in circles or figure eights?
Is there more horizontal motion than vertical?
Does it get bigger during the release execution?
Do you try to time the release with what you normally see for the dot to settle in? (meaning when it usually comes to a stop)
What is the minimum perceived movement normally? (inside the ten? inside the nine?)
When do you decide to execute the shot?
Do you come in from the top or the bottom? How fast?
Are you trying to start the release while the dot is still settling, or waiting until it settles?

It looked to me like you were maybe starting your release before you were settled in on the target. Are you shooting with the clicker? I can't tell what your dot is doing from a video.

I won't say how long you should try to hold because for me it varies. The only thing I would suggest, is studying it longer for the purpose of understanding what is happening.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> I meant with regards to what the dot is doing.
> 
> Is it slowly floating mostly in circles or figure eights? More choppy than slowly floating.
> Is there more horizontal motion than vertical? Horizontal in kind of an oval motion from 2:00 to 7:00/9:00.
> Does it get bigger during the release execution? Yes, sometimes.
> Do you try to time the release with what you normally see for the dot to settle in? (meaning when it usually comes to a stop) It generally doesn't stop. I try and go through the execution without stopping in an even flow. At least that's my intent.
> What is the minimum perceived movement normally? (inside the ten? inside the nine?) Mostly within the 9, sometimes darts out into the 8 but comes right back in.
> When do you decide to execute the shot? See below, last question.
> Do you come in from the top or the bottom? How fast? Slightly from the top but more right at it than anything else. Doesn't take any time at all because I'm generally not far off.
> Are you trying to start the release while the dot is still settling, or waiting until it settles? This may be an issue as I hate waiting.
> It looked to me like you were maybe starting your release before you were settled in on the target. A mentioned above, I am aware of this, difficult to break though. I think more use of the video may help.
> Are you shooting with the clicker? No
> I can't tell what your dot is doing from a video. Generally the dot will stay within the gold but flirts with the 8 ring on some days. It is a oblong shape, right to left with the left side wider than the right. It's also more choppy than smooth if I had to put a label on it.
> I won't say how long you should try to hold because for me it varies. The only thing I would suggest, is studying it longer for the purpose of understanding what is happening. Good advice but I need more data to study. I also noticed that I was feeling fatigued yesterday and again today. Haven't taken a day off in quite a while so I'm do for some rest.




Here's the video shot this morning. 1. No aiming 2. Aiming w/o Execution 3. Full Execution and arrow placement - 3 arrows each scenario. 
http://youtu.be/Mg3IeaP_2LY


----------



## cbrunson

One more question, What's your draw weight?


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> One more question, What's your draw weight?


Currently 45#


----------



## jim p

Well that shows how well I can see.

I also shoot a 3 finger release. I used to shoot with my pinky finger straight and stiff as a board. I am now shooting with a curled and relaxed pinky finger.

Your pinky is relaxed. Intentionally curling the pinky will cause the ring finger to rotate the handle of the hinge.



EPLC said:


> It's a 3 finger release.


----------



## montigre

A couple of things that really caught my eye on this last set of videos as well as the first which may be contributing to the issues you're seeing with hyour hold and execution.

1) Bow side: As you pull harder into the wall the added pressure being applied to your bow hand seemed to have initiated a tremor at the thumb. You're also not loading up the bow arm prior to raising the bow to the target, so you're getting a slightly varying pressure being applied to the bow hand--this may cause some of the release hangups and POI changes.

2) Release side: You're probably not going to like hearing this, but you're collapsing and re-establishing back tension either just as the shot breaks or as a method of getting the shot to break. Each time your release hand moves forward a few mm prior to the release firing and your fingers opening as part of your follow through.

I'm not criticizing or instructing, just pointing out a couple of things that slapped me in the face that you may wish to investigate further.


----------



## EPLC

montigre said:


> A couple of things that really caught my eye on this last set of videos as well as the first which may be contributing to the issues you're seeing with hyour hold and execution.
> 
> 1) Bow side: As you pull harder into the wall the added pressure being applied to your bow hand seemed to have initiated a tremor at the thumb. You're also not loading up the bow arm prior to raising the bow to the target, so you're getting a slightly varying pressure being applied to the bow hand--this may cause some of the release hangups and POI changes.
> 
> 2) Release side: You're probably not going to like hearing this, but you're collapsing and re-establishing back tension either just as the shot breaks or as a method of getting the shot to break. Each time your release hand moves forward a few mm prior to the release firing and your fingers opening as part of your follow through.
> 
> I'm not criticizing or instructing, just pointing out a couple of things that slapped me in the face that you may wish to investigate further.


Good information, I'll look for those things. Thanks. I noticed the thumb thing and could feel it. Interesting was that was the low shot.


----------



## ron w

I noticed the collapse , too. 1st and 3rd shot collapsed just a bit, 2cd. shot, collapse was not noticeable to me.


----------



## EPLC

montigre said:


> A couple of things that really caught my eye on this last set of videos as well as the first which may be contributing to the issues you're seeing with hyour hold and execution.
> 
> 1) Bow side: As you pull harder into the wall the added pressure being applied to your bow hand seemed to have initiated a tremor at the thumb. You're also not loading up the bow arm prior to raising the bow to the target, so you're getting a slightly varying pressure being applied to the bow hand--this may cause some of the release hangups and POI changes.
> 
> 2) Release side: You're probably not going to like hearing this, but you're collapsing and re-establishing back tension either just as the shot breaks or as a method of getting the shot to break. Each time your release hand moves forward a few mm prior to the release firing and your fingers opening as part of your follow through.
> 
> I'm not criticizing or instructing, just pointing out a couple of things that slapped me in the face that you may wish to investigate further.





ron w said:


> I noticed the collapse , too. 1st and 3rd shot collapsed just a bit, 2cd. shot, collapse was not noticeable to me.


I'm not seeing it in the hand as much as I'm picking it up in the release elbow coming forward slightly. As mentioned I'm in a slightly fatigued state right now and could use a couple of days off. I may take Thursday and Friday off and see what happens after that.


----------



## montigre

EPLC said:


> I'm not seeing it in the hand as much as I'm picking it up in the release elbow coming forward slightly. As mentioned I'm in a slightly fatigued state right now and could use a couple of days off. I may take Thursday and Friday off and see what happens after that.


Yes, your elbow is moving forward, that's why I pick it up in the hand (it is all happening fractions of a second before you open [relax] your fingers). My eyes are seeing almost a subtle double clutch action. Not as evident on shot #2 as Ron stated; you had less forward push into the bow hand on that shot (no thumb tremor), but it is there. 

Resting would probably be a very good idea--it would allow you to make a much more accurate appraisal of what is happening. 

That's all I will say for the time being. Time for me to shut up and learn what more experienced shooters have to say.


----------



## ron w

I saw it in the elbow coming forward, actually what I saw was the elbow coming out of alignment, outside the line of flight....loosing back tension. with all the movement going on at the hand, with a manipulative engine method, it's hard to see what is creep and what is movement from release manipulation.
one of the benefits of having a back tension engine is that it greatly reduces the potential for collapse, because release activation has to be in the opposite direction of collapse.


----------



## cbrunson

montigre said:


> A couple of things that really caught my eye on this last set of videos as well as the first which may be contributing to the issues you're seeing with hyour hold and execution.
> 
> 1) Bow side: As you pull harder into the wall the added pressure being applied to your bow hand seemed to have initiated a tremor at the thumb. You're also not loading up the bow arm prior to raising the bow to the target, so you're getting a slightly varying pressure being applied to the bow hand--this may cause some of the release hangups and POI changes.


This is the first thing I would concentrate on. The tremor was a huge red flag. 

I am going to first throw out one of the basics that has been discussed many times here that I catch myself doing sometimes as well. Tension increasing in your hand as you start to execute the shot. It looks like you might be trying to tighten the float by stiffening up your hand. It is a natural thing our brain tells our hand to do to steady something. You may not be consciously doing it, but it is happening. Once you get your bow arm locked in, consciously relax your hand. Let the bow sit there. You also have a lot of contact on your palm.

This is just a start. There are a few other things, but I bet if you soften up, you will cut your movement in half and the jerky motion will also stop. Practice that when you get back to it.


----------



## Lazarus

I liked the timing of the shot EPLC. 

I don't know how long you had rested before shooting the three real time arrows. But this is what I saw; I saw you shoot 3 arrows in 1 minute and 3 seconds, (being very generous with the clock.) That is Way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way too fast. Maybe not for a really aggressive shooter in his 20's. But for folks in our (your) age bracket it's crazy fast. You must allow some time to let the blood re-flow into the areas that are stressed. You have to feel it replenishing your muscles, if you can't feel it you're still shooting too fast. 

*Slow down!* Even stop and run your opposite hand down your bicep and forearm between shots to stimulate it if that's what it takes to slow yourself down. Also, re-position your feet. (I know, some of the experts criticize this. Heck with that, they're not 70 years old.) This stimulates some blood movement too. Last, you got the Jesse Broadwater look down to the T. Just don't let the calmness translate into laziness. Light a fire on your insides, get on your horse internally! 

Take a break between shots and you just might find yourself not dealing with some of the things others have pointed out above. 

I know.......this is different than most of the advice you gotten. Different? From me? Imagine that. :wink:


----------



## jim p

I don't know what I am seeing. Something just seems to be off at the moment of release. It is almost like you are punching the hinge. 

I think that some frame by frame analysis might be helpful.


----------



## cbrunson

I completely agree Lazarus. I noticed the hand issue on the first shot though. 

Like I said there are multiple things here.


----------



## Mahly

If you have, or know someone with an iPhone6, you can video yourself in super slo motion. Then your frame by frame will be clearer. 
Seeing the same as most.... Bow hand seems pretty busy at the shot.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> This is the first thing I would concentrate on. The tremor was a huge red flag.
> 
> I am going to first throw out one of the basics that has been discussed many times here that I catch myself doing sometimes as well. Tension increasing in your hand as you start to execute the shot. It looks like you might be trying to tighten the float by stiffening up your hand. It is a natural thing our brain tells our hand to do to steady something. You may not be consciously doing it, but it is happening. Once you get your bow arm locked in, consciously relax your hand. Let the bow sit there. You also have a lot of contact on your palm.
> 
> This is just a start. There are a few other things, but I bet if you soften up, you will cut your movement in half and the jerky motion will also stop. Practice that when you get back to it.


I agree about the hand tightening but I think there is more tightening than the hand. I can also feel something tightening in the back side of the bow shoulder as well. I increased my loop by .030" a few days ago and have been feeling a tad off since. While .030" doesn't seem like a lot my hold hasn't been the same since. I do like your suggestion of softening up as I was working that recently but haven't been very successful since the loop thing. 



Lazarus said:


> I liked the timing of the shot EPLC.
> 
> I don't know how long you had rested before shooting the three real time arrows. But this is what I saw; I saw you shoot 3 arrows in 1 minute and 3 seconds, (being very generous with the clock.) That is Way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way too fast. Maybe not for a really aggressive shooter in his 20's. But for folks in our (your) age bracket it's crazy fast. You must allow some time to let the blood re-flow into the areas that are stressed. You have to feel it replenishing your muscles, if you can't feel it you're still shooting too fast.
> 
> *Slow down!* Even stop and run your opposite hand down your bicep and forearm between shots to stimulate it if that's what it takes to slow yourself down. Also, re-position your feet. (I know, some of the experts criticize this. Heck with that, they're not 70 years old.) This stimulates some blood movement too. Last, you got the Jesse Broadwater look down to the T. Just don't let the calmness translate into laziness. Light a fire on your insides, get on your horse internally!
> 
> Take a break between shots and you just might find yourself not dealing with some of the things others have pointed out above.
> 
> I know.......this is different than most of the advice you gotten. Different? From me? Imagine that. :wink:


There was really no breaks between the 3 sets of video as they were shot in parallel, one after the other. I had been letting down a lot until about a week ago but lately I seem to be back on rapid fire. 



Mahly said:


> If you have, or know someone with an iPhone6, you can video yourself in super slo motion. Then your frame by frame will be clearer.
> Seeing the same as most.... Bow hand seems pretty busy at the shot.


These were actually shot with my iPhone 6... I tried some slow-motion but there seems to be a glitch in the slow motion as it jumps to real time when the shot breaks for some reason. I'll have to look and see if there is anything written on that.


----------



## Mahly

The first few, and the last few of each vid are full speed. Just let the camera run for a few extra seconds, then edit that out.


----------



## Shogun1

That or just slide the markers to the left and right to play more of it in slow motion. 

Aw shucks, can I even suggest that? I don't even own an iPhone 6. But I know folks that do -- and know you can control that in the playback.


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> The first few, and the last few of each vid are full speed. Just let the camera run for a few extra seconds, then edit that out.





Shogun1 said:


> That or just slide the markers to the left and right to play more of it in slow motion.
> 
> Aw shucks, can I even suggest that? I don't even own an iPhone 6. But I know folks that do -- and know you can control that in the playback.


Good info, thanks to both of you.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> I agree about the hand tightening but I think there is more tightening than the hand. I can also feel something tightening in the back side of the bow shoulder as well. I increased my loop by .030" a few days ago and have been feeling a tad off since. While .030" doesn't seem like a lot my hold hasn't been the same since. I do like your suggestion of softening up as I was working that recently but haven't been very successful since the loop thing.


One of the problems I noticed when learning to relax the bow arm is that you naturally want to drift down at first making you tense up again, trying to raise it back up. That is a problem with relaxing too much on your release arm and not keeping enough pressure against your bow arm, or letting your shoulder collapse. 

If you focus on keeping your shoulder down, start pulling with your release and then start with relaxing your hand. Then relax your arm muscles. If your elbow wants to bend, straighten it just until it stops trying to bend, but don't force it straight. You still need to relax it. Once you feel your whole bow arm relax, you will control the fine movement of the dot with only your pullling force from your release hand. 

After you get this part working correctly, then we can talk about how the different release methods affect the float.


----------



## ron w

yup, I call it "relaxed under tension" and you're right about the shoulder. keeping it down and back, sets up the foundation in your upper arm, at the shoulder and through quadricep muscle, to support the bow with the remainder of your arm staying relaxed and hand in a bone-to-bone condition..
push from the shoulder, not the front half of your arm. when you push with the front half of your arm, it places tension in the hand.


----------



## montigre

ron w said:


> yup, I call it "relaxed under tension" and you're right about the shoulder. keeping it down and back, sets up the foundation in your upper arm, at the shoulder and through quadricep muscle, to support the bow with the remainder of your arm staying relaxed and hand in a bone-to-bone condition..
> push from the shoulder, not the front half of your arm. when you push with the front half of your arm, it places tension in the hand.


I think you may mean tricep muscle...the quad is on the sit down side of the body...lol!!


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> One of the problems I noticed when learning to relax the bow arm is that you naturally want to drift down at first making you tense up again, trying to raise it back up. That is a problem with relaxing too much on your release arm and not keeping enough pressure against your bow arm, or letting your shoulder collapse.
> 
> If you focus on keeping your shoulder down, start pulling with your release and then start with relaxing your hand. Then relax your arm muscles. If your elbow wants to bend, straighten it just until it stops trying to bend, but don't force it straight. You still need to relax it. Once you feel your whole bow arm relax, you will control the fine movement of the dot with only your pullling force from your release hand.
> 
> After you get this part working correctly, then we can talk about how the different release methods affect the float.


Yes, relaxing the bow arm isn't easily gotten right. I did shorten the loop which seems to have helped the range of motion but the thumb twitch was in full force today. I can stop it, but then all else goes south... I did work on keeping the elbow back. Here's my video for today. http://youtu.be/cNpn6zuohUM



ron w said:


> yup, I call it "relaxed under tension" and you're right about the shoulder. keeping it down and back, sets up the foundation in your upper arm, at the shoulder and through quadricep muscle, to support the bow with the remainder of your arm staying relaxed and hand in a bone-to-bone condition..
> push from the shoulder, not the front half of your arm. when you push with the front half of your arm, it places tension in the hand.


I tried the quad relaxation but fell down???


----------



## Mahly

EPLC, have you ever tried a finger sling? If so, results?


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> EPLC, have you ever tried a finger sling? If so, results?


Not often enough to even comment on them... tried them a couple of times at most.


----------



## ron w

you guys are right !,.... my mistake. old dog disease got me again !.


----------



## nochance

montigre said:


> I think you may mean tricep muscle...the quad is on the sit down side of the body...lol!!


front leg isn't it?


----------



## jim p

Looks good. I would like to have those three shots anytime.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Yes, relaxing the bow arm isn't easily gotten right. I did shorten the loop which seems to have helped the range of motion but the thumb twitch was in full force today. I can stop it, but then all else goes south... I did work on keeping the elbow back. Here's my video for today. http://youtu.be/cNpn6zuohUM


It's not easy but it is worth putting the effort into it. 

How did your sight picture look today?


----------



## montigre

nochance said:


> front leg isn't it?


Yes, the 4 muscles that make up the quads sit you down while the 4 muscles that make up the hamstring group stand you up....


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> One of the problems I noticed when learning to relax the bow arm is that you naturally want to drift down at first making you tense up again, trying to raise it back up. That is a problem with relaxing too much on your release arm and not keeping enough pressure against your bow arm, or letting your shoulder collapse.
> 
> If you focus on keeping your shoulder down, start pulling with your release and then start with relaxing your hand. Then relax your arm muscles. If your elbow wants to bend, straighten it just until it stops trying to bend, but don't force it straight. You still need to relax it. Once you feel your whole bow arm relax, you will control the fine movement of the dot with only your pullling force from your release hand.
> 
> After you get this part working correctly, then we can talk about how the different release methods affect the float.


Possibly one of the most important posts ever on AT... Thanks!



cbrunson said:


> It's not easy but it is worth putting the effort into it.
> 
> How did your sight picture look today?


My sight picture today was much improved over yesterday. That said, this evening at my League I worked on that little nugget above and all I can say is thanks again. My release was set a little too slow to really take advantage of it but even with this I made some of the best shots I've ever made and my hold was amazing. Some shots just sat there and many floated around the 10 ring. I only shot a 435 but the score was held back by the speed of the release. I shot for about a half hour after we were done and I really started to get the feel and was drilling X after X. I still need to tweak some things but I feel I have an understanding that I did not have only a few short hours ago. Before I started messing around with different releases I was actually working on a variation of loading the wall something like this but I was loading the hand. This works much better. Now to practice it, haven't even gone there yet.


----------



## Mahly

EPLC said:


> Not often enough to even comment on them... tried them a couple of times at most.


The reason I bring up the finger sling is IF that busy thumb is a distraction, a finger sling should make it sit still.

The 2nd and 3rd shots in your latest vid looked like you were trying to stop the thumb,
If not, forget I said anything. Hate to make you think of something else to work on....well, other than that arrow twirl needs a little work


----------



## Sasquech

Also if the release of rotated up to 45 it will likely go off easier and quicker with out adjustment be careful when you try it. Don't want premature release


----------



## EPLC

U


Mahly said:


> The reason I bring up the finger sling is IF that busy thumb is a distraction, a finger sling should make it sit still.
> 
> The 2nd and 3rd shots in your latest vid looked like you were trying to stop the thumb,
> If not, forget I said anything. Hate to make you think of something else to work on....well, other than that arrow twirl needs a little work


I don't believe the thumb was doing its thing last night using the Brunson method. I can't be 100% certain because there is no video. I'll try and validate with video today. I'm assuming a much improved "me" today...


----------



## ron w

yup, I've found that finger sling has a tendency to relax my hand better than a typical bow sling. I don't really know why, and to be honest, I don't really care why !.
they are a bit more of PIA to deal with getting on and off, but for me, it's small price to pay for the benefit.
maybe the feeling of the sling on the thumb and finger, sends a message that promotes relaxing the hand.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Possibly one of the most important posts ever on AT... Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> My sight picture today was much improved over yesterday. That said, this evening at my League I worked on that little nugget above and all I can say is thanks again. My release was set a little too slow to really take advantage of it but even with this I made some of the best shots I've ever made and my hold was amazing. Some shots just sat there and many floated around the 10 ring. I only shot a 435 but the score was held back by the speed of the release. I shot for about a half hour after we were done and I really started to get the feel and was drilling X after X. I still need to tweak some things but I feel I have an understanding that I did not have only a few short hours ago. Before I started messing around with different releases I was actually working on a variation of loading the wall something like this but I was loading the hand. This works much better. Now to practice it, haven't even gone there yet.


That's great!!

It is truly one of those instant revelation things when you see that you can actually get the dot to stop moving.

The next part is release speed/balance. This is not very critical, but there are some things that make it easier to be more consistent over a large number of shots. I'll elaborate when I have a little more time.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> That's great!!
> 
> It is truly one of those instant revelation things when you see that you can actually get the dot to stop moving.
> 
> The next part is release speed/balance. This is not very critical, but there are some things that make it easier to be more consistent over a large number of shots. I'll elaborate when I have a little more time.


It certainly is! Can't wait to work on this later on this morning. We need more of this very insightful information.


----------



## erdman41

Use a finger sling for two weeks. Then shoot once without it and you will know why you should use one. Best to do this on a padded floor.


----------



## ron w

that will happen with a finger sling or a regular bow sling, if you forget to put your hand through it.
don't ask me how I know this !.


----------



## SonnyThomas

erdman41 said:


> Use a finger sling for two weeks. Then shoot once without it and you will know why you should use one. Best to do this on a padded floor.


You've been there, huh? So have I. 

Customer wanted me to test shoot his brand new bow. I will never forget this. Drew back, aimed and let go. Arrow went down range and so did the bow. Can you imagine how sick I was? Yeah, bow skidded down range, I don't know 10 or 12 feet. Luckily, no damage. Both of us feeling good about the bow we went to target. The arrow was in the bull's eye. I suggested a bow sling and he agreed.


----------



## erdman41

SonnyThomas said:


> You've been there, huh? So have I


Never dropped one. My freestyle rig is close to 9 pounds so I have been able to reach and grab it. The rest on the other hand has left a scar on my hand from the 3-4 times I forgot to put on the sling. I know slow learner it took more than once.


----------



## ron w

I've got the "rest scar", on the top of my thumb knuckle as well !. mainly from years of shooting bows that were much more reactive to the shot than my Supra.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Yeah, customer's bow was just over 4 pounds.


----------



## SonnyThomas

erdman41 said:


> Never dropped one. My freestyle rig is close to 9 pounds so I have been able to reach and grab it. The rest on the other hand has left a scar on my hand from the 3-4 times I forgot to put on the sling. I know slow learner it took more than once.





ron w said:


> I've got the "rest scar", on the top of my thumb knuckle as well !. mainly from years of shooting bows that were much more reactive to the shot than my Supra.


No scars, but surely bloodied up some. Got a picture somewhere.


----------



## ron w

I shot Merlins for years, they had a tendency to really jump out of your hand, on the shot. actually had to look for a more docile bow, because I was getting arthritic, in my big thumb knuckle and the recoil was aggravating it to the point of stopping me from shooting and really tensing up my hand.


----------



## EPLC

I think we have just about covered finger slings. Now back to the main topic. 

I wasn't able to shoot any video today because my tripod was in my wife's car... I did shoot though and continued working on the Brunson method. I didn't shoot for any extended period because I need some rest. This became apparent right from the start so I decided to take it easy today and not shoot a lot. I shot a 10-15 minute warm up and then hung a 5 spot and shot my 1 arrow drill for 12 ends. My first 6 shots went very well with all 6 inside out X's. I took a little control back and shot 5's on shots 7 & 8. Of the next 4 shots, 3 were X's with only one touching the line and shot 11 was a 5. Needless to say my good shots were very good. I did notice that I need more recovery time in between shots as this had much to do with my misses. I also picked up on the fact that I had no low left misses which is commonplace for me. I also did not see the thumb tremor with the exception of a couple of shots. These shots were those that my relaxation wasn't the best. I have some work to do on this process, mostly practice, but there is real promise here. 

Here's my target after 12 ends/arrows.


----------



## cbrunson

It does get harder to relax your bow arm when you get fatigued. Longer rest between shots will help.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> It does get harder to relax your bow arm when you get fatigued. Longer rest between shots will help.


I'm really seeing that... and at my age it is even more important.


----------



## Padgett

You know, I hadn't thought about relaxing my front arm for a long time. It used to be a issue because I had a funky grip but I revised my grip to the more common one used by most pro shooters and that lead me to setting my grip before the shot and not messing with during the draw cycle or after coming to anchor. By setting my grip perfect with my fingers relaxed and continuing to do so through out the draw cycle it totally changed the feel of my front arm during and after coming to anchor. My front arm became more reliable to its overall feel and my shooting instantly improved. I don't have to think about it anymore so I hadn't thought about it until you and cbrunson brought it up.

The key is in the setting of the grip and getting the fingers nice and perfect and relaxed and then as you draw there is absolutely nothing happening to the fingers and they just remain the same. Why does this work because the hand and wrist and forearm do absolutely nothing when drawing the bow so there should be absolutely no muscle contraction at all in them anywhere, they are a true bone to bone thing. 

Then the major thing to have covered after that is your elbow being in the bone to bone straight position without being locked out and it not moving which allows the tricep and bicep to not contract anymore than to just maintain that setting. 

This is why it is a sweet feeling to raise the bow above level slightly and allow the bow to drop as you draw because it gives a fluid motion to the front half and doesn't make the muscles feel like they need to do any work.


----------



## EPLC

After only 3 says of working on my range of motion/float I see a vast improvement over what I had just this past Tuesday. There were no changes to the equipment over this time period. The only changes were made to the shooter, basic form, etc. The biggest change was to implement the suggestions made by cbrunson concerning bow arm relaxing and controlling the shot by pulling into the wall. 

http://youtu.be/4Djf7Lm09ts


----------



## Mahly

:thumbs_up


----------



## EPLC

grantmac said:


> Day 1 you seemed to settle into the shot, then creep into the valley before finally coming back into the wall. For me that is a very tiring way to shoot.
> Day 2 the transition between the draw and the execution was much less tentative. The overall shot timing was shorter.
> 
> I think your initial float after arriving at anchor was similar, but you managed to break shot shot in that initial float rather than trying to force it to get better on day 2.
> 
> Just what I see.
> 
> -Grant


Good pickup but there were a lot of difficulties on that first shot. Day 2 (actually day 4) was a lot easier on me from both a mental and physical standpoint. I can actually see the confidence in my face on that last end. Holding just makes it so much simpler to execute. I feel you can get away with so much more on the backend than you can on the front half. I'm still just learning this little nugget but I've been able to repeat it now after several attempts... I've had all too many things that seemed good initially, only to find difficulty in the repeatability. This process is easily executed and repeated.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Good pickup but there were a lot of difficulties on that first shot. Day 2 (actually day 4) was a lot easier on me from both a mental and physical standpoint. I can actually see the confidence in my face on that last end. Holding just makes it so much simpler to execute. I feel you can get away with so much more on the backend than you can on the front half. I'm still just learning this little nugget but I've been able to repeat it now after several attempts... I've had all too many things that seemed good initially, only to find difficulty in the repeatability. This process is easily executed and repeated.


That little nugget didn't come from me originally.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> That little nugget didn't come from me originally.


Maybe so, but you were the one that was willing to pass it on... My hat is off to you for doing that as there are so many that are unwilling to get into the finer details. For those that think you can't improve on the sight picture, just watch this video. And this is only after a few days of using it. About 1000 or so arrows from now I'm expecting really good things.


----------



## bowman72

those little breakthroughs are awesome when you've reached a plateau. Congrats.


----------



## EPLC

bowman72 said:


> those little breakthroughs are awesome when you've reached a plateau. Congrats.


Yes, and I've slowed down quite a bit since November https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbqCO4VU0Ro

And here's my float from November https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l06nbmGVN8


----------



## EPLC

Well, after shooting the Brunson process since last Wednesday, what better way to jump right in than to shoot the NE Indoor Sectionals this morning. My bow side shoulder has been killing me and woke me up at 5:00 AM but this didn't deter me either. I shot 299 40X with 19 I/O so things could have been better but I was happy to compete and even happier with many of the shots I made. Having the sore shoulder made it somewhat difficult to relax the bow side but the process worked reasonably well in spite of this. My 4 came in the 7th end with the first arrow. A "friend" shooting in the same group reminded me how well I was doing and that I hadn't missed any at the half. My initial urge was to say "there's a long way to go" but I held back and said nothing. Instead I started thinking "why did he have to do that, he does this all the time". Of course the distraction (my fault, not his) changed my line of thinking and made that next end all too important. Not only did I shoot a 4, I only had 1 X as well in that end. I guess I will take from that is my mind is still very fragile in the process vs. performance area... I'll also take away the process was what I had hoped for as I didn't have any expectations besides working the process in competition. Overall, I was quite happy with the outcome.


----------



## bugeaterNE

Shot x qution


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Well, after shooting the Brunson process since last Wednesday, what better way to jump right in than to shoot the NE Indoor Sectionals this morning. My bow side shoulder has been killing me and woke me up at 5:00 AM but this didn't deter me either. I shot 299 40X with 19 I/O so things could have been better but I was happy to compete and even happier with many of the shots I made. Having the sore shoulder made it somewhat difficult to relax the bow side but the process worked reasonably well in spite of this. My 4 came in the 7th end with the first arrow. A "friend" shooting in the same group reminded me how well I was doing and that I hadn't missed any at the half. My initial urge was to say "there's a long way to go" but I held back and said nothing. Instead I started thinking "why did he have to do that, he does this all the time". Of course the distraction (my fault, not his) changed my line of thinking and made that next end all too important. Not only did I shoot a 4, I only had 1 X as well in that end. I guess I will take from that is my mind is still very fragile in the process vs. performance area... I'll also take away the process was what I had hoped for as I didn't have any expectations besides working the process in competition. Overall, I was quite happy with the outcome.


That's the part of the game where I still have a lot of work to do. It's frustrating, but with each competition, I get better.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> That's the part of the game where I still have a lot of work to do. It's frustrating, but with each competition, I get better.


Still, I feel pretty good about my first time in real competition with an entirely new process. Of course I would have liked to have scored higher, but this was still a confidence builder, if not in score, certainly from a process perspective. The shots that involved a nice relaxed bow arm were literally all in the X and nearly half of those were I/O. I'm very happy with this after less than a week. I've not drawn the bow today as I'm nursing the shoulder and this will be difficult to continue as a new bow is "out for delivery"... (not a cure for anything, just an impulse buy )


----------



## EPLC

Here's an interesting close up video of several Pro Archer's release. Nathan Brooks is using an interesting thumb trigger, looks like a spring that compresses as he tightens his hand on it. You can see this at .045 in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWapi2kjCc4


----------

