# ?Back Tension, ? Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!



## TNMAN

I shot nfaa pro div from '78 to mid 80's, mostly in the smaller pond Southeast. There were plenty of pro's "cranking" hinges during that time to winning scores, and some who were shooting what could fit the description of what some now call traditional backtension, or at least a combination of some rotation accomplished with the back with some assist from fingers. Personally have no dog in the fight of what's what or what's best as I shot a Failsafe that entire time, bought directly off of Loyd Napier's quiver at a shoot in Bossier City, LA.


----------



## rebeldawg

And the record breaking first person post starts in 3...2...1... Go!


----------



## mike 66

this is gonna be a long story;thanks for posting this Lazarus


----------



## cr1974

This is a BIG can of worms open here


----------



## Mahly

Until we can hold a census on what people believe is the most widely accepted means of firing a release, this will be an endless debate.
I think it is well established that there is more than one way to fire a release, even a hinge.
For every way to shoot one, there is a pro (or several) that people can use as an example of why their way is best.
I don't shoot pure back tension, but there are better archers and obviously pros that do (or did), and will blow my scores away.
As such, I can't say they are "wrong". Just that what I do now is the best way I have tried for me.
Different strokes.....


----------



## Rick!

*“Back Tension, “ Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!*


----------



## EPLC

Lazarus said:


> Have been doing a lot of reading lately from the era that hinges were invented. There is some speculations to the actual date they were invented. The earliest I can find any advertising of them (Stan's) is a Stanislawski II that was advertised 1975. I am assuming the Stanislaswki One would have been the rope/spike that was so popular in the 1972-1975 era. I know there are people on this forum that have claimed to be actively shooting a hinge as early as 1974. While possible, that's unlikely.
> 
> Below you will find a picture I snapped from the January 1978 copy of Archery (NFAA) Magazine. The article was asking former Vegas winners what release they used and how. This pic is of Bob Jacobson who won the Vegas tournament in 1974 as indicated under his picture. The main reason I posted this is the second box. The question was; how do you fire your current release? You will see his answer.
> 
> My main points; First, Bob Jacobson was probably the first Pro to shoot the hinge succesfully, he did not do so *firing* using "back tension." He says he *kept* back back tension (while running a firing processs.) He did not say he fired the release using "back tension." Second point; This whole idea of relaxing through the shot is not a new idea invented in 2004 by one of the current "guru's." Fact, it's been around since the invention of the hinge as indicated in his response, from 1978. And it didn't take a 2000 word article to explain it, in fact, if these simple statements by Bob Jacobson were all we knew about firing a hinge we'd probably be a lot better off today.
> 
> View attachment 2138833
> 
> 
> I know......for some of you this really proves nothing. And you're still going to fight the idea that "back tension" is the most widely accepted means of *firing* a release. Nothing will convince you it's a myth. But posting this makes me feel better.  Been a little slow around here, now you can flame away.


Thanks for doing the research on this Laz! Looks like my theory still has legs.


----------



## SonnyThomas

I also found reference of the Stanislawski hinge making it's appearance in 1974, but the person noting such said he didn't try a Stan hinge until 1977. Wish I had copied it...

The Problem...What Guru is to be proclaimed and not burst the bubble of the other Guru? Both gave of their concept (?) the same year.
March of 2004 Griv, George Ryals, softening the index finger and pulling with the middle and ring finger.
July of 2004, Larry Wise, fingers should be held with equal tightness.

Lazarus found Bob Jacobson. With Bob Jacobson's description it would well seems he deserves credit or at least acknowledged by one of the Gurus...Mmm? So it isn't his idea, just expanded? So the back tension thing was going on, proclaimed correct of the times even though Bob gave his description. Going up year by year would be exhausting. So we leap forward...
AT's own Daniel Boone posted in January of 2012 that gave of the other means to fire a hinge which more details Bob Jacobson's description. The "door" was opened, light given of what the Pros have been doing. Since then...since Facebook more and more Pros are telling of the other means...Have they given credit to any one individual or "this is the way I do it"?

But will back tension die out? If it works, it works. Those professing of excessive movement to fire the hinge with back tension must be doing something wrong? How much movement is necessary to fire a hinge? That .006" clickers exist says not much. Some profess to "set" the hinge and forget it, which gives to learning your hinge. So if you practice correctly and long enough that "movement" becomes darn little. 

I've tried other shooters hinges, never changed anything, just careful and no problems. I do ask though. Some set the hinge so that just hanging will allow it to eventually fire. I sold one of my hinges to a friend. He set it for him. I traded to get it back (long story). I got home and "fired up" my bow. I didn't change the setting and it shot great, arrow slapping great with the first shots. I just recently told of it, the Stan Deuce and my friend. He had forgot how he set up to fire it and the hinge fired before he was ready. He exclaimed  I had changed it. "No, I didn't. You've been using that thumb release of yours." The gears in his head turned and instantly he pounded the heck out of 3 Xs.


----------



## xavier102772

Nice find Laz. Bob is doing the hold with back tension, fire by slowly squeezing the 2nd and 3rd fingers release technique. This is the one that I prefer as well. Although I have been experimenting with the relaxing the hand release technique as well. Trying to decide which one I like better. I do know that if I build a small amount of extra dynamic tension as I'm executing one of the 2 release techniques, the hold and float are much better than if I just maintain a static tension.

Padgett lists both of these hinge firing techniques on his site as well. He calls them simply "The Yield" and "The Squeeze an Pull" I believe. Pretty much the only two there are. Everything else is just a variation of these two.


----------



## EPLC

I challenge anyone to come up with written instruction for firing a hinge release using strictly back tension with a static hand prior to Y2K. If it exists, I'd love to see it. 

Right now there is evidence that back tension was used only to hold and hand manipulation was used to fire by some of the best professional shooters in the world from 1974 to the present. Apparently someone came up with the slick idea of back tension being the firing engine somewhere along the way. I remember in the early days of AT many of the pros being up in arms over a certain author not knowing what he was talking about.


----------



## ron w

well, I know that the way i explain doing it, is the way I learned and was taught how to do it in about 1974 or maybe 1975, by a PSE pro, by the mane of Joe Clemenic.....(not sure of the spelling of his last name). I am sure of the date, because in 1976, I used it, to win my division (FSU-B division) of the Milw. Sentinal Sports show tournament. not with a hinge, but with a "Thomas release". the process of back tension was , never the less,.....the same....and it was called "back tension". if you relaxed your fingers with that release, your arrow was gone, but who knows where, or when.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Well, I read that clip of Bob Jacobson again and again. He doesn't come right out and call his release a hinge. "similar to rope-spike" stands out.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> I challenge anyone to come up with written instruction for firing a hinge release using strictly back tension with a static hand prior to Y2K. If it exists, I'd love to see it.
> 
> Right now there is evidence that back tension was used only to hold and hand manipulation was used to fire by some of the best professional shooters in the world from 1974 to the present. Apparently someone came up with the slick idea of back tension being the firing engine somewhere along the way. I remember in the early days of AT many of the pros being up in arms over a certain author not knowing what he was talking about.


Well, I doubt you'll find instructions of any kind unless someone has them packed away and sees this. I've had to search high and low for information of some bows and you've got to search everywhere. I had old, old, PSE come in for repairs and a tune up. I called PSE. Much of all the old information was gone, destroyed or something. I had "feelers" out every where and finally a older retired PSE employee came forward with the information I needed. Buried and lost for some years, the sales of Ben Pearson Archery surfaced documents back to 1957.

Sort of interesting was finding this in Archery History. 1970, hold until it goes off. Though not a hinge release perhaps using back tension stems from this.


----------



## Lazarus

What really fascinates me about this whole discussion is this; the hinge was invented sometime in the mid-1970's. But there was really very little flow of information that existed about it until after the internet became popular. Over 25 years the hinge just remained somewhat obscure. I suppose some of that was because of the popularity of the finger punch (wrist strap) release. I suppose some of that gap was just due to the fact that information exchange used to be very slow prior to the internet. And last, it was probably just because no one really believed in it's effectiveness until the early 2000's. Odd. 



EPLC said:


> I challenge anyone to come up with written instruction for firing a hinge release using strictly back tension with a static hand prior to Y2K. If it exists, I'd love to see it.


What I would like to see is someone who is actually *FIRING* a release using "back tension," using no manipulation of the muscles in the hand and no movement of the fingers do what Levi did and get up in front of a group of people and explain it. Not a writer, not a "coach," not an internet legend hawking videos on AT. I'd like to see someone who makes their living shooting a bow come forth and say "that's how I do it." 

Maybe they're out there. I'm not certain I've ever heard anyone (that is shooting for a living) explain it that way.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> ... the process of back tension was , never the less,.....the same....and it was called "back tension". if you relaxed your fingers with that release, your arrow was gone, but who knows where, or when.


Once again, Ron has made my day... 👍👍👍


----------



## montigre

SonnyThomas said:


> Sort of interesting was finding this in Archery History. 1970, hold until it goes off. Though not a hinge release perhaps using back tension stems from this.


That is a gem. Looks like it was addressing the use of a release with a recurve though...Slightly different dynamics in play due to letoff or lack there of.


----------



## Lazarus

^^^ String angles too!!

Something I have really noticed while reading from "back in the day;" most of the Pro's talked about pulling into the wall, even though (by today's standards) there was no wall. I believe too much is made of the differences in the "walls" of the old bows and today's bows. I believe the higher hold weights (as they relate to firing a release) more than offset the mushiness of the old bows.


----------



## Rick!

EPLC said:


> I challenge anyone to come up with written instruction for firing a hinge release using strictly back tension with a static hand prior to Y2K. If it exists, I'd love to see it.
> 
> Right now there is evidence that back tension was used only to hold and hand manipulation was used to fire by some of the best professional shooters in the world from 1974 to the present. Apparently someone came up with the slick idea of back tension being the firing engine somewhere along the way. I remember in the early days of AT many of the pros being up in arms over a certain author not knowing what he was talking about.


Call up Bob at "jakes archery" in Utah.
801-225-9202

Maybe he's got time to answer your questions.


----------



## EPLC

Rick! said:


> Call up Bob at "jakes archery" in Utah.
> 801-225-9202
> 
> Maybe he's got time to answer your questions.


While "Bob" may have some great stories, I'm looking for some tangible evidence, not someone's opinion or recollection. In the early 2000's Bernie released his book. I don't have the book and I don't remember the exact words but in this book he proposes that the average archer is not capable of using the hand manipulation that the pros do, therefore using straight BT would be a better solution. I don't know of anything prior to this but if it exists please bring it forward.


----------



## ron w

you're demand "tangible evidence" by refusing to accept anecdote and recollection, and then you present exactly that, as your argument......even worse,.....in the same breath, you admit, "I can't remember the exact words" and that, "I don't have the book". 
boy,.... that's effective debate.
nothing like a double standard to try and twist a debate in your favor, EPLC !.....WOW!

did you honestly think someone wouldn't catch that?.


----------



## ron w

Lazarus said:


> ^^^ String angles too!!
> 
> Something I have really noticed while reading from "back in the day;" most of the Pro's talked about pulling into the wall, even though (by today's standards) there was no wall. I believe too much is made of the differences in the "walls" of the old bows and today's bows. I believe the higher hold weights (as they relate to firing a release) more than offset the mushiness of the old bows.


 search "wall bangers". very easy way to give the bows of that era, a solid back end. lots of guys used them. there were other ways ,too. using wheel diameters that rotated to the point that the string cables came off the wheel, 90 degrees to tangentially of the string angles at full draw, so the wheels could not rotate any further. both made the wall as hard as todays bows. and both were commonly done in the spot arena, by those who knew what was up.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> While "Bob" may have some great stories, I'm looking for some tangible evidence, not someone's opinion or recollection. In the early 2000's Bernie released his book. I don't have the book and I don't remember the exact words but in this book he proposes that the average archer is not capable of using the hand manipulation that the pros do, therefore using straight BT would be a better solution. I don't know of anything prior to this but if it exists please bring it forward.


Like I noted, you want information you have search for it. The man just might have brochures/pamphlet of the period. The Martin KamAct, gone these many years. A person wanted to rebuild one. His search led to man who tons of parts and instructions. The person found another KamAct and rebuilt it. Those two KamActs I posted in the History Talk forum.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> you're demand "tangible evidence" by refusing to accept anecdote and recollection, and then you present exactly that, as your argument......even worse,.....in the same breath, you admit, "I can't remember the exact words" and that, "I don't have the book".
> boy,.... that's effective debate.
> nothing like a double standard to try and twist a debate in your favor, EPLC !.....WOW!
> 
> did you honestly think someone wouldn't catch that?.


My assessment of Bernie's writings, while not word for word, is quite accurate, but please correct me where I'm wrong instead of evading the chance to provide anything of value. I've been totally honest and consistent about my positions, feelings, theories, shooting level, etc., can you say the same? I'm asking for some tangible evidence that would point to when the "cheating the hinge" thing actually started. Bernie's book is the earliest point of actual reference I could find with regard to this "old school" method. 

Now, instead of being a contrary, provide something of substance with your 40 years of knowledge. Your last example wasn't exactly supportive of your previous position.


----------



## SonnyThomas

ron w said:


> search "wall bangers". very easy way to give the bows of that era, a solid back end. lots of guys used them. there were other ways ,too. using wheel diameters that rotated to the point that the string cables came off the wheel, 90 degrees to tangentially of the string angles at full draw, so the wheels could not rotate any further. both made the wall as hard as todays bows. and both were commonly done in the spot arena, by those who knew what was up.


At the shop in the back room is a odd ball target wheel bow that when you draw the wall is rock hard. A club member has my Pearson target wheel bow and pretty much remember I drew to a wall. That particular bow was a Special Order bow, 37 pounds max, which it checked, and a 27 1/2" draw length. I bought the bow completely disassembled for $10, it was pretty - light blue riser and white limbs. The owner had taken it down for some reason, but said it shot great. With it's 27 1/2" draw and my 29" draw I anchored to the front corner of my chin. No sights, using fingers, Beman Hunter Junior arrows and bit of playing with the nylon Berger button I had a great little accurate toy to play with (within 20 yards - not speedy).


----------



## unclejane

Lazarus said:


> ^^^ String angles too!!
> 
> Something I have really noticed while reading from "back in the day;" most of the Pro's talked about pulling into the wall, even though (by today's standards) there was no wall. I believe too much is made of the differences in the "walls" of the old bows and today's bows. I believe the higher hold weights (as they relate to firing a release) more than offset the mushiness of the old bows.


I have both, my Supra Max with a medium-hard modern wall, and my Tribute which is basically the '15 version of an old early 80's wheel bow. And I agree, the character of the back wall doesn't seem to materially change the way I "pull smoothly into the back wall" to fire my hinge. In fact, the wheel bow requires more care because varying pressure induces much more movement than the PSE allows. It's a little easier to pull out of position with the wheel bow, whereas my PSE will resist that significantly more.

The wheel bow feels a little more like a recurve in that respect and feels less "solid" than the PSE. But in the end, it's the same basic "firing engine" technique (for me)... 

LS


----------



## ron w

as a matter of fact,..yes, I can say that everything I've posted is honestly as I know it. and I don't need to prove it with any "tangible evidence", because what I post, is "tangible evidence", my knowledge of the subject matter speaks for itself.
once again....as in your most recent post, above,......you previously demand such evidence, and then you state that, your "assessment of Bernie's writings are not word for word"..... are you taking us for some kind of fools ?......just wondering...


----------



## Lazarus

ron w said:


> as a matter of fact,..yes, I can say that everything I've posted is honestly as I know it. and I don't need to prove it with any "tangible evidence", because what I post, is "tangible evidence", my knowledge of the subject matter speaks for itself.


Wow. Just wow. 

ronw.........you are who the challenge several posts back was directed at. I've shown concrete evidence from the very early days of the hinge that "back tension" wasn't necessarily a *FIRING* method. Can you come up with just one (from any era,) a direct quote, article, etc from someone who *shoots* for a living (or a major part of their living) that says they *FIRE* the release with "back tension." 

That should be a pretty easy task since according to you "back tension" as a means of *firing* a release is such a widely accepted (I think once you said 80%-90% of the people accepted that) method.

Just one. Honestly, I bet you can do it! I just want to see who it is.


----------



## ride394

Is anybody else getting tired of reading these debates? I mean who really gives a flying F?? Experiment with the different methods and do what works for you. For the record I agree with Ron :darkbeer:


----------



## RCR_III

I say shoot off.... Why not right? It's the only method we haven't tried yet. Actually just shooting our bows. How we shoot our bows. 

And for the record, I agree with everyone to some extent. But I manipulate and use my back so makes sense. ;-)


ride394 said:


> Is anybody else getting tired of reading these debates? I mean who really gives a flying F?? Experiment with the different methods and do what works for you. For the record I agree with Ron :darkbeer:


----------



## SonnyThomas

Day 6 of having the Stan/Griv inquiry on Stanislawski's Facebook page and not one comment....


----------



## SonnyThomas

ride394 said:


> Is anybody else getting tired of reading these debates? I mean who really gives a flying F?? Experiment with the different methods and do what works for you. For the record I agree with Ron :darkbeer:


Yep, I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired of the BS.....


----------



## ron w

SonnyThomas said:


> At the shop in the back room is a odd ball target wheel bow that when you draw the wall is rock hard. A club member has my Pearson target wheel bow and pretty much remember I drew to a wall. That particular bow was a Special Order bow, 37 pounds max, which it checked, and a 27 1/2" draw length. I bought the bow completely disassembled for $10, it was pretty - light blue riser and white limbs. The owner had taken it down for some reason, but said it shot great. With it's 27 1/2" draw and my 29" draw I anchored to the front corner of my chin. No sights, using fingers, Beman Hunter Junior arrows and bit of playing with the nylon Berger button I had a great little accurate toy to play with (within 20 yards - not speedy).


if I recall, PSE, at one time, had published a spread sheet that spec'd draw lengths, wheel diameters, cable lengths and limbs to use, for it's more popular target bows, that produced this "fully rotated wheels", firm wall at full draw, condition. the sheet was intended to help people order bows with this feature from their custom shop.
I had one such bow, that was built for me by Mr. Clemenic. using my current Citation riser, instead of a Laser riser, 1-5/8 inch dia. wide Laser wheels and #3, 45# Laser "target white" limbs. it had enormous brace height around 9-1/2 inches if I recall, hence the cute little, 1-5/8 diameter wheels. in it's build, it went from being a 4 wheel Citation, to a typical two wheel Laser configuration. my draw length was 27-5/16, at the time. 
initially, I was a little upset about having not too long ago, spent the extra money for a Citation and then having it be changed to essentially a Laser, (the Citation was the absolute top of PSE's line up) but after a few shots, it was clearly a better shooting bow after the conversion.
I don't remember paying Mr. Clemenic anything for doing this, he sort of took me under his wings and coached me as we bumped into each other at the shop. it was an opportunity that only comes along to a few lucky shooters, that's for sure. 
at that time , Mr Clemenic as well as other PDE pros, terry Ragsdale and his wife, were shooting similarilly built bows.....of course, built by the PSE custom shop. my bow, assembled by MR. Clemenic, was made from "extra parts", that he had on hand, but was essentially the same as if made by the custom shop. both the Laser and the Citatio, shared the same riser casting, with the addition of the slots for the cable arms, machined into the Citation riser.


----------



## Lazarus

ride394 said:


> Is anybody else getting tired of reading these debates? I mean who really gives a flying F?? Experiment with the different methods and do what works for you. For the record I agree with Ron :darkbeer:


One of the mysteries of the internet. Someone who doesn't "give a flying F" but they still opened the topic. Did someone hold a hand gun to your head and make you read it? Then, took the time to comment. Just doesn't make sense. 

There is a very good reason for these discussions. If you don't understand it that's your privilege. Just as it is mine to point that out. Since I started this topic maybe it would be appropriate to say, next time, bring something. :thumbs_up


----------



## jwilson48

Another? Oh what fun we have!


----------



## ride394

Oh you're one of those "don't open my topic and comment if you don't like the subject" type people... 

I understand the topic very well, but you really wouldn't want my input seeing as you're looking for a "pro" to refute your point. Just a heads up though, you probably won't find a pro to argue with since people like you are why none of them come around these parts. 

Just to humor you, my most solid shooting so far has come from strictly using back tension with no movement of my hand. Doesn't mean I haven't shot well using other methods or that I won't use other methods in the future, but for now I'll stick to the mythical BT.


----------



## Rick!

> July of 2004, Larry Wise, fingers should be held with equal .


Larry's pro career was between 1979-1996, right in the era of question. He is accessible for the missing information the OP is looking for.
Bob Jacobson is still available to fill in the holes, thanks to research by the OP and archeryhistory.com. (another source for old archery info)
I bet a few other early hinge era pros are still around to talk shop.

With the propensity of folks here to name drop, they could easily make a few calls and report back. 

I'll postulate and cut to the chase:
Some used bt, some didn't. Some will proclaim self validation of their hunches, some won't care, some will say shoot the way that works best for you. 

The question will remain; "With the history gap filled in on hinges, are u a better archer now?"

Funny thing is, if you pay attention to your shooting when your training, you will bump into and try most methods ever used to fire a hinge. All it takes is 90-120 arrows a day for around 5 years. Most folks aren't willing to commit to that...or are they?


----------



## possum trapper

the only proven fact is everyone does it different or not the exact same.

i'm still tryn to figure out if someone shoots great scores how can anyone tell them they are doing it wrong?.

who cares how you get the arrow to the target?its really up to you to figure it out which style is for you.

if you like the way you shoot keep at it...if you dont change something


----------



## Padgett

This thread is so important and it is the type of thread that is going to help way more than just one more discussion on shooting subconsciously, it is tearing down the barriers that have existed that have made it so hard to learn hinge shooting. Again for you guys that are just lurking on this thread you can contact me in a pm and I can get you the info on setup and execution that can help make your transition a smooth one so you can enjoy hinge shooting. It really is a sweet thing to become a hinge shooter, this doesn't mean that you will never shoot a index finger release again or find that you are a really good thumb trigger shooter. Becoming proficient at a hinge is something special that can lead to some sweet shooting and lessons learned, nothing more or less.


----------



## DenCMSC

Been teaching my son "back tension" using a hinge (Scott Backspin).....This video has helped a TON. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbJO6u0mLJ8


----------



## unclejane

Well it's definitely true that you'll go through multiple different methods. Maybe that's more important than the one you actually end up with. I'm having an odd anticipation issue with the method I settled on just recently; I believe it's allowing me to command the release which in turn is making me actually flinch on the shot (noticed this last night).

However, I notice this goes away if I do Shawn's "pull smoothly into the wall" method, which was a method I had tried earlier. This seems to restore a surprise shot and hides the commanding thing from my mind. 

So I'm definitely making the rounds among various different methods. That's obviously a "find what works for you", but not an undirected one. I have a choice of different fundamental methods to choose from.... Now the task is just finding which method fits and works.

LS


----------



## EPLC

Padgett said:


> This thread is so important and it is the type of thread that is going to help way more than just one more discussion on shooting subconsciously, it is tearing down the barriers that have existed that have made it so hard to learn hinge shooting. Again for you guys that are just lurking on this thread you can contact me in a pm and I can get you the info on setup and execution that can help make your transition a smooth one so you can enjoy hinge shooting. It really is a sweet thing to become a hinge shooter, this doesn't mean that you will never shoot a index finger release again or find that you are a really good thumb trigger shooter. Becoming proficient at a hinge is something special that can lead to some sweet shooting and lessons learned, nothing more or less.


This is the entire point. Anytime anyone posts a method of shooting a hinge, or anything else for that matter, that doesn't fit the rigid mold of some you are up to ridicule, intimidation and insults. And most of this crap comes from folks that never did figure out how to translate what they are spewing into actual performance. There ARE several effective ways to shoot these hinge releases that involve hand manipulation. Those that have insisted that any manipulation of the hand is "cheating" have been cheating those of us that need to do it a different way... without all the intimidation. 

Also, it has been stated that this "pure" process (BT only execution) has been around for 40 years. While I'm sure the term "back tension" has been around forever, its meaning has certainly evolved from a method of holding while executing (1974) to strictly a method of execution (Date???) and back again to the 1974 method(Levi Morgen 2015, and a host of others). I'm simply challenging the timing of this evolution... and the distortion of the facts. A fine example of this distortion is the following:



ron w said:


> "squeeze and pull, is entirely wrong in respect to using a hinge with the standard engine being back tension.
> the "squeezing" is an entirely, consciously regulated muscle action, that does exactly opposite what a hinge and back tension, is supposed to do. it is precisely the definition of "cheating an hinge off". it is exactly contrary to the entire reason hinges were developed to be fired with back tension.
> I challenge anyone here to prove me wrong and I will gladly participate in a long discussion, revealing the reason why.


----------



## Padgett

That post that you put in yours where ronw outlined squeezing and pulling as cheating an hinge off is the exact kind of post that lead me down a road of suffering for almost two years and it was commonplace to see that kind of post just a few years ago here on archery talk. Any mention of a new shooter wanting to get into hinge shooting would be accompanied by posts just like that one telling that person to say away from anyone who promoted that kind of shooting. I personally can't get those two years back and I refuse to allow these guys to get the first and only say in these threads.

I also refuse to talk about these things and not have readily available stuff that a person can read where I give directions to set up and executionof the shots that I believe are really sweet shots that anyone could be proud of to call their own. Again for you guys that are lurking you can pm me and get plenty of information to get on your way to enjoying becoming a hinge shooter. Just ask.


----------



## Padgett

Don't be afraid to ask weather you do it in the thread or in a pm, I know that there are a few of us that dominate the discussions but don't let that stop you from asking questions and finding out what information we have to offer. I know that the guys that I really respect in my area who are really strong shooters don't have any of this stuff written down for someone to read so for me getting info out of them happens on a course or in a motel room on a asa trip and that is a shame because they really are a wealth of knowledge along with being really strong shooters.


----------



## GWFH

possum trapper said:


> the only proven fact is everyone does it different or not the exact same.


Although it looks this way on the surface, I wouldn't be surprised if there's just that many perceptions of what people "think/describe" they are doing.
I'm guessing if a study was done by placing accelerometers and EMG sensors on people using all these "firing variations", the charted data would all be very similar.....if not close enough to be considered the same.


----------



## cbrunson

Padgett said:


> That post that you put in yours where ronw outlined squeezing and pulling as cheating an hinge off is the exact kind of post that lead me down a road of suffering for almost two years and it was commonplace to see that kind of post just a few years ago here on archery talk. Any mention of a new shooter wanting to get into hinge shooting would be accompanied by posts just like that one telling that person to say away from anyone who promoted that kind of shooting. I personally can't get those two years back and I refuse to allow these guys to get the first and only say in these threads.


Insert like button push. :thumbs_up

The only point to some of the argumentative posts here is to hopefully change the culture from the know it all "do it my way", mentality, to one of exploration and sharing. Whether or not true BT exists, or whether anyone uses it with success is much less important than the fact that there are alternate ways to use the releases, for those guys that struggle with the aforementioned, and those methods can be successful. It is shameful that there are those people stuck in the mentality that one person's suggested method is the only way to be successful. Thankfully, guys like yourself and others here are taking major chips away from the credibility of those few individuals.


----------



## Padgett

One of my goals a few years ago was to eliminate shooting from my things to worry about when on a 3d course, I can't control the distance they put the target at and I can't control the glare and shade that hampers being able to see the 12 ring but I can send a quality arrow to the target that has a chance to hit the spot. This simple decision that I made back then has lead me to hinge shooting because index finger shooting always no matter how hard I tried to give me 5 to 10 poor executions per 3d shoot where I had flinched a little or jerked. Hinge shooting on the other hand gives me almost 100% good executions for the entire season and this gives every arrow that I shoot a chance to hit the 12 ring, sure just over half of them miss but just this weekend I shot 20 of the 40 12's at my little local shoot and 39 out of 40 good executions. I had one that i should have let down but it hadn't fired and I decided to add a little pressure to the release and pulled it off the 12 ring. I know better but it was a good reminder of execution being so important.

Firing the hinge is just one job out of many:

1. Maintaining good form

2. firing the release

3. aiming

4. mental approach to making the good execution

5. course management

6. finding a spot to actually aim at.

7 dealing with poor footing or a down hill shot

I can go on with many little jobs that we have to deal with on every shot and again how we fire the release is just one of them but it does end up being a very important job that we work on every day in our training on the practice targets. The key is to not let firing the release become the one and only worry that you have that you believe is going to send you to pro status because it isn't, having a poor execution of the shot is going to stop you from ever being that good but becoming a pro means that you do every little job very well not just one.


----------



## Lazarus

GWFH said:


> Although it looks this way on the surface, I wouldn't be surprised if there's just that many perceptions of what people "think/describe" they are doing.
> I'm guessing if a study was done by placing accelerometers and EMG sensors on people using all these "firing variations", the charted data would all be very similar.....if not close enough to be considered the same.


:thumbs_up GWFH

I have contended this from the very beginning of my involvement in these kinds of discussions. In reality, in it's most basic form there are only three methods of *firing* a hinge, (1) relaxing/elongating the hand, (2) gripping the hinge with more pressure (or squeezing,) and (3)command shooting it. No, "back tension" does not fall under the category of *firing* a hinge, because pulling doesn't allow the hinge to "let go," without rotation from one of the previous methods that is. There may be several nuances in technique, but all effective ways of *firing* a hinge fall under those three categories.


----------



## ride394

Lazarus said:


> :thumbs_up GWFH
> 
> I have contended this from the very beginning of my involvement in these kinds of discussions. In reality, in it's most basic form there are only three methods of *firing* a hinge, (1) relaxing/elongating the hand, (2) gripping the hinge with more pressure (or squeezing,) and (3)command shooting it. No, "back tension" does not fall under the category of *firing* a hinge, because pulling doesn't allow the hinge to "let go," without rotation from one of the previous methods that is. There may be several nuances in technique, but all effective ways of *firing* a hinge fall under those three categories.


If you pull straight back then you're correct, a hinge won't fire. If you pull with the proper muscles the hinge will absolutely rotate and fire. I really don't see how that's even debatable.


----------



## Lazarus

ride394 said:


> If you pull straight back then you're correct, a hinge won't fire. If you pull with the proper muscles the hinge will absolutely rotate and fire. I really don't see how that's even debatable.


Yep. You're right, if you pull back and down pulling yourself out of alignment and inducing movement in your structure your hand will rotate, (just as if you are squeezing it) and fire the release. What I am talking about here are methods that are commonly used, utilizing proper form. You can probably fire one by rotating the bow to the left (assuming a right hand shooter) off the bale too. The negative results may be a little more dramatic than the results using the method you suggest. However, in this game if it isn't in the x it's a miss.

You do it your way, most will do it the (normally) more accurate way. Every bodies happy. :thumbs_up


----------



## ron w

I don't even have to post and i'm getting my opinions about back tension posted......neat.


----------



## unclejane

RCR_III said:


> I say shoot off.... Why not right? It's the only method we haven't tried yet. Actually just shooting our bows. How we shoot our bows.


Nah, I'd lose with every firing engine we've discussed on here. Then there'd be no way to sort em out at all.

OTOH, maybe we could gauge how we shoot against ourselves with one method vs. the other, how about that? See, it can go in the X even if it's a bad shot. So only we can really know if method W works better than method P (for us). That's how I'm doing it currently....

LS


----------



## RCR_III

I like that, process of elimination through qualification.


unclejane said:


> Nah, I'd lose with every firing engine we've discussed on here. Then there'd be no way to sort em out at all.
> 
> OTOH, maybe we could gauge how we shoot against ourselves with one method vs. the other, how about that? See, it can go in the X even if it's a bad shot. So only we can really know if method W works better than method P (for us). That's how I'm doing it currently....
> 
> LS


----------



## bowfisher

Padgett said:


> That post that you put in yours where ronw outlined squeezing and pulling as cheating an hinge off is the exact kind of post that lead me down a road of suffering for almost two years and it was commonplace to see that kind of post just a few years ago here on archery talk. Any mention of a new shooter wanting to get into hinge shooting would be accompanied by posts just like that one telling that person to say away from anyone who promoted that kind of shooting. I personally can't get those two years back and I refuse to allow these guys to get the first and only say in these threads.
> 
> I also refuse to talk about these things and not have readily available stuff that a person can read where I give directions to set up and executionof the shots that I believe are really sweet shots that anyone could be proud of to call their own. Again for you guys that are lurking you can pm me and get plenty of information to get on your way to enjoying becoming a hinge shooter. Just ask.


I also wasted a few years over the same thing. I want to thank you for getting me on the right path about a year ago, in fact if our paths cross, and im sure they will at a shoot some where, ill buy you a steak dinner. No more left and right misses for me. Thanks Padgett!!!!


----------



## possum trapper

GWFH said:


> Although it looks this way on the surface, I wouldn't be surprised if there's just that many perceptions of what people "think/describe" they are doing.
> I'm guessing if a study was done by placing accelerometers and EMG sensors on people using all these "firing variations", the charted data would all be very similar.....if not close enough to be considered the same.


No surface guessing here


----------



## cbrunson

unclejane said:


> Nah, I'd lose with every firing engine we've discussed on here. Then there'd be no way to sort em out at all.
> 
> OTOH, maybe we could gauge how we shoot against ourselves with one method vs. the other, how about that? See, it can go in the X even if it's a bad shot. So only we can really know if method W works better than method P (for us). That's how I'm doing it currently....
> 
> LS


That is exactly how you find what works best for you. Then, as you get better with one method, try another one again to see if you can improve even more. Just don't change things too often. Shoot easy ways until you build some strength and confidence. One of the more difficult things to do is to leave things alone for a while and just shoot.


----------



## unclejane

RCR_III said:


> I like that, process of elimination through qualification.


Yep, exactly, except I'd disqualify em all! 

LS


----------



## unclejane

cbrunson said:


> That is exactly how you find what works best for you. Then, as you get better with one method, try another one again to see if you can improve even more. Just don't change things too often. Shoot easy ways until you build some strength and confidence. One of the more difficult things to do is to leave things alone for a while and just shoot.


I should mention that a big difficulty in learning a skill is knowing when a particular approach has failed. This is a bit of a craft in itself, much like developing and trying out the tools and approaches themselves. You have to give a persistent trial and not give up too soon, but you also have to know when to quit and move on to something else. 

This is the biggest danger of "how the pros do it" - you can actually carry on with something far too long because someone else who's much better than you or whose abilities you very highly respect, etc., is successful with it. I learned this the hard way in music, to the point that what some considered "proper" technique actually lead to pretty serious injury in my left wrist. I had to try several different techniques that were not well regarded until I found one that didn't break my arm. It's still not well regarded by many bassists but it works for me:

https://soundcloud.com/unclejane/more-bromberg-5

Unfortunately, age has slowed my technique and I'm too deef to have professional aspirations as a bassist anymore in this life, but with "good technique" I couldn't even play something like this....

LS


----------



## RCR_III

To add something to a previous comment. I think that just like with using a new release and getting used to that release, using new techniques to fire a hinge need to be given time to adapt to and learn fully. There's a lot of muscle memory and trial and error involved in any method you use to fire a hinge. And once mastered, you can receive good results out of however you may do it. Each person's mind is made up a little different from the next. Someone's body isn't the same way as anothers. And how they choose to fire a shot with a bow. Pull hard, not pull hard, the type of bow and cam, all those variables matter. 

The part I think many over look is that, just because you can make a certain way of firing a release work for you, have you hit a plateau with that method? And if you have, is it worth trying to learn another way of firing the release to see if when you hit the plateau with that method are the results you acheive with better or worse. 

Just food for thought on the various sides of the arguments on here.


----------



## Fury90flier

haven't read all the comments...will do that shortly-- so my comment may be moot.

I doubt there is anything "new" regarding form or shot execution since the late 60's/early 70's. Seems it's just a revisit of the same thing. The whole "relaxing through the shot" has probably been around since the beginning of archery, not the 70's.


----------



## Fury90flier

firing the shot with "Back tension" is nothing new. If you think that it is, you're simply very young. At 43 I can only speak form limited coaching from the early 80's and into the 90's...draw with your back, pull through the shot while relaxing (all fingers for non release aid--release, relax the index finger) at the wall-- doesn't matter if it was fingers or a release.


if someone is wanting to find something written for the internet...just goes to show their age- very young.


----------



## Lazarus

Fury90flier said:


> firing the shot with "Back tension" is nothing new. If you think that it is, you're simply very young. At 43 I can only speak form limited coaching from the early 80's and into the 90's...draw with your back, pull through the shot while relaxing (all fingers for non release aid--release, relax the index finger) at the wall-- doesn't matter if it was fingers or a release.


Not arguing here, that is not *firing* a hinge using "back tension." That's firing a hinge by allowing it to rotate in your hand.

By the way. I'm 56.


----------



## ron w

the "relax your fingers", Fury90 is talking about, isn't "allowing the release to rotate in your hand", it's relaxing your fingers to let them stretch out straight and flat, except for the hook formed by the second ad third segments of your fingers, so that there is even pressure on all fingers and the swing of your elbow, transfers the rotation to the release. that is part of the the way you fire a release with back tension. 
if you knew what firing a release with "back tension was", you'd know that's what he meant. and he is absolutely right..... it is as old as hinges are..... and much older. people were firing spikes and ledges, the same way, long before hinges showed up. so "back tension" is not something that hinges brought to the table. the English.... during medieval times.... developed the method to draw and shoot the long bows of the era, because they were very high draw weight and "stacked" like a 2x4 at full draw, requiring larger than arm, muscle groups, to draw.
I don't think they had hinges back then. ironically, there is record of an apparatus, much like a ledge, that was known to exist back then.


----------



## EPLC

U


Fury90flier said:


> firing the shot with "Back tension" is nothing new. If you think that it is, you're simply very young. At 43 I can only speak form limited coaching from the early 80's and into the 90's...draw with your back, pull through the shot while relaxing (all fingers for non release aid--release, relax the index finger) at the wall-- doesn't matter if it was fingers or a release.
> 
> 
> if someone is wanting to find something written for the internet...just goes to show their age- very young.


The method you have posted is exactly what we have been saying it was. Relaxing the index while holding with back tension to fire a hinge is right on the money, no matter what ron w thinks you said. The original post that started this thread discribed the same method as you just posted. Please correct me if I misread what you meant. And btw I'm 69.


----------



## cbrunson

RCR_III said:


> To add something to a previous comment. I think that just like with using a new release and getting used to that release, using new techniques to fire a hinge need to be given time to adapt to and learn fully. There's a lot of muscle memory and trial and error involved in any method you use to fire a hinge. And once mastered, you can receive good results out of however you may do it. Each person's mind is made up a little different from the next. Someone's body isn't the same way as anothers. And how they choose to fire a shot with a bow. Pull hard, not pull hard, the type of bow and cam, all those variables matter.
> 
> The part I think many over look is that, just because you can make a certain way of firing a release work for you, have you hit a plateau with that method? And if you have, is it worth trying to learn another way of firing the release to see if when you hit the plateau with that method are the results you acheive with better or worse.
> 
> Just food for thought on the various sides of the arguments on here.


Great post. ^^^^^^

I basically went through this with a hinge. Over about a two year period I shot three different hinges, giving each it’s due. I would set them and leave them for a while, then make small adjustments to get the best feel. One in particular performed very well for me, but I had reached a plateau score wise. I just couldn’t seem to beat 21 Xs (Vegas). One day I decided to pull the button back out just for the hell of it and shot a 24x game. Then within a few weeks hit 27x. The patience and steadiness I learned trying to master a hinge, transferred to the button which I’ve found I can be more accurate with, for now. I can see myself going back to the hinge, and I likely will this outdoor season.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> "squeeze and pull, is entirely wrong in respect to using a hinge with the standard engine being back tension.
> the "squeezing" is an entirely, consciously regulated muscle action, that does exactly opposite what a hinge and back tension, is supposed to do. it is precisely the definition of "cheating an hinge off". it is exactly contrary to the entire reason hinges were developed to be fired with back tension.
> I challenge anyone here to prove me wrong and I will gladly participate in a long discussion, revealing the reason why.


2 points: 
First, I went through this entire thread and there is only one poster that I can find that comes even close to supporting the above statement. 
Secondly, your challenge to debate has been met soundly with post after post in several threads of people successfully using some method of hand manipulation to fire a hinge release. Your claims of the history of the hinge, including method (static hand), designed to shoot a specific way (static hand) have been around since 1974 are debunked by the very first post in this thread. The evidence is overwhelming that hand manipulation is a common and effective method, yet in spite of the evidence presented, rational debate with you continues to be impossible as you continually twist evidence contrary to your argument to be supportive of your own position.


----------



## ron w

and for that, i'm supposed to change my mind and opinions ?. as you say....."pass the cool aid".


----------



## mike 66

i wonder if joe, at zenith archery has any70-80 instruction guides left around from that time period ?:happy1:


----------



## nochance

Mahly can we start a separate forum for bickering?


----------



## montigre

mike 66 said:


> i wonder if joe, at zenith archery has any70-80 instruction guides left around from that time period ?:happy1:


I was thinking the same thing since Joe B was developing his hinge releases around the same time Stan was.


----------



## Padgett

This discussion is long overdue and must continue because it is way to important, I have battled here for a long time and we are for the first time we are so close to getting rid of the tunnel vision that has went right along with hinge shooting for quite some time.

These misconceptions must die, I can remember in the late 70's when lifting weights was a taboo if you were a basketball player or baseball player especially if you were in season and all of the coaches preached that it hurt your shooting or hitting. Kids are so powerful now that they have had to restrict the bats and deaden them down to a stinking wood bat equivalent.

What we are doing in this thread is going to open the door to thousands of shooters to work with a variety of methods and out of those shooters many more solid shooters will develop than in the past. I had better stay on top of my game so I can stay ahead of them as they close the gap.


----------



## ron w

exactly right...
there are more than one method, some are better than others, but none the less... different in their own way. one person believes and relies on one method and has confidence in that choice, while someone else prefers a different method. that doesn't mean that one person is not allowed to speak his/her mind about the method he/she prefers.....as some people on this thread seem to want.
they call a person "narrow minded" and "closed minded" , yet they themselves are doing the exact same thing by trying to stop the person from posting about the method he or she prefers, just because they don't agree with it. it seems to me, the title of this thread, opens the door to discussing all the methods, not just their method.
I say,..... "grow-up"... it's not always possible to have everything your way". disagreeing is not "picking a fight", or "bickering".....at least, not to an "adult".


----------



## EPLC

Padgett said:


> This discussion is long overdue and must continue because it is way to important, I have battled here for a long time and we are for the first time we are so close to getting rid of the tunnel vision that has went right along with hinge shooting for quite some time.
> 
> These misconceptions must die, I can remember in the late 70's when lifting weights was a taboo if you were a basketball player or baseball player especially if you were in season and all of the coaches preached that it hurt your shooting or hitting. Kids are so powerful now that they have had to restrict the bats and deaden them down to a stinking wood bat equivalent.
> 
> What we are doing in this thread is going to open the door to thousands of shooters to work with a variety of methods and out of those shooters many more solid shooters will develop than in the past. I had better stay on top of my game so I can stay ahead of them as they close the gap.


Well said. The shame of "cheating the hinge" resulting from years of intimidation from so-called "experts" needs to be put to bed. Hand manipulation has been around as long as archery. While some would disagree, the argument isn't really whether BT can be used without hand movement, the argument is that execution can and should be used. Personally, I have experienced nothing but trouble with the static hand execution. I believe the intimidation and rigid stand, supported by many along the way that truly have no clue, contributed to my everlasting doubt that I was either doing it wrong, or was failing by not being able to do it this way. Always in the back of my mind that it was wrong to move my hand. 

And to those that think this is a waste of time, so be it. I for one am passionate in my quest to get this right, stop the intimidation, scolding and misinformation that cost me all together too much of my precious time.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> exactly right...
> there are more than one method, some are better than others, but none the less... different in their own way. one person believes and relies on one method and has confidence in that choice, while someone else prefers a different method. that doesn't mean that one person is not allowed to speak his/her mind about the method he/she prefers.....as some people on this thread seem to want.
> they call a person "narrow minded" and "closed minded" , yet they themselves are doing the exact same thing by trying to stop the person from posting about the method he or she prefers, just because they don't agree with it. it seems to me, the title of this thread, opens the door to discussing all the methods, not just their method.
> I say,..... "grow-up"... it's not always possible to have everything your way". disagreeing is not "picking a fight", or "bickering".....at least, not to an "adult".


Thank you ron w, I'll take this as your concession. And once again another attempt by you to distort the facts. No one has said you, or anyone else, couldn't post what they believe was/is good for them. On the contrary we have asked for this. You, on the other hand have been the insistent one with your ridged views and scolding's, and claims of all-knowingness... and quite frankly, personal insults. Sorry but perhaps you should look in the mirror.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Two facts stands out. 1- Back tension is still being taught in the pure sense. 2- Done correctly, it works.

The time period of January 1978 information up through 2004 is a blank. Even from 2004 up to the present information of "other means" to fire a hinge is scarce. I went through my "Library" and found 2007, John Dudley's two part series of Back Tension (International & U.S. Archer whatever) which is long winded, and either poorly explained or poorly written.
1) He starts with "true back tension."
2) Me; He puts in too much.
3) Explains back tension is imperative.
4) Describes drawing with the hinge (thumb and index finger)
5) Inserts "back tension" of the correct back half (right rhomboid group - picture depicted such).
6) Finally, gives of relaxing the index finger and thumb to allow rotation.
7) Always though back tension is included and (me) seeming the release side (back scapula).
8) In the process (I got lost and had to go back) the middle and ring finger are "laid" of the hinge handle.
9) Me; It seems he describes equalization of the index, middle and ring finger.
10) Insertion again of back tension "active back half of the body to get the surprise."
Of 9 and 10 I would question if back tension is giving to the middle and ring finger pulling. 

John's two articles are available through NockONTV - articles. Read for yourself. Much get past in the two articles.

Me; I use a thumb release and I have the tension set heavy so I can get a feel of the barrel/pulling post, but my thumb does not go on the barrel until I'm on target. I do try to have equalization of my fingers. All set, I get on target, back tension kept going and "magic," the shot goes off. And it well seems when on target, thumb on the barrel, I bear down, eyes boring right through the target...so letting the back tension completely take over.

Again me; I have so much more control over my right side rhomboids. Sitting here right now in the chair and without so much as a thought of flexing my rhomboids has it feel I draw up the shoulder blade two inch. My left side I have to concentrate on to make move/flex or whatever you call it. In so much I can't believe you can have the left side over power the right side. If so then the bow arm would move.


----------



## ron w

EPLC said:


> Thank you ron w, I'll take this as your concession.


 it's not a concession to anything, I never once stated it was "my way, or the highway", as you accused me of saying. I guess it's that important to you to "win"....to have it your way.....so important that you'll fabricate, even the perception of, as you put, "a concession". 
you have a PM.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> exactly right...
> there are more than one method, some are better than others, but none the less... different in their own way. one person believes and relies on one method and has confidence in that choice, while someone else prefers a different method. that doesn't mean that one person is not allowed to speak his/her mind about the method he/she prefers.....as some people on this thread seem to want.
> they call a person "narrow minded" and "closed minded" , yet they themselves are doing the exact same thing by trying to stop the person from posting about the method he or she prefers, just because they don't agree with it. it seems to me, the title of this thread, opens the door to discussing all the methods, not just their method.
> I say,..... "grow-up"... it's not always possible to have everything your way". disagreeing is not "picking a fight", or "bickering".....at least, not to an "adult".


Thank you. That has been the point in all these debates. It's nice to see youv'e come to accept it.


----------



## Padgett

Ronw, you have been presenting your method as the one and only choice for as long as I can remember dealing with you here on archery talk. You don't offer suggestions to people on how to shoot with any of the other methods, you have repeatedly gave the impression that if you do anything but your method that you are making a huge mistake because they are the wrong method.

I refuse to be this way, I list specific methods on my website and I tell people how to do them and along with that instruction of how to do it I also give them the differences in the way they execute and the little flaws that each one of them has so that the person can have a educated approach to each one of the methods and hopefully find success in one or more of them. I do this by becoming proficient with each of them and it has taken tens of thousands of arrows to get to the point where i can offer guidance to the finer points of each one of them.


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> Two facts stands out. 1- Back tension is still being taught in the pure sense. 2- Done correctly, it works...


Actually, what you have posted is really your opinion that these things are facts . The method that followed is still someone else's opinion. Whether or not the opinion is correct or not doses not change the "fact" that these are just opinions. Archery, no more than shooting a hinge, isn't an exact science, most is opinion supported by more opinion. For every claim of success using a particular method an equal and opposite claim will be made for some other successful method. The one interesting thing I find about "facts" is that sometimes they are not so factual


----------



## ron w

Brunson,
I never rejected it , nor have I accepted it, and never once specifically stated I did, or didn't. it is your perception and interpretation of what I posted that developed the idea that I was being "contrary, or "argumentive", simply by disagreeing with what you posted.... and/or posting my views on the subject matter. lack of acknowledgement, doesn't infer disagreement, to anyone but a small child, that needs to hear he is doing well.
as I said above......it's too bad that you can't always have everything your way.
most people learn to deal with that condition, in their adolescence.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Actually, what you have posted is really opinion in my opinion . The method that followed is still more opinion. Whether or not the opinion is correct or not doses not change the "fact" that these are just opinions. Archery, no more than shooting a hinge, isn't an exact science, most is opinion supported by more opinion. For every claim of success using a particular method an equal and opposite claim will be made for some other successful method. The one interesting thing I find about "facts" is that sometimes they are not so factual


I'll have to vouch for sonny on this one. It can be done, and it is still taught. It is not my prefered method, as I've found it to be very sensitive to error, but it can be done with everything set up correctly.


----------



## Padgett

The first 60x rounds I shot about 3 years ago were done with t bernies knuckle under with a click, I was not pulling into the wall at all using back tension. I was coming to anchor and I was simply touching the wall and basically sitting in the valley and I simply relaxed my index finger to fire the hinge. I think I shot probably 20 or so 58-59xrounds and then I rattled off about ten 60x rounds doing that method. I really think that like I do many times per year I had peaked and everything was just clicking, the reality of that month and a half of shooting was that it was freaking aweome but I am really glad that I have moved on. That method produced many drop out the bottom of the x shots on a daily basis, I believe that shooting without any tension on the back wall with some back tension creates a very weak front end that at any time can drop out. Secondly I had many guys watch during that time period and comment that I was creeping forward almost a quarter inch during my shot, again not using back tension to create a solid feel into the wall can produce good shooting but it also gives a open invitation to a weak shot that produces drop outs. Again I moved on.

These are the kinds of things that a person needs to hear when they are choosing a method, the relaxing the index finger method is a strong method of choice but only if you learn to come to anchor and apply a nice amount of back tension into the wall. In fact that back tension really helps to pull the hinge into the index finger as you relax it and makes for a much smoother execution and much stronger float pattern with a very small risk of dropping out compared to just sitting against the wall and relaxing the index finger where there is a huge risk of dropping out.

These are the experiences that new shooters need to hear from us so that they can go into their hinge shooting with a positive outlook of what to expect and what to work on as they become proficient at a couple methods and then they can find that one method that sends them to not missing a x for a week. I am telling you that shooting for 1.5 hours a day for 4 or 5 days and not missing a x is something that everyone should experience in their shooting. I haven't done it for a couple months and can't wait for it to happen again.


----------



## RCR_III

I read through the recent posts this morning and got to thinking. I've read an article written by a pro shooter about being told to use a hinge from another pro shooter. At the time he was told, I believe, to pull through the shot using back tension. The method ronw talks about. It was a means to help this shooter get to another level by re-working the brain away from punching a release, and show the affects of a surprise shot and a new way of shooting a bow. 

However, since that time the shooter has also talked about how he learned new techniques to fire the release and incorporate the discipline and muscles he learned to use into the shot as well. 

Is this possibly the original intent of the pure back tension method of shooting? The original teachings of that technique. As a means of teaching and learning a controlled and disciplined shot. 

Just food for thought. But, I can see some truth behind that because when I first started shooting a resistance release and then moved over to a hinge release, I did so because I was punching releases and saw talk of the backtension stuff. I got the Larry Wise DVD and worked through that. Practiced a bunch. Re-trained my mind and my thinking. Toggled back and forth with my thumb release because I wasn't getting a very smooth release with pure back tension, but could apply that movement to my button release and get a smoother release. Ended up still fighting pushing the button with my thumb at times, so I started looking for new options. 

One day I was shooting and started thinking about why I was getting pulled off target using my hinge and pure backtension. Decided it was from the movements of my release arm and the forces being applied to it. I saw that I was fighting my body. So I started looking at my hinge and how it worked. And ways of keeping my arm in alignment with the arrow and bow while still incorporating the pull and suprise shot. That's when I started playing around with relaxing of the index finger, which a lot of the time at first ended up being all three of my fingers relaxing and getting nothing done. Then that developed into squeezing with my middle and ring fingers. That helped, but sometimes caused ups and downs depending on the grip and pressures being placed into the hinge with my fingers. And then from there, it's evolved into what I do now. 

So, this post has a lot to do with my last post and my experiences and thoughts on it all. I see a true place for learning pure back tension. I see an application in our sport where it can help many. But like my last post, I also see where the majority of shooters look like they have adapted other methods into that back tension style of shooting to see if their scores and abilities increased. 

Now onto my next point. What Padgett and some others I believe are trying to stress is that they were told, like many or most of us, that pure back tension was the ONLY way you were supposed to shoot a release and that doing anything other than that was just simply..... Wrong. Which held a lot of people back. So what they are trying to stress now, and get out in mass detail and lecture, is that shooting a release using methods other than pure back tension is not wrong. Not only is it not wrong, it is preferred by the majority of shooters and capable of better results. 

Are they saying pure back tension is a joke or that we should junk that method. I don't think so. I would hope not. Because like I said, I can see an application for it. And as a learning tool it is great. You need that method to bridge a gap between punching and truly trusting your float and making good shots that put you on a new shooting level. But, adapt your own workings into it as well. Don't struggle and put 110% effort into something for a lesser result than what you could have using 80% effort and an adaptation of the pure back tension shooting, that provided better results. 


So at this point if you're still reading, I don't think anyone's saying using pure back tension is incorrect. They aren't attacking anyone based on the methods of their shooting a hinge. They're attacking the person based on a one sided way of teaching the masses and incorporating struggle and frustration into many, and themselves. That made it personal to them. The struggles they went through. So, they get heated in an argument on here. They attack and go back and forth. And then that escalates. And eventually you get what this thread is. A multi page bickering match where absolutely nothing has been solved. Nobody's opinions have positively changed. 

I agree with Padgett in that we need to have a thread similar to this. The good parts though only. The parts that voice that you do not have to shoot a release ONLY by means of pure back tension. That you can shoot in other methods too and not feel guilty or ashamed. If we can come together and be open to that idea and not force one belief down someone's throat, and teach the meanings behind all the methods, we will do everyone a justice going forward.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> I never rejected it , or accepted it, and never once specifically stated did, or didn't. it is your perception and interpretation of what I posted that developed the idea that I was being "contrary, or "argumentive", simply by disagreeing with what you posted and/or posting my views on the subject matter.
> as I said above......it's too bad that you can't always have everything your way.
> most people learn to deal with that condition, in their adolescence.




I think youv'e made some real positive change. Just gotta work on the attitude a little, but baby steps, baby steps.........


----------



## RCR_III

You and I are on the same wave length this morning. Talking about the same articles.


SonnyThomas said:


> Two facts stands out. 1- Back tension is still being taught in the pure sense. 2- Done correctly, it works.
> 
> The time period of January 1978 information up through 2004 is a blank. Even from 2004 up to the present information of "other means" to fire a hinge is scarce. I went through my "Library" and found 2007, John Dudley's two part series of Back Tension (International & U.S. Archer whatever) which is long winded, and either poorly explained or poorly written.
> 1) He starts with "true back tension."
> 2) Me; He puts in too much.
> 3) Explains back tension is imperative.
> 4) Describes drawing with the hinge (thumb and index finger)
> 5) Inserts "back tension" of the correct back half (right rhomboid group - picture depicted such).
> 6) Finally, gives of relaxing the index finger and thumb to allow rotation.
> 7) Always though back tension is included and (me) seeming the release side (back scapula).
> 8) In the process (I got lost and had to go back) the middle and ring finger are "laid" of the hinge handle.
> 9) Me; It seems he describes equalization of the index, middle and ring finger.
> 10) Insertion again of back tension "active back half of the body to get the surprise."
> Of 9 and 10 I would question if back tension is giving to the middle and ring finger pulling.
> 
> John's two articles are available through NockONTV - articles. Read for yourself. Much get past in the two articles.
> 
> Me; I use a thumb release and I have the tension set heavy so I can get a feel of the barrel/pulling post, but my thumb does not go on the barrel until I'm on target. I do try to have equalization of my fingers. All set, I get on target, back tension kept going and "magic," the shot goes off. And it well seems when on target, thumb on the barrel, I bear down, eyes boring right through the target...so letting the back tension completely take over.
> 
> Again me; I have so much more control over my right side rhomboids. Sitting here right now in the chair and without so much as a thought of flexing my rhomboids has it feel I draw up the shoulder blade two inch. My left side I have to concentrate on to make move/flex or whatever you call it. In so much I can't believe you can have the left side over power the right side. If so then the bow arm would move.


----------



## bowfisher

RCR_III said:


> I read through the recent posts this morning and got to thinking. I've read an article written by a pro shooter about being told to use a hinge from another pro shooter. At the time he was told, I believe, to pull through the shot using back tension. The method ronw talks about. It was a means to help this shooter get to another level by re-working the brain away from punching a release, and show the affects of a surprise shot and a new way of shooting a bow.
> 
> However, since that time the shooter has also talked about how he learned new techniques to fire the release and incorporate the discipline and muscles he learned to use into the shot as well.
> 
> Is this possibly the original intent of the pure back tension method of shooting? The original teachings of that technique. As a means of teaching and learning a controlled and disciplined shot.
> 
> Just food for thought. But, I can see some truth behind that because when I first started shooting a resistance release and then moved over to a hinge release, I did so because I was punching releases and saw talk of the backtension stuff. I got the Larry Wise DVD and worked through that. Practiced a bunch. Re-trained my mind and my thinking. Toggled back and forth with my thumb release because I wasn't getting a very smooth release with pure back tension, but could apply that movement to my button release and get a smoother release. Ended up still fighting pushing the button with my thumb at times, so I started looking for new options.
> 
> One day I was shooting and started thinking about why I was getting pulled off target using my hinge and pure backtension. Decided it was from the movements of my release arm and the forces being applied to it. I saw that I was fighting my body. So I started looking at my hinge and how it worked. And ways of keeping my arm in alignment with the arrow and bow while still incorporating the pull and suprise shot. That's when I started playing around with relaxing of the index finger, which a lot of the time at first ended up being all three of my fingers relaxing and getting nothing done. Then that developed into squeezing with my middle and ring fingers. That helped, but sometimes caused ups and downs depending on the grip and pressures being placed into the hinge with my fingers. And then from there, it's evolved into what I do now.
> 
> So, this post has a lot to do with my last post and my experiences and thoughts on it all. I see a true place for learning pure back tension. I see an application in our sport where it can help many. But like my last post, I also see where the majority of shooters look like they have adapted other methods into that back tension style of shooting to see if their scores and abilities increased.
> 
> Now onto my next point. What Padgett and some others I believe are trying to stress is that they were told, like many or most of us, that pure back tension was the ONLY way you were supposed to shoot a release and that doing anything other than that was just simply..... Wrong. Which held a lot of people back. So what they are trying to stress now, and get out in mass detail and lecture, is that shooting a release using methods other than pure back tension is not wrong. Not only is it not wrong, it is preferred by the majority of shooters and capable of better results.
> 
> Are they saying pure back tension is a joke or that we should junk that method. I don't think so. I would hope not. Because like I said, I can see an application for it. And as a learning tool it is great. You need that method to bridge a gap between punching and truly trusting your float and making good shots that put you on a new shooting level. But, adapt your own workings into it as well. Don't struggle and put 110% effort into something for a lesser result than what you could have using 80% effort and an adaptation of the pure back tension shooting, that provided better results.
> 
> 
> So at this point if you're still reading, I don't think anyone's saying using pure back tension is incorrect. They aren't attacking anyone based on the methods of their shooting a hinge. They're attacking the person based on a one sided way of teaching the masses and incorporating struggle and frustration into many, and themselves. That made it personal to them. The struggles they went through. So, they get heated in an argument on here. They attack and go back and forth. And then that escalates. And eventually you get what this thread is. A multi page bickering match where absolutely nothing has been solved. Nobody's opinions have positively changed.
> 
> I agree with Padgett in that we need to have a thread similar to this. The good parts though only. The parts that voice that you do not have to shoot a release ONLY by means of pure back tension. That you can shoot in other methods too and not feel guilty or ashamed. If we can come together and be open to that idea and not force one belief down someone's throat, and teach the meanings behind all the methods, we will do everyone a justice going forward.


:thumbs_up


----------



## ron w

no more, or no less "opinion" than any other method. it is still taught and it still works, just the same as the method you prefer to use. if you are going to contend that it is opinion, so must you admit and contend, your preference is "only opinion", because they both exist and are both used.

padget,
I have presented, that it is the one and only choice that I prefer....... is there something "wrong" with that ?.


----------



## cbrunson

RCR_III said:


> Is this possibly the original intent of the pure back tension method of shooting? The original teachings of that technique. As a means of teaching and learning a controlled and disciplined shot.


Bingo!!!!

Youv'e been impressing me with some of your comments lately. I found that the slowing down and learning a controlled release is the best purpose for a hinge. It forces you to slow down, or you fail miserably. No matter how you use it. Whether that was the original intent or not, it fits that purpose very well.


----------



## Padgett

RCR III, now that was a good post.


----------



## Lazarus

If I may, and RCR III, that's a great post above, I find a lot to agree with, not 100% but that's ok.

Here is my wisdom for this morning, and maybe the source of any disagreement I may have with your post,

With maybe one exception, that being pure instinctive shooting, *Back Tension* is an element of _any_ shot that is made through a bow. Any bow, any style of shooting, any distance, any circumstance, any equipment style. You use back tension to draw the bow and lock things in place. You *maintain* back tension through the release process, once again, with any bow, any style of shooting, any distance, any circumstance, and any style of equipment. Again, it is a basic element of every shot made. But it's not part of the firing process per se. If it is, it shouldn't be. You cannot maintain proper alignment and fire an effortless shot if you are increasing the pull during the firing process in a way that takes your draw arm (or even bow arm) out of alignment. *Any* movement in this manner is actually a mis-use of the term "back tension" because it is involving a basic element of the shot/stature into the firing process in which it doesn't belong. 

Why do I keep hammering on this? Because those who teach that "back tension" and "firing" a release are synonymous with one another are teaching a really bad process. There's several people that have posted on this topic that have made it clear that they suffered from this mis-information campaign. Due to the increased popularity of the hinge in archery, this mis-information campaign really needs to stop for everyone's benefit.


----------



## Lazarus

cbrunson said:


> I think youv'e made some real positive change..........


With reference to the specific subject you were referring to; Opinions vary.....................:cheers: :lol3:


----------



## Padgett

Dang, lazarus has again given us another awesome post. I just don't see how anyone could argue with either one of the two posts that lazurus or RCR III has given us today, they are positive and right on track with the way hinge shooting is going to progress in the coming years.


----------



## unclejane

Screw this, I'm going back to my Evolution +.... 

LS


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> I'll have to vouch for sonny on this one. It can be done, and it is still taught. It is not my prefered method, as I've found it to be very sensitive to error, but it can be done with everything set up correctly.


Sonny's "opinion" that only 2 facts that stand out was my concern. While the method is certainly taught, its effectiveness is certainly not a consensus. The consensus would seem to indicate the opposite as there have been literally tons of "facts" and "opinions" presented that would contest this "Pure, static hand" method as being the best solution. Whether or not it can be done and is still taught are certainly not the main findings of this thread and others that have covered this topic recently. Of course, if this is Sonny's take on what has been said, he is welcome to his opinion.


----------



## EPLC

RCR_III said:


> I read through the recent posts this morning and got to thinking. I've read an article written by a pro shooter about being told to use a hinge from another pro shooter. At the time he was told, I believe, to pull through the shot using back tension. The method ronw talks about. It was a means to help this shooter get to another level by re-working the brain away from punching a release, and show the affects of a surprise shot and a new way of shooting a bow.
> 
> However, since that time the shooter has also talked about how he learned new techniques to fire the release and incorporate the discipline and muscles he learned to use into the shot as well.
> 
> Is this possibly the original intent of the pure back tension method of shooting? The original teachings of that technique. As a means of teaching and learning a controlled and disciplined shot.
> 
> Just food for thought. But, I can see some truth behind that because when I first started shooting a resistance release and then moved over to a hinge release, I did so because I was punching releases and saw talk of the backtension stuff. I got the Larry Wise DVD and worked through that. Practiced a bunch. Re-trained my mind and my thinking. Toggled back and forth with my thumb release because I wasn't getting a very smooth release with pure back tension, but could apply that movement to my button release and get a smoother release. Ended up still fighting pushing the button with my thumb at times, so I started looking for new options.
> 
> One day I was shooting and started thinking about why I was getting pulled off target using my hinge and pure backtension. Decided it was from the movements of my release arm and the forces being applied to it. I saw that I was fighting my body. So I started looking at my hinge and how it worked. And ways of keeping my arm in alignment with the arrow and bow while still incorporating the pull and suprise shot. That's when I started playing around with relaxing of the index finger, which a lot of the time at first ended up being all three of my fingers relaxing and getting nothing done. Then that developed into squeezing with my middle and ring fingers. That helped, but sometimes caused ups and downs depending on the grip and pressures being placed into the hinge with my fingers. And then from there, it's evolved into what I do now.
> 
> So, this post has a lot to do with my last post and my experiences and thoughts on it all. I see a true place for learning pure back tension. I see an application in our sport where it can help many. But like my last post, I also see where the majority of shooters look like they have adapted other methods into that back tension style of shooting to see if their scores and abilities increased.
> 
> Now onto my next point. What Padgett and some others I believe are trying to stress is that they were told, like many or most of us, that pure back tension was the ONLY way you were supposed to shoot a release and that doing anything other than that was just simply..... Wrong. Which held a lot of people back. So what they are trying to stress now, and get out in mass detail and lecture, is that shooting a release using methods other than pure back tension is not wrong. Not only is it not wrong, it is preferred by the majority of shooters and capable of better results.
> 
> Are they saying pure back tension is a joke or that we should junk that method. I don't think so. I would hope not. Because like I said, I can see an application for it. And as a learning tool it is great. You need that method to bridge a gap between punching and truly trusting your float and making good shots that put you on a new shooting level. But, adapt your own workings into it as well. Don't struggle and put 110% effort into something for a lesser result than what you could have using 80% effort and an adaptation of the pure back tension shooting, that provided better results.
> 
> 
> So at this point if you're still reading, I don't think anyone's saying using pure back tension is incorrect. They aren't attacking anyone based on the methods of their shooting a hinge. They're attacking the person based on a one sided way of teaching the masses and incorporating struggle and frustration into many, and themselves. That made it personal to them. The struggles they went through. So, they get heated in an argument on here. They attack and go back and forth. And then that escalates. And eventually you get what this thread is. A multi page bickering match where absolutely nothing has been solved. Nobody's opinions have positively changed.
> 
> I agree with Padgett in that we need to have a thread similar to this. The good parts though only. The parts that voice that you do not have to shoot a release ONLY by means of pure back tension. That you can shoot in other methods too and not feel guilty or ashamed. If we can come together and be open to that idea and not force one belief down someone's throat, and teach the meanings behind all the methods, we will do everyone a justice going forward.





Lazarus said:


> If I may, and RCR III, that's a great post above, I find a lot to agree with, not 100% but that's ok.
> 
> Here is my wisdom for this morning, and maybe the source of any disagreement I may have with your post,
> 
> With maybe one exception, that being pure instinctive shooting, *Back Tension* is an element of _any_ shot that is made through a bow. Any bow, any style of shooting, any distance, any circumstance, any equipment style. You use back tension to draw the bow and lock things in place. You *maintain* back tension through the release process, once again, with any bow, any style of shooting, any distance, any circumstance, and any style of equipment. Again, it is a basic element of every shot made. But it's not part of the firing process per se. If it is, it shouldn't be. You cannot maintain proper alignment and fire an effortless shot if you are increasing the pull during the firing process in a way that takes your draw arm (or even bow arm) out of alignment. *Any* movement in this manner is actually a mis-use of the term "back tension" because it is involving a basic element of the shot/stature into the firing process in which it doesn't belong.
> 
> Why do I keep hammering on this? Because those who teach that "back tension" and "firing" a release are synonymous with one another are teaching a really bad process. There's several people that have posted on this topic that have made it clear that they suffered from this mis-information campaign. Due to the increased popularity of the hinge in archery, this mis-information campaign really needs to stop for everyone's benefit.


Both make very good points... but I need to side with Laz's perspective on this. All too many have pushed the static hand along with this, and while I can only really speak to my own experience, it was really something that held me back.


----------



## PSE Archer

Lazarus said:


> If I may, and RCR III, that's a great post above, I find a lot to agree with, not 100% but that's ok.
> 
> Here is my wisdom for this morning, and maybe the source of any disagreement I may have with your post,
> 
> With maybe one exception, that being pure instinctive shooting, *Back Tension* is an element of _any_ shot that is made through a bow. Any bow, any style of shooting, any distance, any circumstance, any equipment style. You use back tension to draw the bow and lock things in place. You *maintain* back tension through the release process, once again, with any bow, any style of shooting, any distance, any circumstance, and any style of equipment. Again, it is a basic element of every shot made. But it's not part of the firing process per se. If it is, it shouldn't be. You cannot maintain proper alignment and fire an effortless shot if you are increasing the pull during the firing process in a way that takes your draw arm (or even bow arm) out of alignment. *Any* movement in this manner is actually a mis-use of the term "back tension" because it is involving a basic element of the shot/stature into the firing process in which it doesn't belong.
> 
> Why do I keep hammering on this? Because those who teach that "back tension" and "firing" a release are synonymous with one another are teaching a really bad process. There's several people that have posted on this topic that have made it clear that they suffered from this mis-information campaign. Due to the increased popularity of the hinge in archery, this mis-information campaign really needs to stop for everyone's benefit.


I teach BT. I do not have the students focus on squeezing a rhomboid for execution. As you stated - it is for holding the bow at full draw to allow the draw arm and hands to relax. The relaxed hand will give under to tesion applied by the Lan 2 area moving toward the spine. The motion can be unnoticable. The shooter as they progress can incorporate different techniques, as Padgett and other have dicussed.

If one focuses on rhomboid tensioning, this is an isolated muscle, so it is easy to build unwanted tension in other areas and has a very limited range. Lan 2 or "the elbow coming around" is my preffered method of subconscious execution. BUT - if the draw arm and hand are not relaxed, it can and will pull the shooter out of alignment.

To each their own......


----------



## mike 66

cbrunson said:


> Bingo!!!!
> 
> Youv'e been impressing me with some of your comments lately. I found that the slowing down and learning a controlled release is the best purpose for a hinge. It forces you to slow down, or you fail miserably. No matter how you use it. Whether that was the original intent or not, it fits that purpose very well.


well said:moviecorn great post #83 RCR 111


----------



## RCR_III

Maybe I misunderstood you and Laz, or mis stated something in my post, but I'm not an advocate for static hand and only back tension to shoot a release. Quite the opposite. I shoot with a yeilding hand while holding with my back muscles. It's documented and video'd through my website how I prefer to shoot and what I've found that works best for me. 

I was held back for a while too using only back tension with no hand movement. Lots were. Because that's how it was taught. That's why I feel it important to get the information out there about the other methods and benefits.


EPLC said:


> Both make very good points... but I need to side with Laz's perspective on this. All too many have pushed the static hand along with this, and while I can only really speak to my own experience, it was really something that held me back.


----------



## Lazarus

PSE Archer said:


> I teach BT. I do not have the students focus on squeezing a rhomboid for execution. As you stated - it is for holding the bow at full draw to allow the draw arm and hands to relax. The relaxed hand will give under to tesion applied by the Lan 2 area moving toward the spine. The motion can be unnoticable. The shooter as they progress can incorporate different techniques, as Padgett and other have dicussed.
> 
> If one focuses on rhomboid tensioning, this is an isolated muscle, so it is easy to build unwanted tension in other areas and has a very limited range. Lan 2 or "the elbow coming around" is my preffered method of subconscious execution. BUT - if the draw arm and hand are not relaxed, it can and will pull the shooter out of alignment.
> 
> To each their own......


Appreciate the post. I believe we are on the same page. I'm just not in favor of mixing (the terminology) of a defined element of the shot (back tension) with another defined element of the shot (firing.) I am not ashamed to say if the "instruction manuals" that the US Archery coaches teach from do this, I believe it's an error and needs to be changed. Is it the way it's always been? Maybe. But that doesn't mean it's not in error. 

With regard to the words in your quote that I put in red; Key words are "can be" and "unnoticeable." All may be true, but there has to be movement of the head of the hinge for it to fire, even though you may not notice it. 

Again, thanks for your input. :cheers:


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Sonny's "opinion" that only 2 facts that stand out was my concern. While the method is certainly taught, its effectiveness is certainly not a consensus. The consensus would seem to indicate the opposite as there have been literally tons of "facts" and "opinions" presented that would contest this "Pure, static hand" method as being the best solution. Whether or not it can be done and is still taught are certainly not the main findings of this thread and others that have covered this topic recently. Of course, if this is Sonny's take on what has been said, he is welcome to his opinion.


Consensus's are always subject to change. I think it's important to keep that in mind when we say something is or isn't a fact. Otherwise we become what we have fought against.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> Consensus's are always subject to change. I think it's important to keep that in mind when we say something is or isn't a fact. Otherwise we become what we have fought against.


For the record: I did not say anything was the best solution, as you've highlighted in red. What I said was there was much contention with regard to the BT/static hand being the best solution. Sorry, just wanted to clear that up.

Also, just took a look-see at RCR_III's blog... lots of good stuff.

http://api.viglink.com/api/click?fo...! - Page 4&txt=http://rcrchery.wordpress.com/


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> For the record: I did not say anything was the best solution, as you've highlighted in red. What I said was there was much contention with regard to the BT/static hand being the best solution. Sorry, just wanted to clear that up.
> 
> Also, just took a look-see at RCR_III's blog... lots of good stuff.
> 
> http://api.viglink.com/api/click?fo...! - Page 4&txt=http://rcrchery.wordpress.com/


No worries. I know when a guy gets kicked so many times, he has a tendency to come back swinging. I'd just hate to see us beat one dead horse with the leg of another.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> No worries. I know when a guy gets kicked so many times, he has a tendency to come back swinging. I'd just hate to see us beat one dead horse with the leg of another.


I'm with ya...


----------



## RCR_III

Thank you!
Also, just took a look-see at RCR_III's blog... lots of good stuff.

http://api.viglink.com/api/click?fo...! - Page 4&txt=http://rcrchery.wordpress.com/[/QUOTE]


----------



## EPLC

RCR_III said:


> Thank you!
> Also, just took a look-see at RCR_III's blog... lots of good stuff.
> 
> http://api.viglink.com/api/click?fo...! - Page 4&txt=http://rcrchery.wordpress.com/


[/QUOTE]

You're welcome, but the link doesn't seem to be working try this one https://rcrchery.wordpress.com/


----------



## Sasquech

Ok at the risk of being smacked . My coach who has many national champions past and current. Teaches back tension and making the hing go off with elbow based rotation by using the rhomboids. It has no hand movement component and I believe is the true back tension folks refer to. Now many pros have recently admitted to cranking the hinge with there hand most don't even if they admit to doing it watch videos. World archery and pro archery series. These are the best of the best shooting under the toughest conditions. Yet see very little finger cranking. P.s. I was unable to properly execute back tension as described by my coach until I had a release that could not slip in my fingers. Slipping of the ring and middle finger fight the rotation that comes from the shoulder and elbow. Can't get a slipping release to go off with out your fingers. You will end up collapsing some what and rights and lefts creep in. This is not opinion it is personal experience from trying all of Padgett options then reviewing them with my coach and measuring results.


----------



## Lazarus

Sasquech, who is the coach you are referring to? I'd be interested in their teachings. 

I haven't heard any Pro's talking about "cranking the hinge." If you're referring to Levi's ATA video that's not really how he described it, at least I don't think it is. Maybe I'm misunderstanding. 

:thumbs_up


----------



## EPLC

Hey, if you believe the method is working for you stick with it. My experience is different. You mentioned having difficulty with certain release types. Perhaps this is part of the reason many have trouble with straight BT. It may be a simple matter of the setup variables being so stringent that they are difficult to achieve by many?
Just curious, do you have any problems pulling yourself off center? This seems to be one of the major issues mentioned? Thanks


----------



## ron w

so EPLC, what specifically, might be those variables in certain types of hinges, that might cause the difficulty ?.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> so EPLC, what specifically, might be those variables in certain types of hinges, that might cause the difficulty ?.


It's not just the hinge variable. For me, the system seems to be too fussy for me to get it right. I personally need a system with more flexibility and doesn't create alignment issues. As a result I've moved on to something that works better for me.


----------



## ron w

when you consider the amount of "flexibility" afforded, in hitting a 1 inch circle at 20 yards.....it seems to me the method used to shoot the bow, can't be very flexible.


----------



## jwilson48

ron w said:


> when you consider the amount of "flexibility" afforded, in hitting a 1 inch circle at 20 yards.....it seems to me the method used to shoot the bow, can't be very flexible.


I think that's the point. It's much harder to do that consistently with pure bt for most of us. Not as easy to replicate. It's like someone having a target setup with an ata of 28", 5 inch brace, 2x4 grip etc


----------



## cbrunson

Yep. Forgiveness.


----------



## ron w

the whole process of back tension rotation, was developed because it is a method that does replicate consistently..... once properly learned. again, the eventual training of the process into the sub conscious, by the process of eliminating the variable command sets with let down drills, leaves but one set of commands for the execution to run on. when that condition is met, it can only produce the one execution, that is the only action there is to administer, so the shot only runs that way. if the set of commands is properly constructed, the shot will run the way it should.


----------



## Padgett

Just sitting here I am reminding myself that the difference between all of these methods to me is so subtle, I shoot all of them really good and enjoy shooting with all of them. For me it really comes down to performance where with pure back tension or yielding I can shoot 50 to 100 x's in a row when shooting with them but with squeeze and pull I might not miss for 400 so 500 shots. The ability for me to produce perfect executions hundreds of times in a row with that firing engine to me is what puts it on top of my list. 

The key here is I became proficient at each one of them and then I let performance pick the one that stands out, I really could have chosen to shoot with pure back tension. Pure back tension is something I enjoy doing and it produces really good shooting for me but the thing I don't like about it is that it is so subtle. I am a 3d shooter and I have to deal with really bad footing and down hill shots where my body is contorted and it sucks, for me pure back tension takes a very mature shooter that has very good form and a lot of muscle memory built up in their system to execute it on perfect flat ground so when you throw in poor footing and a down hill shot where your form is suffering to get into a position to execute you are screwed. 

With pure back tension my only real gripe indoor was that during my execution it tended to pull my pin off to the side sometimes but really I think that if it was my top choice that I would have done enough training with it that I would have canceled out this issue. The issues that it produces on the 3d course I really don't think that you would ever erase them. That is why I believe that the yielding and slight squeeze of the finger type engines are so much more forgiving to a shooter in a variety of venues over pure back tension.


----------



## Padgett

Ronw, I don't have a problem with anything in your last post about pure back tension being developed because once it is learned it can be replicated consistently. The problem is that the other firing methods offer the exact same option to commit to one of them and learn it and then it will allow you to replicate consistently.


----------



## SonnyThomas

SonnyThomas said:


> Two facts stands out. 1- Back tension is still being taught in the pure sense. 2- Done correctly, it works.





EPLC said:


> Actually, what you have posted is really your opinion that these things are facts . The method that followed is still someone else's opinion. Whether or not the opinion is correct or not doses not change the "fact" that these are just opinions. Archery, no more than shooting a hinge, isn't an exact science, most is opinion supported by more opinion. For every claim of success using a particular method an equal and opposite claim will be made for some other successful method. The one interesting thing I find about "facts" is that sometimes they are not so factual


I gave how John Dudley's article was for me. I noted where the Two Part article can be found and under what heading, NockOnTV, Article. Opinion? John Dudley is just person with a opinion? World Class archer, coach, has his own TV show, writes articles which are published right along side of Terry Wunderle, Bernie Pellierite, and Robert Ragsdale and it's his "opinion" as if he's just another person? If John is just another person with a opinion what does that make you?


----------



## Lazarus

And here I am again this morning saying......"back tension" is an element of the shot completely separate from the *firing process.* One has nothing (directly) to do with the other. 

No, I'm not saying don't *fire* using "back tension" if you *think* that is best. I'm saying "back tension" *FIRING* in the world of precision compound shooting is a myth. And any one who promotes "back tension" as a firing method in the world of precision compound shooting is in error. I don't care what your name is. 

:cheers:


----------



## Padgett

Personally, I have been really torn this last 6 months. For me listening to Chance and Jesse broadwater and many other of the top shooters in the world along with griv talk about relaxing their hand during their execution as their method has really bothered me because it isn't the one I use when competing. I use my Squeeze and pull engine where I come into the wall and use a good amount of back tension to be very solid into the wall and not just touching it and then I release my thumb peg and begin floating. I then very smoothly pull into the wall with my ring and middle finger, I really don't squeeze them I just add pressure to the wall with them and this creates a little rotation and the arrow is gone in about 3 to 5 seconds.

I am torn because I don't like wasting time and at 45 years old I have wasted way to many decades doing stupid things. I am 100% positive that I am proficient at yielding and my squeeze and pull engines and for me my decisions are strictly performance based.

Performance is a funny thing because right now I am basically the same with each of them, I am not shooting as strong as I was just 2 months ago. Right now I am executing really good but I am missing 1 or 2 x's every day for some reason in about 100 or so shots regardless of which engine I am using. I am not stressing out about my shooting being poor because it is still the best shooting I have ever experienced but 2 months ago I was just stinking better. My shooting had a rapid rise and I was very focused and each day was just perfect, as the last couple months have went by I shot awesome but just being on the line by myself I haven't had that focus that allows me to be that perfect. So I have been using both firing engines and the squeeze and pull still cranks out my best feeling executions but I still have hope that yielding may prove in the long run to be something that takes over.


----------



## Lazarus

Padgett. All work and no play make jack dull boy. You're over thinking this because you're cooped up indoors. You'll be fine when you get on the course at Ritter tomorrow, provided you are going. Trust, me, I know of what I speak here. Too much practice without the reward of a meaningful derby makes you stale. 

:cheers:


----------



## ron w

so what, I prefer back tension...I don't prefer the other methods. again...a Quigley said...."I said I have no use for a hand gun, not that I didn't know how to use one". what so hard about acknowledging that.
you guys all seem to want to try and convert me....or convince me that other options are valid....I never said they weren't. I only said I don't prefer them and have no desire to forward or support their existence.
none of that speaks to the idea that I don't think they exist, or that they don't work, for you.....just that I don't prefer them. is there something wrong with that ?.
it seems to me, that while you all accuse me of being stubborn, or narrow minded....it is all of you that are actually doing the same thing, by condescendingly discounting my preference, every time I post with silly little laughing people and other immature inferences.
physiologically, most other methods, especially those that require some type of hand manipulation, are actually far more complicated mentally, and far more troublesome to replicate consistently. the whole reason back tension rotation was developed, was to get away from that complication. large skeletal muscle groups (rhomoids) are far more physiologically equipped to replicate simple actions more consistently on their own, and are more easily trained, than fine motor groups, such as those involved in the process of hand and finger manipulation. 
it's not opinion....it's medical fact. if you doubt that...go talk to a physiologist.


----------



## ron w

Lazarus said:


> And here I am again this morning saying......"back tension" is an element of the shot completely separate from the *firing process.* One has nothing (directly) to do with the other.
> 
> No, I'm not saying don't *fire* using "back tension" if you *think* that is best. I'm saying "back tension" *FIRING* in the world of precision compound shooting is a myth. And any one who promotes "back tension" as a firing method in the world of precision compound shooting is in error. I don't care what your name is.
> 
> :cheers:


that said, what makes you an authority on that specific subject?. you're no more an authority on the subject than I am, yet you seem to stress that your opinion is more valid than mine.....to the point of being condescending and posting little immature characters rolling around laughing in your replies to my posts.


----------



## Rick!

Coke!
No, Pepsi!
No, Mountain Dew!!

Some are going to be adamant in promoting their firing method. Some are going to be open to trying different methods and some may even claim blasphemy to one or the other. It's the interweb way.

For me, my preferred method is pure bt and I don't have right/left issues. What affects my r/l is a fundamental failure to relax or "scrunching." Is it harder or require more skill or setup to consistently repeat? Maybe. Just this week I changed my d loop length by -.060" and it went too far so I came back .040" and my shot break quality went up a bunch. Is it that sensitive or is it just in my head? Whatever it is, I made it feel better to work for me by adjusting and putting arrows down range. 

It is fun, though, to finish a session with two or three ends using a different method to gauge how it works and if equal or more X's are a result. Maybe, it'll come in handy in a few months.


----------



## Padgett

Every day when I train I have to switch between yielding and my squeeze and pull engine and doing so has been a interesting thing to learn to do, if you watch me shoot you may not even be able to tell which one I am using because there just isn't hardly any rotation to see. I have my hinge set up so that it has built in safety rotation that allows me to draw my hinge safely and when I release my thumb peg and give my hinge to my index finger that safety rotation is let out of the hinge. Once I get all of the thumb peg pressure given to my index finger my hinge is on the edge of firing and only needs a very subtle amount of rotation to fire.

Now my perceived effort at this point is a huge difference between yielding and squeezing and pulling and this is something that was hard to accept in the beginning and now I am very much ok with it. When I am shooting with the squeeze and pull engine my hand is much more of a hard hand and very solid making my anchor feel very strong and on task, with this engine I do very smoothly pull into the back wall with my ring and middle finger but it is so subtle and feels like very little to no movement actually happens and the release fires. With Yielding my anchor feels much more relaxed and able to move around on my jaw even though it isn't moving around on my jaw the sensation that it could is there. With yielding I feel a much bigger expansion of my system as I smoothly pull my forarm and wrist and hand straight back and my fingers yield or stretch and the release then fires. These two methods again when you watch me shoot look identical but to me they feel totally different. 

One thing I can say is that when I am banging the center of the x and my arrows are not even close to touching the line and are completely inside out the squeeze and pull engine is something special and so incredibly easy for me to execute over and over but when I get 50 or so shots into a shooting round or session and for some reason my shot changes and freezes up the ability for me to just switch over to the yield engine and shoot a few shots has proven to be such a confidence boosting thing that I have done the training with that engine and trust it to be almost my other engines equal that can easily take care of me in a time of need.

I am all about confidence and leaning ways to build it up in every little issue that can pop up when shooting competitively and for me this is a big one.


----------



## RCR_III

Reo squeezes his middle and ring fingers to execute and he's not half bad ;-) you may be onto something with the method you're already using.


Padgett said:


> Personally, I have been really torn this last 6 months. For me listening to Chance and Jesse broadwater and many other of the top shooters in the world along with griv talk about relaxing their hand during their execution as their method has really bothered me because it isn't the one I use when competing. I use my Squeeze and pull engine where I come into the wall and use a good amount of back tension to be very solid into the wall and not just touching it and then I release my thumb peg and begin floating. I then very smoothly pull into the wall with my ring and middle finger, I really don't squeeze them I just add pressure to the wall with them and this creates a little rotation and the arrow is gone in about 3 to 5 seconds.
> 
> I am torn because I don't like wasting time and at 45 years old I have wasted way to many decades doing stupid things. I am 100% positive that I am proficient at yielding and my squeeze and pull engines and for me my decisions are strictly performance based.
> 
> Performance is a funny thing because right now I am basically the same with each of them, I am not shooting as strong as I was just 2 months ago. Right now I am executing really good but I am missing 1 or 2 x's every day for some reason in about 100 or so shots regardless of which engine I am using. I am not stressing out about my shooting being poor because it is still the best shooting I have ever experienced but 2 months ago I was just stinking better. My shooting had a rapid rise and I was very focused and each day was just perfect, as the last couple months have went by I shot awesome but just being on the line by myself I haven't had that focus that allows me to be that perfect. So I have been using both firing engines and the squeeze and pull still cranks out my best feeling executions but I still have hope that yielding may prove in the long run to be something that takes over.


----------



## cbrunson

I suppose if we all agreed, there would just be the one book, right?


----------



## Padgett

I know he does and I what is really important to notice when a guy like him shoots is that it really isn't rotating, if you watch him closely over and over you can see a very slight amount of squeeze sometimes but many times you see nothing. It is also absolutely not cranking the release, he is holding into the wall very strong and not just sitting in the valley and slightly increasing the pressure on the wall with his ring and middle finger.

Nuts and bolts very rarely talks about his firing method but just a few months ago he actually responded when I was in a thread mentioning that he also teaches this method and he only increases the pressure with the middle finger only. I did it for a while and enjoyed it but enjoyed using both the middle and ring finger more.

The rotation that you are seeing is the fact that we are keeping the index finger neutral and as the extra pressure is applied to the ring and middle finger this pushes the hinge into the index finger moving it forward which is a form of rotation. This is why guys who lock up or freeze their index finger struggle to fire their hinge. Once you realize that you just keep the index finger neutral as the other two slightly pull into the wall everything will start happening and you will have yourself a awesome little firing engine.

I have a firing engine where I squeeze my ring and middle finger and I at the same time relax my index finger, this is my scissors engine and it is a rotation engine. It creates a huge amount of rotation and is totally different than squeeze and pull, to me the pure back tension crowd that frowns on using your hand to help always look at these methods from yielding to squeeze and pull and scissors as all the same and they label them cranking. They are simply not the same and each one has a distinct personality that can be used to your advantage to learn lessons that hinge shooting has to offer.


----------



## SonnyThomas

For those who haven't read John's back tension article or whatever.. I'd really suggest you read of the many articles he has, some are quite interesting.

Back tension - again, long and covers more than just back tension as we have....bow shoulder, etc.
http://www.nockontv.com/article?download=46:back-tension-part-1&start=40
http://www.nockontv.com/article?download=45:back-tension-part-2&start=40

NockOnTV www.nockontv.com 

John Dudley
APA Rookie of the Year 
IBO National Champion (2X)
NABH National Champion
AZ International Gold Medalist
European Grand Prix Gold Medalist 
World Field Championship Bronze Medalist 
World Field Championship Silver Medalist
Arnold Classic Champion (2X)
US Open Silver Medalist
US Open Gold Medal Team
British National Indoor Champion
Australian Field Championship Gold Medalist
45 Career Top 3 Professional finishes


----------



## Mahly

I think it's safe to say that manipulating the hinge is a viable way to fire a hinge.
It is also safe to say that using back tension alone is a viable way to shoot a hinge.

They both have strengths and weaknesses. 
Advocated for each, based on their experience, believe that have found the best way to shoot a hinge. They may look at it as the CORRECT way.
Those that don't shoot that way, are by default shooting it "wrong".
So we get a bit of heat in the discussion.

We ALL have PROOF that both ways work. 
Some ways are not as compatible with some people.
The thing to keep in mind, especially with those very adamant about their views, is WHY are they continuing to debate if not argue for their method?
It's because they know it works for them, and it can work for others. We have seen a lot of jousting from people who ALL are trying to help each other.
I personally use a method to manipulate the hinge, shown to me by a guy who I KNOW really wants to help others shoot better.
At the same time, I KNOW the guys that "fight" for pure back tension as a firing engine ALSO want to help others shoot better.
This is why I can't get mad at anyone for keeping the debate going to put it nicely. I get ticked when we make it personal, but not for stating what you think will help others.

We have acknowledgment from BOTH sides, that both sides DO work. We are really just debating WHICH works "better" for us, and what we think will help others. Can you really get mad at someone for that?

The best thing with all this debate, we have GREAT descriptions for several different engines. Back tension has been looked at with a microscope. If someone wants to learn back tension as a firing engine, you can get all you need in these threads.
If you want to learn to fire a hinge using a different engine (manipulations of some kind) that info is here as well.

I personally have used at least 8 different firing techniques for shooting a bow. I have found some that work, and some that don't (hint, punching a trigger is NOT for me!!!!). I've been shooting for 30 something years now. YESTERDAY I found what I believe to be my best technique yet.

We can get a bit feisty, but this forum is AWSOME for learning new things, and re-examining WHY we do what we do.
ALL here should be proud of that.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Mahly, yes, things work and as we progress or like me, busted hand, rebuilt hand, injuries of youth effecting age and you try, learn many ways and sometimes change to keep shooting.


----------



## ron w

my release hand has an index finger that has no middle finger knuckle. it was cut off in a wood working accident about 1984. it bends at the big knuckle and that's all it does....I am not able to vary the pressure with my index as I shoot. we all have our problems, we all learn to compensate for them.


----------



## Fury90flier

Lazarus said:


> And here I am again this morning saying......"back tension" is an element of the shot completely separate from the *firing process.* One has nothing (directly) to do with the other.
> 
> No, I'm not saying don't *fire* using "back tension" if you *think* that is best. I'm saying "back tension" *FIRING* in the world of precision compound shooting is a myth. And any one who promotes "back tension" as a firing method in the world of precision compound shooting is in error. I don't care what your name is.
> 
> :cheers:


to say BT has nothing to do with the firing process I see as an inaccurate statement. While it may be true for you and others, BT alone absolutely can be used as part of the firing sequence. It just depends on how you're holding.

Think of doing something as simple as curles when working out. You have the "curling" motion that is say 98% of the movement...then you have that last "squeeze".

If you apply that same process to drawing, holding then squeeze that last 2% for firing, you can get the transfer of weight over the pivot point of the hinge....I've had enough AD'd (accidental discharges) to know...lol If you keep a rigid hand, wrist, arm and really pull with your back and you don't have significant pressure on the thumb peg/index---it's firing.


I see the whole debate as moot really. If there isn't a transfer from one side of the pivot point to the other the release isn't going...just have to figure out how each individual likes to make that happen.

Trip the sear how you want...just do it the same way each time.


----------



## possum trapper

it ALL depends what your definition of is is


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> my release hand has an index finger that has no middle finger knuckle. it was cut off in a wood working accident about 1984. it bends at the big knuckle and that's all it does....I am not able to vary the pressure with my index as I shoot. we all have our problems, we all learn to compensate for them.


So, are you recommending we whack off a finger to shoot BT? Why didn't you say so?  Could you post up a picture, I want to make sure I get this one right...


----------



## ron w

what ??????


----------



## unclejane

ron w said:


> what ??????


+1, that one went right over my head too....

Meanwhile, I hate to bring this up..... But I think ron is right (tho I kind of always suspected he was) about "pure back tension". After a couple days on my Evo, I just got out my Honey Do for the heck of it and tried this firing engine:

Pull.

The hinge goes right off every time.... Uh oh.....

LS


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> what ??????


I was kidding ron


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> So, are you recommending we whack off a finger to shoot BT? Why didn't you say so?  Could you post up a picture, I want to make sure I get this one right...





EPLC said:


> I was kidding ron


You want to see weird you should see a picture of Zesty in the Brand Specific Martin forum. He shoots fingers and is missing his index finger. People go nuts over thinking he's shooting two finger above


----------



## unclejane

possum trapper said:


> it ALL depends what your definition of is is


Precisely... 
But... just to prove it to myself again, I tried "pure back tension" on both my PSE and my Hoyt one more time after eating dinner. I also used my spare Honey Do, which was just repaired (and setup/shot also I think) by Forrest Carter himself, so it's totally dialed in. All I did was come back to the wall and pull, doing absolutely nothing with my finger pressure at all. Popped right off at only a slightly higher pressure than my Evo +. Tried again with my other Honey Do, same thing.

I only made two changes recently:
- a couple days with the Evo to check for form breakdown (and there was some, this got me back to pulling with the back like usual).
- completely stopped manipulating the fingers at all. Just kept the pressure the same.

Bang...

Course, I'm sticking with the pull-through for the time being since I need the practice, but the next time I pull out the hinge I'm going to have a look at a) why this is working and b) what exactly I'm actually doing with the fingers, if anything.

Could be ron, and the old timers on "back tension" were probably right all along (which wouldn't surprise me).  What kinda fun is that on a Fri. night, huh?

LS


----------



## Mahly

Pure BT does work. It will take time to find out if it's right for you.
If it IS for you, congrats!!! You found your engine!!! Took me 30 years to find mine LOL!!!


----------



## unclejane

Mahly said:


> Pure BT does work. It will take time to find out if it's right for you.
> If it IS for you, congrats!!! You found your engine!!! Took me 30 years to find mine LOL!!!


I did notice the anticipation/incipient target panic thing is gone with it. Basically, I do exactly the same thing with the Honey Do as I do with the Evo and it works. It goes off kind of hard, but goes off (fixable? probably). How cool is that.... 

LS


----------



## ron w

that "goes off kind of hard", is the exact reason you interject some rotation into the "pure back tension " by contracting your rhomboid and is the reason draw length becomes the most important aspect of learning and sustaining a good hinge release execution that doesn't involve any wrist rotation or finger manipulation. the idea, is to eliminate as many ancillary components of the execution as possible. simply put,.... the less you brain has to command, during the release phase, the better the condition of execution. 
when you pull straight back with a hinge, you are doing what is known as, "ripping the release off the string". the release goes off, simply from purely pulling to the point that your grip on the release gives, enough to allow the release to rotate enough to break the sear. most guys that shoot this way, set their hinges fairly hot and then sometimes have to deal with the problems that arise from that condition. the over tension release do work, but they also promote that "ripping the release off the string" state of mind into the execution. 
basically, by setting the release hot, to facilitate the straight back pull, you take all the little bit of safety and security that having the sear set a little deeper gives a hinge, when you learn to develop the correct rotation.
the break of the shot is not supposed to be a violent event. it should be a smooth uneventful "disconnection" that happens with very little disturbance to the sight picture, when it is done correctly. one of the common problems people have with learning this process, results in hearing people say, " it pulls the sight off the target". that is because they are not introducing any of the transferred rotation that rhomboid contraction installs, into their execution.
the role draw length plays in good back tension execution, is to establish an anchor position, that leaves just a bit of leeway, just ever so slightly short, to facilitate the rotation produced by contracting your rhomboid. most commonly, people attempt to convert to a hinge, after shooting some other release and despite the fact that their draw length may be "perfect" for the release they were shooting, it most likely needs to be adjusted for the hinge. 
the hard walls of todays bows, does have some influence in the learning curve of using a hinge, without any manipulation, but it certainly can be done just as easily as learning the necessities of consistent manipulation through wrist rotation or finger pressure variation and is a lot less complicated for the brain to manage because the process involves large skeletal muscles, that are more designed to work by self generated command.


----------



## Sasquech

*“Back Tension, “ Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!*

Totally agree


----------



## TDS

ron w said:


> that "goes off kind of hard", is the exact reason you interject some rotation into the "pure back tension " by contracting your rhomboid and is the reason draw length becomes the most important aspect of learning and sustaining a good hinge release execution that doesn't involve any wrist rotation or finger manipulation. the idea, is to eliminate as many ancillary components of the execution as possible. simply put,.... the less you brain has to command, during the release phase, the better the condition of execution.
> when you pull straight back with a hinge, you are doing what is known as, "ripping the release off the string". the release goes off, simply from purely pulling to the point that your grip on the release gives, enough to allow the release to rotate enough to break the sear. most guys that shoot this way, set their hinges fairly hot and then sometimes have to deal with the problems that arise from that condition. the over tension release do work, but they also promote that "ripping the release off the string" state of mind into the execution.
> basically, by setting the release hot, to facilitate the straight back pull, you take all the little bit of safety and security that having the sear set a little deeper gives a hinge, when you learn to develop the correct rotation.
> the break of the shot is not supposed to be a violent event. it should be a smooth uneventful "disconnection" that happens with very little disturbance to the sight picture, when it is done correctly. one of the common problems people have with learning this process, results in hearing people say, " it pulls the sight off the target". that is because they are not introducing any of the transferred rotation that rhomboid contraction installs, into their execution.
> the role draw length plays in good back tension execution, is to establish an anchor position, that leaves just a bit of leeway, just ever so slightly short, to facilitate the rotation produced by contracting your rhomboid. most commonly, people attempt to convert to a hinge, after shooting some other release and despite the fact that their draw length may be "perfect" for the re
> lease they were shooting, it most likely needs to be adjusted for the hinge.
> the hard walls of todays bows, does have some influence in the learning curve of using a hinge, without any manipulation, but it certainly can be done just as easily as learning the necessities of consistent manipulation through wrist rotation or finger pressure variation and is a lot less complicated for the brain to manage because the process involves large skeletal muscles, that are more designed to work by self generated command.


Ron, can you provide more detail?

establish an anchor position, that leaves just a bit of leeway, just ever so slightly short, to facilitate the rotation produced by contracting your rhomboid.


----------



## erdman41

You guys go ahead and set your draw length to get your release to fire.

I'll set mine to what gives me the best hold.


----------



## ron w

the ergonomics of good back tension execution, is what established the importance of the correct draw length that also produces the best hold. 
you can't have the "best hold", without being at the most ideal draw length for a good back tension execution.
that "best hold", is exactly what supports a good BT execution and vice-verse.
when the hold is at it's best, effort needed to maintain alignment throughout the release execution is minimized.


----------



## ron w

TDS said:


> Ron, can you provide more detail?
> 
> establish an anchor position, that leaves just a bit of leeway, just ever so slightly short, to facilitate the rotation produced by contracting your rhomboid.


 simply put, when your draw length is "just right", it leaves your hold with good float, and a release position at anchor, that allows enough rotation to break the sear. if you are slightly long, it takes a little more effort to produce the rotation and if short, rotation happens easier, but the sight picture is somewhat unstable, producing eratic alignment and inconsistent POI. the two aspects are self supporting and self destructive, at the same time...thus the importance of establishing the exactly right draw length. as your execution becomes more perfected, it comes down to as little a twist or two of the string, to find that exact anchor position that produces the right rotation, with as little effort as possible. 
when your release execution is well ingrained subconsciously, and your draw length is perfect for your execution, you get the feeling that you draw, anchor, and do nothing but concentrate on sight alignment on the X, and the shot breaks without any thought being directed towards the release execution. in order for this to happen, your draw length has to be exactly what your release execution needs. consequently, it also is the right draw length for the best hold and float range because it sets your anatomy up to best support the entire process. as my above post suggests, the two aspects of good execution are so completely entwined and co-dependent, that you cannot have one, without having the other, and if one is off, so will be the other....hence, both aspects are "self supporting and self destructive", to a good execution at the same time.


----------



## SonnyThomas

ron, some of what you have in your replies above is so much like Dudley has in his Back Tension Part Two. Go to Set Up in part two and read through; "In a nut shell that is “back tension” or, at least, the movement needed to properly fire a release from pulling."

There is so much reading to get through to what most all us here have brought forth. I mean every one that has been in the Back Tension threads. Stance, shoulder, draw length, how to hold the release to get started, how the release will be when you find what works for you and so much more. The "so much more" is what some of us would like to by-pass, but it's important. We might take his article differently, but we've got so much ingrained in our minds to hard to accept.


----------



## unclejane

ron w said:


> that "goes off kind of hard", is the exact reason you interject some rotation into the "pure back tension " by contracting your rhomboid and is the reason draw length becomes the most important aspect of learning and sustaining a good hinge release execution that doesn't involve any wrist rotation or finger manipulation. the idea, is to eliminate as many ancillary components of the execution as possible. simply put,.... the less you brain has to command, during the release phase, the better the condition of execution.


Well what's hopeful about it for me is:
- the anticipation problem goes away. My theory is, the extra twiddling I was trying to do with the fingers to rotate the hinge amounted to an effort to command the shot. It felt like I was back to square one like when I shot my trigger releases. If all I do is pull with the back, that seems to work for me with respect to my particular target panic condition.
- obviously some rotation at the hand does happen anyway, even if it just feels like I'm pulling straight back. The literature I've read on oly recurve execution discusses this (you might have cited this earlier on the thread?). I think that's whats firing the hinge.
- the firm break seems to be slightly less pronounced when shooting my Tribute, with its 100mile deep back wall. 

All very interesting and enlightening. If nothing else, it gives me some hope for when, or if, I pick my hinges back up. I'm back at the pull-through release like I said, since I need some remedial form and execution exercise anyway. If that's successful, I may just abandon the hinge. But if not, I think I have a starting point for when I pick it back up.

Yepper, you guys were right all along LOL. But, so is everyone else - such a variety of approaches which makes shooting such a neat thing to do!

LS


----------



## EPLC

unclejane said:


> I did notice the anticipation/incipient target panic thing is gone with it. Basically, I do exactly the same thing with the Honey Do as I do with the Evo and it works. It goes off kind of hard, but goes off (fixable? probably). How cool is that....
> 
> LS





ron w said:


> that "goes off kind of hard", is the exact reason you interject some rotation into the "pure back tension " by contracting your rhomboid and is the reason draw length becomes the most important aspect of learning and sustaining a good hinge release execution that doesn't involve any wrist rotation or finger manipulation. the idea, is to eliminate as many ancillary components of the execution as possible. simply put,.... the less you brain has to command, during the release phase, the better the condition of execution.
> when you pull straight back with a hinge, you are doing what is known as, "ripping the release off the string". the release goes off, simply from purely pulling to the point that your grip on the release gives, enough to allow the release to rotate enough to break the sear. most guys that shoot this way, set their hinges fairly hot and then sometimes have to deal with the problems that arise from that condition. the over tension release do work, but they also promote that "ripping the release off the string" state of mind into the execution.
> basically, by setting the release hot, to facilitate the straight back pull, you take all the little bit of safety and security that having the sear set a little deeper gives a hinge, when you learn to develop the correct rotation.
> the break of the shot is not supposed to be a violent event. it should be a smooth uneventful "disconnection" that happens with very little disturbance to the sight picture, when it is done correctly. one of the common problems people have with learning this process, results in hearing people say, " it pulls the sight off the target". that is because they are not introducing any of the transferred rotation that rhomboid contraction installs, into their execution.
> the role draw length plays in good back tension execution, is to establish an anchor position, that leaves just a bit of leeway, just ever so slightly short, to facilitate the rotation produced by contracting your rhomboid. most commonly, people attempt to convert to a hinge, after shooting some other release and despite the fact that their draw length may be "perfect" for the release they were shooting, it most likely needs to be adjusted for the hinge.
> the hard walls of todays bows, does have some influence in the learning curve of using a hinge, without any manipulation, but it certainly can be done just as easily as learning the necessities of consistent manipulation through wrist rotation or finger pressure variation and is a lot less complicated for the brain to manage because the process involves large skeletal muscles, that are more designed to work by self generated command.


Or, simply put, you can put a little pressure on the middle and ring fingers as you pull and make the process much easier on your body. Some people, such as myself, just do not have enough flexibility or body control to shoot without some hand manipulation. From personal experience you can waste a lot of time and effort trying to make something work that may not be the best method for you. Not to say this won't work, but from what you are posting I can see many of the difficulties that I faced in your trials. You'll hear some say it takes years to learn to shoot a hinge properly... let's say you invest those years and then find it's not working... What do you do then?

This is a simple process that shouldn't require the kind of effort being recommended to make it work. Have you ever noticed that when BT hasn't worked out for you, no matter how much effort you've put into it, it's always your fault or you must be doing something wrong, etc., etc.? It never seems to be the simple possibility that the BT process requirements are just too fussy for many? Just asking...


----------



## ron w

if you're asking me, you're asking the wrong guy. I know nothing about it.


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> You'll hear some say it takes years to learn to shoot a hinge properly... let's say you invest those years and then find it's not working... What do you do then?


This is where 35+ (well 40+ really) years experience in the learning business comes in for me. It no longer takes me years to discover something isn't working. As I wrote elsewhere, it's a bit of an art, but finding out that a particular process has failed is a skill in itself. And when you've failed as many times as I have, for as long as I've been failing at learning things, that diagnosis methodology is a finely sharpened surgical tool in my self-teaching tool set LOL. 
I'd say I've been at the hinge for a couple months and have come round to where I'm at with it in approx. that period of time. No way no how do I spend years practicing a failed skill anymore, no matter what the heck it is I'm learning LOL. Those days are finally, thankfully, behind me now.


> This is a simple process that shouldn't require the kind of effort being recommended to make it work. Have you ever noticed that when BT hasn't worked out for you, no matter how much effort you've put into it, it's always your fault or you must be doing something wrong, etc., etc.? It never seems to be the simple possibility that the BT process requirements are just too fussy for many? Just asking...


In my case, there's just no way around it. It turns out to have been my fault and I was doing something wrong. I mean, there it is - I can't sugar coat it in any other way. Ron is right, as I've always suspected because he has this odd tendency to be right a significant amount of the time anyway, lol, and I was not learning the "pure back tension" skill "properly". Again, that's not to say anyone else is wrong either; that's been hashed out to a nauseating degree in this thread and others already. I'm just not going there. Simply, I picked up my pull-through last week and sure enough, there it was staring me in the face - my form had broken down and I wasn't pulling through the shot with my back as I had learned years ago.

Picked up my hinge yesterday, the one Forrest Carter setup for me so I knew it was right LOL, came to the wall and pulled, no finger wiggling, relaxing, expanding, no nothin. I just hung onto the hinge and pulled... bang. Arrow gone. Target panic at bay. I have no argument with that - it *has* to be me and not the equipment or our established shot processes.

You guys including ron are right and I was "doing it wrong". So there it is for me. As I said, I'm keeping my hinges in the bag for a while and sticking with the pull-through for now to verify my form. There could be other breakdown issues that I'll discover along the way.
What a tangled web we weave, LOL.....

LS


----------



## SonnyThomas

I like for you all to read Dudley's article. There's stuff in there that sort of goes hand-in-hand with much given to these Back Tension threads. He relates of letting relaxing the thumb and index finger. I read and think, but....Is relaxing the thumb and index finger equalizing pressure across the fingers so the hinge can rotate, middle and ring finger be allowed to pull? Does back tension and the pivot point work to move the release arm just that tiny bit to fire the hinge? He relates of the back half of the body, release side and front side...static? so the shoulder stays as it should and bow arm not be pulled off.....


----------



## unclejane

SonnyThomas said:


> I like for you all to read Dudley's article. There's stuff in there that sort of goes hand-in-hand with much given to these Back Tension threads. He relates of letting relaxing the thumb and index finger. I read and think, but....Is relaxing the thumb and index finger equalizing pressure across the fingers so the hinge can rotate, middle and ring finger be allowed to pull? Does back tension and the pivot point work to move the release arm just that tiny bit to fire the hinge? He relates of the back half of the body, release side and front side...static? so the shoulder stays as it should and bow arm not be pulled off.....


I think I read that article a while back, but I do need to read it again if so (I'm a huge fan of "the Dud"). 

As for me, what I discovered was any effort to try to expand, relax this or that finger, etc. a) eventually brought my usual target panic back and b) actually fought - through some mechanism that I haven't researched yet - the needed rotation of the hinge to make it fire. What I think, repeat think, was going on was I was unknowingly replacing the microscopic coming round of the draw arm with an attempted manual rotation of the hinge with the fingers. 

That's what I observed immediately when I hooked on with my pull-through a few days ago: I was coming to anchor and stopping with the back, didn't realize I was doing that and I learned years ago when shooting oly recurve that that's death for the shot for me. Then I was trying to twiddle the handle with my fingers somehow. 

With the pull-through, you just "haul back and shoot" (thank you sir) anyway. So for grins dragged out my Honey Do and "hauled back and shot". Worked every time to my not-insignificant amazement.

The only effect I noticed was a bit of a firm release (ron addressed that above) but I didn't notice any change in the float or pulling the dot off. Hell, the bare shaft was just about right on my PSE, which is slightly unforgiving left/right-wise when I pull too hard against the wall. So my "pure back tension" attempt was, what, probably about 85% or so there? If I pick my hinges back up after working with my pull-through, maybe I can fix that. Dunno yet.

So it was definitely rotating, but without my knowledge. So "pure back tension" must have something goin' on.....

LS


----------



## ron w

it only makes sence...
in a logical order of occurrences, we install a bit of rotation into the last few ounces of "staying on the stops", that rotates the release to fire. you draw with your rhomboids, they are already in the process, so the natural extension of that process is to continue the draw, so to speak,.... with the same muscle(s)..... which rotates the release as the draw gets to it's furthest back condition. the rhomboid is already resisting the holding weight, so it's just a matter of a final rearward extension of the upper arm that results in the rotation that occurs because the upper arm is at it's extent of rearward travel and can only do one thing...that is swing in an arc pivoting beause the scaplula is pulling the upper arm in towards the body. that pull from the scapula causes the upper arm to swing, transfers rotation to the release and breaks the sear.


----------



## unclejane

Well all I can say is it seems to be working as long as I pull with good form. That's what I wasn't doing before and I must have been defeating the natural, but unnoticed, rotation. Back to the pull-through for now, but at least now I have some hope LOL.

LS


----------



## Lazarus

Looks like those on the forum that perpetuate the myth of back tension as a firing method are winning today. Probably because those of us who know it's a myth are actually shooting, instead of trying to prove unicorns exist. 

:cheers:


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> if you're asking me, you're asking the wrong guy. I know nothing about it.


And no, I wasn't asking you but every now and then you and I see eye to eye on something. 



SonnyThomas said:


> I like for you all to read Dudley's article. There's stuff in there that sort of goes hand-in-hand with much given to these Back Tension threads. He relates of letting relaxing the thumb and index finger. I read and think, but....Is relaxing the thumb and index finger equalizing pressure across the fingers so the hinge can rotate, middle and ring finger be allowed to pull? Does back tension and the pivot point work to move the release arm just that tiny bit to fire the hinge? He relates of the back half of the body, release side and front side...static? so the shoulder stays as it should and bow arm not be pulled off.....


Relaxing the thumb and index finger "IS" a form of hand manipulation. There is no way to talk or rationalize around this "fact". Here's the statement from the Dudley article.

"Now that you have anchored, all fingers are in position and feel comfortable, think about relaxing your pointer finger and thumb on your release hand. It will almost feel
as if your release is slipping off you pointer finger and thumb. This will cause the release to slowly rotate around the middle finger and fire. The result will be an unanticipated shot."

There is no room for interpretation, speculation or any other rationalization. He "IS" recommending hand manipulation to execute the release. He is "NOT" saying this is how to get the hand into a position that will allow back tension to fire the release.


----------



## cbrunson

Yep. Just got back from the shoot. Went well, except for the misfire resulting in a 7.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> And no, I wasn't asking you but every now and then you and I see eye to eye on something.
> 
> 
> 
> Relaxing the thumb and index finger "IS" a form of hand manipulation. There is no way to talk or rationalize around this "fact". Here's the statement from the Dudley article.
> 
> "Now that you have anchored, all fingers are in position and feel comfortable, think about relaxing your pointer finger and thumb on your release hand. It will almost feel
> as if your release is slipping off you pointer finger and thumb. This will cause the release to slowly rotate around the middle finger and fire. The result will be an unanticipated shot."
> 
> There is no room for interpretation, speculation or any other rationalization. He "IS" recommending hand manipulation to execute the release. He is "NOT" saying this is how to get the hand into a position that will allow back tension to fire the release.


Read it several times and don't deny it. More of John's article brings some wonder and why I pointed this out. There is much read in his article and if just looking for a specific things are missed or taken as we think...
For instance;
" The Set Up
When we hear the words back tension we obviously think of the back and, more specifically, the back half of the body when at full draw. Normally one would think of the pulling muscles or the active muscles that will be used. There are however, things that are equally important to the function of this back half, keying specifically to the front shoulder positioning. *Believe it or not the positioning or location of the front shoulder is so critical to executing a shot using back tension*. It will dictate how you pull, what you pull with, the steadiness and the consistency of the shot.


----------



## EPLC

Sorry, there's no wondering about this. He goes on to say, "Make sure to remember to maintain good back pressure while executing the relaxation in the hands."


----------



## bowfisher

So am I getting this right, are there two trains of thought on releasing with your back. One with adding to the back wall and one just moving the elbow behind your head without adding to the back wall?


----------



## SonnyThomas

A reading of other of this articles on my part....I read two other articles, Mastering the Release Aid and the other with pivot point established so release arm can draw/swing so the hinge is easier to fire and each giving of release hand, position and why...Of one article he is talking of a thumb release. One manner works for the thumb and another works better for the hinge...Takes forever to download which makes finding the pivot point part.
I'll find it sooner or later


----------



## SonnyThomas

bowfisher said:


> So am I getting this right, are there two trains of thought on releasing with your back. One with adding to the back wall and one just moving the elbow behind your head without adding to the back wall?


No. I don't think so. Back tension is used with the various manners of firing a hinge. There is what is called true back tension that fires the release and then "other means" of firing the release with manipulating thumb and fingers. "Other means" has come forward from a few years back and now being told of by numerous Pros. So those of us that fire a hinge one way and those by another way...Both work. "Other means" is supported by George Ryals (Griv). Back tension unto it's self is supported by Larry Wise. No one so far has pointed to the coach being wrong


----------



## ron w

that "relaxation in the hands", doesn't necessarily mean producing rotation with the fingers or wrist. I see no reference to "producing rotation with varying finger tension"...., do you ?.


----------



## jwilson48

ron w said:


> that "relaxation in the hands", doesn't necessarily mean producing rotation with the fingers or wrist. I see no reference to "producing rotation with varying finger tension"...., do you ?.


Relaxing the hands does exactly that...allows the hinge to rotate against the pressure


----------



## SonnyThomas

ron w said:


> that "relaxation in the hands", doesn't necessarily mean producing rotation with the fingers or wrist. I see no reference to "producing rotation with varying finger tension"...., do you ?.


John sort of interjects his manner of drawing a bow with the index finger and thumb controlling the pulling post. He notes; "I like to teach the first
time hinge users to *draw without the last three fingers *on the release to make sure there is a confidence built that the release won’t go off. After you are *comfortable doing that you can draw with your other fingers on the handle but bearing no load*. Now that you have anchored, *all fingers are in position and feel comfortable, think about relaxing your pointer finger and thumb on your release hand. *It will almost feel
as if your release is slipping off you pointer finger and thumb. *This will cause the release to slowly rotate around the middle finger and fire*. The result will be an unanticipated shot."

Okay, the middle finger isn't pulling, is it ? What happened to the ring finger? What happened with the ring and little finger if a 4 finger hinge?


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> that "relaxation in the hands", doesn't necessarily mean producing rotation with the fingers or wrist. I see no reference to "producing rotation with varying finger tension"...., do you ?.


Yes I do and so does almost everyone else. This is the crux of the problem. You can put specific undeniable evidence out there that leaves no room for interpretation and you still deny it, and/or twist it to fit your narrow minded agenda.

"Now that you have anchored, all fingers are in position and feel comfortable, think about relaxing your pointer finger and thumb on your release hand. It will almost feel
as if your release is slipping off you pointer finger and thumb. This will cause the release to slowly rotate around the middle finger and fire. The result will be an unanticipated shot. 
Make sure to remember to maintain good back pressure while executing the relaxation in the hands." ~ John Dudley

There is no room for interpretation in this quote. It is what it is, regardless of your denial. 



SonnyThomas said:


> John sort of interjects his manner of drawing a bow with the index finger and thumb controlling the pulling post. He notes; "I like to teach the first
> time hinge users to *draw without the last three fingers *on the release to make sure there is a confidence built that the release won’t go off. After you are *comfortable doing that you can draw with your other fingers on the handle but bearing no load*. Now that you have anchored, *all fingers are in position and feel comfortable, think about relaxing your pointer finger and thumb on your release hand. *It will almost feel
> as if your release is slipping off you pointer finger and thumb. *This will cause the release to slowly rotate around the middle finger and fire*. The result will be an unanticipated shot."
> 
> Okay, the middle finger isn't pulling, is it ? What happened to the ring finger? What happened with the ring and little finger if a 4 finger hinge?


Answer: The release is rotating because of the relaxation of the index and thumb. This results in the point of rotation being the middle finger. The ring finger has no role in the process as described. You are not seeing it because you do not want to see it. It is as plain as the nose on your face.


----------



## SonnyThomas

SonnyThomas said:


> Okay, the middle finger isn't pulling, is it ? What happened to the ring finger? What happened with the ring and little finger if a 4 finger hinge?


Point of point, clarity. A two finger hinge, thumb, index and middle finger. A three finger hinge, thumb, index, middle and ring finger. A four finger hinge, thumb, index, middle, ring and little finger.

And keep your cocky mouth to yourself. Where have you seen me cut or jab someone?


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> Point of point, clarity. A two finger hinge, thumb, index and middle finger. A three finger hinge, thumb, index, middle and ring finger. A four finger hinge, thumb, index, middle, ring and little finger.
> 
> And keep your cocky mouth to yourself. Where have you seen me cut or jab someone?


I'm not jabbing you Sonny, just pointing out the obvious. You are not seeing this because you do not want to see it, or you simply do not understand what is very obviously stated by Mr. Dudley. In the process as stated, the number of fingers of the release has no impact to the rotation around the middle finger. If the middle finger is static, the release has to rotate around it if you relax the thumb and index. It is what it is, can't happen any other way.


----------



## unclejane

SonnyThomas said:


> No. I don't think so. Back tension is used with the various manners of firing a hinge. There is what is called true back tension that fires the release and then "other means" of firing the release with manipulating thumb and fingers. "Other means" has come forward from a few years back and now being told of by numerous Pros. So those of us that fire a hinge one way and those by another way...Both work. "Other means" is supported by George Ryals (Griv). Back tension unto it's self is supported by Larry Wise. No one so far has pointed to the coach being wrong


I was coming round to the non-Larry Wise side myself until I personally gave it a go. Now I think "pure back tension" (or rather its results) is actually among the now rather large set of techniques that work (and it probably always has been). In other words, LW describes a working technique, as does GRIV and John Dudley.

The thread at this point seems to have entered a small, saturating recursive loop concerned only with whether ron w is right or not. The content seems to have been wrung out of the thread by now....

LS


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> Point of point, clarity. A two finger hinge, thumb, index and middle finger. A three finger hinge, thumb, index, middle and ring finger. A four finger hinge, thumb, index, middle, ring and little finger.
> 
> And keep your cocky mouth to yourself. Where have you seen me cut or jab someone?


Here's the best I can do for you Sonny.


----------



## jwilson48

The method being described is basically Padgetts scissor method....which requires hand manipulation...what are we even arguing about anymore?


----------



## unclejane

jwilson48 said:


> The method being described is basically Padgetts scissor method....which requires hand manipulation...what are we even arguing about anymore?


... yes, which works perfectly (tho not for me, but definitely very well for Shawn and many others). The argument like I said, uh oh, oh wait.. now it seems to be whether Sonny is right.... it was ron w for a while....keeps going back and forth between various infinite loops. I don't keep track anymore .

LS


----------



## ride394

*“Back Tension, “ Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!*

This thread should be moved to general with the way you _jolly fellows_ argue. 

Everyone has their own way. Pure back tension is NOT a myth and works for some people. Hand manipulation works for some people. Why is there even a debate about this?


----------



## showard321

So my question is hand position at anchor. Vertical, 45 degree angle, or horizontal.


----------



## EPLC

*“Back Tension, “ Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!*



ride394 said:


> This thread should be moved to general with the way you jolly fellows argue.
> 
> Everyone has their own way. Pure back tension is NOT a myth and works for some people. Hand manipulation works for some people. Why is there even a debate about this?


Hey, you missed the point... or you're not paying attention. Sonny seems to be confused about the Dudley article as he keeps asking the same question over and over in different ways. Ron w on the other hand wants to twist Mr. Dudley's words to fit his narrow agenda. I really don't care how many ways there are to shoot a hinge, and recognize there are more than just a few. Unfortunately, there are those that continue to insist that the only "true" way to shoot the hinge is with a static hand. I submit that this type of intimidation that has gone along with this line of thought is the problem and I will continue to reject it, not whether or not it can be done, but the insistence that it "must" be done. The Dudley article is very specific about hand manipulation being part of his methodology, although this seems to be eluding some and being rejected by others. There is one other that can't seem to make up his mind. I assume this is due to his limited experience.


----------



## Lazarus

ride394 said:


> This thread should be moved to general with the way you jolly fellows argue.
> 
> Everyone has their own way. Pure back tension is NOT a myth and works for some people.


You are 100%.correct. Back tension is not a myth. But as a means of firing a hinge it is. It a myth created many years ago with absolutely no basis in fact. Kinda like 5 or 600 years ago some people theorized that the world was flat. Same thing here.


----------



## Sasquech

Laz just because you have not made it work does not make it a myth. My son shot 597 tonight doing it all nights. It is real and 2 months ago I would have agreed with you until I was taught to do it by an expert coach. Jim morrow great coach an fixed more release forms to perfection than any one I have worked with. He is fairly priced and very good at what he does. I as with unclean and Ron atest it works. May not be your cup of tea but please stop making things personal. There are lots of ways to make a release go off pick one that works for you if it stops getting you where you need to be try another. But have some respect for your fellow contributors. We all want to improve. Let's put our money on the line at vegas and Nationals.


----------



## Mahly

showard321 said:


> So my question is hand position at anchor. Vertical, 45 degree angle, or horizontal.


The way I understand it , if you want to use pure back tension to fire the hinge, the closer to horizontal the better.
If you want to manipulate the hinge, it doesn't matter.


----------



## Mahly

Lazarus said:


> You are 100%.correct. Back tension is not a myth. But as a means of firing a hinge it is. It a myth created many years ago with absolutely no basis in fact. Kinda like 5 or 600 years ago some people theorized that the world was flat. Same thing here.


I can't agree with that. I am sure your can use pure back tension to fire a hinge. I have done it.
I don't prefer it as an engine, but I can't deny it exists.


----------



## ride394

EPLC said:


> Hey, you missed the point... or you're not paying attention. Sonny seems to be confused about the Dudley article as he keeps asking the same question over and over in different ways. Ron w on the other hand wants to twist Mr. Dudley's words to fit his narrow agenda. I really don't care how many ways there are to shoot a hinge, and recognize there are more than just a few. Unfortunately, there are those that continue to insist that the only "true" way to shoot the hinge is with a static hand. I submit that this type of intimidation that has gone along with this line of thought is the problem and I will continue to reject it, not whether or not it can be done, but the insistence that it "must" be done. The Dudley article is very specific about hand manipulation being part of his methodology, although this seems to be eluding some and being rejected by others. There is one other that can't seem to make up his mind. I assume this is due to his limited experience.


I didn't bother to read you're response, but the only 2 narrow minded people here are you and Lazarus. Ron has conceded that manipulating works, but you and laz continue to fight him to the death. 

You guys are as bad as the people that used to say "anything but pure BT is cheating".


----------



## ride394

Mahly said:


> The way I understand it , if you want to use pure back tension to fire the hinge, the closer to horizontal the better.
> If you want to manipulate the hinge, it doesn't matter.


I know where you're thinking stems from, but I actually think closer to 45 is better for pure back tension. Horizontal lends itself to swinging your elbow across the back in a horizontal line (inducing too much use of the traps).


----------



## Mahly

Topic gentlemen (hint, the topic is not going to be who agrees with whom)


----------



## unclejane

*“Back Tension, “ Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!*

_I was going to post something off topic, but I knew I would get edited or an infraction for not bringing anything of value to the conversation._

LS


----------



## grantmac

I can do pure BT "hand-hand" releases indoors where I can tune the DL exactly to where it needs to be, the scores are perhaps even similar to other engines although my overall tension level will be higher. But good luck getting that engine to run with a +20Degree angle on a tough field course. Just isn't gonna happen in my experience. Other engines work just fine though.

-Grant


----------



## Sasquech

Agrees it has limitations since everything needs to be right. If the draw length is too long you will have a hard time ever trying it an since that is a common occourance most can't get it to work for them. Many pro shops think the average guy is 30 inch draw... Thus the struggle easy to be bottomed out if trying to use your back.


----------



## Lazarus

Sasquech said:


> Laz just because you have not made it work does not make it a myth. My son shot 597 tonight doing it all nights. It is real and 2 months ago I would have agreed with you until I was taught to do it by an expert coach. Jim morrow great coach an fixed more release forms to perfection than any one I have worked with. He is fairly priced and very good at what he does. I as with unclean and Ron atest it works. May not be your cup of tea but please stop making things personal. There are lots of ways to make a release go off pick one that works for you if it stops getting you where you need to be try another. But have some respect for your fellow contributors. We all want to improve. Let's put our money on the line at vegas and Nationals.


It's not personal at all. I simply adamantly disagree that "back tension" is a firing method. When I get back to a computer in 24 hours or so I'll get back in the game here.


----------



## EPLC

ride394 said:


> I didn't bother to read you're response, but the only 2 narrow minded people here are you and Lazarus. Ron has conceded that manipulating works, but you and laz continue to fight him to the death.
> 
> You guys are as bad as the people that used to say "anything but pure BT is cheating".


Actually, you hit the nail on the head when you said you didn't read my response. Laz and I agree on many things but I'm not joining him in the fight as to whether or not it is possible to fire a hinge without any hand movement. I believe this is a futile battle because so many have been indoctrinated or intimidated that it, not only works, but it is the only "pure" way to shoot a hinge. It's this indoctrination and intimidation that I challenge, not the process itself. 

Had you read the Dudley article and the denial that some posted about his method you would see that no true consession has been provided and you would understand where I am coming from. But then you haven't bothered to read any of this, you just want to obstruct.


----------



## northern rednek

*“Back Tension, “ Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!*

For me pure back tension firing engine is the only one that gives me consistent results. I would never say it's the best way but for me it's what works best. I can get good results with some kind of manipulation but find I'll get rounds with inconsistent results. But there are a lot of better shooters than me that can manipulate and be very consistent. I believe you have to find what works for you. Once you find something that works then ingrain it, then you can experiment but are able to hit the reset if things are going south.


----------



## ron w

Laz....
if as you say, "we all want to improve" and we should "all have respect for the others' input"..... why is that you constantly refute with calling a myth, every time someone mentions back tension as a firing method, rather than just stating you prefer not to do it that way.
the pot calling the kettle black.


----------



## Lazarus

ron.....find one compound/freestyle Shooter who makes a living shooting a bow that *fires* a bow using this mythical (now) "pure" back tension and I'll begin to listen. Not a "coach," not a YouTube personality. 

I like how it's vogue now to put the word "pure" in front of back tension. 

:cheers:


----------



## ron w

Lazarus said:


> ron.....find one compound/freestyle Shooter who makes a living shooting a bow that *fires* a bow using this mythical (now) "pure" back tension and I'll begin to listen. Not a "coach," not a YouTube personality.
> 
> I like how it's vogue now to put the word "pure" in front of back tension.
> 
> :cheers:


 I don't use the word..... "pure"..... in reference to rotational back tension....do I ?. the fact that no pro uses it, if that is universally accurate...(there are a lot of pros in the world), doesn't make it a myth, it only makes it a method "not preferred", by those pros who don't use it.
you continually base your disagreement on want the pros are doing, but all that does is support the fact that an exceptionally smaller percentage of "back tension shooters" shoot with a method that is, in one way or another,....different.
it does not in any way, provide any proof or any evident fact,...what-so-ever...., that Back tension as a firing engine, does not exist. 
it is only your interpolated opinion, that it is a "myth". and opinions don't hold water,...they are just one person's thought, or idea based on his or her interpretation of the information he or she is, or was exposed to.
in simpler terms.....because one or two people say it isn't so,....doesn't make it factual evidence. if that were the case, we would never have stepped foot on the moon, and Christopher Columbus would have never found the East Coast of North America. these are obviously much grander in scale and significance, the fact remains similar in scope.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> Sonny seems to be confused about the Dudley article as he keeps asking the same question over and over in different ways..


Not confused one bit. I point out through different questions or putting question marks to a word, sentence or the readings in John's articles. I use a thumb release 95% of the time and a hinge 5% (does vary). I've tried relaxing my index finger with a thumb and it can be scary. Read John's Mastering the Release and he gives of a thumb and hinge needing handled differently.

With a thumb I draw with all three fingers and evenly. My thumb doesn't go on the pulling post until I'm set/on target. At that point it's letting the shot happen, maintaining back tension, not manipulating fingers or thumb. 

As with Padgett's write up for the hinge, I draw evenly with all fingers while holding with the thumb. As taken, on target I release my thumb, let the hinge balance or equalize on my fingers. It's then allowing back tension to take over. If form is correct the release fires if of it's own. I'm out of whack it doesn't fire easily. Left out with many descriptions is the pivot point. The rhomboids can't draw the scapula if all is not there to give a proper pivot point. John points this out, the scapula being drawn. Pretty simple to check and no bow needed. Set as to shoot and apply back tension. The elbow is drawn back. Set to shoot, but have the elbow out and apply back tension. No movement or hard to make move.

I've described somewhere about my two finger hinge. It is set exactly like John describes. The Deuce set not what I call hot, I just let off the thumb barrel wait out the shot. It normally goes off between 4 to 9 seconds. I don't time, but feel a difference. It doesn't go off I let down. 

Of my three finger hinges I get along with my MagMicro Trio with no pulling barrel better than I do with my Blackjack with pulling post. I draw mostly with the index and thumb, relax, allowing the equalization or balance across my fingers. It's then maintaining back tension until the releases fire. It's here that I realize what John gives of the bow shoulder set, critical to back tension, Part Two.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> I'm not jabbing you Sonny, just pointing out the obvious. You are not seeing this because you do not want to see it, or you simply do not understand what is very obviously stated by Mr. Dudley. In the process as stated, the number of fingers of the release has no impact to the rotation around the middle finger. If the middle finger is static, the release has to rotate around it if you relax the thumb and index. It is what it is, can't happen any other way.


You do pop off at the mouth.... The question is why a 3 finger, why a 4 finger if only the middle finger is static or the pivot. The other point is just relaxing the thumb the release firing is called having it set hot. It works. Those who have a release set cold then manipulate the release more. What has to take place? Pulling with the other fingers.... Didn't you point out a method you were trying, pushing with the thumb? If so was your release set cold or hot?


----------



## unclejane

Lazarus said:


> ron.....find one compound/freestyle Shooter who makes a living shooting a bow that *fires* a bow using this mythical (now) "pure" back tension and I'll begin to listen. Not a "coach," not a YouTube personality.
> 
> I like how it's vogue now to put the word "pure" in front of back tension.
> 
> :cheers:


I swear, I just tried it again with my Hoyt and Honey Do - I just slap made a fist and grabbed that dude. Released the safety and pulled with the back. As far as I could tell, I had a grip and I mean a GRIP on that SOB. Goes right off at only a mildly higher pressure than my pull through...... 

Slightly off topic, more on the topic now of different methods, a pro named Tom Gomez, who I believe shoots for Mathews, describes actually increasing the finger pressure to rotate the release. Not pure back tension, but I find the description interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFAUaezgBkA
LS


----------



## unclejane

unclejane said:


> _I was going to post something off topic, but I knew I would get edited or an infraction for not bringing anything of value to the conversation._
> 
> LS


LOL.. sorry about this Mahly and EP, this was tongue-in-cheek and not meant as a true insult. My bad.

LS


----------



## ron w

what is very obviously stated by Mr. Dudley, is that he "relaxes his fingers". ....NOT...that he varies the amount of relaxation amongst his fingers that would produce the necessary rotation. when you learn back tension as a firing engine, it is paramount that you relax your fingers and hand, in order to allow the tendons to transfer the elbow's swing to the release. it is a universally common aspect in any back tension oriented execution, to have to have your fingers relaxed within the parameters of not letting the release escape your fingers' grip. maintaining too much tension, promotes the condition of not letting the release rotate, despite the swing produced at the elbow from rhomboid contraction. 
if you contend, as you have in previous posts, ..."that you take things literally",.... interpreting that statement, would not take the assumed position that "relaxing his fingers", means manipulating the release to produce rotation. it's easy to interpret what you want it to mean, for your purpose, but difficult to remain true to your position of literal conception, when it doesn't fit your agenda.


----------



## unclejane

ron w said:


> what is very obviously stated by Mr. Dudley, is the relaxes his fingers. ....NOT...that he varies the amount of relaxation amongst his fingers that would produce the necessary rotation. when you learn back tension as a firing engine, it is paramount that you relax your fingers and hand, in order to allow the tendons to transfer the elbow's swing to the release. it is a universally common aspect in any back tension oriented execution, to have to have your fingers relaxed within the parameters of not letting the release escape your fingers' grip. maintaining too much tension, promotes the condition of not letting the release rotate, despite the swing produced at the elbow from rhomboid contraction.
> if you contend, as you have in previous posts, ..."that you take things literally",.... interpreting that statement, would not take the assumed position that "relaxing his fingers", means manipulating the release to produce rotation. it's easy to interpret what you want it to mean, for your purpose, but difficult to remain true to your position of literal conception, when it doesn't fit your agenda.


Well, how about this: maybe there's shooters like myself who are just pathologically unable to come to anchor and simply hold with the back, and then introduce another method? I have such horrible target panic that any shot process where I stop pulling is just sudden death. Or at least, once I start the final "engine" it just must involve a continuous pull with the back and frankly nothing else....

Perhaps its just this select group of poor souls with advanced target panic or in my case just you know, lack of talent, that are, well, doomed in a sense, to "pure back tension" to fire a hinge (not that PBT is a remedial thing)? Perhaps advocates of other types of firing engines that do involve manipulation with expansion, etc. like Shawn and JD are writing to a less afflicted audience? You know, just watch me shoot compared to a really skilled archer and you'll see what I mean.

For me it just slap don't work unless it's just the simplest possible thing using one muscle lol, like the back. My brain just can't handle more than that.... I dunno just throwing that out there....

LS


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> You do pop off at the mouth.... The question is why a 3 finger, why a 4 finger if only the middle finger is static or the pivot. The other point is just relaxing the thumb the release firing is called having it set hot. It works. Those who have a release set cold then manipulate the release more. What has to take place? Pulling with the other fingers.... Didn't you point out a method you were trying, pushing with the thumb? If so was your release set cold or hot?


The number of fingers does not have anything to do with the explanation of shooting a hinge in the Dudley article. I can't help you if you simply do not, or will not understand the simple process as it was written. The number of fingers does not have anything to do with the explanation of shooting a hinge in the Dudley article. This is really simple stuff and you are trying to make more of it than it really is. If you think this is popping off at the mouth there's nothing else I can say to convince you.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> what is very obviously stated by Mr. Dudley, is that he "relaxes his fingers". ....NOT...that he varies the amount of relaxation amongst his fingers that would produce the necessary rotation. when you learn back tension as a firing engine, it is paramount that you relax your fingers and hand, in order to allow the tendons to transfer the elbow's swing to the release. it is a universally common aspect in any back tension oriented execution, to have to have your fingers relaxed within the parameters of not letting the release escape your fingers' grip. maintaining too much tension, promotes the condition of not letting the release rotate, despite the swing produced at the elbow from rhomboid contraction.
> if you contend, as you have in previous posts, ..."that you take things literally",.... interpreting that statement, would not take the assumed position that "relaxing his fingers", means manipulating the release to produce rotation. it's easy to interpret what you want it to mean, for your purpose, but difficult to remain true to your position of literal conception, when it doesn't fit your agenda.


If you truly believe that, you are either suffering from a serious reading comprehension issue or you are truly delusional.

_*...think about relaxing your pointer finger and thumb on your release hand. It will almost feel
as if your release is slipping off you pointer finger and thumb. This will cause the release to slowly rotate around the middle finger and fire... ~ John Dudley*_

Also, with regard to having a relaxed hand ~_ *"All fingers should be held with equal tightness on the release and not relaxed." ~ Larry Wise*_


----------



## unclejane

PS: I just tried the Chance B. thing as best I could, with my Honey Do way deep in the fingers and executed a shot with my Hoyt. I was maintaining a grip and I mean a Kung Fu Grip on that sucker. I could feel it rotating as I pulled (I was focusing on it and not really the shot)......pop, went right off. Not 100% sure where the rotation was coming from, but it wasn't the fingers far as I could tell...

Veeeery interesting.....

LS


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> The number of fingers does not have anything to do with the explanation of shooting a hinge in the Dudley article. I can't help you if you simply do not, or will not understand the simple process as it was written. The number of fingers does not have anything to do with the explanation of shooting a hinge in the Dudley article. This is really simple stuff and you are trying to make more of it than it really is. If you think this is popping off at the mouth there's nothing else I can say to convince you.


I first got my two finger release. A herd of releases on the market, why a two finger release? I went in search of. At first the two finger hinge was faster and then another said slower. Another said a two finger was harder fire, but not so with me. Finally, I got a reply that seemed correct. 
Date of picture of my new Stanislawski Deuce, 01/23/2011. Answer had to come a month or so after;
“3 and 4 finger models create a balance for the individual and ease the pressure on the index finger in drawing. Hinge type releases and thumb releases can be adjusted in a manner to fit the individual, ergonomic fit. The more the ring and pinky finger are employed the more difference of feel and rotation come about. Not unusual is for a target shooter to carry another releases, not so much as a back up, but to give a different manner of firing. To more fit the individual are models of thumb and hinge release with different design of handle and more swept back handles and again, ergonomic fit.”

From Padgett who has much following on AT;
"2. Now draw back with all fingers and get to anchor and then just release the thumb pressure smoothly and do not try to fire the hinge just release the thumb pressure and that is it. Now let down and speed up the moon a little and repeat the process over and over for about 5 minutes and sooner or later when you come to anchor and release the thumb peg it will fire. Now we know where we are and we are right on the edge which is way to fast so now slow down the moon just a little and you should be able to come to anchor using all fingers during the draw cycle and then let go of the pressure on the thumb peg and the hinge hasn't fired but it is close.

3. Hinge setup is complete 

4. Over the next week or so tweak the speed very slightly until you find the perfect speed setting that allows you to draw with all fingers and fire the hinge easily using your favorite firing engine. You don't want it too fast where you are scared of early releases and you don't want it so slow you can't rotate it enough to fire it. You want it just right."


----------



## SonnyThomas

Won't show in above post...??? The Deuce, no middle finger groove. The Blackjack and Mag are near the same. The 2 ST360 may look identical for 3 fingers, but a slight difference. With the fourth finger a different set of the thumb barrel to give of the 3 finger. The Shootoff is a swept back design and does feel different and adjusted different than the ST360s.


----------



## EPLC

Yes releases can all have a different feel. That said; In the example that you questioned it makes no difference. If you relax your index and thumb the release will rotate around the middle finger. Nothing changes.


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> Won't show in above post...??? The Deuce, no middle finger groove. The Blackjack and Mag are near the same. The 2 ST360 may look identical for 3 fingers, but a slight difference. With the fourth finger a different set of the thumb barrel to give of the 3 finger. The Shootoff is a swept back design and does feel different and adjusted different than the ST360s.


Ok, last try: If the index is relaxed while keeping the middle finger in the same spot, the release has to follow the relaxing index finger, thus creating a rotation with the pivot point being the middle finger. This would be true of all the releases pictured, but I used an ST-360 for demonstration purposes.


----------



## EPLC

Another method that results in the pivot point being the index finger instead of the middle finger would be if you apply pressure with the middle finger (and ring and little if you want). The rotation still happens but the pivot changes to the index finger. That said, both result in a rotation that fires the release. With a button the rotation causes pressure on the thumb trigger, firing it. With a hinge the rotation trips the sear.


----------



## Padgett

Guys, keep it up. I have had a bunch of guys in the short time that this and a couple of other threads in this sub forum find me and get on their way to becoming hinge shooters and I am really liking what I am hearing as they touch base with me. They are up and running with their new hinges and to me they seem to have a great outlook for what it takes to become a hinge shooter. They don't believe it is a over night quick fix and I have a feeling they are going to make it and become real hinge shooters.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> Ok, last try: If the index is relaxed while keeping the middle finger in the same spot, the release has to follow the relaxing index finger, thus creating a rotation with the pivot point being the middle finger. This would be true of all the releases pictured, but I used an ST-360 for demonstration purposes.





EPLC said:


> Another method that results in the pivot point being the index finger instead of the middle finger would be if you apply pressure with the middle finger (and ring and little if you want). The rotation still happens but the pivot changes to the index finger. That said, both result in a rotation that fires the release. With a button the rotation causes pressure on the thumb trigger, firing it. With a hinge the rotation trips the sear.


Didn't show me any more than I already know. Still, I use back tension to get good results, not manipulation of the index finger.


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> Didn't show me any more than I already know. Still, I use back tension to get good results, not manipulation of the index finger.


Then why didn't you just say that?


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> Then why didn't you just say that?


I have from whenever the back tension threads began....What were you doing, just reading what you wanted to? Started giving of way back when the forums started - http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2200954&p=1069586714#post1069586714


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> I have from whenever the back tension threads began....What were you doing, just reading what you wanted to? Started giving of way back when the forums started - http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2200954&p=1069586714#post1069586714


No I'm sorry but I have to respectfully disagree. You've been beating around the bush for weeks on this and I wasn't involved in the discussion last February. You said to read the Dudley article and I did. Unfortunately Mr. Dudley didn't support your method so we went back and forth on that for a while with you (and Ron w) trying to spin it to say what it didn't say. It's only now that you have come out directly and stated your position. So, the only question is: are you happy with the level that you currently shoot? If the answer is yes, then I'm happy for you. If the answer is no, as it is with me, then maybe trying something different may provide some improvement. Based on my experience with a static hand I was never going to get beyond the intermediate level. I believe that I am now free from the indoctrination and intimidation that has been commonly used to promote the static hand, "cheating the hinge" crap I am seeing progress.


----------



## xavier102772

Even the makers of the releases are saying that back tension isn't firing the release or at the very least is not the optimum release firing technique.

https://www.ishootastan.com/2003-and-after/2011-manual-all-products

It's the yielding/relaxing hand that allows the hinge to rotate that enables the release to fire. As per instructions from the Stan manual in the link above.

For me, I'm gonna side with Lazarus, Padgett, Dudley, Levi and the release manufacturer Stan that the optimum hinge firing technique is in the Stan Manual, on Padgetts website, in Dudley's article, spelled out by Lazarus and reiterated by Levi...a yielding hand while slightly increasing back tension/dynamic tension fires the release by rotation of the release.

In my own shooting it's this exact technique that has taken my shooting to new levels.


----------



## EPLC

Didn't someone just recently try to claim the Stan instruction manual was from days of old?


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> I believe that I am now free from the indoctrination and intimidation that has been commonly used to promote the static hand, "cheating the hinge" crap I am seeing progress.


Interesting... Nobody is indoctrinating or intimidating anyone, nor is anyone promoting any "crap" that I've been able to see. So it's unknown to me where you're inferring these "musts" pressures from. Very strange....

From what I've been able to gather, I've only seen a number of different approaches that all seem to be as eligible as any others for trying out to see if they work out. Each approach may have its group of advocates; I guess it's just who sounds like they're the loudest?

Been a great thread for me....

LS


----------



## EPLC

unclejane said:


> Interesting... Nobody is indoctrinating or intimidating anyone, nor is anyone promoting any "crap" that I've been able to see. So it's unknown to me where you're inferring these "musts" pressures from. Very strange....
> 
> From what I've been able to gather, I've only seen a number of different approaches that all seem to be as eligible as any others for trying out to see if they work out. Each approach may have its group of advocates; I guess it's just who sounds like they're the loudest?
> 
> Been a great thread for me....
> 
> LS





ron w said:


> "squeeze and pull, is entirely wrong in respect to using a hinge with the standard engine being back tension.
> the "squeezing" is an entirely, consciously regulated muscle action, that does exactly opposite what a hinge and back tension, is supposed to do. it is precisely the definition of "cheating an hinge off". it is exactly contrary to the entire reason hinges were developed to be fired with back tension.
> I challenge anyone here to prove me wrong and I will gladly participate in a long discussion, revealing the reason why.


Here's another gem...



ron w said:


> again, it is not scolding, it is stating a simple fact that is a known true statement.
> and contrary to your thinking, archery is an exact science, that has very structured and well established methods, that have been developed over more years than just about any other sport in existence.
> people who don't understand or don't/won't bother to do any reading or investigation , in order to understand the sport, are the only people who say that "it is not an exact science". they hide behind the idea that "you have to find what works for you", because they don't want to put in the effort to learn to do it in the ways that are known and established, as ways that work the best.



Need I dig up more? There is a ton of it out there.


----------



## Padgett

Unclejane, I have been letting EPLC fight most of the fight in this thread. I think this thread is beyond important and it is changing archery talk forever and hinge shooting forever. I am a guy that spent years here on archery talk and read everything available and the fact is is sucked and there was little to no useful information to help a guy get started. There was only phrases thrown in your face that talked about this awesome back tension thing where everything was subconscious but it was absolutely useless to new shooters to get them up and running. I have almost 2 years of suffering myself where I had blisters on my fingers and hinges that I gave away and traded and hours spent wasting time with absolutely no useful direction or instruction.

Right now on archery talk it is almost impossible to be on here and not get your hands on some of the best hinge shooting instruction within a day or so and all for free of charge because I have a few thousand guys who have used my articles that will refer you to me in a pm and I send it to you within minutes and that is if I don't find you in a thread and get it them in your hands even quicker.

The information we give out isn't ever going to be perfect, it is tough to become a hinge shooter even if you have a good coach for some people so just reading a few articles for some people isn't going to be overly productive but I know that for a lot of people the articles have opened up doors for them to enjoy hinge shooting.


----------



## bowfisher

EPLC said:


> Here's another gem...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need I dig up more? There is a ton of it out there.


I agree, this guys has been pushing it as the Only way for years.


----------



## Padgett

By the way I am pretty sure I know the real reason it has been so hard to find the good information, one of my buddies gives me crap all the time that I help people to much. I am getting beat at asa by more than one guy that has used my information to become strong shooters and he throws that in my face every time one of them beats me, I really think that a lot of the information is only available if you pay a coach for a weekend seminar or online help and we have already proven that some of the top coaches are iffy when it comes to what they are offering.

Even with ranging distance, I know that when I was in the team shoot and I asked Jeff Hopkins if he had some advice for a ground judger like myself for getting better the best he could do was tell me that he was probably the best in the world at ranging targets and he had always been good just because. This year I stayed around after a team shoot and he was talking to Cheri Hott at a target about ranging targets and I walked up and ranged the one next to them and heard him talking to her about how he ranges a target. I stood there and listened and I could tell that he was irritated with me because he looked at me a few times as he talked to her but he continued and I continued listening for a good 10 minutes. He really didn't say anything that I didn't already know but the fact that he offered it to a woman who will never shoot in his class and possibly take some money away from him said volumes.


----------



## Fury90flier

EPLC said:


> Here's the best I can do for you Sonny.


The picture is correct, just that the pivot point is missing (though obvious). move the rotation (middle finger) to the actual pivot point of the hinge and others will likely understand how the various methos of firing work.


----------



## Fury90flier

Mahly said:


> Topic gentlemen (hint, the topic is not going to be who agrees with whom)


I agree.


----------



## Padgett

I am going to remind you guys that all we are discussing is firing the hinge, it isn't even the most important lesson to be learned. Firing the hinge is only one of the aspects of hinge shooting that we seem to get stuck on and spend the most time discussing. I know that for the last couple years I have taken a lot of crap because I train with different firing methods and that I would be better off just shooting one method and perfecting it. Well I am really glad that I didn't listen because shooting with a variety of methods has taught me a lesson that I think many of the coaches and top shooters have missed out on, FIRING A HINGE IS JUST A JOB. It is a job that has a simple purpose and that is to send the arrow on its way and I have found that all of the methods get that job done nicely but they do so with their own set of positive and negative influences that a guy can use to his advantage. 

For those of you who learned from someone 30 years ago and you have never strayed from that method and you have committed yourself to it 100%, I say great for you to have the guts to trust something that much and stay true to the cause. I guess there is satisfaction in that kind of trust and faith that you have spent a lifetime doing something and never straying.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> No I'm sorry but I have to respectfully disagree. You've been beating around the bush for weeks on this and I wasn't involved in the discussion last February. You said to read the Dudley article and I did. Unfortunately Mr. Dudley didn't support your method so we went back and forth on that for a while with you (and Ron w) trying to spin it to say what it didn't say. It's only now that you have come out directly and stated your position. So, the only question is: are you happy with the level that you currently shoot? If the answer is yes, then I'm happy for you. If the answer is no, as it is with me, then maybe trying something different may provide some improvement. Based on my experience with a static hand I was never going to get beyond the intermediate level. I believe that I am now free from the indoctrination and intimidation that has been commonly used to promote the static hand, "cheating the hinge" crap I am seeing progress.


Sorry, you must reading what you want to read or make of. All along I've told of my manner of shooting a thumb release and hinge. I've told of trying relaxing my index finger and even posted pictures. Of John Dudley's articles, I've read a bunch, have a bunch downloaded. John goes to lengths describing things not of what the heading of his articles are about. My complaint of John's articles isn't much different than I feel of nuts&bolts's replies here on AT. Alan's Nuts&Bolts of Archery is far much better and I have the original and the updated version. I feel Johns' article are written poorly as in bits and pieces should have been elsewhere in the his article, but read the article, come back and read it again with what came from reading the entire article things become clearer....
Evidently I'm happy with my shooting. I've tried much that people, you included, have put forth in this forum and I've told of it and getting the glitches trying some. Junked it, shot my way back a couple of times. As for a hinge, until I get over my confidence problem I doubt I will ever convert to a hinge. And why should I when I shoot so well with a thumb release? And I've told I don't like shooting spots and of no club or shop promotes the Vegas Face. We have the IAA with one Vegas Aggregate per zone for the entire year. I'm driving 100 or 200 miles to shoot in another zone. The Midwest Open is once a year. Wow, two Vegas events for the whole year...League shooting in my area....It sucks. Most all want to run 10 week sessions and half and more of the shooters fall out by week 5. Handicaps suck. A 300 shooter getting beat by a handicapper....field14 does try and has one of the best handicap systems I've seen. Need one, ask him or I have his stored on my computer.....


----------



## Padgett

Two times when my dad and I were racing bicycles he said something that really struck me and changed me forever:

1. JUST RIDE THROUGH THEM One day we were on a 400 mile training ride that was going to take us about 36 to 40 hours to complete, we were about 160 miles into the ride and had just went down a nice down hill run into a valley with a little river which meant we had to do a good 3/4 mile climb once we crossed the bridge. We got about half way up the climb and my dad started screaming as he pedaled his bike and I looked back over my shoulder and his quads and his calves were totally cramped up and he was screaming in pain as he pumped on the pedals. He kept riding and suffering up the last half of that climb and by the time we got to the top he had recovered and I asked him if we needed to pull over for a few minutes and he said no I am good to go now because if you push through the cramps the first time your legs lock up then they won't come back the rest of the ride. Holy crap, I asked dad how in the hell do you know this trick because I have never heard anyone talk about it before and he said because most people just do what most people do and that is to pull over and stretch on the side of the road. 

2. YOUR BODY CHANGES AFTER YOU DO A 200 MILE RIDE I was really strong and was doing mountain bike races and road bike races and riding from 2 to 5 hours every day 7 days a week, I had never been in that kind of cardio shape before and it was simply amazing how good I felt. Dad was 50 years old and goint to paris france to race in ultra distance type races and I had begun to follow him around missouri on some of these training rides and we were talking one day on a short 80 mile ride and he made that famous comment "your body changes after you do a 200". I really thought he was full of crap because how could riding slowly well under your top effort change your body, there was no way in my mind that he was actually telling me something true and I thought he was just messing with me. I mean I was putting in hours of training every day and racing at my maximum output all the time so how in the hell could riding well below that effort do anything but wast 14 hours of my life sitting on a skinny seat. Well just about two weeks later I showed up and did a doubble century with my 50 year old dad and we rode about a 19 mph average speed for about 13 hours and had a great time. It was a fun day and we rode with some cool people and nothing really significant happened until about a week and a half later, my body changed. Holy hell I was simply stronger in every way, my climbing and my sprinting and my average speed and my overall strength on a bike was simply way better than ever before.

To me this is exactly what has given me the ability to look at archery with a open mind and not only look at it but dive in and find out these things that so many people never experience.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Padgett said:


> I am going to remind you guys that all we are discussing is firing the hinge, it isn't even the most important lesson to be learned. Firing the hinge is only one of the aspects of hinge shooting that we seem to get stuck on and spend the most time discussing. I know that for the last couple years I have taken a lot of crap because I train with different firing methods and that I would be better off just shooting one method and perfecting it. Well I am really glad that I didn't listen because shooting with a variety of methods has taught me a lesson that I think many of the coaches and top shooters have missed out on, FIRING A HINGE IS JUST A JOB. It is a job that has a simple purpose and that is to send the arrow on its way and I have found that all of the methods get that job done nicely but they do so with their own set of positive and negative influences that a guy can use to his advantage.
> 
> For those of you who learned from someone 30 years ago and you have never strayed from that method and you have committed yourself to it 100%, I say great for you to have the guts to trust something that much and stay true to the cause. I guess there is satisfaction in that kind of trust and faith that you have spent a lifetime doing something and never straying.


Padgett, I've got a Library of your write ups. I think that much of them. Keep chugging...


----------



## ron w

again, it's amazing that I don't even have to be "signed in", and I get my thoughts posted, repeatedly......
there is absolutely nowhere, in any of my posts, where I proclaim, "it is the only way". only you guys that refuse to accept any one else's views, are the ones that are falsely attaching that interpreted and assumed position, to my posts.
I thank you, EPLC, Cbrunson and bowfisher, for keeping my preferential opinions, at the fore front of this discussion.....keep up the good work.
the irony of this, is that it is specifically, you three, that seem to disagree with me the most, are the ones that are reposting my opinions the most often......again,...thanks guys, I appreciate that !.


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> I feel Johns' article are written poorly as in bits and pieces should have been elsewhere in the his article,


Surly you jest?


----------



## Padgett

Ronw, where were you when I was suffering? In fact where are all the guys that lead me down that road of 2 years of reading stuff and then 2 more years of actual suffering while shooting thousands of arrows that used to be here shoving only one perspective down our throats.

I am on every stinking one of these threads and I can't remember one new hinge shooter who is enjoying their hinge and shooting it with pure back tension, every single shooter that is coming forward and sharing with us their new found hinge shooting is doing so with something other than pure back tension. The only people that are openly using it as their preferred method are guys like you that claim to have done it for decades.

I am still waiting for you to produce one pro shooter that is competitive that is actually doing it.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> again, it's amazing that I don't even have to be "signed in", and I get my thoughts posted, repeatedly......
> there is absolutely nowhere, in any of my posts, where I proclaim, "it is the only way". only you guys that refuse to accept any one else's views, are the ones that are falsely attaching that interpreted and assumed position, to my posts.
> I thank you, EPLC, Cbrunson and bowfisher, for keeping my preferential opinions, at the fore front of this discussion.....keep up the good work.
> the irony of this, is that it is specifically, you three, that seem to disagree with me the most, are the ones that are reposting my opinions the most often......again,...thanks guys, I appreciate that !.


You're welcome! But while your exact words were not "it is the only way" you certainly made the following certainly sound like all other ways are trash. Examples:

"that does exactly opposite what a hinge and back tension, is supposed to do. it is precisely the definition of "cheating an hinge off". "

"again, it is not scolding, it is stating a simple fact that is a known true statement."

"and contrary to your thinking, archery is an exact science, that has very structured and well established methods"

"they hide behind the idea that "you have to find what works for you", because they don't want to put in the effort to learn to do it in the ways that are known and established, as ways that work the best."

I especially like that last one. Need more?


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> Surly you jest?


Can't stand it, can you? You just have to come back with something.


----------



## SonnyThomas

For the record, for those using a hinge and using "other means" I have no issue with, use what works...Again, I've tried relaxing of the index finger with a hinge and noted impact was excellent, just needing sight adjustment to correct placement. Weather and family issues get better perhaps I'll try again. Meanwhile, I'll stay with my thumb releases....


----------



## ron w

whether I think it is trash or not, is only the interpretation of those who read the posts. if they have a chip on their shoulder about hearing about other methods,....they might assume I am "trashing" other methods. the fact is that what I post about, is my preferred method and has no other inferences to any other method being trash,....that assumed interpretation is what you conceive in your head......most likey because you have a problem with accepting other views. 
because I don't talk about other methods, doesn't mean I think they are "trash", it means I don't care to talk about them. 
EPLC, in your most precious post above, you do exactly that......
You infer that because my words weren't exactly, "it is the only way" you assume I meant all other ways were trash. ....did I say other ways were trash, or not ?. of everyone on here, you are the best at reading and assuming people's words mean something other than what is posted. I personally am sick of it and that is why I refuse to post beyond insignificant input for now on. 
you have done the forum a great disservice, by quieting someone who has a great deal of knowledge and experience when it comes to issues about target shooting and hinges.


----------



## Padgett

The time line of lessons learned when becoming a hinge shooter or thumb trigger shooter is the biggest problem, it is only a guess but I have a really good opinion that almost no new hinge shooters were shooting with a true float that had absolutely no influence on it or control. Almost all shooters who are coming off a index finger release are firing the release when the pin is perfect, there are a few guys that do shoot a index finger release properly with their float but it is very rare.

What this means is that in the beginning when a shooter is first learning how to fire their hinge they are still commanding the hinge based on what the pin is doing and the releases are nicer than the index finger they just came off of but in all reality they haven't learned the important lessons of shooting yet. This is why so many guys struggle with their hinge shooting because it isn't going off exactly when they want it to and they end up freezing up in anticipation of it firing and things get worse.

This is exactly why every hinge shooter that I work with is told to read my mental approach articles twice a day for two weeks, I tell them to do this over and over when they pm me and I know that some of them do it and some don't but I do tell them as much as possible as reminders because not working on your approach to floating and understanding of being disconnected from your aiming when firing your release is only going to prolong the things that were holding you back with your index finger. 

Fortunately the cool thing about a hinge is by just owning one you are going to accidentally have some shots that are freaking awesome surprise shots and these accidental shots are what fuels you to give the hinge a little more time and then if you are lucky you can get on top of the learning curve and then things start happening that send you to becoming a real hinge shooter.


----------



## Padgett

Ronw, you can try all you want to make eplc feel bad but it isn't going to work. He has been very open with his struggles for quite some time asking for help and each and every time even though he felt like he was being open to suggestion there was something holding him back from enjoying his shooting. Right now he has found that something that he had been hanging on to for a long time that he had put faith into was right under his nose screwing him and I have a feeling he is going to be a strong shooter and a strong set of vocal cords from hear on out.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> whether I think it is trash or not, is only the interpretation of those who read the posts. if they have a chip on their shoulder about hearing about other methods,....they might assume I am "trashing" other methods. the fact is that what I post about, is my preferred method and has no other inferences to any other method being trash,....that assumed interpretation is what you conceive in your head......most likey because you have a problem with accepting other views.
> because I don't talk about other methods, doesn't mean I think they are "trash", it means I don't care to talk about them.
> EPLC, in your most precious post above, you do exactly that......
> You infer that because my words weren't exactly, "it is the only way" you assume I meant all other ways were trash. ....did I say other ways were trash, or not ?. of everyone on here, you are the best at reading and assuming people's words mean something other than what is posted. I personally am sick of it and that is why I refuse to post beyond insignificant input for now on.
> you have done the forum a great disservice, by quieting someone who has a great deal of knowledge and experience when it comes to issues about target shooting and hinges.


To the contrary. EPLC has been at the forefront of bringing some broad misconceptions to light. Not by being the know it all, but by sticking his ground with trying something different, that a few guys like yourself think is a waste of time. You are condescending towards him and others for standing their ground, and quite frankly, you spew all this so called knowledge with no established credibility other than YOUR interpretetion of what somebody else says is the correct way. Clear back to the first thread on this subject when EPLC was talking about pushing the release to fire it, you, sonny and some others jumped all over him, telling him and everyone else how stupid it was to try something other than your perception of BT. Now you're claiming to be indifferent? Get over yourself. You are definately famous for something around here, but it's not what you think it is.


----------



## Padgett

Ronw, I am going to remind you that I am proficient at Yielding and Squeezing into the wall and Pure back tension and relaxing the index finger and I can have very open minded discussions about them. I am proficient not because I spent 5 minutes trying something on the practice range and came to the conclusion that it was a poor method, I am proficient at them because of hundreds of hours of shooting with each of them. I absolutely do not believe that you are proficient at any other method than the one that you currently use because just like your admitted approach to these threads I believe your shooting is the same. You only talk about one thing and you practice only one thing.

One of the lessons that you are never going to learn in your archery career is that once you disconnect your aiming from your execution of the hinge your choice of method really doesn't matter anymore, this is a lesson that only people who become proficient at more than none method will ever experinece. Sure I have my favorite method that I have confidence in because it produces my best shooting sessions but it doesn't mean that the other ones suck because they do a fine job of firing the hinge also.


----------



## Padgett

I remember when EPLC talked about pushing the thumb peg as a option and I talked to him about it being something I had done in the past and I gave him some thoughts on it positive and negative and that I had moved on away from that method. That is what we need here, guys who have done things and have specific tendencies good or bad to give that can help a person know what to expect. Again trying something for 5 minutes isn't enough.


----------



## Mahly

OK, ron w has stated that other methods are not trash, former posts may have been misinterpreted, and he prefers using back tension to fire a hinge.
We have heard that there is more than one way to fire a hinge, and not everyone agrees on which way is best... some are able to use more than 1 effectively.
As such, seeing as we all seem to agree here (believe it or not) that there are multiple ways to shoot a hinge, there is no (longer a?) need to convince everyone that there is more than one way to shoot a hinge.
what would be interesting is trying to explain why <_insert method of firing a hinge_> will work best for everyone else....or anyone else. Basically list the attributes of your preferred technique, ignoring the other techniques.
Don't tell me why "X" is wrong, tell me why "Y" is right.

MY example would be that the way I shoot a hinge now (and yes, this method is new to me so you can question its efficacy based on my short time of experience with it), works because it allows me to hold the release at my preferred (nearly vertical) angle, and allows for the least amount of tension in the hand, while masking as much of the rotation (caused from the hand, or at least index finger yielding to tension) as possible. I get distracted by feeling too much rotation, so I move my thumb into a position (touching middle finger) that masks much of the movement. This takes very little cognitive thought to fire. I am not thinking about rotating the hinge, I don't FEEL like I'm rotating the hinge, but I am still rotating the hinge. To me, it has become much the same sensation of using "back tension" to fire the release, as it is a surprise shot, that just seems to happen. Proper hinge set-up helps a lot (I use Padgett's method 100% for that)
If your someone who needs to feel the rotation to know you haven't frozen up, this ain't gonna be the technique for you, and that's fine. It's what works for me, and more importantly, WHY it works for me.

So, instead of telling us why someone else is wrong, (This is not directed at any one person...plenty have been doing it) tell us exactly what you do that makes it right for you, and WHY.

P.S. Speaking as a forum member, not a Mod, I really don't care to see who agrees/disagrees with you, and who you can quote supporting your technique or contradicting someone else's technique. I wanna know what is working for YOU! (THIS is how you help others)


----------



## SonnyThomas

cbrunson said:


> To the contrary. EPLC has been at the forefront of bringing some broad misconceptions to light. Not by being the know it all, but by sticking his ground with trying something different, that a few guys like yourself think is a waste of time. You are condescending towards him and others for standing their ground, and quite frankly, you spew all this so called knowledge with no established credibility other than YOUR interpretetion of what somebody else says is the correct way. Clear back to the first thread on this subject when EPLC was talking about pushing the release to fire it, you, *sonny *and some others jumped all over him, telling him and everyone else how stupid it was to try something other than your perception of BT. Now you're claiming to be indifferent? Get over yourself. You are definately famous for something around here, but it's not what you think it is.


Excuse me, is there another Sonny in this forum? I just went through the entire Thread of the Push thumb method EPLC was trying. Not once did I trash him or jump over EPLC. I in fact told of him to pursue it and more than once...If a conflict then matters of that wandering off topic - conscious, subconscious, Motor skills.

"Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post 
Find something that works for you that is repeatable and perfect it."

Sonny; "Then do it. Talking doesn't get it done.... I report to one person, me......

Sonny; I said it. I'd be shooting, getting things ironed out to the new "push" and not worrying about Posting and then no getting up in the air about who's replying whatever.

Check - 
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2381510&p=1071876879#post1071876879
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2381510&p=1072012819#post1072012819


----------



## cbrunson

Lock in, static release arm, rotate hinge. Bow arm and release arm stay in alignment through the shot. I do have a heavy pull into the stops. Current avg practice scores, 25-27x Vegas.


----------



## ron w

Mahly, 
I think i've done a fairly decent job of expanding on my preference with regard to what and why it works......
ironically, I went and listened to the video of Cuzin' Dave at Lancaster's tournament by way of the link provided in the "Cuz on conscious-subconscious" post.... and lo' and behold,.... as they talked, he mentioned that the main content of what both, he and the host would teach, is the "fundamentals, of shooting a hinge and the importance of those fundamentals above all other methods...... just exactly what certain people on this thread and so many others, continually criticize me with accusations of, "ramming it down their throats". 
hhhhmmmm,...undeniable support from one of the best in the world.....almost to the point that much of the detail of what he said,..... is almost word for word,.... what I've been posting in several threads here. 
I can assume that you guys that refute my posts, must also disagree with Dave Cousins ?.


----------



## Rick!

So, since the OP lit a match and fired this topic up, who is now a better shooter with the info contained herein? 

I'll go first; not me, I'll stick with my own program. 

It is entertaining though, kind of like Foghorn Leghorn and Barnyard Dog.

http://youtu.be/YtO3JqZwASA


----------



## ron w

Padgett said:


> Ronw, I am going to remind you that I am proficient at Yielding and Squeezing into the wall and Pure back tension and relaxing the index finger and I can have very open minded discussions about them. I am proficient not because I spent 5 minutes trying something on the practice range and came to the conclusion that it was a poor method, I am proficient at them because of hundreds of hours of shooting with each of them. I absolutely do not believe that you are proficient at any other method than the one that you currently use because just like your admitted approach to these threads I believe your shooting is the same. You only talk about one thing and you practice only one thing.
> 
> One of the lessons that you are never going to learn in your archery career is that once you disconnect your aiming from your execution of the hinge your choice of method really doesn't matter anymore, this is a lesson that only people who become proficient at more than none method will ever experinece. Sure I have my favorite method that I have confidence in because it produces my best shooting sessions but it doesn't mean that the other ones suck because they do a fine job of firing the hinge also.


do you honestly think that in 40 years of shooting a hinge, I haven't seriously tried alternative methods ?. if you want to seriously discuss other methods, those that you contend I can't discuss, because "I don't use them".....bring it on.
as I've said before...my position is just like "Quiggly from down under". ...." I didn't say I don't know how to use a hand gun, I said I have no use for them."


----------



## cbrunson

SonnyThomas said:


> Excuse me, is there another Sonny in this forum? I just went through the entire Thread of the Push thumb method EPLC was trying. Not once did I trash him or jump over EPLC. I in fact told of him to pursue it and more than once...If a conflict then matters of that wandering off topic - conscious, subconscious, Motor skills.
> 
> "Quote Originally Posted by EPLC View Post
> Find something that works for you that is repeatable and perfect it."
> 
> Sonny; "Then do it. Talking doesn't get it done.... I report to one person, me......
> 
> Sonny; I said it. I'd be shooting, getting things ironed out to the new "push" and not worrying about Posting and then no getting up in the air about who's replying whatever.
> 
> Check -
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2381510&p=1071876879#post1071876879
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2381510&p=1072012819#post1072012819


You're correct, sorry. I just remembered you attacking him over that thread. I forgot it was via PM instead of on the thread.


----------



## Mahly

ron w,

Lets look into that. We know you much prefer the "pure back tension" method, but what would be your #2 choice? If you didn't fire due to back tension moving the elbow, and no hand movement, how would you fire the hinge and why? What could work for YOU, if you didn't have your experience with your current method.


----------



## Padgett

For me I believe in hinge setup as the number one goal for a new hinge shooter, once he gets the hinge set up so that it is safe to draw with the finger on the peg and then once he releases the peg and gives that pressure to the index finger the hinge is close to firing he should be able to do any of the current firing methods out there and be on his way to getting in some good entry level training. Setting up the hinge slow and forcing yourself to generate a huge amount of rotation is a suffer fest to say the least and setting it up way to hot is a recipe for disaster.

My current firing method or firing engine is "Squeeze and Pull", for me it has a very solid personality and very subtle felt perception of movement which I do prefer over a engine that has a bunch of felt rotation. For me I am to the point where I can float my .19 pin inside a x at 20 yards and if I don't do something stupid with my effort to fire the hinge it will stay inside the x for the duration of the shot. This is why using this very subtle engine is a very good choice for me. I let go of the thumb peg pressure and my thumb is barely touching my peg and I very slowly increase the pressure of my middle finger and my ring finger on the wall and continue to do so until it fires.

Some other things that it also does for me:

1. Is it gives a very solid feeling anchor against my jaw, with other firing methods such as yielding my anchor feels much more mushy or relaxed and to me this is why the float pattern of that engine is bigger. 

2. When I shoot with pure back tension which to me is a even more subtle firing engine than squeeze and pull my biggest difference is that pure back tension doesn't pull straight back into the wall so it tends to pull the pin off to the side, for this reason I prefer using engines that pull straight back in line with the arrow. 

3. To me the back muscles are a big group of muscles that generate a bunch of useful power that a shooter can use to his benefit, I use my back tension to apply a good amount of tension to my wall so that I am not just touching the wall. This choice to have the correct draw length so that I am not to stretched out is so very important and it allows me to come to anchor and then generate some back tension that in effect squeezed me into the wall and makes me very solid and have no creep which reduces my float and slows my float down to a crawl without any jumping around and bouncing or dropping out. When I am a little nervous and my muscles are twitchy when I generate this back tension and put my system under this feel of being into the wall that muscle twitchy sensation goes away instead of screwing up my float.

4. My squeeze and pull engine also keeps my anchor planted nice and low on my jaw and doesn't allow it to creep up my face, I believe this is because it is a strong anchored engine with a nice smooth pull into the wall with the ring and middle finger that helps it stay very still and not wander around.

5. Right now I am finding that a solid index finger is helping me be a more solid shooter also, in the last year I have really been more comfortable leaving my index finger neutral feeling. I have found though that as I release my thumb peg and give that pressure to my index finger when it is relaxed it is much more inconsistent and could produce a really fast execution or a really long one. By having a more solid index finger I get a very very consistent execution. It does require you to be willing to work on your hinge speed and not just set it and leave it alone.


----------



## Padgett

I was typing my last post when you asked me to bring it on, I bring it on everyday. I talk about my personal shooting and what it has taken to get me right where I am right now and the things that i have experienced along the way. 

My last post is just like so many of the posts that I offer up on all of the threads that I post in, I give specific little things that I use and have experience using with my fingers and my back tension and pulling into the wall. As I grow as a hinge shooter I will be able to put these things in even better context to help even more people enjoy their shooting including myself because I absolutely do not believe that I am done getting better.


----------



## ron w

Mahly said:


> ron w,
> 
> Lets look into that. We know you much prefer the "pure back tension" method, but what would be your #2 choice? If you didn't fire due to back tension moving the elbow, and no hand movement, how would you fire the hinge and why? What could work for YOU, if you didn't have your experience with your current method.


 to some extent, the question you pose is moot, simply because what I use works , so there's no reason to consider a different method. I can only assume that if I didn't have my experience with my current method, I would probably be doing it some other way. as far as which other way, your guess is as good as mine. I do it the way I do, because I learned that way and it has worked for 40 years, with no need to change. 
I can only assume that i'd do it with some sort of manipulation....I mean the release has got to rotate some how, right (?)..... it won't fire by itself. I've certainly tried other methods and have always gone back to rotational back tension, because I am most comfortable with that method. the others, just seem to be way too much work and fuss....just the same as people say about rotational back tension. the difference is that I , just like Padgett, can do other methods, but my preferred way is rotational back tension....most likely because that is the way that has been ingrained into my shot the best, so many years ago. it's always worked and it's easy for me to produce, there fore, there's no reason to change or even consider a different method.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> Mahly,
> I think i've done a fairly decent job of expanding on my preference with regard to what and why it works......
> ironically, I went and listened to the video of Cuzin' Dave at Lancaster's tournament by way of the link provided in the "Cuz on conscious-subconscious" post.... and lo' and behold,.... as they talked, he mentioned that the main content of what both, he and the host would teach, is the "fundamentals, of shooting a hinge and the importance of those fundamentals above all other methods...... just exactly what certain people on this thread and so many others, continually criticize me with accusations of, "ramming it down their throats".
> hhhhmmmm,...undeniable support from one of the best in the world.....almost to the point that much of the detail of what he said,..... is almost word for word,.... what I've been posting in several threads here.
> I can assume that you guys that refute my posts, must also disagree with Dave Cousins ?.


Are you comparing yourself to Dave Cousins? IMO there is a distinct difference between what you define as "fundamentals" and what Mr. Cousins does. He and Dudley are basically on the same page. Dudley supports back tension with hand manipulation, you sir, do not. It would seem that you are on a mission to take the "fun" out of fundamentals.


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> Here's another gem...
> 
> Need I dig up more? There is a ton of it out there.


I personally see no intimidation, attack or "crap" of any kind here.

LS


----------



## ron w

back tension with hand manipulation is not fundamental back tension. again, you have managed to interpret what I said, and twist around to make it sound like I am proclaiming to be on the same level as Mr. Cousins.

you surely are a "master" at that.


----------



## ron w

unclejane said:


> I personally see no intimidation, attack or "crap" of any kind here.
> 
> LS


yea, I don't either !.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Are you comparing yourself to Dave Cousins? IMO there is a distinct difference between what you define as "fundamentals" and what Mr. Cousins does. He and Dudley are basically on the same page. Dudley supports back tension with hand manipulation, you sir, do not. It would seem that you are on a mission to take the "fun" out of fundamentals.


Doesn't he shoot a button?


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> Doesn't he shoot a button?


But why should that matter?


----------



## ron w

amazing,...simply amazing......


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> back tension with hand manipulation is not fundamental back tension. again, you have managed to interpret what I said, and twist around to make it sound like I am proclaiming to be on the same level as Mr. Cousins.
> 
> you surely are a "master" at that.


The statement in RED leaves no room for interpretation. You've done it again and you don't even know it. Since that last sentence may have confused you, I'll explain. You just declared a documented method that has been around from 1974 to the present and recommended by many of the best shooters in the world over and over again as "not fundamental back tension"... While you certainly have the right to your opinion, your constant positioning of your opinions as fact is absurd.



ron w said:


> ...I can assume that you guys that refute my posts, must also disagree with Dave Cousins ?.


Actually, you DID compare yourself to Dave Cousins with your insinuation that Mr. Cousins agrees with you 100%, and to disagree with you would be a disagreement with Dave Cousins. You do stuff like that all the time.


----------



## Lazarus

So.......today's buzzword is "fundamental" back tension? Yesterday it was "pure." I gotta keep my new invented archery terms and words updated so I can keep up.


----------



## rn3

Now I am confused, all these years I thought there was only back tension, now I learn there is multiple kinds.


----------



## EPLC

rn3 said:


> Now I am confused, all these years I thought there was only back tension, now I learn there is multiple kinds.


See below.



Lazarus said:


> Have been doing a lot of reading lately from the era that hinges were invented. There is some speculations to the actual date they were invented. The earliest I can find any advertising of them (Stan's) is a Stanislawski II that was advertised 1975. I am assuming the Stanislaswki One would have been the rope/spike that was so popular in the 1972-1975 era. I know there are people on this forum that have claimed to be actively shooting a hinge as early as 1974. While possible, that's unlikely.
> 
> Below you will find a picture I snapped from the January 1978 copy of Archery (NFAA) Magazine. The article was asking former Vegas winners what release they used and how. This pic is of Bob Jacobson who won the Vegas tournament in 1974 as indicated under his picture. The main reason I posted this is the second box. The question was; how do you fire your current release? You will see his answer.
> 
> My main points; First, Bob Jacobson was probably the first Pro to shoot the hinge succesfully, he did not do so *firing* using "back tension." He says he *kept* back back tension (while running a firing processs.) He did not say he fired the release using "back tension." Second point; This whole idea of relaxing through the shot is not a new idea invented in 2004 by one of the current "guru's." Fact, it's been around since the invention of the hinge as indicated in his response, from 1978. And it didn't take a 2000 word article to explain it, in fact, if these simple statements by Bob Jacobson were all we knew about firing a hinge we'd probably be a lot better off today.
> 
> View attachment 2138833
> 
> 
> I know......for some of you this really proves nothing. And you're still going to fight the idea that "back tension" is the most widely accepted means of *firing* a release. Nothing will convince you it's a myth. But posting this makes me feel better.  Been a little slow around here, now you can flame away.


The original post is quoted above. I don't know where the version of BT that ron w supports originated, but I do know that from 1974 to present day many, if not most, of the top archers in the world support the method described in the 1974 article by Bob Jaconsen right after he won Vegas. 

"Once set to shoot, I concentrate on relaxing both bow and release hands, keeping back tension and slowly squeezing with the second and third fingers until the release is activated" ~ Bob Jacobsen, 1974


----------



## rn3

EPLC said:


> See below.
> 
> 
> 
> The original post is quoted above. I don't know where the version of BT that ron w supports originated, but I do know that from 1974 to present day many, if not most, of the top archery in the world support the method described in the 1974 article by Bob Jaconsen right after he won Vegas.
> 
> "Once set to shoot, I concentrate on relaxing both bow and release hands, keeping back tension and slowly squeezing with the second and third fingers until the release is activated" ~ Bob Jacobsen, 1974


I was being sarcastic.


----------



## EPLC

rn3 said:


> I was being sarcastic.


That's Ok, the OP needed to be brought to the forefront anyway to get things back on track.


----------



## Lazarus

rn3 said:


> I was being sarcastic.


I got that! :thumbs_up

Thought it was funny.


----------



## MsNipeR

RCR_III said:


> Thank you!
> Also, just took a look-see at RCR_III's blog... lots of good stuff.
> 
> http://api.viglink.com/api/click?fo...! - Page 4&txt=http://rcrchery.wordpress.com/


[/QUOTE]
you are describing in your blog the last one same kind of method as im using. if i dont relax my knuckles in releasehand i like a dont get the tension or rotation thrue to my fingers and the shot wont go off. same time it easier for to activate right muscle in my back, makes my float calm. just like spectatorshooter i still struggle with up and down misses but thats maybe because of uneven pressure from time to time.


----------



## field14

EPLC said:


> See below.
> 
> 
> 
> The original post is quoted above. I don't know where the version of BT that ron w supports originated, but I do know that from 1974 to present day many, if not most, of the top archers in the world support the method described in the 1974 article by Bob Jaconsen right after he won Vegas.
> 
> "Once set to shoot, I concentrate on relaxing both bow and release hands, keeping back tension and slowly squeezing with the second and third fingers until the release is activated" ~ Bob Jacobsen, 1974


The first Vegas shoot that caused a stir and the "revolution of the release aid" was in 1970, and a ledge style release was used.
Subsequent to the ledges were the "rope spike" and the "rope" releases (concho style). Eva Troncoso was a Master of the double loop rope release. Gene Parnell, and Gene Lueck were masters of the "rope spike style" releases.
Mel Stanislawski, I think was the first one to shoot perfect at Vegas around 1974 or 1975. I still have my first two Stanislawski trip gate releases, by the way. Up until just before Mel won Vegas with his hinge release, moving parts weren't permitted in competition, which is why the rope spikes, many of which were home-made were so popular. Once "moving parts and sears" were allowed, the flood gates were open.
Those of you that weren't around by then have little concept or knowledge about holding weights of 30#, 35#, or 40#+ and what it takes for that. You do not draw back and hold that kind of holding weight with your hand and arms like is so commonly done today what with the higher letoff bows where holding weights are in the lower teens or even less than that! Today, you don't 'have to' shoot with full transfer, but those that do are the ones on the podium; those that don't are inconsistent, winning once in a while, or not winning at all other than locally, if that.
The photos below are of ledge style releases used in the early 1970's by such greats as Gene Lueck, Gene Parnell, Dean Pridgen (my source for most of the photos), Freddie Troncoso, and a host of others...shooting recurved bows with these releases with "proper back tension" because you cannot draw and hold the bow with that kind of holding weight without using the correct muscles. Remember, the weight of the bow built up as you drew the bow back, so holding weights were, for most men, in the mid 30# to mid or high 40# range...no letoff.
I have a photo of the release aid used by Gene Lueck to win Vegas (will dig it up later)...and it was NOT a hinge release...Gene's time was before Mel Stanislawski won Vegas with his patented and now well known hinge/trip gate release.
The release in the lower right corner of the group of releases is "similar" to Gene's release, but not exactly the same. The one pictured is a rope/pin release, while Gene's was more towards the "rope/spike" release and the "spike" on Gene's was adjustable. "Normal rope-spike release speed was set by the length of the rope or manually bending the spike (or both).

Oh, for those that think the Scott BackSpin is "new"...nope. The Fawley release, replete with a "bearing" in the first finger area was first made around 1974 or so, and looks identical or nearly so to the BackSpin. You'll recognize the nearly identical things about the Fawley, with the exception that the Fawley was a rope around the string style, and the BackSpin is for shooting from a d-loop. Can the Fawley be shot with a d-loop? Absolutely!

If you are looking for a good read, I'm working on my 4th book, an "Autobowography" that goes thru from my raw beginnings as a hacky bow hunter on through the "development" of the releases, compound bows, and other accessories over the course of the past 50 years. It is NOT a technical book at all; it isn't filled with laborious graphs, tables, diagrams, shooting techniques and all that hullabaloo...The book is more story related, not caring about who invented what first and had the most patents or sold the mostest with the bestest ad campaigns. I'll leave that up to the engineers like like the mechanical aspects; I'll leave that up to historians that want to conduct research projects to put everything into exact chronological order (boring).
I already have literally hundreds of photos of release aids that will boggle your mind. Then come the bows, the arrows, the nocks, the vanes, sights, scopes, stabilizers, arm guards, bow slings, and yes, even bow stringers! I hope to have it done by mid summer. What a fun project...OH...there are true stories in the book too. 
field14 (tom D.)


----------



## RCR_III

It could be the pressure in the release from the pulling of the elbow down. It could be a creep tuning matter that might help. As you're pulling straight back you could try moving the holding pressure of the release in your hand to the outside finger. It will have to be a concious transfer at first until you get the feel down. As you let off the thumb peg and the pressure distributes and evens out on all your fingers, allow your outside finger to be your "pulling point" along with the arm and elbow as you increase tension in your back. Mentally making that finger your pulling point will start to shift more of the pressure to that finger and will aide in helping the release fire. 

you are describing in your blog the last one same kind of method as im using. if i dont relax my knuckles in releasehand i like a dont get the tension or rotation thrue to my fingers and the shot wont go off. same time it easier for to activate right muscle in my back, makes my float calm. just like spectatorshooter i still struggle with up and down misses but thats maybe because of uneven pressure from time to time.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Lazarus

field14, Jacobsen won Vegas in 74 using a rope spike. His words not mine. The quote that EPLC shared above was from an interview in Archery Magazine, I think it was January 1978. I did the research on it a week or so ago and posted a pic of the quote in the magazine elsewhere in this forum. Not sure which. 

My memory told me that hinges were prevalent in the mid-70's, but I found my memory to be faulty when I did the research, they really didn't gain much traction in the sport until the late 70's but still weren't widely accepted until many years later. They are far more popular now than ever.


----------



## Lazarus

field14 said:


> Mel Stanislawski, I think was the first one to shoot perfect at Vegas around 1974 or 1975.


Bob Bitner was the first to shoot a clean Vegas round in 1967. With fingers. 

I'm not sure who was the first to shoot Vegas clean with a release. Time for some more research I guess. :teeth:


----------



## field14

Lazarus said:


> Jacobsen won Vegas in 74 using a rope spike. The quote that EPLC shared above was from an interview in Archery Magazine, I think it was January 1978. I did the research on it a week or so ago and posted a pic of the quote in the magazine elsewhere in this forum. Not sure which.
> 
> My memory told me that hinges were prevalent in the mid-70's, but I found my memory to be faulty when I did the research, they really didn't gain much traction in the sport until the late 70's but still weren't widely accepted until many years later. They are far more popular now than ever.


Gene Parnell, a very close friend of mine and fellow competitor won Vegas in 1973 with a "home-made" rope-spike release. I know that to be fact, because he was using the same home-made rope spike release and Spartan II RECURVED bow when he gave me a spanking at the Wyoming State Field Tournament in Gillette, Wyoming in August of 1972.
I also know for a fact that Gene Lueck won Vegas with his "home made" rope spike release, and that Mel Stanislawski used his Hinge release to win Vegas...maybe that was 1975?
I also know for a fact that in 1975 probably in the fall, I purchased my two Stanislawsi Hinge releases for...a whopping $25 each. I had been shooting a Sizemore release aid up until that time after having piddled for a long time with home-made rope spike releases.
Seems that also around 1975 or 6...the sear triggers got "legalized" and I had some "Hot Shot" releases that if you got a good one, they were fine, but if you got a bad one, they were terrible. Releases only got better from there...Rolease, ER-300 (Freddie Troncoso), Barner Conchos, FailSafe (Terry Ragsdale shot the dickens out of his), Fletchmatics, too many to count.
I know for a fact that in Ohio, release aids for use in competition were legalized in early 1974, but NOT for "FITA Style" or "American round" competition. Had to shoot recurved bow with fingers on the string for "Target" shooting until 1975 when Ohio "gave in."


----------



## Lazarus

Tom........I really find your rundown on all of the 1970's releases to be inadequate with the omission of the "Super Chicken." :teeth: 

On a more serious note the Barner (finger punch) release was really popular then too. If there is one thing that archery would have been better off if it had never been invented it would be the finger punch (aka wrist strap) release.


----------



## field14

Lazarus said:


> Bob Bitner was the first to shoot a clean Vegas round in 1967. With fingers.
> 
> I'm not sure who was the first to shoot Vegas clean with a release. Time for some more research I guess. :teeth:


I think it was either Gene Lueck or Mel Stanislawski that "cleaned" Vegas with a perfect score.
Of course, back in the 1960's and earlier 1970's, the "Vegas face" was NOT used at the Desert Classic, or as we know it today, the "Vegas shoot."
I also know that Victor Berger, in either 1970 or 1971 also shot a perfect 300 at the Desert Classic, or was it two back to back 300's? I shot with Denise Libby, who was at the event when Victor was on the line and shot an arrow into the middle of the middle and everyone cheered because he had cleaned the round. But Victor wasn't done. He apparently turned around to the audience and said "Vun more arrow", drew back, anchored, aimed and centered it for the perfect score and the win. Or so I was told by Denise Libby that was what happened.
They were using the old, PAA indoor face. 16 inch target face with a bullseye the same size as it is today, without an "X-ring" in it. All 5 arrows into ONE spot, no time limit. That quickly changed, however when a particular PAA shooter kept pushing the issue, taking 8-10 minutes to shoot his 5 arrows...so they adopted the 5 minute time limit for 5 shots, which has been shortened now to 4 minutes for 5 shots. The original PAA indoor face was all black with white lines and a white spot. Then they went away from the black background to an "UGLY" turquoise color, and then to the single spot with the background we see today of the darker blue. Then a 4-spot "Championship Face" was developed (even had the X-ring in it), 15 ends of 4 arrows...but was never used in National competition. Then, finally they adopted the 5-spot target face we know today, and it has remained that way for many years.
I cannot remember when the "Vegas Shoot" went to the multi-colored target face, but I do know that for the longest time, you shot a 450 round on Friday, a 450 round on Saturday, and a 300 round on Sunday for 1,200 points possible. Terry Ragsdale scored a perfect 1,200 at Vegas and repeated with another perfect 1,200 at Cobo Hall a month later. I think he was using a FailSafe release aid, springie arrow rest, and 1914 aluminum arrows, and a Dacron B-50 string with steel cables on two different compound bows, one for each tournament.
Doesn't matter the exact year, who cares? The 1,200 possible was soon replaced with the current 90 arrow format for the event. It helped to make room for more shooters in the same allotted amount of time, which is primarily why the round format became 300 on Friday, Saturday and on Sunday. The time saved allowed for added shooting line times.
The


----------



## field14

Lazarus said:


> Tom........I really find your rundown on all of the 1970's releases to be inadequate with the omission of the "Super Chicken." :teeth:
> 
> On a more serious note the Barner (finger punch) release was really popular then too. If there is one thing that archery would have been better off if it had never been invented it would be the finger punch (aka wrist strap) release.


Lazarus,
Wow! I'm impressed that you know about the Super Chicken release aid! You are speaking of this creation:
First is an original ad from "Archery Magazine" from 1975, then a photo of the real McCoy courtesy of Dean Pridgen.

The other release is a photo of the actual release used by Gene Lueck to win Vegas. A home-made rope spike. There were iterations of the rope spike, too. Some had the rope on the outside of the spike, others, like Gene Lueck's had the rope on the inside of the spike; Still others, such as the one used by Gene Parnell, had the rope acutally tied down (served) along the spike to help keep the rope off the middle or first finger). 2nd photo courtesy of Dean Pridgen.


----------



## EPLC

field14 said:


> The first Vegas shoot that caused a stir and the "revolution of the release aid" was in 1970, and a ledge style release was used.
> Subsequent to the ledges were the "rope spike" and the "rope" releases (concho style). Eva Troncoso was a Master of the double loop rope release. Gene Parnell, and Gene Lueck were masters of the "rope spike style" releases.
> Mel Stanislawski, I think was the first one to shoot perfect at Vegas around 1974 or 1975. I still have my first two Stanislawski trip gate releases, by the way. Up until just before Mel won Vegas with his hinge release, moving parts weren't permitted in competition, which is why the rope spikes, many of which were home-made were so popular. Once "moving parts and sears" were allowed, the flood gates were open.
> Those of you that weren't around by then have little concept or knowledge about holding weights of 30#, 35#, or 40#+ and what it takes for that. You do not draw back and hold that kind of holding weight with your hand and arms like is so commonly done today what with the higher letoff bows where holding weights are in the lower teens or even less than that! Today, you don't 'have to' shoot with full transfer, but those that do are the ones on the podium; those that don't are inconsistent, winning once in a while, or not winning at all other than locally, if that.
> The photos below are of ledge style releases used in the early 1970's by such greats as Gene Lueck, Gene Parnell, Dean Pridgen (my source for most of the photos), Freddie Troncoso, and a host of others...shooting recurved bows with these releases with "proper back tension" because you cannot draw and hold the bow with that kind of holding weight without using the correct muscles. Remember, the weight of the bow built up as you drew the bow back, so holding weights were, for most men, in the mid 30# to mid or high 40# range...no letoff.
> I have a photo of the release aid used by Gene Lueck to win Vegas (will dig it up later)...and it was NOT a hinge release...Gene's time was before Mel Stanislawski won Vegas with his patented and now well known hinge/trip gate release.
> The release in the lower right corner of the group of releases is "similar" to Gene's release, but not exactly the same. The one pictured is a rope/pin release, while Gene's was more towards the "rope/spike" release and the "spike" on Gene's was adjustable. "Normal rope-spike release speed was set by the length of the rope or manually bending the spike (or both).
> 
> Oh, for those that think the Scott BackSpin is "new"...nope. The Fawley release, replete with a "bearing" in the first finger area was first made around 1974 or so, and looks identical or nearly so to the BackSpin. You'll recognize the nearly identical things about the Fawley, with the exception that the Fawley was a rope around the string style, and the BackSpin is for shooting from a d-loop. Can the Fawley be shot with a d-loop? Absolutely!
> 
> If you are looking for a good read, I'm working on my 4th book, an "Autobowography" that goes thru from my raw beginnings as a hacky bow hunter on through the "development" of the releases, compound bows, and other accessories over the course of the past 50 years. It is NOT a technical book at all; it isn't filled with laborious graphs, tables, diagrams, shooting techniques and all that hullabaloo...The book is more story related, not caring about who invented what first and had the most patents or sold the mostest with the bestest ad campaigns. I'll leave that up to the engineers like like the mechanical aspects; I'll leave that up to historians that want to conduct research projects to put everything into exact chronological order (boring).
> I already have literally hundreds of photos of release aids that will boggle your mind. Then come the bows, the arrows, the nocks, the vanes, sights, scopes, stabilizers, arm guards, bow slings, and yes, even bow stringers! I hope to have it done by mid summer. What a fun project...OH...there are true stories in the book too.
> field14 (tom D.)
> View attachment 2144964


Sorry Tom, while I love the history lessons, you are 80% wrong about who is on the podium, and has been on the podium since 1974. You are also wrong about the only way to excel is your way. You're continual spreading of "there is only one way to effectively shoot a hinge" is no more than a continuance of the indoctrination that has gone on within this site since its origination. Can I assume you've done quite well by it? And while I'm at it, I won't be investing in the book. Funny how these things work, I sell stuff here also, but it costs me $250 a year to do it.


----------



## Lazarus

Lol.....yes Tom, I even owned a Super Chicken at one time. They were made by a guy that was kind of in my peer group. Regarding the rope/spike, all of the GOOD ones were home made.  In fact, in 1974 I'd say almost everyone was shooting a home made rope spike. I made many different configurations of them myself, and am surprised I survived. :teeth:

Fun times........doesn't sound like you need any help on your book. But if you ever hit a snag just give me a shout, never know, I might be able to figure it out.


----------



## mike 66

field14 said:


> The first Vegas shoot that caused a stir and the "revolution of the release aid" was in 1970, and a ledge style release was used.
> Subsequent to the ledges were the "rope spike" and the "rope" releases (concho style). Eva Troncoso was a Master of the double loop rope release. Gene Parnell, and Gene Lueck were masters of the "rope spike style" releases.
> Mel Stanislawski, I think was the first one to shoot perfect at Vegas around 1974 or 1975. I still have my first two Stanislawski trip gate releases, by the way. Up until just before Mel won Vegas with his hinge release, moving parts weren't permitted in competition, which is why the rope spikes, many of which were home-made were so popular. Once "moving parts and sears" were allowed, the flood gates were open.
> Those of you that weren't around by then have little concept or knowledge about holding weights of 30#, 35#, or 40#+ and what it takes for that. You do not draw back and hold that kind of holding weight with your hand and arms like is so commonly done today what with the higher letoff bows where holding weights are in the lower teens or even less than that! Today, you don't 'have to' shoot with full transfer, but those that do are the ones on the podium; those that don't are inconsistent, winning once in a while, or not winning at all other than locally, if that.
> The photos below are of ledge style releases used in the early 1970's by such greats as Gene Lueck, Gene Parnell, Dean Pridgen (my source for most of the photos), Freddie Troncoso, and a host of others...shooting recurved bows with these releases with "proper back tension" because you cannot draw and hold the bow with that kind of holding weight without using the correct muscles. Remember, the weight of the bow built up as you drew the bow back, so holding weights were, for most men, in the mid 30# to mid or high 40# range...no letoff.
> I have a photo of the release aid used by Gene Lueck to win Vegas (will dig it up later)...and it was NOT a hinge release...Gene's time was before Mel Stanislawski won Vegas with his patented and now well known hinge/trip gate release.
> The release in the lower right corner of the group of releases is "similar" to Gene's release, but not exactly the same. The one pictured is a rope/pin release, while Gene's was more towards the "rope/spike" release and the "spike" on Gene's was adjustable. "Normal rope-spike release speed was set by the length of the rope or manually bending the spike (or both).
> 
> Oh, for those that think the Scott BackSpin is "new"...nope. The Fawley release, replete with a "bearing" in the first finger area was first made around 1974 or so, and looks identical or nearly so to the BackSpin. You'll recognize the nearly identical things about the Fawley, with the exception that the Fawley was a rope around the string style, and the BackSpin is for shooting from a d-loop. Can the Fawley be shot with a d-loop? Absolutely!
> 
> If you are looking for a good read, I'm working on my 4th book, an "Autobowography" that goes thru from my raw beginnings as a hacky bow hunter on through the "development" of the releases, compound bows, and other accessories over the course of the past 50 years. It is NOT a technical book at all; it isn't filled with laborious graphs, tables, diagrams, shooting techniques and all that hullabaloo...The book is more story related, not caring about who invented what first and had the most patents or sold the mostest with the bestest ad campaigns. I'll leave that up to the engineers like like the mechanical aspects; I'll leave that up to historians that want to conduct research projects to put everything into exact chronological order (boring).
> I already have literally hundreds of photos of release aids that will boggle your mind. Then come the bows, the arrows, the nocks, the vanes, sights, scopes, stabilizers, arm guards, bow slings, and yes, even bow stringers! I hope to have it done by mid summer. What a fun project...OH...there are true stories in the book too.
> field14 (tom D.)
> View attachment 2144964


VERY COOL ... thanks for sharing this i was very young at this time,,i do remember freddie .t ....but not the others.but back then i had no idea who earl.ann hoyt was.. they lived only a couple of block away.back then i saw a lot of release aids made at home.. and a lot of them were flying down range..i remember shaking my head several times watching them shoot those things.thanks again TOM


----------



## field14

Lazarus said:


> Lol.....yes Tom, I even owned a Super Chicken at one time. They were made by a guy that was kind of in my peer group. Regarding the rope/spike, all of the GOOD ones were home made.  In fact, in 1974 I'd say almost everyone was shooting a home made rope spike. I made many different configurations of them myself, and am surprised I survived. :teeth:
> 
> Fun times........doesn't sound like you need any help on your book. But if you ever hit a snag just give me a shout, never know, I might be able to figure it out.


Amazing how some people tell you you are wrong, when you actually competed with the people you are speaking about, and you LIVED what happened, isn't it? Then they make rash statements, putting and twisting words into their own connotations and interpretations; but that is the way people are these days. Nit-picky, CSI investigators, you know the song and dance....


But that is OK, you just "consider the source" and providing a link to something is NOT "selling the item" it is only...providing a link. No arm twisting, if you use the link, it is by your choice. Providing information about something isn't a crime; at least, not yet.

I may well hit a few snags, there are some photos of things that I dearly would love to have, but instead of taking band width here, I'll PM you about things that may help. Of course, you will receive full credits for any and all contributions, ha.

Here's one you may not know about...the ROLEASE (it is from the early 1980's): I still have it in my collection. It is a third finger activated release with a bearing that contacts the peg. Rope around release aid, and obviously well before the advent of the d-loop. I guess it could be used with a d-loop, but it sure would keep the d-loop open, wouldn't it? No pinch point on the loop with this release, ha.


----------



## Lazarus

Not to change the topic we drifted to back to the topic but........

The rope/spike release was (in my mind) the very best training aid (that wasn't even a training aid) to learning how to properly shoot a freestyle bow. There were only two ways to shoot it, right, and wrong. Wrong was giving it a great big yank. Right was doing it exactly like most Pro shooters shoot today, with a relaxed hand, maintaining tension in the back and "letting go" via transfer of the hold weight gradually from index finger to ring finger with the long finger acting as a fulcrum. It was so simple, and simple is usually better.


----------



## Lazarus

Field 14. I remember vaguely the Rolease but never had the opportunity to shoot it. Kind of looks like a knock off of the Hot Shot ring finger trigger which I loved. Love the threaded screw for the trigger............never seen anyone do that before, nor try to lengthen it out with a longer bolt to (try to) get more leverage with the pinky. :wink: Like a lot of things........we just had to try them didn't we, even if they were a bad idea.


----------



## field14

Lazarus said:


> Not to change the topic we drifted to back to the topic but........
> 
> The rope/spike release was (in my mind) the very best training aid (that wasn't even a training aid) to learning how to properly shoot a freestyle bow. There were only two ways to shoot it, right, and wrong. Wrong was giving it a great big yank. Right was doing it exactly like most Pro shooters shoot today, with a relaxed hand, maintaining tension in the back and "letting go" via transfer of the hold weight gradually from index finger to ring finger with the long finger acting as a fulcrum. It was so simple, and simple is usually better.


BINGO! You hit the nail on the head. but the key words being misunderstood today is "relax", and "maintaining tension in the back"...it is construed to mean, "let go of" and the "rest of the story" isn't being taught at that particular stage of the teaching process.
It was and still IS "simple." But of course, strict interpretation of every single word is so "critical" with today's shooters, that they grab at the first thing and don't get the "rest of the story." Many instructors don't mention "maintaining tension in the back and don't talk much about "transfer" either...that somehow gets left out or is simply thought to be an "automatic" follow-on by the students. 
Then of course, the accusations and total misinterpretations and sticking words into people's mouths, trash talking, ridiculing, and downright nasty remarks...typical of the disrespect people afford to other people trying to help...and then they wonder why the help dries up completely and they are told to go suck eggs.

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## field14

Lazarus said:


> Field 14. I remember vaguely the Rolease but never had the opportunity to shoot it. Kind of looks like a knock off of the Hot Shot ring finger trigger which I loved. Love the threaded screw for the trigger............never seen anyone do that before, nor try to lengthen it out with a longer bolt to (try to) get more leverage with the pinky. :wink: Like a lot of things........we just had to try them didn't we, even if they were a bad idea.


Yep, been there and done that extending the "trigger" with the Rolease. Originally it had a humongous and heavy cylinder similar to the big button on a Carter Thumb trigger. It was heavy and bulky, so I replaced that with the screw that is in the photo. There was a speed adjustment screw for the adjustment of the travel, too. You basically break over the trip point of the bearing vs the lever and the shot is loosed. Bad thing is no tension adjustment, and the heavier the holding weight, the "harder" you had to MAINTAIN BACK TENSION and RELAX the hand to allow the release to rotate into the 4th finger to trip the shot.
field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## montigre

field14 said:


> BINGO! You hit the nail on the head. but the key words being misunderstood today is "relax", and "maintaining tension in the back"...it is construed to mean, "let go of" and the "rest of the story" isn't being taught at that particular stage of the teaching process.
> It was and still IS "simple." But of course, strict interpretation of every single word is so "critical" with today's shooters, that they grab at the first thing and don't get the "rest of the story." Many instructors don't mention "maintaining tension in the back and don't talk much about "transfer" either...that somehow gets left out or is simply thought to be an "automatic" follow-on by the students.
> Then of course, the accusations and total misinterpretations and sticking words into people's mouths, trash talking, ridiculing, and downright nasty remarks...typical of the disrespect people afford to other people trying to help...and then they wonder why the help dries up completely and they are told to go suck eggs.
> 
> field14 (Tom D.)


Double bingo!! And you also have to remember that "maintaining tension in the back" does not mean remaining static back there, but increasing the tension in a direct proportion to the amount that is being relaxed in the wrist. 

To do otherwise produces that short herky jerky follow through that goes straight back and stops at the shooter's ear (or the artificially flourished follow through that occurrs when the arrow is already well past the bow) instead of the explosive end that occurrs when the draw elbow *naturally arcs* back and downward *at the time of release*. 

Okay, flame on, folks....:wink:


----------



## unclejane

montigre said:


> Double bingo!! And you also have to remember that "maintaining tension in the back" does not mean remaining static back there, but increasing the tension in a direct proportion to the amount that is being relaxed in the wrist.
> 
> To do otherwise produces that short herky jerky follow through that goes straight back and stops at the shooter's ear (or the artificially flourished follow through that occurrs when the arrow is already well past the bow) instead of the explosive end that occurrs when the draw elbow *naturally arcs* back and downward *at the time of release*.
> 
> Okay, flame on, folks....:wink:


Yep, that's usually how I can tell I got a good surprise release pulling with the back. My right hand tends to fly back and may even drop downward; the bow does its own thing against the sling. If I stop pulling and just hold, and heave the shot off by some other means, I do the shorty jerkey target panicky looking thing....

LS


----------



## Padgett

This nice little time line that you have given us back to the 1970's is nice but I want to remind you guys that a good 3 years ago I started fighting a war on here because something wasn't right. Things just didn't add up because I watched videos and asked questions and the same thing kept happening, none of the really good shooters were doing what was being crammed down our throat here on archery talk.

I just told a person in a Pm that we have "WON THE WAR", and it really is over. From now on the guys that still are trying to hang onto their stance are in the minority and in fact they are already changing the way they are presenting their selves. Guys that never would admit that anything was going on in the hand are now giving ground and actually talking about how their hand is relaxed and must be relaxed for their method to work so that the hand can create rotation as the back tension does its job. This is a admission that these guys absolutely refused to make in the past. The funny thing is watching them dig into the past and find things or use current pro shooters to side with like we have been doing all along. 

Personally I don't have a problem with them closing the gap and I know it will take some time for them to convert over to where I am at but it isn't about my personal journey, the fact is I have made it to becoming a real hinge shooter and I did so by suffering and then learning and then executing my way to where I am today. My goal is to simply help as many thousands of shooters get on their way to some sweet shooting that I already experience.


----------



## unclejane

Padgett said:


> I just told a person in a Pm that we have "WON THE WAR", and it really is over. From now on the guys that still are trying to hang onto their stance are in the minority and in fact they are already changing the way they are presenting their selves. Guys that never would admit that anything was going on in the hand are now giving ground and actually talking about how their hand is relaxed and must be relaxed for their method to work so that the hand can create rotation as the back tension does its job. This is a admission that these guys absolutely refused to make in the past. The funny thing is watching them dig into the past and find things or use current pro shooters to side with like we have been doing all along.


Absolutely and in fact, it's even sort of swinging the other way a bit. We got a few guys on here saying "pure back tension" is not only *not* the my-way-or-the-highway of the curmudgeonly past, but it's actually a "myth". Now all of sudden it's the *wrong* approach - 180 degrees from the only-right-approach of years past - because it doesn't actually* exist*.

In reality, though, it looks like the middle road is where things are actually converging. All the approaches discussed actually work including the "mythical" PBT. So in my view, we're back where we started but plus one - the PBT approach of the past is now in the stable of "firing engines" for use by whomever chooses to use it, along with the rest. It's the one I'm going to use when I go back to my hinge (if I go back).

In other words, they're all valid candidates now, not just all of them minus PBT before all this got started... So we've actually made progress, IMO....

LS


----------



## Lazarus

Padgett said:


> This nice little time line that you have given us back to the 1970's is nice but I want to remind you guys that a good 3 years ago I started fighting a war on here because something wasn't right. Things just didn't add up because I watched videos and asked questions and the same thing kept happening, none of the really good shooters were doing what was being crammed down our throat here on archery talk.
> 
> I just told a person in a Pm that we have "WON THE WAR", and it really is over. From now on the guys that still are trying to hang onto their stance are in the minority and in fact they are already changing the way they are presenting their selves. Guys that never would admit that anything was going on in the hand are now giving ground and actually talking about how their hand is relaxed and must be relaxed for their method to work so that the hand can create rotation as the back tension does its job. This is a admission that these guys absolutely refused to make in the past. The funny thing is watching them dig into the past and find things or use current pro shooters to side with like we have been doing all along.
> 
> Personally I don't have a problem with them closing the gap and I know it will take some time for them to convert over to where I am at but it isn't about my personal journey, the fact is I have made it to becoming a real hinge shooter and I did so by suffering and then learning and then executing my way to where I am today. My goal is to simply help as many thousands of shooters get on their way to some sweet shooting that I already experience.


That is exactly right Padgett. You hit that one out of the park. That's exactly what I pointed out (in another way) to ELPC while of go in my response to his PM. One doesn't have to go but just a few posts up to see the example you are speaking of. 

Furthermore, don't blame me for what went on three years ago. I shot a thumb button most of the time then and wasn't part of the argument. :wink: 

Last, I doubt the war is really over. The mythical way will have it's hold outs until they all die off. :cheers:


----------



## Padgett

Unclejane you are wrong about the myth comment, The MYTH was all about the fact that back tension was the only good choice to be made to actually fire a hinge. Hinges are still stinking called back tension on many if not most all websites where you buy them or they are made by the manufactures.


----------



## EPLC

With regard to the recent claim that there is a consensus among the "podium" shooters that back tension is performed the way Tom layed it out (no hand movement)... and they are just saying it differently, I submit the following, you be the judge. It is word for word as best as I can duplicate it. 
_
*"Once set to shoot, I concentrate on relaxing both bow and release hands, keeping back tension and slowly squeezing with the second and third fingers until the release is activated" ~ Bob Jacobsen, 1974

"To activate the shot your index finger softens on the release and allows the handle to pivot slightly (there is very little perceivable motion here, but you can feel it) and POOF! The shot is released. You hold the form for about 3 beats for follow through and you are ready to reset. You have just shot a perfect arrow." ~ George Ryals IV, 2005

"It's not what they do, it's them trying to put into words what they do. Hence the idea of back tension is invented or of a controlled rotation to make a clicker go off or a squeeze to make a trigger go off. These are not what are done..." Alistair Whittingham

"...and I became really good friends with these guy's, the really top shooters, then I started realizing nobody used back tension..." ~ Levi Morgan, 2015

“…I’m letting my back muscles basically just hold the bow back…” “…I give up a little (finger) tension and the shot breaks…” Jesse Broadwater, 2015*_


----------



## Padgett

Yes, I saw where a guy or so mentioned that it was impossible to fire a hinge with back tension. So what if one guy says it can't be done, I am one of the guys that has been fighting this stinking war for years against pure back tension and I shoot with it all the stinking time. My point has always been that we are screwing new potential hinge shooters when we tell them that it is the absolutely only choice to make and that all other choices are cheating or cranking or manipulating. 

I will remind all of you guys that you can all debate this stuff all you want on firing the hinge but I still say the biggest issue for a shooter is hinge setup and it is absolutely the biggest thing overlooked by almost every coach out there. It took me over a year after I wrote the hinge setup routine and giving it out to hundreds of guys before it finally was recognized by any of the people who coach and participate here on archery talk, why because everyone was being told to set it really slow and blank bale until you learn back tension. There was no instruction there was no directions other than set it slow and suffer. Now I catch many of these guys using the hinge setup routine method in their posts on a regular basis.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> With regard to the recent claim that there is a consensus among the "podium" shooters that back tension is performed the way Tom layed it out (no hand movement)... and they are just saying it differently, I submit the following, you be the judge. It is word for word as best as I can duplicate it.
> _
> *"Once set to shoot, I concentrate on relaxing both bow and release hands, keeping back tension and slowly squeezing with the second and third fingers until the release is activated" ~ Bob Jacobsen, 1974
> 
> "To activate the shot your index finger softens on the release and allows the handle to pivot slightly (there is very little perceivable motion here, but you can feel it) and POOF! The shot is released. You hold the form for about 3 beats for follow through and you are ready to reset. You have just shot a perfect arrow." ~ George Ryals IV, 2005
> 
> "It's not what they do, it's them trying to put into words what they do. Hence the idea of back tension is invented or of a controlled rotation to make a clicker go off or a squeeze to make a trigger go off. These are not what are done..." Alistair Whittingham
> 
> "...and I became really good friends with these guy's, the really top shooters, then I started realizing nobody used back tension..." ~ Levi Morgan, 2015
> 
> “…I’m letting my back muscles basically just hold the bow back…” “…I give up a little (finger) tension and the shot breaks…” Jesse Broadwater, 2015*_


One might think that according to the BT experts posting here that those gentlemen are mere novices, that don't really understand archery or how they do it themselves.


----------



## cbrunson

Padgett said:


> Unclejane you are wrong about the myth comment, The MYTH was all about the fact that back tension was the only good choice to be made to actually fire a hinge. Hinges are still stinking called back tension on many if not most all websites where you buy them or they are made by the manufactures.


Laz kinda said it was a myth that it even existed. That's where we got outa hand I think.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Well, I can agree there's been a bunch of stuff on AT that had me rolling my eyes, especially where one picks up a hinge and has it mastered in one afternoon, just move your release elbow back and Lord knows what else. Even the thumb release is crazy. How can one soften/relax the index finger when the release is set so light that breathing on the barrel fires the release? Twice this past month I've tried someone's thumb release and twice I couldn't touch the barrel without it going off. The Stan Shootoff I just purchased, same way, so light "looking hard" at the barrel would have it fire. Set with a lot more tension I have a "feel" of barrel and handle that is proving just excellent (still don't like the hook up).....

As for the War, it's going to go on. The best one can do is present all methods and let the archer choose. Options available, they can choose something else if Door #1 doesn't open.


----------



## RCR_III

I'm all fine with teaching and showing other ways of shooting a hinge than just using your back muscles, but let's be careful not to let this go too far and accidentally teach new hinge users to not use their back muscles at all. And let's also not forget, there's a time and place for only using ur back to fire a hinge. 

We just need to let the options be known. And incorporate good help to those needing it.


----------



## Padgett

I did some experimenting with BLANK BAILING this fall and I don't remember if I ever told you guys my findings, I took my scott backspin and I set is very slow compared to my normal setting and I went up to the target about 6 feet from it and took off my sight and drew back normally a few times. Then I went ahead and ran my engine and nothing happened and so I down drew and did it again and again and it took a few attempts and then all of a sudden it fired. That moment I had found the speed of that setting and from then on I was able to stand there and fire, what basically had happened is that I had slightly changed my grip from my normal grip to take out the slack that slowing the moon had created. Now over time this slow setting would become no different basically from my normal speed setting other than I had lost my good grip on the hinge.

This lesson that I had just learned or taught myself was so important to my own shooting and my coaching of new hinge shooters. The lesson is that you can totally shoot a hinge with the perfect grip on the hinge and never deviate from it to get the hinge to fire. You can change the speed of the hinge to match your perfect grip, this is where so many of the good shooters have gotten lucky in my opinion. They got lucky and stumbled onto the good speed setting with a good grip on the hinge right from the start either by chance or by having a person help them. Why do I know it was more luck than anything else, because until I began giving out my hinge setup routine it was next to impossible to find anyone who was actually doing it. I have stumbled onto a few people who knew how to set up a hinge but they certainly weren't giving it out to anyone but a buddy or two here and there.


----------



## Padgett

I disagree, the war is over. What is left is a very small pest control problem and as long as we do a good job of sitting out some sticky traps and also when one of them runs out across the floor we stomp them they will never be able to screw up people again on a grand scale.


----------



## cbrunson

SonnyThomas said:


> Well, I can agree there's been a bunch of stuff on AT that had me rolling my eyes, especially where one picks up a hinge and has it mastered in one afternoon, just move your release elbow back and Lord knows what else. Even the thumb release is crazy. How can one soften/relax the index finger when the release is set so light that breathing on the barrel fires the release? Twice this past month I've tried someone's thumb release and twice I couldn't touch the barrel without it going off. The Stan Shootoff I just purchased, same way, so light "looking hard" at the barrel would have it fire. Set with a lot more tension I have a "feel" of barrel and handle that is proving just excellent (still don't like the hook up).....
> 
> As for the War, it's going to go on. The best one can do is present all methods and let the archer choose. Options available, they can choose something else if Door #1 doesn't open.


From one button shooter to another, I hear ya on the hair trigger. I prefer a very heavy trigger.

As for the war, at least options are being explored now instead of everyone clinging to the long running misconceptions of old.


----------



## Padgett

I take this really personally because not only did I suffer for 2 years with the absolute pathetic instruction that was available but I see so many people out there with the same problem and they are spending just as much time as many of us traveling to shoots and shooting in their yard and for them finding something they can understand and then actually execute just isn't happening.

I deal with this same problem here in my school where I teach math in middle school. Kids for the most part go through my class for a year and do just fine learning how to do things and enjoying what can be a boring class because of how I teach and present algebra, then they go to the next grade level the next year and they come back to me complaining that it is so different and hard and they don't understand anything this teacher is teaching. I look at their assignment and most of the time it is the same stinking thing I taught them to do the year before and in minutes I have them up and running.

The kids always ask me WHY DOES MY NEW TEACHER MAKE THINGS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND. You know what, I don't know why people do this. I have friends that I have taught with for years and they simply suck at presenting simple ideas to kids and even though they are a outstanding wealth of knowledge they can't present finding common denominators to save their life. So guess what, kids end up suffering and not learning just like new hinge shooters here on archery talk they get a new hinge with a hope that they can enjoy shooting with it and they end up suffering.


----------



## unclejane

Padgett said:


> Unclejane you are wrong about the myth comment, The MYTH was all about the fact that back tension was the only good choice to be made to actually fire a hinge. Hinges are still stinking called back tension on many if not most all websites where you buy them or they are made by the manufactures.


You're quite right about that, but in these threads it has mutated beyond that into an *invalid* method of firing a hinge period, according to Laz. EP seems to believe something along those lines also. That's a long ways from the *only* way to fire a hinge LOL. As far away as you can get, in fact.

I do agree about the "back tension" label, even for pull-through releases.....

LS


----------



## cbrunson

Same could be said with everyone saying you need to shoot a hinge to be accurate.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Padgett said:


> I disagree, the war is over. What is left is a very small pest control problem and as long as we do a good job of sitting out some sticky traps and also when one of them runs out across the floor we stomp them they will never be able to screw up people again on a grand scale.


How many people go to coaches and how many are and will go to coaches that go the other way? This spreads. How many read Facebook pages (Levi) and Blogs? I have Facebook with a passion, but I'm on it. I've got Tim, Dave, Chris, Tom, Steve and so many others and yet, "you have to have so and so" to be up on archery....

This firing the hinge stuff has just become (not yet, but close) another personal preference, completing a full circle. I don't care if you shoot a bow upside down and backwards, practice, perfect it and you're on your way.


----------



## SonnyThomas

cbrunson said:


> Same could be said with everyone saying you need to shoot a hinge to be accurate.


When was it, a "puncher" won Vegas? Dietmar Trillus?


----------



## EPLC

RCR_III said:


> I'm all fine with teaching and showing other ways of shooting a hinge than just using your back muscles, but let's be careful not to let this go too far and accidentally teach new hinge users to not use their back muscles at all. And let's also not forget, there's a time and place for only using ur back to fire a hinge.
> 
> We just need to let the options be known. And incorporate good help to those needing it.


I can't be 100% certain as so much has been written, but I do not believe anyone has claimed you shouldn't use the back muscles? The back is a necessary part of the system, it's the manner in which it is used which results in differences of opinion. Personally I don't really care if a method is working for someone, I just have a problem with the promotion of certain methods as being the only way to reach the mountain.


----------



## Padgett

Sometimes you just have to break away and take a risk, I shot with my dad in the back yard for over 30 freaking years with my fingers. I still have my old trusty three layer finger tab in my archery pack to remind me of where I came from, my dad is 70 years old now and still shoots a 70lb bow with his fingers. I can remember when I got my first 20 dollar cobra release and the flood of comments from him about the bad things that go along with shooting a release and why hunting with one is a bad idea. I stuck with it and continued to improve. 

I can remember the point where I had given away a couple of my hinges to a friend because they just sucked and I was trying so hard to do this back tension thing, I had read the bernies book and everything available and tried to stay focused on what was being said but I finally took another risk even though I felt like a stinking failure. I started rotating the hinge with my fingers and relaxing my index finger and firing the hinge with these methods. I thought I was the only person doing it that the pro shooters and top shooters in the nation were doing only back tension and that I was a idiot for doing anything else, the problem was within weeks I started shooting really freaking good. The risk was paying off and even though I got bashed here on archery talk when I mentioned my success I took the next risk and committed to a good year of training and learning on my own all of the things that I now believe in . There were so many lessons to be learned and so many hours spent but it has given me the ability to stand next to anyone in the world and shoot right along with them with my hinge and enjoy knowing that I have taken the risks that have given me the right to call myself a hinge shooter.


----------



## cbrunson

SonnyThomas said:


> When was it, a "puncher" won Vegas? Dietmar Trillus?


Mike Schloesser won Vegas with a button last year and just set the world record in Nimes with one.


----------



## Padgett

By the way, right after I first wrote my first article the Hinge Setup Routine I can remember some guy sending me a pm where he asked me if I was a pro shooter or if I was certified as a coach. He told me that I had no business coaching people here on archery talk because I had no certification, well I chose to believe in myself and after meeting so called certified coaches I am not feeling to bad about not paying my 250 bucks to sit in a seminar to get that little piece of paper.

I am simply a 3d shooter who decided that Levi Morgan doesn't have to be the only person who can be good at shooting a hinge and that I could teach myself how to do it, for you guys that are lurking on this thread all you have to do is give me a pm and we can get started.


----------



## SonnyThomas

cbrunson said:


> Mike Schloesser won Vegas with a button last year and just set the world record in Nimes with one.


Button Pushers of the World, Unite!


----------



## Padgett

Dietmar isn't a puncher, he just uses a tru ball short and sweet as his primary release and guys like to give him crap for punching to a vegas win. He even talks about training and competing with other releases such as hinges and thumb triggers and that he is just more accurate with the index finger one. He fires it with a firing method that creates a surprise release just like we do.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Padgett said:


> Dietmar isn't a puncher, he just uses a tru ball short and sweet as his primary release and guys like to give him crap for punching to a vegas win. He even talks about training and competing with other releases such as hinges and thumb triggers and that he is just more accurate with the index finger one. He fires it with a firing method that creates a surprise release just like we do.


I forget who, Tim Gillingham maybe, call Deitmar a "puncher." Something like; "Glad to see a puncher win it."


----------



## Padgett

I remember when Tim said that, back then I was a big fan of Dietmar and had done a lot of searching for stuff where he talked about shooting and his training. During the time he was winning vegas and fita stuff he was training with his other releases and was showing up and winning with his index finger release. He wasn't punching though.

I mainly used Dietmar as a good form to study, because on the fita shoots they have many camera angles and watching form is easy on those videos for me and I did watch him fire his release and he is smooth and not punching.


----------



## EPLC

Yes, nobody that is truly good at shooting actually punches the release, no matter what process they use.


----------



## cbrunson

Let me be the first to admit that I’m a recovering puncher myself. I credit the hinge for setting my head straight, but after going back and applying what I learned with the hinge to the button, well, let’s just say you guys fighting with hinges can have them.


----------



## Lazarus

cbrunson said:


> Laz kinda said it was a myth that it even existed. That's where we got outa hand I think.


Yes, I have said "back tension" as a firing method was a myth. Precisely what I meant was this; It's a myth that it is a dominant firing process, #1 because it's impossible to duplicate, and #2 The release still has to revolve, and you can't make the release revolve simply by pulling harder. And last, #3, and it's been mentioned countless times, I'll say it a little different, *most* people who are actually shooting what they think to be "back tension" are truly just manipulating the trigger with the hand. More than likely they've just got it set so hot that they don't know any different. 

And I'll say it for the umpteenth time in a different way; Whoever the person was that first mixed back tension, (which is a totally separate act) with the act of firing a hinge needs his bag slit and his leg run through it. The use of "back tension" (or simply pulling harder, or manipulating the draw arm) to get a release to fire is a myth. That is if you want to hit what you shoot at.


----------



## cbrunson

Lazarus said:


> Yes, I have said "back tension" as a firing method was a myth. Precisely what I meant was this; It's a myth that it is a dominant firing process, #1 because it's impossible to duplicate, and #2 The release still has to revolve, and you can't make the release revolve simply by pulling harder. And last, #3, and it's been mentioned countless times, I'll say it a little different, *most* people who are actually shooting what they think to be "back tension" are truly just manipulating the trigger with the hand. More than likely they've just got it set so hot that they don't know any different.
> 
> And I'll say it for the umpteenth time in a different way; Whoever the person was that first mixed back tension, (which is a totally separate act) with the act of firing a hinge needs his bag slit and his leg run through it. The use of "back tension" (or simply pulling harder, or manipulating the draw arm) to get a release to fire is a myth. That is if you want to hit what you shoot at.


:lol: That’s why I said “kinda”
Everything was going good. You even got ronw to crack, but then you had to keep going didn’t ya?


----------



## Lazarus

cbrunson said:


> :lol: That’s why I said “kinda”
> Everything was going good. You even got ronw to crack, but then you had to keep going didn’t ya?


I'm not known for having an exceptional ability to be able to keep my mouth shut. :teeth: 

This has been a really informative topic of late I must say. :cheers:


----------



## ron w

you guys are fools, if you think you got me to crack, you have gotten me to give on helping anyone any more, that's all....no big deal, i'll just keep my knowledge of hinges and back tension, to my self...all the guys that want to learn true rotational back tension, can thank you for that.
you guys just go right ahead and teach them all how to shoot.
as I've said before,,,, i never once said anything of the sort, that it is the ONLY way to shoot a hinge....that is all in your minds. there's nothing to crack about, because I never said what you guys think I said. ypu have fabricated lie's about what I've said and twisted my words around to suit your arguments enough....I want absolutely nothing to do with you guys anymore.


----------



## EPLC

All I know is this: Since 1974 (as this OP described nicely) to present day many of the world class shooters have been shooting a combination of back tension to hold and some variation of hand manipulation to rotate the release. I'm finding this to be a much better, more accurate and steadier method than what I was previously influenced to believe.


----------



## Lazarus

ronw.......you just need to realize much of what was taught to you is inaccurate, if not at the time you learned it, it is now. With all due respect to your abilities and knowledge 
much of what you know was the paradigm (I threw the big word in for you) at the time you learned it. But people were winning indoor tournaments with 300x52's in that age. Now that won't even win Young Adult freestyle. 

We are talking precision shooting here. Not old school fling them up there and score them. 

Again, with all due respect, times have changed. We no longer are shooting at little white dots. We are shooting at the intersection of an x in the middle of ring in a little white dot, and hitting it. 

Maybe you should enjoy learning some new things? And trashing the old unproven ideas. I don't know. :cheers:


----------



## unclejane

Lazarus said:


> ronw.......you just need to realize much of what was taught to you is inaccurate, if not at the time you learned it, it is now.


No, it's not inaccurate and it never was - that's something that has been clarified to you on a repeated basis in these threads. You simply thinking and saying it's inaccurate over and over, despite repeated correction to the contrary, doesn't make it so. 


> With all due respect to your abilities and knowledge
> much of what you know was the paradigm (I threw the big word in for you) at the time you learned it. But people were winning indoor tournaments with 300x52's in that age. Now that won't even win Young Adult freestyle.
> 
> We are talking precision shooting here. Not old school fling them up there and score them.


This is just revisionist history to cover up your own error. Precision shooting has always been precision shooting; at no time was it "fling them up there and score them". That's just "fling them up there and score them" and always has been (and there's nothing wrong with that). I don't recall Terry Ragsdale, for example, ever "flinging them up there and scoring them", or similarly for other precision shooters of the past.



> Again, with all due respect, times have changed. We no longer are shooting at little white dots. We are shooting at the intersection of an x in the middle of ring in a little white dot, and hitting it.


Archers, however, have not changed. We're built the same as always, think the same and have pretty much the same set of abilities and limitations. So what goes out of style is probably not what you think goes out of style. True, our learning always progresses, but the lessons of the past on the basics of a bow and arrow aren't wisely forgotten.


> Maybe you should enjoy learning some new things? And trashing the old unproven ideas. I don't know. :cheers:


Ditto.

LS


----------



## EPLC

Attention: The how do you shoot a hinge poll has BT only shooters climbing to a whopping 14.71%... it's been running a consistent 12% :mg:


----------



## carlosii

I have learned that I can punch any release made by man...and it really honks me off.

I've paid to attend seminars with GRIV and Wise both...and I'm sure I embarrassed them both by my lack of "getting it".


----------



## Lazarus

carlosii said:


> I have learned that I can punch any release made by man...and it really honks me off.
> 
> I've paid to attend seminars with GRIV and Wise both...and I'm sure I embarrassed them both by my lack of "getting it".


Easily fixable. It takes time, yes. But it's not hard. Actually with the proper approach there's nothing to "get," you only have to "do." :cheers:


----------



## SonnyThomas

carlosii said:


> I have learned that I can punch any release made by man...and it really honks me off.
> 
> I've paid to attend seminars with GRIV and Wise both...and I'm sure I embarrassed them both by my lack of "getting it".


What'd them lessons cost? You know, I ain't the best, but a cup of coffee I think is reasonable. We can meet at the old archery shop. I still have the keys....


----------



## Padgett

Ronw, I realize that you haven't cracked and you probably aren't going to but I hope that you realize that you keeping your knowledge to yourself isn't going to change anything. You are going through the same issue that Daleb1 went through for the last few years where your poor ability to post on threads is keeping people from getting hardly anything from your posts. I have read your posts for a long time and you have some good things to say at times but you almost always have a way to tick people off and they are sick of it, so you can either choose to work on your approach to posting or you are going to continue to suffer.

You are kidding yourself that all of us including myself don't have to work on these things to survive here on archery talk, it is a ongoing issue of learning how to grow and be productive without getting upset. It is hard to be 100% sure of your knowledge and present it in a good way when the next post may try and prove you to be wrong but I have found that if I truly believe in my methods and present them in a open manner they have been accepted and used by thousands of guys who have been appreciative, sure many of my methods were probably introductory to these guys and they have moved on but the fact is they gave them a boost and direction to go ahead and get up and running and then make good decisions.


----------



## ron w

Lazarus said:


> ronw.......you just need to realize much of what was taught to you is inaccurate, if not at the time you learned it, it is now. With all due respect to your abilities and knowledge
> much of what you know was the paradigm (I threw the big word in for you) at the time you learned it. But people were winning indoor tournaments with 300x52's in that age. Now that won't even win Young Adult freestyle.
> 
> We are talking precision shooting here. Not old school fling them up there and score them.
> 
> Again, with all due respect, times have changed. We no longer are shooting at little white dots. We are shooting at the intersection of an x in the middle of ring in a little white dot, and hitting it.
> 
> Maybe you should enjoy learning some new things? And trashing the old unproven ideas. I don't know. :cheers:



no, people won tournaments back then with the same perfect scores that people win tournaments with, now. when was it, that MR. Raggsdale put up his perfect scores ?. using essentially the same design sight, lens, peep and a release, as people use now. in fact, higher power lenses were much more common back then, than they are now, so people were "focusing" on the same thing then, as now. 
and as far as inaccurate information. what I learned, I learned from the guy that was Terry Raggsdale's main competition at Vegas and Cobo Hall, at the time...I hardly think he was mis- informed. 
contrary to your misconception, shooting was not much different, at that level, than it is now. the same "rules" about form and execution were in effect then, as they are now.....exactly the same. if you don't realize that, it's not my problem. as evidence, I refer to your own presentation of the excerpts from the article you use. you so called support of your idea, also supports the fact that things are the same, chronologically. 
what you don't realize is that it is only you and a very small number of creative word twisters, on this forum (you're all very good at it, I might add) that have some crazy idea that things are not the same. there's always a small group of people that just don't seem to be able to grasp the idea and there fore, fabricate silliness to justify their short comings, because they have no other plausible reason, to explain their not being able to do it. it was the same then as it is now. there were people that couldn't do it back then also, and all they could do, is come up with some ridiculous excuse, like "we're not sheep". and then when asked to provide a reason why, they would hide behind their fabrications, never really producing anything that made factual sense, to support their lack of capability and understanding.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> Attention: The how do you shoot a hinge poll has BT only shooters climbing to a whopping 14.71%... it's been running a consistent 12% :mg:


Yep, you only want to see it your way, just like you always have. RCR said he'd look at Griv and Larry's procedures last night and nothing yet.....

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2407647&p=1072201556#post1072201556
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2407647&p=1072204618#post1072204618


----------



## ron w

Padgett said:


> Ronw, I realize that you haven't cracked and you probably aren't going to but I hope that you realize that you keeping your knowledge to yourself isn't going to change anything. You are going through the same issue that Daleb1 went through for the last few years where your poor ability to post on threads is keeping people from getting hardly anything from your posts. I have read your posts for a long time and you have some good things to say at times but you almost always have a way to tick people off and they are sick of it, so you can either choose to work on your approach to posting or you are going to continue to suffer.
> 
> You are kidding yourself that all of us including myself don't have to work on these things to survive here on archery talk, it is a ongoing issue of learning how to grow and be productive without getting upset. It is hard to be 100% sure of your knowledge and present it in a good way when the next post may try and prove you to be wrong but I have found that if I truly believe in my methods and present them in a open manner they have been accepted and used by thousands of guys who have been appreciative, sure many of my methods were probably introductory to these guys and they have moved on but the fact is they gave them a boost and direction to go ahead and get up and running and then make good decisions.


 if you can't take realistic fact and wordage, don't read my posts.


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> Yep, you only want to see it your way, just like you always have. RCR said he'd look at Griv and Larry's procedures last night and nothing yet.....
> 
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2407647&p=1072201556#post1072201556
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2407647&p=1072204618#post1072204618


Actually, I didn't say anything about "my way" as it isn't really listed. What is polled is straight BT against several others that all include various hand manipulations. Call it "your way" against the world. As of this morning "your way" has about 12%... Just reporting the facts Sonny


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> no, people won tournaments back then with the same perfect scores that people win tournaments with, now. when was it, that MR. Raggsdale put up his perfect scores ?. using essentially the same design sight, lens, peep and a release, as people use now. in fact, higher power lenses were much more common back then, than they are now, so people were "focusing" on the same thing then, as now.
> and as far as inaccurate information. what I learned, I learned from the guy that was Terry Raggsdale's main competition at Vegas and Cobo Hall, at the time...I hardly think he was mis- informed.
> contrary to your misconception, shooting was not much different, at that level, than it is now. the same "rules" about form and execution were in effect then, as they are now.....exactly the same. if you don't realize that, it's not my problem. as evidence, I refer to your own presentation of the excerpts from the article you use. you so called support of your idea, also supports the fact that things are the same, chronologically.
> what you don't realize is that it is only you and a very small number of creative word twisters, on this forum (you're all very good at it, I might add) that have some crazy idea that things are not the same. there's always a small group of people that just don't seem to be able to grasp the idea and there fore, fabricate silliness to justify their short comings, because they have no other plausible reason, to explain their not being able to do it. it was the same then as it is now. there were people that couldn't do it back then also, and all they could do, is come up with some ridiculous excuse, like "we're not sheep". and then when asked to provide a reason why, they would hide behind their fabrications, never really producing anything that made factual sense, to support their lack of capability and understanding.


Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't a perfect score a "big 10" 300 then and has since changed to 300 30X? I don't think the face even had an X ring back then? Not to diminish Mr. Raggsdale's accomplishments, but the game and equipment have evolved since then, as well as the methodology. Back then there were very few that could shoot a Vegas 300, today a 300 Vegas is commonplace.


----------



## Lazarus

EPLC said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't a perfect score a "big 10" 300 then and has since changed to 300 30X? I don't think the face even had an X ring back then?


When Terry shot the perfects at Vegas and Cobo Hall in the same year they were on the Vegas face. A monstrous feat at that time. But if you look at the targets, they are FAR, FAR, FAR from being the same as a perfect score today with essentially one single hole in each target. But don't tell ron........also, don't tell him that I learned from the likes of Terry and the people who taught him, not the guys that came in second. :teeth: I really don't like to talk about (my role in) that era too much, brings back too many memories, some good, some bad, but I had to throw that in. 

When the first indoor 300's were being shot however they were on the NFAA face.


----------



## field14

To set some of the record straight with regard to Vegas winners. The source of this is Gene Lueck (OldPro on AT) who has, with help of many others researched this to a great extent.
1962-
Matt Yurick/Lou Shine Unlimited not invented yet!
1963-1964-1965-No Records
1967-
Lester Gervais/Lou Shine -- 1st two 300 scores shot by Lester and Bob Bitner was the first.
1968-1969-No records
1970-
Victor Berger/ Ann Butz --*Berger won against three release shooters, Lewis, Marino and Troncoso.*
1971-
Jack Lancaster/Denise Libby—Lancaster, Bill Mills Shot off 600 tie.
1972-
Ken Ostling/Mary Lynn Snyder—No limited class.--4 way tie at 600 Ostling, Bill Mills, John Williamson, Rich Slagle
1973-
Gene Parnell/Darlene Collier—Jim Pickering/LaVon Hagemeyer. Score change. Gold target no 10 ring inside out scoring. Touch the line is low score. 5-300s shot.
1974-
Bob (Jake) Jacobsen/Eva Troncoso---Jim Pickering/Joan Newbauer. New target Vegas 10 ring) *Mel Stanislawski shot the first 300.*
1975-
Jim Quarles/Eva Troncoso—Rod Schooler/Ann Schooler---Gene Lueck (OldPro) shoots the second Vegas 300.
1976-
Mark Perfect/Eva Troncoso---Ken Stanlislawski/Anita Denend Changed to 450 round. No perfects!
1977-
Ray Waleszcak/Ginger McClintock---Terry Frazer/Denice Libby
1978-
Terry Ragsdale/Fay Binney---Terry Frazer/Frozine Green--- Terry shot the first and only 1200 score to date at Vegas. 450,450,300, Vegas 10 ring target. He did it again in Detroit at the North American Indoor.
1979-
Terry Ragsdale/Michelle Ragsdale---John Doer/Carolyn Griffith---only Gene Lueck and Stan Colombo finished with 300s on Sunday.
1980-
Jack Cramer/Katie Smith---Jerry Podratz/Caroline Griffith –The beginning of the Katie Smith era! Three way shootoff at 1197. Cramer, John Taylor, Terry Ragsdale---three 450 rounds by Taylor, Larry Wise, and Alan Mikula---5-Sunday 300s by: Cramer, Gene Lueck, Joe Klemeneic, Jon Willig, and Mikula.
1981-
Garry Lampshire/Katie Smith---John Doerr/ Caroline Griffith---Four way shoot off at 1197—Lampshire, Jon Willig, Jim Stout, and Dean Pridgen---two 450s by Jon Willig and Ron Walker---Sunday 300s by: Pridgen, Harold Mobley, Terry Ragsdale, and Mickey Fancher.
1982-
Dean Pridgen/Katie Smith---Ed Rohde/Caroline Griffith---two way shoot off at 1199, Dean and Larry Wise---7-450s shot, two by Dean and one each by: Katie Smith ( First ever by a woman) Larry Wise, Terry Ragsdale, Jim Stout, and Mike Leiter. Sunday 300s by: Michelle Ragsdale, Larry Wise, Jim Stout, Mike Leiter, Frank Pearson, and John Taylor.
1983-
Jon Willig/Katie Smith---Terry Frazer/Caroline Griffith---No shoot off. Four 450s. Katie Smith, Jon Willig, Dean Pridgen and Mike Derus. Three Sunday 300s by: Jon, Dean, and Garry Lampshire.
1884-
DAVE BARNSDALE/Katie Smith---Frank Gandy/Caroline Griffith---Three way shoot off at 1198: Barnsdale, Ragsdale and Wise.
1985-
Terry Ragsdale/Katie Smith---Frank Gandy/Ginger McClintock---No shoot off—Terry with the first 900 at Vegas. Changed scoring to 3-300 rounds.
1986-
Rich Wiley/Becky Pearson---Eric Hall/Trish (Hall) Johnson---Three way shoot off at 899. Rich Wiley, Kirk Ethridge, Larry Wise. Lots of 300s.
1987-
Harold Mobley/Becky Pearson---Eric Hall/Trish Johnson---Two way shoot off at 900: Harold Mobley and Dee Wilde.
1988-
Jeff Rogers/Becky Pearson---Eric Hall/Dahrl Suttner---Three way shoot off at 899. Jeff, Eric Hall, Dee Wilde.
1989Dee Wilde/Linda Klosterman---Rich Johnson/Caroline Phillips---Two way shoot off at 899. Dee and Kirk Ethridge.
1990-
Jeff Rogers/Fay Binney---Rich Johnson/Dahrl Suttner---Five way shoot off at 898. Jeff, Dave Barnsdale, Terry Ragsdale, Dee Wilde, Danny Cobb.
1991-
Frank Pearson/Fay Binney---Rich Johnson/Tina Mihalo---First shoot off concept of a qualify and elimination.
1992-
Kirk Ethridge/Carol Bitner---Denise Parker/Mike Kerr---New Target 150 possible score.
1993-
Dee Wilde/Fay Binney---Randy Brabec/Marihelen Rogers---


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> Actually, I didn't say anything about "my way" as it isn't really listed. What is polled is straight BT against several others that all include various hand manipulations. Call it "your way" against the world. As of this morning "your way" has about 12%... Just reporting the facts Sonny


#38
Well, I questioned the Poll as for content. I posted links....and nothing...

Increasing Back Tension ONLY
Increasing pressure with outside fingers ONLY
Releasing pressure on index finger ONLY - George Ryals (Griv) all the way
Releasing pressure on index while increasing pressure on outside fingers
Yielding top of hand. (letting hand stretch aka GRIV method) - Not Griv and Yielding top of hand? Still, more to Larry Wise
Relaxing hand and arm while holding with back muscles - Still, more to Larry Wise

4:46 pm CT and Relaxing hand and arm in the lead by 1. Mounting to 26 of 56 if Yielding and Relaxing hand and arm is taken as Larry. 

#45 - RCR
I'm actually suprised the last option is in the lead. I figured it would be the 4th option that carried the way personally.

#53
9:09 pm CT check.....
Increasing Back Tension ONLY ------------------------------ 10 -----* Larry 
Yielding Top of hand ----------------------------------------- 07 -----* Larry - I thought confusing - RCR still to look into
Relaxing hand and arm while holding with back muscles - 20 ----- * Larry - above/here - Larry states fingers tight (hang on to release) 
----------------------------------------------------Total ------ 37

Variations of George Ryals (Griv)
Increasing pressure with outside fingers ONLY ------------------------------- 09
Releasing pressure on index finger ONLY ------------------------------------- 04
Releasing pressure on index while increasing pressure on outside fingers - 21
-------------------------------------------------------------- total ------------- 34


----------



## field14

Lazarus said:


> When Terry shot the perfects at Vegas and Cobo Hall in the same year they were on the Vegas face. A monstrous feat at that time. But if you look at the targets, they are FAR, FAR, FAR from being the same as a perfect score today with essentially one single hole in each target. But don't tell ron........also, don't tell him that I learned from the likes of Terry and the people who taught him, not the guys that came in second. :teeth: I really don't like to talk about (my role in) that era too much, brings back too many memories, some good, some bad, but I had to throw that in.
> 
> When the first indoor 300's were being shot however they were on the NFAA face.


Lazarus,
I beg to differ with you. NOBODY was shooting FAT SHAFTS back then, they shot correctly spined arrows for their setup. In addition, I have been told that when Terry shot his perfect 1200 (that is 120 arrows...45, 45, and 30) instead of the shortened up version of 30, 30, 30, by the way), he touched the line on the 10-ring fewer than 5 times total for the three days. I was also told that at Cobo Hall, with a completely different bow than what he used at Vegas, he again shot 1,200 (120 straight 10's...45, 45, 30 format again) and again touched the line less than 5 times!
So, when you compare today's FAT SHAFT rounds to those of the pre-2512 era (prior to 1989), you are comparing apples to oranges.
Mel Stanislawski (1974), I believe shot the first 300 on the "new" Vegas face with the 10-ring incorporated the very first year it was introduced. Wasn't HIS fault there wasn't yet a "baby-X". He also didn't have the distinct advantage of FAT SHAFTING those 10's either. Had to shoot them in there!
In addition...for VEGAS, you "only" need the 900 for the CHAMPIONSHIP division to make the shoot down. They don't bother to really "count" the X's until deep into the shoot down, if it comes to that.
One helluva lot EASIER to shoot 90 in the 10 ring than it is to shoot 120 straight, especially when it is 45, 45, and 30!

The cream would still rise to the top; it always has, and it always will. Take away the FAT SHAFTS and there would be way fewer 300's...but again, those shooters that are the cream of the crop would still overcome...just fewer of them, is all.
In the later 1970's and into the 1980's, they were shooting 450 rounds on Saturday and Sunday, and a 300 on Sunday...MUCH tougher to shoot "perfect" on than a 30 arrow "300" round. Don't give me this "baby-x" stuff...cuz they don't COUNT ONE BIT until you have the 900 to make the shoot down rounds...and only then, the baby-x comes into play only when it is pretty deep into the shoot down. 
field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## Lazarus

Ok field14, I have no problem with you differing with me. Give me a minute or ten and I can tell you how many of his arrows touched the line at Vegas that year. Doesn't matter to me, I know this for a FACT though, fat shafts or not, there are no more loose holes in a 300 Vegas target like there was in 1978. In fact I dare say that the average hole in a Vegas target has shrunk in half in just the last five years. Please don't make yourself look foolish by arguing that the shooters of today aren't shooting better than the shooters of the 70's. It just isn't true. :cheers: You're too intelligent for that.


----------



## ron w

so what, a "perfect score" is a "perfect score", each is perfect, for the time and state of the art, in which it was shot. every single athletic event in history has improved over time, so your contention that the perfect score from back then is less of an accomplishment, than a perfect score now, means absolutely nothing, what so ever, other than the importance it holds to your twisted agenda.


----------



## unclejane

ron w said:


> so what, a "perfect score" is a "perfect score", each is perfect, for the time and state of the art, in which it was shot. every single athletic event in history has improved over time, so your contention that the perfect score from back then is less of an accomplishment, than a perfect score now, means absolutely nothing, what so ever, other than the importance it holds to your twisted agenda.


I think it's hilarious.... It's still a good point that technological advancements can help to yield better performance in a sport over time, you have to grant that. But you also have to be really asleep at the wheel to confuse that with the silly idea that the participants have improved over time. Unless you're a eugenics conspiracy theorist or something like that.... 

But the idea that precision shooting was "throw em up there and score em" back in the 70's is still a total haw-haw for me.... 

LS


----------



## Padgett

I am going to keep reminding all of the guys who are reading this thread that we have free reading readily available that will totally show you how to set up a hinge and fire one easily so that you can begin your hinge shooting in a productive way all the way up to being competitive at a very high level. Do not let anyone on this thread turn you away from getting a good start on your hinge shooting, this has been a problem for a long time and we are getting really close to eliminating them from being in control.

I started just like many of you guys not having any good experience to get started with and I listened to these guys in the past and they threw the I have been shooting for 40 years since the hinge was invented in my face many times only to send me down a dead end road of suffering. Just pm me and I can get you the info that you need.


----------



## Lazarus

field14 said:


> Lazarus,
> I beg to differ with you. NOBODY was shooting FAT SHAFTS back then, they shot correctly spined arrows for their setup. In addition, I have been told that when Terry shot his perfect 1200 (that is 120 arrows...45, 45, and 30) instead of the shortened up version of 30, 30, 30, by the way), he touched the line on the 10-ring fewer than 5 times total for the three days.


You were close! I looked up the scorecard Rags was keeping. It was 10 not counting his practice ends. Phenomenal shooting for the day. Also, he was shooting 1814's, pretty skinny, so obviously that added to the inside out count. It was definitely a performance ahead of it's time. 

:cheers:


----------



## Padgett

Sometimes I think that many of the guys in this thread that contribute to the suffering of so many new shooters are just like some of the 3d shooters I see on the local courses, they are easy to spot because they have shot together for decades and they are very opinionated and set in their ways and they suck beyond belief but they show up every weekend and continue to do the same things that they have done for decades. 

What is funny is I began shooting in the late 1970's and my dad was a solid shooter in the area and won a few tournaments so he remembers some of these guys and they sucked back then also.


----------



## Lazarus

^^^ That's some funny stuff right there. ^^^

Funny thing about the best humor, it's usually true. :cheers:


----------



## unclejane

Padgett said:


> Sometimes I think that many of the guys in this thread that contribute to the suffering of so many new shooters are just like some of the 3d shooters I see on the local courses, they are easy to spot because they have shot together for decades and they are very opinionated and set in their ways and they suck beyond belief but they show up every weekend and continue to do the same things that they have done for decades.
> 
> What is funny is I began shooting in the late 1970's and my dad was a solid shooter in the area and won a few tournaments so he remembers some of these guys and they sucked back then also.


Well speaking for myself, your writings about your methods as well as threads like these have certainly reduced my suffering orders of magnitude over what it could have been. When I started, there was hardly any online community that I had access to. I didn't even know what target panic was much less that I had the most horrible case of it you could imagine. I was totally on my own doing the wrong thing until it tore up my upper body LOL.

I shot my hinge again last night on my Hoyt with the locals using the Wise/PBT method and found my good shot rate had gone back up to about 97%. I had good pull-through surprise shots almost all the time, with only 2 or maybe 3 "hangups". 

So while I've settled on a method you don't use or advocate, that you make your experience available certainly gave me an opportunity to teach myself a workable method that I wouldn't have otherwise had. So just some personal kudos that you do relieve suffering LOL and please keep on doing so!

LS


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> so what, a "perfect score" is a "perfect score", each is perfect, for the time and state of the art, in which it was shot. every single athletic event in history has improved over time, so your contention that the perfect score from back then is less of an accomplishment, than a perfect score now, means absolutely nothing, what so ever, other than the importance it holds to your twisted agenda.


Hey, "a perfect score by any other name is still a perfect score", just doesn't hold up. Your logic is faulty. A 300 Vegas is not the same as a 300 30X Vegas anymore than a perfect 560 field on the old 5/3 face is the same as a 560 on todays face. And now that they are counting X's as 1's then all bets are off. Perfect isn't perfect anymore. Simple math Ron, simple math. And as was pointed out, forget about the scores, the group sizes today are significantly smaller then back then. Much of this has got to do with many factors, including equipment, but training and methodology has evolved as well. You posted a short while ago that archery is an exact science. It is not! It is continually evolving in equipment, methodology and training technique's and will continue to do so for the unforeseeable future.


----------



## Padgett

You have to be careful when comparing current achievements to past ones, Micheal jordan is a good one that hasn't played for quite some time but I think you can still compare him to the current players and I personally think he would still be the dominant player that a Lebron would have to take second place to. Terry Ragsdale is one of the shooters from the past that I personally think would still be winning and producing some awesome scores right now against chance and jesse and reo.

I realize that Terry was shooting on a different face than is used now for some of his awesome wins but all you have to do is watch him shoot and if you know anything about what a true stud looks like he fits that mold.


----------



## EPLC

Padgett said:


> You have to be careful when comparing current achievements to past ones, Micheal jordan is a good one that hasn't played for quite some time but I think you can still compare him to the current players and I personally think he would still be the dominant player that a Lebron would have to take second place to. Terry Ragsdale is one of the shooters from the past that I personally think would still be winning and producing some awesome scores right now against chance and jesse and reo.
> 
> I realize that Terry was shooting on a different face than is used now for some of his awesome wins but all you have to do is watch him shoot and if you know anything about what a true stud looks like he fits that mold.


My comments were in no way meant to take away from the accomplishments of the great shooters of the past. Terry, from the very few examples of him shooting had a classic form that is very similar to todays best shooters. My point was that the best archers of today have evolved with the technology, methodology and training techniques to achieve groups that were impossible to achieve back in the day. I'm sure that Mr. Ragsdale, in his prime, would be in the finals today as well with todays equipment to enhance his tremendous mental and physical skills.


----------



## Lazarus

EPLC said:


> My comments were in no way meant to take away from the accomplishments of the great shooters of the past. Terry, from the very few examples of him shooting had a classic form that is very similar to todays best shooters. My point was that the best archers of today have evolved with the technology, methodology and training techniques to achieve groups that were impossible to achieve back in the day. I'm sure that Mr. Ragsdale, in his prime, would be in the finals today as well with todays equipment to enhance his tremendous mental and physical skills.


Yep. Form=Score. He would be at the top of the heap today.

Funny thing is, I posted a pic of his bow and bow arm/grip on this forum a few months ago without any identifying parts of his face or body. There were people on this exact forum that made fun of the form in the pic not knowing it was one of *the* most successful shooters of all time. :set1_rolf2:

I'm not going back to look, but most likely it was the same people that are defending the myth of back tension firing today. :wink:


----------



## carlosii

Would anybody be in favor of "Back Tension" being made a free standing forum?


----------



## ron w

EPLC said:


> My comments were in no way meant to take away from the accomplishments of the great shooters of the past. Terry, from the very few examples of him shooting had a classic form that is very similar to todays best shooters. My point was that the best archers of today have evolved with the technology, methodology and training techniques to achieve groups that were impossible to achieve back in the day. I'm sure that Mr. Ragsdale, in his prime, would be in the finals today as well with todays equipment to enhance his tremendous mental and physical skills.


 and with this post, you completely support what I said.


----------



## Lazarus

carlosii said:


> Would anybody be in favor of "Back Tension" being made a free standing forum?


No. But I am in favor if someone doesn't like a topic they can choose not to participate! :cheers:

On the other hand if is was a "back tension" forum that talked about the merits of one of the most relevant aspects of a good shot, that might be good. If it talked about the mythical firing mechanism called "back tension" it would be pretty useless. But then again, people could talk about unicorns, bigfoot, and Sasquatch there too. It would get all the trash off the I&A forum.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> and with this post, you completely support what I said.


No, I did not, unless you actually meant what I just said. If that be the case then you might have said, "That's really what I meant", instead of positioning it as being my fault or misunderstanding. Maybe if you would soften your approach more people would listen to you seriously?


----------



## Mahly

*“Back Tension, “ Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!*

Alright everyone.
Again we have morphed into who agrees with whom.
Let's focus more about the topic, and less about who agrees with you.
I have a challenge for those here who wish to follow the "my way is right, your way is wrong, and here is why" discussion.
It seems we are really worried that the other guy "gets it". They would agree with you if they only understood.
Then the other guy says, "no, I get it, your just wrong". Leading to end endless circle.
If you think you DO get it, explain the OTHER sides point of view.
See if you can put it down in a way that the "other" side will agree with.
Not YOUR opinion, describe in detail how to use the other technique, and why it works.
People can then see each point of view knowing it is not misunderstood. Clarity for all... Debaters, and lurkers.
We have heard different sides of the coin. Tell me what the other guys technique is in a way that they agree with you 100%.
If you can't do that, you don't get it.
Again, this is for everyone that is arguing that they are right, the other side is wrong, and they just don't get it.

Note: anything snarky or abusing results in disqualification, and may have further consequences. 

GO!


----------



## Lazarus

Mahly, I've never once said that "my way was the only way." There are myriad ways. But;

(1) the best shooters in the world don't fire with this mythical *firing* technique called "back tension" 
(2) promoting it as one of archery's "best practices" is a disservice because it's not 
(3) as has been demonstrated in this post, even recently, those who promote this "back tension" firing method don't even realize it but they're not *doing* it. 

I'm pretty much done with this one. Points been made. I'm kinda with cbrunson and the suggestion he made earlier. I just wish he'd make the post. :cheers:

Carry on.....


----------



## Mahly

You haven't said your way is the only way, but you have also called the "other way" a myth and impossible. So if nothing else it SOUNDS like it is your way or the highway.
SOME of the best shooters don't use back tension as a firing method....some punch the trigger, Some use it with a thumb trigger. It is a disservice to say it can't work, or is a myth when it have been proven to work for some.
And yes, some people ARE doing it.

I agree that it is NOT the best technique for everyone. Probably not the best technique for MOST shooters, but it does work for some, and that technique is why I am still shooting archery today. It served it's purpose, and I have moved on....but it DID work for me.

I STILL challenge everyone here who thinks the other side doesn't get it, to spell out the method you do NOT believe in.
IF you can do it, there is NO reason for the "other" side to continue to pound the reasons they feel their technique is best.
And if the other side CAN describe exactly your technique, and it's benefits, then there is no need to keep pounding your technique as your telling someone something they already know.

We've heard the same arguments over and over from each side. SOME conceding that the other technique is valid, if not optimal, some saying "my way or the highway".

Who can/will accept the challenge? Laz, can you describe for us the PBT method and it's benefits(even if in your mind it's just a theory)? I'm not saying you have to believe it, just explain how it's supposed to work. And I'm not just looking at Laz, you know who you are (on BOTH sides).

P.S. no copy/pasting either LOL!:cheers:


----------



## Lazarus

I pretty much covered it all over on the other topic just now Mahly. 

To summarize; 

1.Cheating your form (aka back tension firing) is not a best practice and should not be taught. Why? Because it teaches bad form, AND it teaches release settings that encourage exactly the problems that the (mythical) technique is supposed to help "cure."

2.When it comes to firing T Handles the advanced teaching should be; Figure out what method is right for the situation! Here's an extreme example; say you're shooting in a 24 mph cross wind, are you going to shoot more of a Ryals type release? Or might it be more similar to a Gillingham? Hopefully you get that I was trying to use a little humor there to illustrate a valid point. 

To the range.......:cheers:


----------



## Mahly

Lol! I get it, but I still have to call that a fail


----------



## Lazarus

Mahly said:


> Lol! I get it, but I still have to call that a fail


:wink:Free your mind. Stop thinking in terms of a flat floor and 20 yards, or as the elitists put it; 18m. :teeth:


----------



## ron w

what difference does distance and grade of ground, or for that matter footing make ?. I use the same execution whether shooting level, up or down, at all distances. the execution works exactly the same, feels the same and takes the same amount of effort, in all positions and distances
the thought of changing method of execution, because of elevation or distance, is ludicrous and completely contrary to the concept of consistent archery.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> what difference does distance and grade of ground, or for that matter footing make ?. I use the same execution whether shooting level, up or down, at all distances. the execution works exactly the same, feels the same and takes the same amount of effort, in all positions and distances
> the thought of changing method of execution, because of elevation or distance, is ludicrous and completely contrary to the concept of consistent archery.


Big difference. Mostly for form. If your draw length and loop length have to be within a nats arse to execute your shot, you will struggle at a 30 deg angle shot with one foot on a tree stump and the other foot four inches lower.


----------



## bowfisher

ron w said:


> what difference does distance and grade of ground, or for that matter footing make ?. I use the same execution whether shooting level, up or down, at all distances. the execution works exactly the same, feels the same and takes the same amount of effort, in all positions and distances
> the thought of changing method of execution, because of elevation or distance, is ludicrous and completely contrary to the concept of consistent archery.


Don't get out much do ya Ron?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxXuCY_HeCQ&list=FLLObOn5wULYNY2a7hKllvDQ&index=8


----------



## ron w

cbrunson said:


> Big difference. Mostly for form. If your draw length and loop length have to be within a nats arse to execute your shot, you will struggle at a 30 deg angle shot with one foot on a tree stump and the other foot four inches lower.


 your "form" and the release execution, are two separate issues. one "form" will change slightly for up/down shots, but the release execution should remain constant in methodology. 
I would have thought, given the nature of this forum, you would understood that as a given aspect , instead of the poor attempt to discount, again, condescendingly, my post. aperantly, that's all you can do to refute something you don't understand.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> what difference does distance and grade of ground, or for that matter footing make ?. I use the same execution whether shooting level, up or down, at all distances. the execution works exactly the same, feels the same and takes the same amount of effort, in all positions and distances
> the thought of changing method of execution, because of elevation or distance, is ludicrous and completely contrary to the concept of consistent archery.


No one is debating what you do Ron, I think the question might be, "to what result"? Results mean everything in this sport and if your process isn't producing them to a level of excellence then there exists the possibility that something else may provide improvement to your process and game. To remain rigid and un-teachable is a state that I choose not to follow. This is really about process, and I do know something about process from my professional life. Any process that contains no flexibility and is so rigid that the users cannot make adjustments as needed is a process that will break. PBT is a fine example of a process that is too ridge for most folks to master so adjustments have been made, such as variations of hand manipulation, etc.


----------



## Padgett

Lets see, I shoot 40 some 3d shoots a year and at least one time per tournament if not more I step up to a down hill shot on a slab of shale that is crumbling and broken with my front foot either 4 inches lower or higher than my rear foot. Not to mention I am left handed and the guys who set up the freaking courses are right handed and footing is for them and not me. So I come to full draw and settle in on the target with my smooth moon and run my engine and nothing happens, why ronw? Because something in the footing and the angle of the shot has caused my hinge to be at a different freaking angle than when I am on perfectly flat ground. So I could be a idiot and just force the shot by ripping my hinge off the cams or I can let down and take a few breaths and then draw back and shoot with my firing engine that produces much more rotation that will suck up the extra slack that the poor footing created. 

See I prefer to win tournaments instead of being hard headed and closed minded, sure when I shoot indoor rounds the method that produces more rotation scores about one or two misses per 100 shots than my competition method but on a tough footing shot it is freaking valuable beyond belief.


----------



## EPLC

Which reminds me. I asked for some concrete evidence several times as to where the PBT process originated. So far, no takers. We know that in 1974 Bob Jacobsen wasn't using it and we know today's top shooters aren't using it. So I have to assume it began somewhere in-between those two points. The earliest reference that I know of is Bernie's book followed by Larry's "Core Archery" a couple of years later (2004). I also know that around this same time there were several professional shooters on this forum that took extreme exception to Bernie's teachings. It was also around this time that GRIV posted several "dynamic tension" articles in which he uses a form of hand manipulation to execute. We know that just recently Levi Morgan said none of the really top shooters were actually using it... etc., etc.

So where did PBT come actually from? I can only speculate so lets play a little what-if. What if when the hinge came out a few professionals recognized the edge this newfangled release would give them. In order to hold back the competition they may have said, "It takes an extreme effort to learn this release as you can only activate it with PBT!", or "I don't use any hand movement to operate this new devise, I only use the proper back muscles to operate it as moving the hand would be cheating the release", and then maybe, "Not working for you, well you must be doing it wrong, just keep practicing until you get it right, perhaps a few more months of blind bale will help". A few actually may have either mastered this PBT thing against all odds or just believed that they did and started to promoted it to still others... These others never did master the process but continued drinking the idea and they in turn started to promote the process because they knew it had to be valid because the original group of professional shooters were doing so well with it... In 2002 a legion of disciples was created by still others promoting this PBT process without any more credentials then a good gift of gab and a platform that could reach 1000's with one post. 

Seem farfetched?


----------



## ron w

EPLC said:


> No one is debating what you do Ron, I think the question might be, "to what result"? Results mean everything in this sport and if your process isn't producing them to a level of excellence then there exists the possibility that something else may provide improvement to your process and game. To remain rigid and un-teachable is a state that I choose not to follow. This is really about process, and I do know something about process from my professional life. Any process that contains no flexibility and is so rigid that the users cannot make adjustments as needed is a process that will break. PBT is a fine example of a process that is too ridge for most folks to master so adjustments have been made, such as variations of hand manipulation, etc.


 if no one is debating what I do, why are all my posts on the subject met with condescending ridicule ?. because I believe in, propagate and rely on my method of shooting, how does that make me, " rigid and unteachable", any more than your believing in, propagating and relying on your method, which actually physiologically much more complex in consistent reproduction.. ?. 
it involves much less musculature and far less production of mentally generated commands to muscles that are much more oriented to being guided with much less input.
as I've said before,....if you doubt that, go talk to a physiologist about it.
rhomboid contraction as a firing engine, is less difficult to master than any other form of execution....when it's taught right. maybe the problem lies in your ability to teach it right. 

you guys are the masters of fabricated twisted facts and double standards. your views on it's "rigid and inflexible " nature is just as rigid and unteachable an attitude, as you accuse mine of being.


----------



## RCR_III

If we are merely speculating on the origins, I'd put out there that the original intent was to help with target panic, or punching a release and becoming jumpy or having other issues. The method of only using back muscles took the hand movement/finger movement out of the equation and allowed people to overcome some of their issues. Or atleast being taught that way.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> if no one is debating what I do, why are all my posts on the subject met with condescending ridicule ?. because I believe in, propagate and rely on my method of shooting, how does that make me, " rigid and unteachable", any more than your believing in, propagating and relying on your method, which actually physiologically much more complex in consistent reproduction.. ?.
> it involves much less musculature and far less production of mentally generated commands to muscles that are much more oriented to being guided with much less input.
> as I've said before,....if you doubt that, go talk to a physiologist about it.
> rhomboid contraction as a firing engine, is less difficult to master than any other form of execution....when it's taught right. maybe the problem lies in your ability to teach it right.
> 
> you guys are the masters of fabricated twisted facts and double standards. your views on it's "rigid and inflexible " nature is just as rigid and unteachable an attitude, as you accuse mine of being.


The question was: To what result?


----------



## ron w

Padgett said:


> Lets see, I shoot 40 some 3d shoots a year and at least one time per tournament if not more I step up to a down hill shot on a slab of shale that is crumbling and broken with my front foot either 4 inches lower or higher than my rear foot. Not to mention I am left handed and the guys who set up the freaking courses are right handed and footing is for them and not me. So I come to full draw and settle in on the target with my smooth moon and run my engine and nothing happens, why ronw? Because something in the footing and the angle of the shot has caused my hinge to be at a different freaking angle than when I am on perfectly flat ground. So I could be a idiot and just force the shot by ripping my hinge off the cams or I can let down and take a few breaths and then draw back and shoot with my firing engine that produces much more rotation that will suck up the extra slack that the poor footing created.
> i'm sorry you have that problem,....I don't. and I don't because I was taught correctly,....that the muscular process of release execution has to isolated from the rest of your body's actions. when it is, the conditions that influence what your body is doing, have no effect on the execution of the release process.
> I guess it's just a matter of how deeply we understand the process.


----------



## EPLC

RCR_III said:


> If we are merely speculating on the origins, I'd put out there that the original intent was to help with target panic, or punching a release and becoming jumpy or having other issues. The method of only using back muscles took the hand movement/finger movement out of the equation and allowed people to overcome some of their issues. Or atleast being taught that way.


Yes, my comments were strictly speculation, but I believe plausible. I suppose your speculation is as good as any but I would love to see something concrete. Assuming no concrete evidence will come forward, I also welcome any additional speculation.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> your "form" and the release execution, are two separate issues. one "form" will change slightly for up/down shots, but the release execution should remain constant in methodology.
> I would have thought, given the nature of this forum, you would understood that as a given aspect , instead of the poor attempt to discount, again, condescendingly, my post. aperantly, that's all you can do to refute something you don't understand.


No condescension. It's becoming quite clear now what your motives are.


----------



## RCR_III

May I ask why? Why it has become so important for you to get this concrete evidence? Is it a personal point a finger and told you so moment you are hoping to get? Or did you get upset at some of the comments and want to prove a point to them? (I can understand wanting to do this, been there a time or two) Or another reasoning behind it? 

The reason I'm asking is because I feel with all the time that has passed and the number of threads and pages going on about this topic and subject if the desireable ending result was to come to fruition for you, it would have by now. 

At some point everyone has to quit agging the other(s) on and let this die out. It's become something far different than teaching or leaning about hinge use. It's become a mess of throwing sand in faces while playing in the sandbox. For the outside community to look into archery and see this, it's not good publicity. It's not inviting. It's not going to welcome anyone to reach out to ask for help, or feel they have found an enviroment to broadcast in. It's not growing our sport.

We can't be having an internal civil war and expect to flourish. If someone teaches another to use back tension as the primary and single method of firing a hinge and the other person reads and wants to try that method, then there's nothing you or I can do to but to offer other alternatives if that does not work for that person. In my opinion, the manipulation of your hand in some form or fashion is the most popular idea at this point in time. I think that has a lot to do with todays harder backwalls and adapting to that. But, not everyone can throw a curve ball. Not everyone has their brain wired to control parts of their bodies, ie fingers, palms, muscles, joint movements, ect. And even for the ones that do have that kind of control, their brain will perceive things differently and need a different variation of a method to reach maximum potential.

Our jobs are to give people options to choose from. To show them multiple ways to skin a pig so to speak. It's to promote a healthy atmosphere that they will want to come into to ask and learn from. 

At this point I will say these threads have become no better than the old shooting with backtension is the best way and only way and everything else is cheating teachings.


EPLC said:


> Yes, my comments were strictly speculation, but I believe plausible. I suppose your speculation is as good as any but I would love to see something concrete. Assuming no concrete evidence will come forward, I also welcome any additional speculation.


----------



## EPLC

RCR_III said:


> May I ask why? Why it has become so important for you to get this concrete evidence? Is it a personal point a finger and told you so moment you are hoping to get? Or did you get upset at some of the comments and want to prove a point to them? (I can understand wanting to do this, been there a time or two) Or another reasoning behind it?
> 
> The reason I'm asking is because I feel with all the time that has passed and the number of threads and pages going on about this topic and subject if the desireable ending result was to come to fruition for you, it would have by now.
> 
> At some point everyone has to quit agging the other(s) on and let this die out. It's become something far different than teaching or leaning about hinge use. It's become a mess of throwing sand in faces while playing in the sandbox. For the outside community to look into archery and see this, it's not good publicity. It's not inviting. It's not going to welcome anyone to reach out to ask for help, or feel they have found an enviroment to broadcast in. It's not growing our sport.
> 
> We can't be having an internal civil war and expect to flourish. If someone teaches another to use back tension as the primary and single method of firing a hinge and the other person reads and wants to try that method, then there's nothing you or I can do to but to offer other alternatives if that does not work for that person. In my opinion, the manipulation of your hand in some form or fashion is the most popular idea at this point in time. I think that has a lot to do with todays harder backwalls and adapting to that. But, not everyone can throw a curve ball. Not everyone has their brain wired to control parts of their bodies, ie fingers, palms, muscles, joint movements, ect. And even for the ones that do have that kind of control, their brain will perceive things differently and need a different variation of a method to reach maximum potential.
> 
> Our jobs are to give people options to choose from. To show them multiple ways to skin a pig so to speak. It's to promote a healthy atmosphere that they will want to come into to ask and learn from.
> 
> At this point I will say these threads have become no better than the old shooting with backtension is the best way and only way and everything else is cheating teachings.


I honestly would like to know who/when started this PBT thing and why? We've heard a lot of opinion and speculation, I've given mine and you've given yours. Call it natural curiosity... I've started a thread to address this topic in which I would hope the discussion will be civil.


----------



## Padgett

Lets see I have two choices to make:

1. I can choose to accept shots that suck but stick to my belief that some day I will actually be able to do something that right now I can't.

2. I can choose to be a very intelligent well rounded shooter that adapts well and produces perfect shot executions with no excuses to mull over in the truck on the way home.

You can try all you want ron to throw your 40 years in our faces but you are losing ground with every word your speak, the fact is that the next generation of shooters are going to get a much more clear introduction of hinge shooting than ever before and thousands of people are going to enjoy it without having to battle through like I did.


----------



## cbrunson

RCR_III said:


> May I ask why? Why it has become so important for you to get this concrete evidence? Is it a personal point a finger and told you so moment you are hoping to get? Or did you get upset at some of the comments and want to prove a point to them? (I can understand wanting to do this, been there a time or two) Or another reasoning behind it?
> 
> The reason I'm asking is because I feel with all the time that has passed and the number of threads and pages going on about this topic and subject if the desireable ending result was to come to fruition for you, it would have by now.
> 
> At some point everyone has to quit agging the other(s) on and let this die out. It's become something far different than teaching or leaning about hinge use. It's become a mess of throwing sand in faces while playing in the sandbox. For the outside community to look into archery and see this, it's not good publicity. It's not inviting. It's not going to welcome anyone to reach out to ask for help, or feel they have found an enviroment to broadcast in. It's not growing our sport.
> 
> We can't be having an internal civil war and expect to flourish. If someone teaches another to use back tension as the primary and single method of firing a hinge and the other person reads and wants to try that method, then there's nothing you or I can do to but to offer other alternatives if that does not work for that person. In my opinion, the manipulation of your hand in some form or fashion is the most popular idea at this point in time. I think that has a lot to do with todays harder backwalls and adapting to that. But, not everyone can throw a curve ball. Not everyone has their brain wired to control parts of their bodies, ie fingers, palms, muscles, joint movements, ect. And even for the ones that do have that kind of control, their brain will perceive things differently and need a different variation of a method to reach maximum potential.
> 
> Our jobs are to give people options to choose from. To show them multiple ways to skin a pig so to speak. It's to promote a healthy atmosphere that they will want to come into to ask and learn from.
> 
> At this point I will say these threads have become no better than the old shooting with backtension is the best way and only way and everything else is cheating teachings.


Excellent post ^^^^^ :thumbs_up

It is a sad deal when people are asking questions through PMs because they don’t want to be attacked by keyboard coaches in the open forum.


----------



## bowfisher

I can see where some think we might be going to far and we probably are. But some of us have been seeing this for years (this is the only way) and we are sick of it. I can remember some of the best in the world posting years ago and got run off by some telling them they were doing it wrong.


----------



## Rick!

EPLC said:


> Which reminds me. I asked for some concrete evidence several times as to where the PBT process originated. So far, no takers. We know that in 1974 Bob Jacobsen wasn't using it and we know today's top shooters aren't using it. So I have to assume it began somewhere in-between those two points. The earliest reference that I know of is Bernie's book followed by Larry's "Core Archery" a couple of years later (2004). I also know that around this same time there were several professional shooters on this forum that took extreme exception to Bernie's teachings. It was also around this time that GRIV posted several "dynamic tension" articles in which he uses a form of hand manipulation to execute. We know that just recently Levi Morgan said none of the really top shooters were actually using it... etc., etc.
> 
> So where did PBT come actually from? I can only speculate so lets play a little what-if. What if when the hinge came out a few professionals recognized the edge this newfangled release would give them. In order to hold back the competition they may have said, "It takes an extreme effort to learn this release as you can only activate it with PBT!", or "I don't use any hand movement to operate this new devise, I only use the proper back muscles to operate it as moving the hand would be cheating the release", and then maybe, "Not working for you, well you must be doing it wrong, just keep practicing until you get it right, perhaps a few more months of blind bale will help". A few actually may have either mastered this PBT thing against all odds or just believed that they did and started to promoted it to still others... These others never did master the process but continued drinking the idea and they in turn started to promote the process because they knew it had to be valid because the original group of professional shooters were doing so well with it... In 2002 a legion of disciples was created by still others promoting this PBT process without any more credentials then a good gift of gab and a platform that could reach 1000's with one post.
> 
> Seem farfetched?


Yes, the stuff fables are made of. There is no conspiracy theory to be "blown away." 

Alternate version:

There is very little purse money for spot pros, then and now.
If I have a competitive advantage, I ain't telling you about it, let alone the folks on the interweb.
Second, I'm way too busy to teach or write books right now. Maybe when I'm done shooting pro, I'll write a book.
If you want to know how I do it, get yerself a pro playing card and we can talk on the practice line.
See me in a 100,000 arrows and maybe I'll answer a question for you.

End alternate version. 

This version can be used for vintage car racing, drag racing, trophy hunting and other competitive arenas where you need to be qualified by those "in the know" before critical tribal knowledge is passed on.

It's a sport folks, not a science project, treat it as such and have some fun.


----------



## Lazarus

Rick! said:


> Yes, the stuff fables are made of. There is no conspiracy theory to be "blown away."


I agree, no conspiracy theory. My take on it is; it's the good old USofA. Capitalism rocks. Some guys that were fairly descent shooters recognized an opportunity to make money. Couple that with the fact that there was very little print info about compound/release shooting in the era they came along, this is where opportunity and innovation meet. A couple of guys came up with some plausible theories and sold them. Since the general public was pretty well un-informed regarding some of their voo-doo their stuff sold. It became the commonly held belief. 

Meanwhile, the "Guru's" didn't shoot competitively for years. Equipment advanced, training got better, people talked, the internet came along to aid in the sharing of info. Poof........we wake up 10-15 years later and a lot of the voo-doo those guys sold (which may have been ok a the time) is really, really flawed and outdated in the current competitive archery culture. 

It's pretty much a natural progression. Sad thing is; some of those _guys_ are still promoting their smoke n mirrors. But then again, it's the good old USofA and they have the right. Just like those whom have progressed, improved and innovated have the right to sell the new ideas. Ain't it great.

Sadly, the casual user kind of gets caught in the crossfire. Could be kind of confusing to some I suppose. 

:cheers:


----------



## Padgett

The beauty is the same guy that took a e35 parallel limb bow and made shoot downs in last years top indoor stuff also took it and went on to win some asa 3d and another shooter of the year. It is this guy who has opened the one door that has up to now been triple locked and nailed shut and braced with steel bars and you are dang right that me and many other guys have jumped through that door never to look back.


----------



## Lazarus

Padgett said:


> The beauty is the same guy that took a e35 parallel limb bow and made shoot downs in last years top indoor stuff also took it and went on to win some asa 3d and another shooter of the year. It is this guy who has opened the one door that has up to now been triple locked and nailed shut and braced with steel bars and you are dang right that me and many other guys have jumped through that door never to look back.


Amen to that. :cheers:


----------



## Padgett

For me I am a performance driver person and I am not scared of my body, I trust that I have some shooting talent and that my body can do what I ask it to do and give me good feed back. This confidence in my body has given me the ability to have a open mind and approach to my shooting instead of being scared to try things, so many guys told me to be scared of my index finger release and never shoot it again and only shoot the hinge. The have told me to be scared of anything but back tension to fire my hinge and never shoot it any other way. They have told me that I should be scared to be proficient in different methods and scrap all of them but one and only shoot that method. They have told me that any conscious thought anywhere at any time should be avoided and to be honest I am sick and tired of people trying to convince me to be scared of my body and my mind.

I still remember back when I started winning local tournaments making a simple goal, I wanted to shoot higher scores because a guy Blake Allen was beating me every freaking time he showed up to a tournament by about 10 points. My goal was to shoot 35 out of the 40 targets without flinching, this was a lofty goal and I had set it really high and that season I think that I only met that goal one time. I was shooting a index finger scott silverhorn at the time.

This year I shot all 7 of the asa tournaments and that is 40 shots per which is 280 shots and I have forgotten the exact number but I believe I was right at 277 good executions for the season. Funny thing is that one of the three or so poor executions actually resulted in a 12 on the target but it was totally luck.

That little goal that I made back when I was totally just squeezing the trigger was by a shooter who knew nothing about float or back tension or lan2 or yielding or subconscious shooting, he was just a shooter who knew that 10 or so flinches per round that sent arrows 3 or 4 inches to the left or right of a 12 ring weren't helping the cause. Right now for me shooting is more enjoyable than I ever expected it to be because I just execute good shots, accuracy isn't a issue anymore and shooting with really good shooters isn't the issue or a difficult yardage to guess. When it is my turn to shoot I simply execute a good shot and I go write down the score and move onto the next target.


----------



## skynight

I may read all 15 pages later, so this may have been touched on. Back tension was how finger shooters shot recurves before the compound was invented. 
My dad would not own a firearm after coming home from WW2. He was involved in competitive archery in California shortly after the war. When I started shooting his old recurves he repeatedly told me that the proper way to shoot a bow was using back muscles.
Back tension has been around a long time. My dad told me that in the '70s and had not shot for decades at the time.

I always assumed hinges and hook releases were invented to allow this same type of shooting using a release rather than fingers.


----------



## ron w

exactly right. hooks, ledges and hinges were designed to be shot with "back tension" or "rhomboidal contraction" as the primary means of producing the rotation that fires them.
as bows began showing up with much firmer walls, as the bows of today, the concept of producing rotation by wrist or finger manipulation, gained popularity, because of the difficulty of producing rotation against the firm wall. 
rotation through rhomboid contraction can be and still is produced with rhomboid contraction, even with the much firmer walls of todays bows. you just need to figure out how to do it by not trying to pull the release off the string.


----------



## unclejane

ron w said:


> rotation through rhomboid contraction can be and still is produced with rhomboid contraction, even with the much firmer walls of todays bows. you just need to figure out how to do it by not trying to pull the release off the string.


What I do is, using a release with a safety, I start the final part of the shot with the least pressure against the wall to begin with. I try to be light to very light against the wall when I come to anchor. So when I release the safety, I have as much "squish" as I can get to provide room to pull back. If I'm already fairly firm against the wall when I release the safety the bow will fight back quite a bit more.

My Hoyt is more forgiving in this respect than my PSE, so I have to be more attentive to it with the PSE....

LS


----------



## rn3

The release was invented to have a cleaner release from the string, had nothing to do with rotational back tension.


----------



## Lazarus

rn3 said:


> The release was invented to have a cleaner release from the string, had nothing to do with rotational back tension.


Bingo.....:cheers:


----------



## Lazarus

And the hinge was one of the first mechanical variations of the release that was invented to have a cleaner release from the string that had nothing to do with back tension. :thumbs_up

Furthermore, the early hinges had no thumb post, requiring even more hand motion to get them to fire because they couldn't be drawn nearly as close to the fire position as today's hinges.


----------



## rn3

Lazarus said:


> And the hinge was one of the first mechanical variations of the release that was invented to have a cleaner release from the string that had nothing to do with back tension. :thumbs_up
> 
> Furthermore, the early hinges had no thumb post, requiring even more hand motion to get them to fire because they couldn't be drawn nearly as close to the fire position as today's hinges.


Exactly!!


----------



## Padgett

You know Lazarus, I thought the same thing about a hinge with no peg needing to be set much slower to be drawn safely. This fall I took my scott back spin and I removed the peg and I did my hinge setup routine with it one afternoon and I shot with it this way for a week or so, to my surprise it proved to be a very sweet setup where it really didn't have anymore slack in it to provide any extra safety than normal. I loved the smooth and effortless transition from drawing the bow to executing my shot because there was absolutely no wasted motion letting go of the thumb peg. 

My big problem is that my hand gets sore, my whole life I have had tender hands and when I shoot a thumb trigger my index finger gets so freaking sore I just dread shooting it. Same with hinge shooting, by the end of the week even though I enjoyed shooting my hinge this way I stopped because of the discomfort. But I did learn a valuable lesson that learning how to set up a hinge with a peg or without a peg should be done with my hinge setup routine and you can have the best setup without being scared to draw with all fingers equally used.


----------



## EPLC

rn3 said:


> The release was invented to have a cleaner release from the string, had nothing to do with rotational back tension.


This makes complete sense.



ron w said:


> exactly right. hooks, ledges and hinges were designed to be shot with "back tension" or "rhomboidal contraction" as the primary means of producing the rotation that fires them.
> as bows began showing up with much firmer walls, as the bows of today, the concept of producing rotation by wrist or finger manipulation, gained popularity, because of the difficulty of producing rotation against the firm wall.
> rotation through rhomboid contraction can be and still is produced with rhomboid contraction, even with the much firmer walls of todays bows. you just need to figure out how to do it by not trying to pull the release off the string.


You continually post your opinions, assumptions and what some may have told you in 1974 as fact without any physical reference. Please provide the source of this hypothesis. And while I agree that finger shooters have been using some form of back tension forever, they also relax the hand/fingers to release the arrow.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Stanislawski MagMicro Trio, no pulling post. Mine is the large version. Draw with index finger touching thumb, but middle and ring finger aiding (don't want it going off). Anchored and on target I let the index relax so all three fingers are "equal" holding the Mag. Holding with back tension is near always present, so it's a matter of waiting for the release to fire. Only hinge I have I haven't considered selling.


----------



## Mahly

EPLC said:


> You continually post your opinions, assumptions and what some may have told you in 1974 as fact without any physical reference. Please provide the source of this hypothesis. And while I agree that finger shooters have been using some form of back tension forever, they also relax the hand/fingers to release the arrow.





We can go further than that.
Do we have evidence that "the release" was indeed invented to have a cleaner release from the string? 
Do we have evidence what the very first release was?
Could it have OTHER reasons for being invented? (Inventor didn't like holding #60+ pounds of bow back with his fingers?)
No matter WHY the first release was made, we don't seem to have evidence of how the inventor designed the release to be fired. The release and technique have evolved.

You guys know you can have TP shooting fingers too right?


----------



## Lazarus

Mahly said:


> The release and technique have evolved.


That is very true.........and it's evolving into a new era, one where myths aren't promoted as fact. It's techniques are evolving to be much more accurate as well based on pure physics and common sense. :cheers: 

As the rest, the history is kind of off topic so I won't address it.


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> We can go further than that.
> Do we have evidence that "the release" was indeed invented to have a cleaner release from the string?
> Do we have evidence what the very first release was?
> Could it have OTHER reasons for being invented? (Inventor didn't like holding #60+ pounds of bow back with his fingers?)
> No matter WHY the first release was made, we don't seem to have evidence of how the inventor designed the release to be fired. The release and technique have evolved.
> 
> You guys know you can have TP shooting fingers too right?


Exactly my point, unless there is some patent or something else such as an old article there probably is not much hard evidence in existence to back up some of the "stated as fact" opinions we are continually bombarded with. While we can agree that much of what is posted with regard to the history of the release is no more than opinion, assumption or hypothesis... some of these ideas make good sense from a logical perspective when you examine the physical evidence that is available. The Jacobsen article provides a good example of execution with hand manipulation. One could make the hypothesis that this method was common practice at the time and simply an variation of the finger release. While still only a small sample of evidence, it is obvious that there was no hand manipulation taboo in his method.


----------



## Mahly

I can agree with that.
At the same time, I have to believe people from the era when they say they were taught a certain method, and it was common (if not the only method).
I believe that PTB was around in the 70's....possibly earlier. I don't think we will ever know exactly when it started, or when it became the dominant method taught.
I don't think it was ever the ONLY method taught, and I don't think it ever should be.
All we know is that at some point it was taught, and many target archers shot that way....right or wrong.
I choose not to follow that path, but I know it's there.
I suppose if anything is/was a myth, it is that there was only one technique being taught.


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> I can agree with that.
> At the same time, I have to believe people from the era when they say they were taught a certain method, and it was common (if not the only method).
> I believe that PTB was around in the 70's....possibly earlier. I don't think we will ever know exactly when it started, or when it became the dominant method taught.
> I don't think it was ever the ONLY method taught, and I don't think it ever should be.
> All we know is that at some point it was taught, and many target archers shot that way....right or wrong.
> I choose not to follow that path, but I know it's there.
> I suppose if anything is/was a myth, it is that there was only one technique being taught.


Oh I think it's been around for a long time (BT). My question is when someone added the "P" and hand manipulation was made a no-no? I would find it very hard to believe it was "designed" to be that way. My assumption is that what we have been calling PBT came in somewhat later. Hey, the instruction to not move the hand may actually have been a diversion to hold down the competition. Call it what you may, but the possibility exists.


----------



## ron w

as I've said before, my knowledge on the subject is my own proof, I don't need any other "proof". and I don't need some pros idea of how he does it, to model my execution after. what I do I know works and how I learned it, I know is the way it was taught, when I learned it and I have no reason to change, simply because someone does it differently, now.
there's no proof in the fact that manipulation works any better, just because some body wrote an article about how he chooses to execute his release. yet just because it is published documentation, it is automatically assumed and assigned some power of some kind of proof. all it is , is someone's written explanation of how he runs a release.....that provides to proof of anything, what so ever....only evidence that someone used a hinge with finger or wrist manipulation back then....which I already knew. the simple fact that there is more documented account of manipulation than there is about rotational back tension, is because rotational back tension was the understood standard of operation at that time and there was no need to print any documentation about it. by that fact, naturally, there would be more occurrence of articles that exemplify deviations from the standard, such as the Jacobson article.. again ....just because the article exists proves nothing more than an example of one method of release articulation, that is someone's chosen method and "proves" absolutely nothing beyond the premise that an alternative to rotational back tension existed at that time.
there is no question in my mind whether it did, or did not exist at that time, so I don't see where your constant rebuttal of my posts, have any bearing on their content. 
I fully realize you most certainly can have target panic with fingers, just as you most certainly can have target panic with gun.....i'm curious,......what's the significance in that, regarding the content of this thread and your constant rebuttals to my posts ?. this thread is about back tension techniques and hinges, not fingers. please stay on track.


----------



## EPLC

Ron, your knowledge had to come from somewhere. You claim that the hinge and it's predecessors were "designed" to be shot in a very specific manner. How could you possibly state that as fact when it can not possibly be more than your opinion? If it is not just your opinion and you have some source of data to support your claim, then let's hear it, see it, post a link to it, or any other manner with which you would like to present it.


----------



## ron w

what "knowledge" are you talking about ?. I know what I learned and how I learned it. that doesn't need documented proof. someone taught it to me, I didn't just grab it out of thin air.
just because there isn't allot of documented media , doesn't suggest that it didn't exist. as I've said, I need no documentation or source of data, to know that.

if you can't accept that, it's not my problem....i'm not entirely dependent on the internet, or some pros words, for my intelligence.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree....oh well.


----------



## Mahly

EPLC said:


> ...Hey, the instruction to not move the hand may actually have been a diversion to hold down the competition. Call it what you may, but the possibility exists.


Absolutely....although, equally possible is that Ron Jacobsen was doing the exact same thing....however unlikely, it is possible.


----------



## ron w

EPLC, 
like wise,....show me documentation, a link, or some source of data, that states undeniably, that rotational back tension does not exist.......and not some pros opinion, or claim that when he became a pro, he discovered that none of them use back tension.....that, in no way what so ever, "proves" it doesn't exist. 
the fact that there's not much written about it means nothing,.... it simply means , no-one has, or very few, have written about it. 
as for the releases, again, I know that In my area, most people that shot a ledge or a hinge, shot them with rotational back tension and again, that is my knowledge and I don't need to prove it to my self to believe it, nor do I have to read about it on the internet, to know it is fact. whether you choose to believe it or not, matters very little to me.


----------



## Padgett

The biggest and most useful thing that is overlooked is hinge setup, it is over looked for a variety of reasons:

1. A hinge setup routine doesn't come with hinges in the package so people are afraid of them and they over emphasize the effort on the index finger and thumb peg to draw it without punching themselves in the face.

2. They suffer with the first problem I gave and over time they develop bad habits that they perfect so that they can actually shoot it.

3. Hinge setup isn't something that is stressed, shooting methods such as back tension are forced on people instead of getting them off to a good start so they have no idea that they should spend time working on their hinge setup.

4. People actually say "Set it Slow and Forget It", I can't believe how many times I heard this when I first started and the suffering that it caused me and even now that I am a accomplished good hinge shooter i have guys try and tell me to set it slow and forget it. This goes along with poor instruction that causes people to fail.


Hinge setup in the beginning of your shooting allows you to fire the hinge safely and and then also it helps build your foundation of a good grip and fundamentals, then as you progress you continue to work on your hinge setup and you use the speed of the hinge to be a positive part of your hinge shooting that allows you to run a smooth engine and fire your hinge within a nice shot window with what ever method of execution that you want to put your time and effort into.

If you have never done my hinge setup routine I strongly suggest that you make the decision to do so, it is a week of lessons learned that if you haven't done before can be a very good experience even if you have been a hinge shooter for a long time. I do the hinge setup routine with one of my secondary hinges every couple months because it keeps my system honest, I will have a plan for for that hinge to be slower or faster than my competition hinge so that I can shoot earlier or later in my shot window with it and this gives me something to work on that is specific to my needs.

This past season I realized probably around june that I was approaching pro level shooting about 2 seconds into my shot window, my float early in my window was able to stay inside a asa 12 ring at 40 yards for the first 3 seconds of my window and then by second 5 - 7 it was just a average shooter. I had my competition hinge set up to fire about 2 seconds for most of the season which is really fast and I didn't enjoy it but it gave me months of awesome shooting. Now during that time I always knew that I was going to need to work on the second half of my shot window and this fall starting in September I did so by taking one of my hinges and setting it up to fire later in my shot window and I have trained with it for most of the winter indoor sessions that I have done. In the last couple weeks I have shot a couple of 3d shoots and both times I found myself shooting much later in my shot window very strongly compared to last season so my training has worked and I have shifted my really strong shooting from only existing in my early shot window to the entire shot window. 

This growth of my optimal shot window is making my shooting much less stressful and strong because when you are scared that it isn't going to go off or it is going to go off to early or that it needs to go off early all of these things lead to stress that hurts your overall shooting performance. By enjoying my best summer of 3d ever and also finding time to train the second half of my shot window now I am even stronger.

This is what is available to you if you choose to actually take a step back and make the choice to have specific training that attacks the problems that you have instead of just doing the same stinking thing you have been doing. It starts by being honest with your needs and then with the hinge setup routine to get started.


----------



## Mahly

Using that guy's ^^^^^ hinge set-up helped me a LOT!


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> as I've said before, my knowledge on the subject is my own proof, I don't need any other "proof". .





ron w said:


> what "knowledge" are you talking about ?.


See above.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> EPLC,
> like wise,....show me documentation, a link, or some source of data, that states undeniably, that rotational back tension does not exist.......and not some pros opinion, or claim that when he became a pro, he discovered that none of them use back tension.....that, in no way what so ever, "proves" it doesn't exist.
> the fact that there's not much written about it means nothing,.... it simply means , no-one has, or very few, have written about it.
> as for the releases, again, I know that In my area, most people that shot a ledge or a hinge, shot them with rotational back tension and again, that is my knowledge and I don't need to prove it to my self to believe it, nor do I have to read about it on the internet, to know it is fact. whether you choose to believe it or not, matters very little to me.


Never said it didn't exist. My question was: when did it become popular to restrict hand movement within that process?


----------



## jwilson48

Padgett said:


> The biggest and most useful thing that is overlooked is hinge setup, it is over looked for a variety of reasons:
> 
> 1. A hinge setup routine doesn't come with hinges in the package so people are afraid of them and they over emphasize the effort on the index finger and thumb peg to draw it without punching themselves in the face.
> 
> 2. They suffer with the first problem I gave and over time they develop bad habits that they perfect so that they can actually shoot it.
> 
> 3. Hinge setup isn't something that is stressed, shooting methods such as back tension are forced on people instead of getting them off to a good start so they have no idea that they should spend time working on their hinge setup.
> 
> 4. People actually say "Set it Slow and Forget It", I can't believe how many times I heard this when I first started and the suffering that it caused me and even now that I am a accomplished good hinge shooter i have guys try and tell me to set it slow and forget it. This goes along with poor instruction that causes people to fail.
> 
> 
> Hinge setup in the beginning of your shooting allows you to fire the hinge safely and and then also it helps build your foundation of a good grip and fundamentals, then as you progress you continue to work on your hinge setup and you use the speed of the hinge to be a positive part of your hinge shooting that allows you to run a smooth engine and fire your hinge within a nice shot window with what ever method of execution that you want to put your time and effort into.
> 
> If you have never done my hinge setup routine I strongly suggest that you make the decision to do so, it is a week of lessons learned that if you haven't done before can be a very good experience even if you have been a hinge shooter for a long time. I do the hinge setup routine with one of my secondary hinges every couple months because it keeps my system honest, I will have a plan for for that hinge to be slower or faster than my competition hinge so that I can shoot earlier or later in my shot window with it and this gives me something to work on that is specific to my needs.
> 
> This past season I realized probably around june that I was approaching pro level shooting about 2 seconds into my shot window, my float early in my window was able to stay inside a asa 12 ring at 40 yards for the first 3 seconds of my window and then by second 5 - 7 it was just a average shooter. I had my competition hinge set up to fire about 2 seconds for most of the season which is really fast and I didn't enjoy it but it gave me months of awesome shooting. Now during that time I always knew that I was going to need to work on the second half of my shot window and this fall starting in September I did so by taking one of my hinges and setting it up to fire later in my shot window and I have trained with it for most of the winter indoor sessions that I have done. In the last couple weeks I have shot a couple of 3d shoots and both times I found myself shooting much later in my shot window very strongly compared to last season so my training has worked and I have shifted my really strong shooting from only existing in my early shot window to the entire shot window.
> 
> This growth of my optimal shot window is making my shooting much less stressful and strong because when you are scared that it isn't going to go off or it is going to go off to early or that it needs to go off early all of these things lead to stress that hurts your overall shooting performance. By enjoying my best summer of 3d ever and also finding time to train the second half of my shot window now I am even stronger.
> 
> This is what is available to you if you choose to actually take a step back and make the choice to have specific training that attacks the problems that you have instead of just doing the same stinking thing you have been doing. It starts by being honest with your needs and then with the hinge setup routine to get started.


Good info. I've never studied my float until this past month. One of the things I'm struggling with right now is making it more consistent. One shot it will never leave the x, the next it will leave it by 4". One thing I noticed the last time I shot was by applying too much back tension (for me) was making it stay rock steady until right before the shot would break and then the pin would leave the x big time. I've been adding so much I've been reading into my shooting and changing so many things at once had been counter productive. For now, my best shooting has been with some bt, but just barely enough to slow the float. Any more and unless the shot breaks very early my shooting goes to crap...anybody have any opinions on this?


----------



## Mahly

I am convinced we will never have a date...or even a year.
We know from eye witnesses that it existed in the early 70's if not sooner.
We also know from the article posted that not everyone used that technique.
We don't know if when it was a dominant technique, again eye witness reports that at least in some areas it was considered the norm back in the 70's if not sooner.
We have shown that today, numerous techniques still exist, and we have plenty of information on how to use those techniques.
Some choose not to believe in other techniques, and that's fine. Others are happy to play with multiple techniques, and that's fine too.
For those that believe in only one method, ron w said it best. You have to agree to disagree. Nothing wrong with that either.


----------



## ron w

I cannot tell when it became popular, I can only tell you that is the way I and many others learned it in '74 or 75 and the way it was taught . to be honest, I never really learned anything about deliberate manipulatory rotation of a hinge, other than it was not to be done with a good back tension execution . 
if you can't accept that, oh well,..... I can't make you accept it,..... nor do I care if you do or don't, so please quite wasting your time rebutting my posts, it won't change anything and your constant argumentive rebuttals don't adhere to the subject matter of the thread's intent.


----------



## ron w

Mahly, 
I don't believe in only one method, I believe in my "choice" of only one method.


----------



## Mahly

ron w said:


> Mahly,
> I don't believe in only one method, I believe in my "choice" of only one method.


Never said you did. In fact, I know there are posts where you clearly said you knew other methods existed.


----------



## ron w

you're right, my mistake.


----------



## Padgett

jwilson48, you are going through exactly what we have all went through when learning how to shoot a hinge. The key is to learn to execute your shot without allowing the efforts of your firing engine to mess around with your float, the first thing you have to do is recognize what your natural float actually looks like for about 8 seconds of floating. This is done by letting down and having absolutely no intentions of firing, you can't study your float when actually firing a shot.

Once you have done this for a couple weeks you will have a good idea of what your natural float pattern really looks like and then as you run your firing engine you can start finding out what is screwing with it and learn how to eliminate the tendencies that pull your pin off the x or allow it to drop out the bottom of the x. Any little issues that pop up on a regular basis are things that you can choose to work on and eliminate.

For me personally I have learned that taking my thumb off the thumb peg to be a time of transition that causes funny float issues that add to stress that I didn't like so I trained myself to do it so smoothly that my pin doesn't even flutter a little bit.

For me I have shot while just sitting in the valley barely touching the wall and this caused my pin to drop out the bottom on a regular basis, I then began putting back tension into the wall and this pulled my pin off the pin to the right on a regular basis so I learned to pull straight back into the wall and it works really well for me.

I also learned that I absolutely do not want to be half way through a shot and increase my pull into the wall because something isn't happening because this causes my float to jump around. I have a very smooth delivery of back tension during my shot that doesn't change.

I also learned that being in the valley and then starting my firing engine which then pulls into the wall is a bad thing because going from no tension on the wall to applying tension to the wall causes problems with the float. So I come to anchor and as I am settling in on the x I apply a good amount of back tension to the wall and it is a constant amount already applied. So that as I start my firing engine and smoothly pull into the wall the very subtle increase in tension is absorbed by my float and it isn't bothered.


----------



## Padgett

These are the lessons that a person must learn and they are the advanced lessons that are beyond just picking a firing method, Picking a method is something you must do but then you have to dive in and start seeing the personality that that method has and how to deal with it. There are fundamental things such as choosing to sit in the valley or stretching your system into the wall using back tension do do so. Almost all of us believe that having your draw length set perfect so that you can easily apply some back tension to the wall is very important. I don't know one person that is teaching that you should be sitting in the valley.


----------



## redman

super great info from Padgett


----------



## jwilson48

Padgett,

Thanks again. The constant bt is working better for me as well. I had been trying to increase at the same time squeezing middle and ring fingers and it was also causing the hinge to fire at different times probably based on how much bt was there vs how far into the squeeze. Before, by simply pulling into the wall until pin settles, the pin wasn't being pulled away from the x. I'm going to go back to the way I started as I was having much better success


----------



## skynight

rn3 said:


> The release was invented to have a cleaner release from the string, had nothing to do with rotational back tension.


Yes, without a doubt.

The question to me is why hook or ledge and hinge type? Triggers probably release the string cleaner without the rotation.

I have just always assumed it was to replicate the bt finger shot with a cleaner string release.

I'm open to other ideas.


----------



## Lazarus

I know very little for certain. But I do know this;

When it comes to this discussion I place far more value on a mans opinion that is making a living with a bow and arrow over someone's opinion that has never shot higher scores in their life than I did when I was a teenager 40 years ago. Makes perfect sense to me. But as always, to each their own. 

:cheers:

And yes, there's some good info up there Padgett. Thanks for hanging in here when so many have said screw it. :thumbs_up


----------



## SonnyThomas

skynight said:


> Yes, without a doubt.
> 
> The question to me is why hook or ledge and hinge type? Triggers probably release the string cleaner without the rotation.
> 
> I have just always assumed it was to replicate the bt finger shot with a cleaner string release.
> 
> I'm open to other ideas.


Triggers, as referring to thumb releases or index releases?
Index releases offer no means of rotation to fire, but said the index release can be fired with back tension.

Hooks of thumb releases are "stationary" within the head which is part of the handle as is part of or the whole. 

The hook is within the head and the head of the hinge release swivels.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Lazarus said:


> I know very little for certain. But I do know this; When it comes to this discussion I place far more value on a mans opinion that is making a living with a bow and arrow over someone's opinion that has never shot higher scores in their life than I did when I was a teenager 40 years ago. Makes perfect sense to me. But as always, to each their own.


And you've progressed to National podium status or Pro? Just asking.... I think I asked in one post who were national winners or something like, but no reply..... Can't remember if I put this in, but really at even state level a state champion is only noted/recognized if his or her or some organization wants to use the individual as PR or example.


----------



## Padgett

If I continue to get better which is my hope then great, if I am as good as I am going to get then sweet because I absolutely love my present shooting ability. I just love the things that archery talk has given me over the last few years and if I can help some other people enjoy their shooting as much as me than great.

But not for one moment has any of our discussions lately bothered me, I have been nothing but proud of where we are heading and it is only going to get better.


----------



## Padgett

I must have missed any requests for me to dish out my lack of national championships or world records, I have none Sonny.


----------



## Mahly

All that REALLY matters, is "will (or even can) it help me?".
Using some new techniques (thanx Padgett) I am shooting better. That's all I ask.


----------



## JV NC

I received my first hinge release, today. I guess I'll go read this thread now (or, maybe I shouldn't!).

First time I drew it at the bale, I couldn't make it fire. Since then, it's completely surprising. 

I will say the little click is unnerving!


----------



## grantmac

JV NC said:


> I received my first hinge release, today. I guess I'll go read this thread now (or, maybe I shouldn't!).
> 
> First time I drew it at the bale, I couldn't make it fire. Since then, it's completely surprising.
> 
> I will say the little click is unnerving!


Go directly here:
http://padgettarchery.com/

I recommend a string bow before you start with your actual bow.

-Grant


----------



## JV NC

Why do you recommend a string bow?

What's the purpose of it?


----------



## Mahly

Let's you practice without the stress or danger of using s real bow.

Just use a bit of string with a loop at the end, draw to your anchor, and learn to use the hinge before using the hinge.


----------



## JV NC

I guess I'm not understanding where all the fear is. That's all. It doesn't seem that difficult.


----------



## Mahly

Apparently for you... It's in the click


----------



## SonnyThomas

Padgett said:


> I must have missed any requests for me to dish out my lack of national championships or world records, I have none Sonny.


It wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, just a question as to remind us that none us are super stars of archery.... Like where have I excelled? At club 3Ds and state sanctioned events. Obligations, I attended 2 National 3Ds and disliked both (4 hours per day for 2 days to shoot 40 targets. 6 hours to shoot 30 targets.) I won't go again. I'd rather be wore out from shooting than wore out from waiting....


----------



## grantmac

The click should be comforting, not unnerving.

It's not difficult but like anything else it needs repetition and experimentation. When I started I carried my hinge and string everywhere. I must have "shot" it 100 times for every arrow that went down range.

-Grant


----------



## bowfisher

Mahly said:


> All that REALLY matters, is "will (or even can) it help me?".
> Using some new techniques (thanx Padgett) I am shooting better. That's all I ask.


:thumbs_up


----------



## Lazarus

SonnyThomas said:


> And you've progressed to National podium status or Pro?


Not sure how that applies to me being smart enough to listen to one of the best shooters in the world rather than someone who has never shot better in their lives than I did when I was 16, but since you asked I'll be glad to tell you, briefly, 

Had been out of competitive archery for an extended period until about 5 years ago. Upon re-entering I shot a few rubber deer and was totally uninspired by that. Set a goal three years ago to be the best Senior shooter in the U.S. Shot two target tournaments last year as a litmus test. Won them both. The Mo State Target Championship and the Mo Show Me Target Championship (both as a Senior.) Wasn't shooting near as good then as I am now. I plan to pay my Pro dues before the Yankton First Dakota Classic. And that's all I'm gonna say about it. In my world walk is walk and talk is talk, and walk talks a lot better than talk walks. 

:cheers:


----------



## Rick!

JV NC said:


> Why do you recommend a string bow?
> 
> What's the purpose of it?





Mahly said:


> Let's you practice without the stress or danger of using s real bow.
> 
> Just use a bit of string with a loop at the end, draw to your anchor, and learn to use the hinge before using the hinge.


A string bow is a great aid in becoming acquainted with your new release. You can learn what hand angle works best for you. You can feel what happens when you adjust the cam or moon. When you play with it enough, you can also get a very good idea of where your anchor works best with the release, hence giving you a real good hint at a draw length/d loop combination to emulate on your bow. 
I still use a string bow for practice - 1/8" nylon cord with a d-loop tied on it.


----------



## JV NC

The click was unnerving for the simple reason of ........every time I've ever heard a click before, the arrow was sent down range. 

That is all I meant.


----------



## Mahly

Ahhhh. I misunderstood you. For many, they get spooked by the click as they use it while aiming.
All too common an issue.


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> I am convinced we will never have a date...or even a year.
> We know from eye witnesses that it existed in the early 70's if not sooner.
> We also know from the article posted that not everyone used that technique.
> We don't know if when it was a dominant technique, again eye witness reports that at least in some areas it was considered the norm back in the 70's if not sooner.
> We have shown that today, numerous techniques still exist, and we have plenty of information on how to use those techniques.
> Some choose not to believe in other techniques, and that's fine. Others are happy to play with multiple techniques, and that's fine too.
> For those that believe in only one method, ron w said it best. You have to agree to disagree. Nothing wrong with that either.


If we are talking about PBT as defined as: "Using the back muscles exclusively to execute the hinge style release or it's predecessors", then I respectfully disagree that there is any logic that can support PBT (as defined) being taught in the early 70's. The release, in crude form was around from at least 1950 but gained little popularity until the mid to late 60's. In 1962 any release with moving parts was banned from NFAA competition. This was reaffirmed in 1971. Also in 1971 The American Archery Council's equipment committee submitted a recommendation that would outlaw the release, the compound bow, and in the case of barebow shooters, string walking. The release of the early to mid 70's was a crude, mostly homemade mix of different ideas. The rope spike, the predecessor to the hinge was the latest rage among some of the top shooters in the early 70's. In 1974 the first hinge was introduced. These are facts. 

To assume a specific method of execution such as PBT was being taught in a widespread fashion in the mid 70's is a stretch as best due to the newness and minimal popularity of the release. It's more likely that the release was simply being executed using a modified version of the finger release, which certainly included back tension along with some form of finger manipulation... I believe it is more logical to believe that the method of execution that Bob Jacobsen described in detail was more likely to be the "pure" method of execution using back tension of that period. It is also reasonable to assume that the "eye witness" accounts of being taught "PBT" (as defined above) back then are really a mishmash of different methods with the term back tension associated with each of them. The claim that "I learned back tension back then" could, and I have to assume mean a lot of different things.


----------



## Mahly

That would all make sense if we based the origin of PBT on the invention of the hinge.
I have heard that shooting a spike or ledge was done in the same in the same manner
I have never shot those style releases, but knew several who did (and continued to well into the mid-late 80s).
Now of course, for this discussion, that is only hearsay, as I can only relay what I heard back then.
In any case, it's safe to say it was in place in the mid 70s, if not sooner. Again we aren't going to find an exact date. But we can trace it back around 40 years.


----------



## EPLC

Didn't say it would be exclusive to the hinge as I did also mention it's predecessors. Also, I think the definition of PBT we have established would not fit the 70's or sooner assumption. It certainly would not be used to shoot a finger release and I would find it very difficult to believe the execution methods used for early releases were not just variations of finger shooting methods. I also would find it very difficult to rotate the elbow around and back to shoot a recurve or longbow without relaxing the hand/fingers. I think I would want to pull straight back while relaxing the fingers.

6. Relax the fingers of your right hand to let the string slip past them. This prevents the bow from jumping or lurching, which will throw off your shot. ~ from WikiHow http://www.wikihow.com/Shoot-an-English-Long-Bow


----------



## Mahly

True, but it's very hard to hold the string horizontally with fingers. The rotation would then be the elbow going down vs. back.
Other than that, I think the technique leads itself to any T handled release.


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> True, but it's very hard to hold the string horizontally with fingers. The rotation would then be the elbow going down vs. back.
> Other than that, I think the technique leads itself to any T handled release.


The point being, finger manipulation is a necessary step in the process.


----------



## grantmac

With a recurve the arm is generally in front of the line at the transfer and then BT brings it into line at the moment of the clicker break, in an ideal world. Continuous movement is the process. Same deal when shooting barebow without the clicker except that the release is a bit more commanded via finger relaxation.

Where I'm going is this: rotational expansion works with a recurve because it's used to get inline and set draw length. Doesn't work so hot when you are against a wall in my experience.

-Grant


----------



## unclejane

grantmac said:


> With a recurve the arm is generally in front of the line at the transfer and then BT brings it into line at the moment of the clicker break, in an ideal world. Continuous movement is the process. Same deal when shooting barebow without the clicker except that the release is a bit more commanded via finger relaxation.
> 
> Where I'm going is this: rotational expansion works with a recurve because it's used to get inline and set draw length. Doesn't work so hot when you are against a wall in my experience.
> 
> -Grant


Actually, I'm finding it works the same way on compound. The only exception is you're a little less out of line at the start and the movement to get into line is less pronounced. But yes a less hard back wall can certainly help, though, and of course you have to have your draw length set pretty close to right. Well, you do anyway I suppose...

But with my Supra Max, which has what I'd call a medium hard back wall, there's plenty of squish to pull right round into it and have the release pop off. What I do is settle very lightly on the wall when I release the safety. Then I just pull straight back and the induced rotation takes care of it.

LS


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> Didn't say it would be exclusive to the hinge as I did also mention it's predecessors. Also, I think the definition of PBT we have established would not fit the 70's or sooner assumption.


Found a 1970 era passage that noted "true back tension." Will try to relocate...only went through 40 or so links...:sad:

So much about the hinge, but "Terry Ragsdale shot back to back perfect FITA rounds in Vegas and Cobo Hall, with a $15.00, Hotshot, thumb release in 1978." So how did he do with a Hot Shot before and after?


----------



## bseltzer

SonnyThomas said:


> Found a 1970 era passage that noted "true back tension." Will try to relocate...only went through 40 or so links...:sad:


Funny... That's what was being taught almost universally in the early '60's when I first began this journey at the age of 13. That, and releasing the shot by relaxation of the drawing forearm, allowing the string to seemingly spontaneously pull itself right through your fingers. In the 50 some odd years since then, these basics have always worked for me. To be sure, they have required adjustments to accommodate new equipment geometries, but the fundamentals of execution haven't changed significantly in half a century. At least not for me, and certainly not with the advent of the hinge release. 

Like I said, "At least not for me..." I have no supporting documentation, no credentials of any significance, nothing but my own, anecdotal experience. And no desire or compulsion to proselytize. I make *no* claims that this is the right way, and it sure as hell is *not* the "only" right way. It is simply a way that works for me. It's simple, easily reproduced, with predictable results for a simple soul such as mine. Maybe, I'm too "simple" to understand the deep mysteries of "pure back tension". I do know, however, what my experience has taught me over more time than most of you understand. I also know that experience is relevant only to me. And I'm OK with me. Now the rest of y'all... 

Seems to me, old man Ecclesiastes was on to something... See 1:9 

Just my 2¢. He said, stepping quietly to the far side of the bar...


----------



## Sasquech

Here wea are approaching 450 posts when it is apparent Ron laz elpc Padgett will never condense this is a fruitless exercise I challenge each of the major players to post slow motion video of their shot two angles behind looking down range and front perp to shooting lane get elbow to front hand.


----------



## ron w

what seems to be widely misunderstood in this thread, amongst the detractors, is that the specific method of "rotational back tension" as a firing engine existed before the introduction of the hinge and that the hinge was designed, as a progressional improvement to accommodate that method of firing engine, that already existed for the commonly used spikes and ledges. the method was not developed, because the hinge was introduced, the hinge was invented because the method already existed.
the unfortunate aspect to this is that there isn't much documentation regarding the method from that time and in the eyes of those who are so reliant internet or documented "proof", it appears to them, that if there is no documentation,...it must not have existed.
you realize,....knowledge didn't exist, before the internet appeared.


----------



## EPLC

bseltzer said:


> Funny... That's what was being taught almost universally in the early '60's when I first began this journey at the age of 13. That, and releasing the shot by relaxation of the drawing forearm, allowing the string to seemingly spontaneously pull itself right through your fingers. In the 50 some odd years since then, these basics have always worked for me. To be sure, they have required adjustments to accommodate new equipment geometries, but the fundamentals of execution haven't changed significantly in half a century. At least not for me, and certainly not with the advent of the hinge release.
> 
> Like I said, "At least not for me..." I have no supporting documentation, no credentials of any significance, nothing but my own, anecdotal experience. And no desire or compulsion to proselytize. I make *no* claims that this is the right way, and it sure as hell is *not* the "only" right way. It is simply a way that works for me. It's simple, easily reproduced, with predictable results for a simple soul such as mine. Maybe, I'm too "simple" to understand the deep mysteries of "pure back tension". I do know, however, what my experience has taught me over more time than most of you understand. I also know that experience is relevant only to me. And I'm OK with me. Now the rest of y'all...
> 
> Seems to me, old man Ecclesiastes was on to something... See 1:9
> 
> Just my 2¢. He said, stepping quietly to the far side of the bar...


Just to be perfectly clear I take no exception to the quote above, in fact I fully support it as it requires a form of hand manipulation, combined with back tension, to execute the shot. I'm sure this technique has been around forever. That said: My question, issue and problem is with the "CHEATING THE HINGE" supporters. No more, no less.


----------



## Lazarus

Sasquech said:


> Here wea are approaching 450 posts when it is apparent Ron laz elpc Padgett will never condense this is a fruitless exercise I challenge each of the major players to post Solomon ideo of their shot two angles behind looking down range and front perp to shooting lane get elbow to front hand.


I'll see what I can do. The five minutes it took me to decipher this message is five minutes of my life I'll never get back. I could have shot 10 arrows in that down time. :teeth:


----------



## montigre

Sasquech said:


> Here wea are approaching 450 posts when it is apparent Ron laz elpc Padgett will never condense this is a fruitless exercise I challenge each of the major players to post Solomon ideo of their shot two angles behind looking down range and front perp to shooting lane get elbow to front hand.


Sasq, That response must have been posted on your phone, or your're the reincarnation of OBT---need a decoder ring to figure it out...lol!!


----------



## EPLC

EPLC said:


> Just to be perfectly clear I take no exception to the quote above, in fact I fully support it as it requires a form of hand manipulation, combined with back tension, to execute the shot. I'm sure this technique has been around forever. That said: My question, issue and problem is with the "CHEATING THE HINGE" supporters. No more, no less.


Let me take this one step farther because I believe the separate argument that PBT is a myth is not an argument that can be won and only serves to cloud the real issue. Therefore I can not support it. I say this because this argument only serves to entrench the many folks out there that have been taught various methods that support the use of back tension. This entrenchment only serves to polarize and create tunnel vision in those that you are trying to convince. As a result they can not see past this point.

What I "AM" against is the demand, edict, notion and/or posting that claims PBT (as defined: BT with no hand manipulation) is the only "TRUE" and/or "PURE" method to shoot a hinge or any other release. To take a position that any type of hand assistance is "CHEATING THE HINGE" is not PBT, it is actually PBS... I also do not support the notion that "PBT" (as defined above) has been around as long as people are claiming as the notion that hand manipulation is taboo is a release related notion and releases were very much still in their infancy in the 1970's. To assume a very strict set of instructions was available along with the introduction of the hinge is not logically supported. The only way this would be possible would be if the original hinge was supported with a specific instruction sheet that spelled this out. I am open to the remote possibility that this document may have existed but I'd have to see one to believe it. Am I perfectly clear?


----------



## SonnyThomas

Well, I already said if it works it's not cheating the hinge. People I know who use back tension say the same thing, it's not cheating the hinge. ASA Senior Pro TY; "Can't be wrong if you're placing and winning."

Seems all this squabble is prolonged by only a few. Let it drop and it'll go away. If some one enters Inter/Advan to ask for help with a hinge then give the methods used and let the inquirer choose. No BS, straight talk. No pointing out something someone replies being wrong...Add positively or don't reply at all.....


----------



## EPLC

grantmac said:


> With a recurve the arm is generally in front of the line at the transfer and then BT brings it into line at the moment of the clicker break, in an ideal world. Continuous movement is the process. Same deal when shooting barebow without the clicker except that the release is a bit more commanded via finger relaxation.
> 
> Where I'm going is this: rotational expansion works with a recurve because it's used to get inline and set draw length. Doesn't work so hot when you are against a wall in my experience.
> 
> -Grant


This still requires some form of finger relaxation, movement and or manipulation. And yes, relaxation does count as manipulation. You lock your fingers to draw. You relax your fingers to shoot. As far as rotation goes, I support that it is bad form to draw using it. The following link is Alistair Whittingham's method, which I support 100%... I suggest everyone take a look at it -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5BYtDLFcKM&list=PLAVFmM4j7zpa1SLMJlmlJ1wtXexZtJS6S&index=7


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> What I "AM" against is the demand, edict, notion and/or posting that claims PBT (as defined: BT with no hand manipulation) is the only "TRUE" and/or "PURE" method to shoot a hinge or any other release.


Nobody is issuing any such edict, notion or posting and, to my knowledge, no one ever has. You're engaging in a form of "straw manning"; you're seeing something that isn't there. I agree that "cheating the hinge" is probably a misnomer for PBT - it likely refers to something else.


> I also do not support the notion that "PBT" (as defined above) has been around as long as people are claiming as the notion that hand manipulation is taboo is a release related notion and releases were very much still in their infancy in the 1970's. To assume a very strict set of instructions was available along with the introduction of the hinge is not logically supported. The only way this would be possible would be if the original hinge was supported with a specific instruction sheet that spelled this out. I am open to the remote possibility that this document may have existed but I'd have to see one to believe it. Am I perfectly clear?


You're quite right to not accept PBT diachronically, since there's really no satisfactory way to answer your original question or truly illuminate its full history. In the absence of confirming evidence, witholding belief in the claim is the right strategy. However, if you were to deny that it exists today - that is if you supported Laz's "myth" argument - you would be flat wrong (but I don't think this is your position at this point).

You definitely *are* flat wrong to continue to complain that you're being bullied, coerced, etc. towards any particular technique. Nobody is doing any of that to you and no one ever has. That problem is yours and yours alone.

LS


----------



## EPLC

unclejane said:


> Nobody is issuing any such edict, notion or posting and, to my knowledge, no one ever has. You're engaging in a form of "straw manning"; you're seeing something that isn't there. I agree that "cheating the hinge" is probably a misnomer for PBT - it likely refers to something else.
> 
> You're quite right to not accept PBT diachronically, since there's really no satisfactory way to answer your original question. In the absence of confirming evidence, witholding belief in the claim is the right strategy. However, if you were to deny that it exists today - that is if you supported Laz's "myth" argument - you would be flat wrong (but I don't think this is your position at this point).
> 
> You definitely *are* flat wrong to continue to complain that you're being bullied, coerced, etc. towards any particular technique. Nobody is doing any of that to you and no one ever has. That problem is yours and yours alone.
> 
> LS


See below... And there are many more examples. 



ron w said:


> "squeeze and pull, is entirely wrong in respect to using a hinge with the standard engine being back tension.
> the "squeezing" is an entirely, consciously regulated muscle action, that does exactly opposite what a hinge and back tension, is supposed to do. it is precisely the definition of "cheating an hinge off". it is exactly contrary to the entire reason hinges were developed to be fired with back tension.
> I challenge anyone here to prove me wrong and I will gladly participate in a long discussion, revealing the reason why.


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> This still requires some form of finger relaxation, movement and or manipulation. And yes, relaxation does count as manipulation. You lock your fingers to draw. You relax your fingers to shoot. As far as rotation goes, I support that it is bad form to draw using it. The following link is Alistair Whittingham's method, which I support 100%... I suggest everyone take a look at it -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5BYtDLFcKM&list=PLAVFmM4j7zpa1SLMJlmlJ1wtXexZtJS6S&index=7


But notice you still can't draw a bow completely without rotation (LAN2 I believe it's called), even with AW's method. It's physically not really possible. I use the same method and am able to take advantage of that fact - PBT definitely works for me as a meta-firing-engine....

LS


----------



## EPLC

unclejane said:


> But notice you can't draw a bow completely without rotation (LAN2 I believe it's called), even with AW's method. I use the same method and PBT definitely works for me.
> 
> LS


I support Alistair's process 100%... you read into it whatever you want.


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> See below... And there are many more examples.


So far you've only produced this one quote from ron w, with whom you seem to have an axe to grind. And, I believe, ron had the gumption to even reverse the hardness of his stand on this comment later. So I'm highly skeptical - please produce some bullying, coercing posts directed specifically at you. PS: I have no investment in this - if you produce real evidence I'll change my mind. But like you with the history of BT, I withhold belief in your claim until you prove it.

LS


----------



## unclejane

EPLC said:


> I support Alistair's process 100%... you read into it whatever you want.


I see. So now all of a sudden AW's method vis-a-vis rotation of the back end is a matter of interpretation then? I thought you were offering this as not open to interpretation? You declare rotation as "bad form". Which is it? Hint: if you expect others to be consistent in their claims, you also need to be similarly consistent in your rebuttals.

LS


----------



## Mahly

EPLC said:


> Let me take this one step farther because I believe the separate argument that PBT is a myth is not an argument that can be won and only serves to cloud the real issue. Therefore I can not support it. I say this because this argument only serves to entrench the many folks out there that have been taught various methods that support the use of back tension. This entrenchment only serves to polarize and create tunnel vision in those that you are trying to convince. As a result they can not see past this point.
> 
> What I "AM" against is the demand, edict, notion and/or posting that claims PBT (as defined: BT with no hand manipulation) is the only "TRUE" and/or "PURE" method to shoot a hinge or any other release. To take a position that any type of hand assistance is "CHEATING THE HINGE" is not PBT, it is actually PBS... I also do not support the notion that "PBT" (as defined above) has been around as long as people are claiming as the notion that hand manipulation is taboo is a release related notion and releases were very much still in their infancy in the 1970's. To assume a very strict set of instructions was available along with the introduction of the hinge is not logically supported. The only way this would be possible would be if the original hinge was supported with a specific instruction sheet that spelled this out. I am open to the remote possibility that this document may have existed but I'd have to see one to believe it. Am I perfectly clear?







ron w said:


> exactly right...
> *there are more than one method*, some are better than others, but none the less... different in their own way. one person believes and relies on one method and has confidence in that choice, while someone else prefers a different method. that doesn't mean that one person is not allowed to speak his/her mind *about the method* he/she prefers.....as some people on this thread seem to want.


"Cheating the hinge" applies to the PBT method. You can not have hand manipulation _using that technique_, perhaps the more accurate term is "cheating the technique"

Ron posted that first quote in October, and has since said there are OTHER techniques.

I see no one left that is saying the other techniques do not exist

Whether it started in the 60's or if Larry Wise started it, the fact is, right now, we have a multitude of methods for shooting a hinge. No one is saying (what someone said in the past might not be what they are saying now) you must shoot the hinge 1 way, at least not that PBT is the only way. To use the PBT method, you can not manipulate the hinge...otherwise your not using the PBT method.


----------



## Mahly

Sasquech said:


> Here wea are approaching 450 posts when it is apparent Ron laz elpc Padgett will never condense this is a fruitless exercise I challenge each of the major players to post slow motion video of their shot two angles behind looking down range and front perp to shooting lane get elbow to front hand.


fixed


----------



## RCR_III

Sasquech said:


> Here wea are approaching 450 posts when it is apparent Ron laz elpc Padgett will never condense this is a fruitless exercise I challenge each of the major players to post slow motion video of their shot two angles behind looking down range and front perp to shooting lane get elbow to front hand.


Hey I'll play along and see if it encourages anyone else to join in. I have already shot the video in the past actually. It's on my website and is under the article about release execution I wrote. Website link is in my signature.


----------



## grantmac

EPLC said:


> This still requires some form of finger relaxation, movement and or manipulation. And yes, relaxation does count as manipulation. You lock your fingers to draw. You relax your fingers to shoot. As far as rotation goes, I support that it is bad form to draw using it. The following link is Alistair Whittingham's method, which I support 100%... I suggest everyone take a look at it -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5BYtDLFcKM&list=PLAVFmM4j7zpa1SLMJlmlJ1wtXexZtJS6S&index=7


Totally with you on the finger manipulation, especially for barebow. With Oly if you start relaxing the fingers too soon you can get severely stuck trying to break the clicker.
I'm not 100% on Alistair for recurve execution since there are excellent examples of pullers, pushers and pull/push executioners at the highest level of recurve competition. I know for me I am a rotational draw, static front-end shooter who prefers a low-wrist position for Barebow recurve. But I am a linear draw, medium-wrist shooter with a compound.



unclejane said:


> So far you've only produced this one quote from ron w, with whom you seem to have an axe to grind. And, I believe, ron had the gumption to even reverse the hardness of his stand on this comment later. So I'm highly skeptical - please produce some bullying, coercing posts directed specifically at you. PS: I have no investment in this - if you produce real evidence I'll change my mind. But like you with the history of BT, I withhold belief in your claim until you prove it.


You simply weren't around here even 3 years ago when any mention of hand manipulation would result in a verbal smack-down of that technique. Believe me when I say we are currently posting in a Golden Age of enlightenment here on AT as far as hinge execution is concerned.

-Grant


----------



## Lazarus

grantmac said:


> Totally with you on the finger manipulation, especially for barebow. With Oly if you start relaxing the fingers too soon you can get severely stuck trying to break the clicker.
> I'm not 100% on Alistair for recurve execution since there are excellent examples of pullers, pushers and pull/push executioners at the highest level of recurve competition. I know for me I am a rotational draw, static front-end shooter who prefers a low-wrist position for Barebow recurve. But I am a linear draw, medium-wrist shooter with a compound.
> 
> 
> Believe me when I say we are currently posting in a Golden Age of enlightenment here on AT as far as hinge execution is concerned.
> 
> -Grant


Yep, and the mis-information just keeps cropping up. Old prejudices die very hard, very hard. 

I read a quote by Mark Twain the other day, it said; "It's easier to fool people than it is to convince people they have been fooled." That is exactly what has happened with this back tension as a firing method debate. 

It's great to see this all coming down. Hopefully in the next week or so I can share some of the phone conversations, emails, etc that I have been party to about release execution/firing methods because of this discussion. There's some really good stuff, all coming from top shooters. 

:cheers:


----------



## Padgett

I had a person ask me to post some of my 5-spot targets and vegas targets so they could see how I was shooting and now we are wanting videos, I am just a amateur and have nothing but a bunch of local wins and some podiums and top ten finishes at the national level in my 3d classes. All you are going to see is a overweight 45 year old school teacher who wears suspenders with pretty good form and a bowtech specialist with 150,000 shots through it. Exciting stuff. You would be better off watching Jesse Broadwater.


----------



## bowfisher

Lazarus said:


> Yep, and the mis-information just keeps cropping up. Old prejudices die very hard, very hard.
> 
> I read a quote by Mark Twain the other day, it said; "It's easier to fool people than it is to convince people they have been fooled." That is exactly what has happened with this back tension as a firing method debate.
> 
> It's great to see this all coming down. *Hopefully in the next week or so I can share some of the phone conversations, emails, etc that I have been party to about release execution/firing methods because of this discussion. There's some really good stuff, all coming from top shooters*.
> 
> :cheers:


:thumbs_up


----------



## bseltzer

Padgett said:


> All you are going to see is a overweight 45 year old school teacher who wears suspenders with pretty good form and a bowtech specialist with 150,000 shots through it.


See now, there's bad technique right there! Everybody knows you can't possibly execute pure belly tension while wearing suspenders. You may fool yourself with that technique, but in reality you're just cheating the belt. :eyebrows:


----------



## EPLC

RCR_III said:


> Hey I'll play along and see if it encourages anyone else to join in. I have already shot the video in the past actually. It's on my website and is under the article about release execution I wrote. Website link is in my signature.


I can see the increasing pressure on the middle and ring fingers. This firing engine is one I'm currently perfecting as I also had some collapsing issues with just relaxing the thumb and index. A combination of the two while maintaining BT seems to be working out better. I've also switched releases twice in the past couple of weeks which adds to the confusion


----------



## unclejane

grantmac said:


> You simply weren't around here even 3 years ago when any mention of hand manipulation would result in a verbal smack-down of that technique. Believe me when I say we are currently posting in a Golden Age of enlightenment here on AT as far as hinge execution is concerned.
> 
> -Grant


Well 3 years would seem to me to be plenty of time to get over it, then? I mean, here in 2015 I don't see anyone assaulting EPLC or anyone else for whatever firing engine they're using. Someone just disagreeing with you isn't coercing or bullying you, only the individual can make that inference from simple criticism and that's not the fault of the critic.

I agree tho we're in a Golden Age. We have more techniques and technology available to us now than ever before, and that's a good thing for sure.

LS


----------



## SonnyThomas

grantmac said:


> Believe me when I say we are currently posting in a Golden Age of enlightenment here on AT as far as hinge execution is concerned.
> 
> -Grant


What we have here in Inter/Advan is garbage. This was Golden. Disagreements, "expansion of discussion," but slamming anyone like here in Inter/Advan - http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1676924


----------



## ron w

there's been nothing new about hinge management since only a few years after they were introduced. people used every conceivable method of rotation there is today, as far back as I can remember. the confusion lies in the fact that when someone declares their preferential method and it's teachings, a number of people on this forum, immediately assume the "chip on their shoulder" attitude that the poster means, it is their way or the high way. 
the fact is, that except for a very few people on here, barely anyone was either, old enough to be shooting back then or, didn't start shooting until well after that time. even 18 to 20 years ago, is only half way back, to the time i'm speaking about. consequently, they would not know anything, or at best, very little about it's history, other than what has been documented, and there unfortunately, isn't much documented about "true rotational back tension" for some reason other than what I mentioned earlier ( I have no other explanation for the absence of documentation), so in the same spirit of that attitude, they assume it is just opinion and conjecture, because evidently they need to have some sort of documentation, to accept it as factual evidence, simply because they know so very little about it..
another problem with it, is that unless you were around and actively shooting and interested enough to research and learn about the method, issues concerning exposure to the information, what little there was, didn't appear to a lot of them, until they got involved with this forum and of course, information about hinges would only be as old as the forum is, which is only roughly as old, as when they started shooting. 
so it doesn't surprise me that in this age of "internet intelligence", someone might think any information about anything "pre-internet", would be considered either BS, or opinion, or conjecture.
personally, I am very disgusted and offended, that people would assume that something someone posted, would be an untruth or an inaccuracy, simply because they weren't around to learn it, or hear it, when the information was generated.
I guess that's the way internet intelligence works, though........no documented evidence on the net, means it didn't exist.


----------



## Lazarus

SonnyThomas said:


> What we have here in Inter/Advan is garbage. This was Golden. Disagreements, "expansion of discussion," but slamming anyone like here in Inter/Advan - http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1676924


Sonny, in some ways you are correct. There is a little more info available now, plus the info is more refined than it was 3-5 years ago. However there's far fewer people that actually know what they are talking about involved in the discussion here. This is because of the mentality of some of the less experienced and less informed. Therefore the ones that choose to bring nothing to the discussion except their prejudices unfortunately seem to have more of a voice. It kind of sucks. Nevertheless, there's a lot of positive info being shared off these forums because of these discussions. It's kind of sad that the real discussion can't take place publicly. But that's just the nature of the forum anymore I suppose. 

I haven't read the topic that you mentioned for a while, but I remember there is an awesome quote just a few posts in. Mike Leiter says "he has no idea" how his release fires. I love that. That's some of the best info you'll ever get on shooting a hinge from any forum. Somebody with some real credentials admitting he has no idea. Isn't that far more refreshing than someone who's never excelled at the game repeatedly telling you how an act he's never done is performed? 

I'm gonna post a couple of old releases on the other topic in a moment........they aren't hinges. You might like them. :teeth:


----------



## Mahly

*“Back Tension, “ Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!*

I disagree that "real" discussions can't take place publicly.
We can bring videos of pros discussing their techniques, they can post them on their Facebook but they can't have a back and forth discussion?
In the BJ video with Chance, he said there is no wrong way. He can't say that here?
Even without a back and forth, they can surely state their opinion.
What happened in the past with people pushing BPT as the only method to fire a hinge is just that.... In the past.
Rigid denial of alternate techniques is almost universally opposed. NO ONE HERE is saying BPT is the only way.
To the pros that wish to comment, comment. If your worried about being dragged into an argument, it's very easy to simply not play that game.
If someone can not handle someone else questioning their technique, I question the confidence they have in it.

This bickering isn't helping anyone. It did force people to explain their methods in more detail, but I think everyone here has said what they need to say. 

I have closed other threads that have run their course, this one is in line for the same.

Bring something new to the thread, or leave it be.

(NOT directed at one person or group)


----------



## Lazarus

By all means there has been a lot of good stuff brought up here Mahly. Totally agree! 

The point being, not so many people want to wade into the toxicity. I've only hung with it because I'm invested pretty deeply in it. 

As far as closing the topic.........I wouldn't do that. Look at the topic, it's pretty broad, a place to talk about different techniques. Granted, only about one in 5 posts has a nugget in it but that's probably quite a bit better than most area's of the forum.

You want something new? Ok, I learned something new about executing a hinge this morning. I *thought* I had tried every single way to fire a hinge known to man. No, I hadn't. I stumbled onto something this morning that is different than anything I had ever done. It's simply taking my thumb off the peg, relaxing my hand then making the tips of my thumb and ring finger meet while maintaining the relaxed hand. 

I believe the technique may have merit. It's a super fast way to get the hinge to fire I know that. You don't want to meet those two fingers without being on the dot because things are gonna start happening pretty quick! 

There, that's new. At least to me. No it's not "clubbing" the hand that has been talked about here before. Maybe somebody uses this technique. If so, maybe they'll share it's intricacies with us. I'm gonna really work with it. Probably not the cure all of hinge triggering methods, but I'd bet a C note to a dollar that it's one I'll use in some situations! 

:cheers:


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> there's been nothing new about hinge management since only a few years after they were introduced. people used every conceivable method of rotation there is today, as far back as I can remember. the confusion lies in the fact that when someone declares their preferential method and it's teachings, a number of people on this forum, immediately assume the "chip on their shoulder" attitude that the poster means, it is their way or the high way.
> the fact is, that except for a very few people on here, barely anyone was either, old enough to be shooting back then or, didn't start shooting until well after that time. even 18 to 20 years ago, is only half way back, to the time i'm speaking about. consequently, they would not know anything, or at best, very little about it's history, other than what has been documented, and there unfortunately, isn't much documented about "true rotational back tension" for some reason other than what I mentioned earlier ( I have no other explanation for the absence of documentation), so in the same spirit of that attitude, they assume it is just opinion and conjecture, because evidently they need to have some sort of documentation, to accept it as factual evidence, simply because they know so very little about it..
> another problem with it, is that unless you were around and actively shooting and interested enough to research and learn about the method, issues concerning exposure to the information, what little there was, didn't appear to a lot of them, until they got involved with this forum and of course, information about hinges would only be as old as the forum is, which is only roughly as old, as when they started shooting.
> so it doesn't surprise me that in this age of "internet intelligence", someone might think any information about anything "pre-internet", would be considered either BS, or opinion, or conjecture.
> personally, I am very disgusted and offended, that people would assume that something someone posted, would be an untruth or an inaccuracy, simply because they weren't around to learn it, or hear it, when the information was generated.
> I guess that's the way internet intelligence works, though........no documented evidence on the net, means it didn't exist.


First off, it ain't been as you described and as far as having a chip on one's shoulder...hmmm. Just a suggestion: You might try and position your opinions, recollections and conjectures for what they are instead of passing them off as "fact". Example: "The hinge was designed to be fired xxx..." The original intent was xxx..." These would be totally accepted by starting them out with two simple words... "I believe..." When you position something as fact, when in fact it is only opinion, conjecture or recollection of something that you could not possibly know it's sometimes very hard to hold back a response.


----------



## Mahly

*“Back Tension, “ Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!*

_I believe _that is GREAT advice to EVERYONE here. Ron certainly hasn't been alone on that.

P.S. See what I did there


----------



## jwilson48

I get that everyone has their opinion and seems like everyone thinks they need to have the last word. My problem with all this arguing is simple. I am here as a sponge. I am trying to absorb as much useful information I can, and reading through 30 posts to find one person that has any relevant information actually regarding bt techniques instead of who believes what or what is real and what is a unicorn. 

This forum is supposed to be about archers helping archers.

I want to know how to perfect my shooting by learning from as many different people as I can,as many techniques I can, and find what works best for me.


----------



## Lazarus

jwilson, one of the forums best at explaining release techniques is Padgett. If you want to get the real scoop contact him. I'll offer the same thing, I will not BS you, I'm fairly experienced at this but I'm not a "coach" per se although I do/have helped people. Feel free to contact me as well with questions. Also, contact Padgett about his hinge articles. They're worth the read. 

As far as the forum. It's just been going through a bumpy period. It's gonna straighten out soon. :cheers:


----------



## ron w

*“Back Tension, “ Techniques, and Hinges, OH MY!*



Mahly said:


> "Cheating the hinge" applies to the PBT method. You can not have hand manipulation _using that technique_, perhaps the more accurate term is "cheating the technique"
> 
> Ron posted that first quote in October, and has since said there are OTHER techniques.
> 
> I see no one left that is saying the other techniques do not exist
> 
> Whether it started in the 60's or if Larry Wise started it, the fact is, right now, we have a multitude of methods for shooting a hinge. No one is saying (what someone said in the past might not be what they are saying now) you must shoot the hinge 1 way, at least not that PBT is the only way. To use the PBT method, you can not manipulate the hinge...otherwise your not using the PBT method.


 the really comical thing is that, nowhere in any of my posts, did directly state, that there is only one way to do it. all this wasted BS, is completely founded on one or two people's assumptions.


----------



## northern rednek

Tag


----------



## unclejane

ron w said:


> the really comical thing is that, nowhere in any of my posts, did directly state, that there is only one way to do it. all this wasted BS, is completely founded on one or two people's assumptions.


I'd close it. I'm even getting strange tantrums by PM now. The topic has been exhausted, IMO.

LS


----------



## jwilson48

Lazarus said:


> jwilson, one of the forums best at explaining release techniques is Padgett. If you want to get the real scoop contact him. I'll offer the same thing, I will not BS you, I'm fairly experienced at this but I'm not a "coach" per se although I do/have helped people. Feel free to contact me as well with questions. Also, contact Padgett about his hinge articles. They're worth the read.
> 
> As far as the forum. It's just been going through a bumpy period. It's gonna straighten out soon. :cheers:


I have and he definitely got me started out great. It seems like every day I shoot I get better and more confidant in my shooting abilities. I was a good shot with a finger puncher release. Now I'm just trying to get better. I have no intentions of ever shooting national competitions but I love this feeling of improving. the biggest thing I've noticed is my consistency has gotten better. instead of shooting really good once or twice a week it's almost everyday now. I cannot hold a candle to Padgett or several of the guys on this forum that's why I'm constantly trying to improve. 

I'm a hunter first, but I do enjoy shooting my bow immensely.


----------



## carlosii

bseltzer said:


> See now, there's bad technique right there! Everybody knows you can't possibly execute pure belly tension while wearing suspenders. You may fool yourself with that technique, but in reality you're just cheating the belt. :eyebrows:


I thought the exact same thing when I read that.


----------



## carlosii

bseltzer said:


> See now, there's bad technique right there! Everybody knows you can't possibly execute pure belly tension while wearing suspenders. You may fool yourself with that technique, but in reality you're just cheating the belt. :eyebrows:


I thought the exact same thing when I read that.


----------



## carlosii

Mahly said:


> I disagree that "real" discussions can't take place publicly.
> We can bring videos of pros discussing their techniques, they can post them on their Facebook but they can't have a back and forth discussion?
> In the BJ video with Chance, he said there is no wrong way. He can't say that here?
> Even without a back and forth, they can surely state their opinion.
> What happened in the past with people pushing BPT as the only method to fire a hinge is just that.... In the past.
> Rigid denial of alternate techniques is almost universally opposed. NO ONE HERE is saying BPT is the only way.
> To the pros that wish to comment, comment. If your worried about being dragged into an argument, it's very easy to simply not play that game.
> If someone can not handle someone else questioning their technique, I question the confidence they have in it.
> 
> This bickering isn't helping anyone. It did force people to explain their methods in more detail, but *I think everyone here has said what they need to say. *
> 
> I have closed other threads that have run their course, this one is in line for the same.
> 
> Bring something new to the thread, or leave it be.
> 
> (NOT directed at one person or group)


Or as Robert Earle Keene wrote, "The road goes on forever and the party never ends". Right? :jazzmatazzes:


----------



## Padgett

You guys suck, my buddies give me crap about my suspenders and my sockets on my stabilizers and every breath I take and archery talk is supposed to be my safe haven. 

One thing I love to do is go back and find some of my first posts here on archery talk and actually see where I really was as a shooter, I see a guy that wanted to shoot well but had no knowledge to lean on and take care of him and he wasn't even aware of most of it existing. I can remember Griggs making some really good posts but when that one post sparked some interest there was no where to go to find out the rest of the story. 

That is something that I have really tried to make a impact to the beginning competitive shooter is once they have that spark of interest and they find me or get referred to me I can within minutes get them to a good variety of articles on hinge and thumb triggers and shooting sessions and form and mental approaches and aiming. They are short reads and to me they are designed to spark and then lead the new shooter into learning the lessons that need to be learned. I resist the temptation to expand the articles into a long drawn out 60 page sufferfest, they are short and hit the points that I want them to make and then it is up to the shooter to go out and do his training and let the lesson take effect. many of these guys end up here in the threads 6 months later contributing to the conversations in a way not possible to them when they first came here looking for help, not only that they show up and kick my butt in open a at the stinking asa tournaments.

If you are lurking and haven't read my articles they are one pm away and all you have to do is ask. They aren't anything but all the lessons that I have learned right here on archery talk and in my back yard and they are evolving as my knowledge ability to shoot really good change over time.


----------



## carlosii

Padgett said:


> You guys suck, my buddies give me crap about my suspenders and my sockets on my stabilizers and every breath I take and archery talk is supposed to be my safe haven.
> 
> One thing I love to do is go back and find some of my first posts here on archery talk and actually see where I really was as a shooter, I see a guy that wanted to shoot well but had no knowledge to lean on and take care of him and he wasn't even aware of most of it existing. I can remember Griggs making some really good posts but when that one post sparked some interest there was no where to go to find out the rest of the story.
> 
> That is something that I have really tried to make a impact to the beginning competitive shooter is once they have that spark of interest and they find me or get referred to me I can within minutes get them to a good variety of articles on hinge and thumb triggers and shooting sessions and form and mental approaches and aiming. They are short reads and to me they are designed to spark and then lead the new shooter into learning the lessons that need to be learned. I resist the temptation to expand the articles into a long drawn out 60 page sufferfest, they are short and hit the points that I want them to make and then it is up to the shooter to go out and do his training and let the lesson take effect. many of these guys end up here in the threads 6 months later contributing to the conversations in a way not possible to them when they first came here looking for help, not only that they show up and kick my butt in open a at the stinking asa tournaments.
> 
> If you are lurking and haven't read my articles they are one pm away and all you have to do is ask. They aren't anything but all the lessons that I have learned right here on archery talk and in my back yard and they are evolving as my knowledge ability to shoot really good change over time.


Sockets on stabilizers? Do you have a link for that? Maybe some pics?


----------



## ron w

as far as the pros coming on here and posting, it will never happen any more. they've learned a long time ago that it's useless to post just be bombarded with rhetoric, sarcasm and unfounded disagreement. that leaves the membership to take care of that wonderful aspect, amongst themselves.
Griv, Dave Cousins, Jim Despart, the Wildes, the Raggsdales,(all three of them), MR. Wunderle, Forest and Jerry Carter and several other top pros, were at one time, all on here every day, happily giving out their knowledge,....but they all learned their lesson.


----------



## JV NC

This thread is finally making sense to me.


----------

