# The pure back tension thing.



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

:happy1: ....

LS


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

hhhmmm, yea, where's my popcorn, this should be entertaining!.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

yep, sorry just couldn't resist.....

LS


----------



## northern rednek (Oct 24, 2008)

Lol, not meant to be like that. Just after Levi's statement about no pro's doing it I jumped on the wagon and it has destroyed my shooting and the enjoyment of shooting. It works for them but a intermediate like me does better with pbt.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

northern rednek said:


> Hello, not trying to start the debate over again, just trying to maybe help out someone else like me. Pure back tension firing engine is the only one and the most enjoyable for me. I just finished dedicating 3 months to learning some kind of manipulation with the hand and all I got out of it was target panic. Not saying pure back tension is the only or best way but for me it is. All I have to do is draw settle, start the back then watch the x. That easy. I'll prob take a bashing for this but I hope it will help someone that's been struggling like I have.


No bashing here. Use what you think best and advise of the same....

Now if them guys would share the popcorn....:sad:


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

northern rednek said:


> Hello, not trying to start the debate over again, just trying to maybe help out someone else like me. Pure back tension firing engine is the only one and the most enjoyable for me. I just finished dedicating 3 months to learning some kind of manipulation with the hand and all I got out of it was target panic. Not saying pure back tension is the only or best way but for me it is. All I have to do is draw settle, start the back then watch the x. That easy. I'll prob take a bashing for this but I hope it will help someone that's been struggling like I have.


Archery is not an exact science, it's about finding something that works for "you" that is repeatable. While my experience with that method is different than yours, what works for you is the correct method for you.


----------



## Iowa shooter (Feb 23, 2013)

There are many great coaches that preach pure back tension.


----------



## northern rednek (Oct 24, 2008)

That's why I started this so if someone was discouraged using one way they could give the pbt method a go. We're all dif in structure and mental uses.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

SonnyThomas said:


> No bashing here. Use what you think best and advise of the same....
> Now if them guys would share the popcorn....:sad:


Agreed, now gentlemen, please pass me some of that popcorn....


----------



## mod10g (Dec 18, 2006)

When I use the pure back tension in practice or local league night it works great for me, but at Vegas or some of the away tournaments that we go to I have trouble relaxing and it tends to hang up on me because it is hard to relax the release hand under pressure for me. I am starting a new style of release and way to fire it that I hope will eliminate that problem but only time will tell. I think that may be the reason most pros have gone to a manipulated style.


----------



## Iowa shooter (Feb 23, 2013)

Iowa shooter said:


> There are many great coaches that preach pure back tension.


One of the reasons they teach pure back tension is to shoot a unanticipated shot and attempt to avoid target panic.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

every body is different, when I attempt to go away from what you guys call, "pure back tension", I have the same problems that you guys have when you try to use "pure back tension". maybe it's all in just how well the method is taught and/or learned and/or understood.
when i get into high pressure shooting situations, my two trips to Vegas were just such situations, also !. I revert back and engulf myself in my shot and release execution, concentrating on running my back tension as the firing engine. it is actually my "safe place" and as long as I feel it is running right, I know my shots are as good as I am capable of executing them.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

archery , as an "exact science", is no less or more exact, in it's science, that any other sport activity.


----------



## Iowa shooter (Feb 23, 2013)

ron w said:


> archery , as an "exact science", is no less or more exact, in it's science, that any other sport activity.


Yep. And even science has to have someone interpret test results.


----------



## northern rednek (Oct 24, 2008)

ron w said:


> every body is different, when I attempt to go away from what you guys call, "pure back tension", I have the same problems that you guys have when you try to use "pure back tension". maybe it's all in just how well the method is taught and/or learned and/or understood.
> when i get into high pressure shooting situations, my two trips to Vegas were just such situations, also !. I revert back and engulf myself in my shot and release execution, concentrating on running my back tension as the firing engine. it is actually my "safe place" and as long as I feel it is running right, I know my shots are as good as I am capable of executing them.


I'm the same, I get hung up when I try some sort of manipulation. When I use pbt I just execute and focus the arrow to the x.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

montigre said:


> Agreed, now gentlemen, please pass me some of that popcorn....


Actually, since I don't shoot a hinge anymore, I may be disqualified from commenting on the matter now? I sort of have no choice, now I must use PBT. OTOH, it works very well for me, I shot this type of group most of the day today with my Evo and my Hoyt wheel bow. 
The rate of groups spread out more than this is only about 10 to 20%, which for me is outstanding.

So here're my salutes to PBT! 

K off to pop another bucket of the white stuff....

LS


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

For me, I'm somehow too aware of what is going on with the release using PBT. 
Moving to a manipulation style helped some things, but I still ended up being distracted by the movement.
For me, I have been working on an engine that pretty much runs itself, much like PBT works for some. But this engine doesn't require an addition of back tension, a manual rotation, or even a conscious relaxation or (yield). It simply requires that I don't pay attention to it.
I can't take away from the PBT method, or any of the manipulation styles... Too many use those techniques that are better than I.
But THIS is what is working for ME, and improving my shooting.
I still want to give it more time to prove itself, but it's working like nothing else I have ever tried.


----------



## Sasquech (Dec 15, 2014)

Yup I use it too. Think it works fine for me shooting the best scores of my life. Certainly can't complain with results


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

Oh speaking of release, BowJunky just posted this. When I watch these guys I'm reminded that my Feeble Skills Are No Match for the Dark Side of the Force. This is the kind of video I can watch all day...

Not really on topic, except to notice all the different techniques....

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

LS


----------



## bowfisher (Jan 21, 2003)

northern rednek said:


> Hello, not trying to start the debate over again, just trying to maybe help out someone else like me. Pure back tension firing engine is the only one and the most enjoyable for me. I just finished dedicating 3 months to learning some kind of manipulation with the hand and all I got out of it was target panic. Not saying pure back tension is the only or best way but for me it is. All I have to do is draw settle, start the back then watch the x. That easy. I'll prob take a bashing for this but I hope it will help someone that's been struggling like I have.


So what is pure back tension to you? Are you moving your elbow around behind your head with no hand movement or ?


----------



## Sasquech (Dec 15, 2014)

Pure back tension can be seen in most all of bow junkies vispdeonposted above no finger movement . The release aid is actuated by the rotation slight as it is from the index finger flesh yielding more than the two or 3 other fingers when you pull. And the pull comes from squeezing the shoulder blade towards the spine but the amount of movement required to actuate the release is imperceptible. And is only apparent post release actuation. On the follow through.

Hope that helps


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

getting that engine to run by itself, reliabley is a key element to using "pure" back tension. it's actually the entire purpose of pure back tension. the execution involves the movement of muscles that are large, relatively singular in function, meaning that it doesn't take a lot of busy process internally to guide and command their movement, and used as support for the skeletal structure of our bodies, which means they are more receptive to commands that are originated in the subconscious level of process, instead of muscles that are small, complex in command and not used to being guided subconsciously......such as the muscle that run our hands and fingers. these muscles (the later) are capable of subconscious reception and they do run that way, but there are differences. they need to be consciously taught to do a task, where our rhomboids are intrinsically programed to do what they do...just like the natural progression that a baby goes through as he/she learns to go from crawling to walking. that muscular activity is in our DNA, and doesn't need to be taught. so it is, with out rhomboids, we do not have to teach them to move our upper arm, because that task is pre programed into our DNA. about the only thing that is pre programed for our fingers, is grasping.....obviously, because for all practical purposes, that is their job.
the point of this is that, while our finger can certainly be taught to rotate the release, it requires some amount of conscious guidance, that detracts attention and focus from the activity of aiming the bow, while we shoot. 
in reality, it boils down to the old saying, ..." use the right tool for the job".
now, that is not to say that PBT is the "right way", as some of you might accuse me of saying.... it just implies that the muscular purpose and function of the rhomboids is better suited to doing the job required. thus, the reason, back tension as a firing engine was developed, when it was. 
consequently, as this criteria was established already for quite some time, the hinge eventually showed up, as the release designed to work within that criteria.
the fact that an article exists, that demonstrates an alternative to this procession, is because the method is somewhat "outside the box" of what is/was considered standard for the operation. media will always gravitate towards, expose and sensationalize something that is somewhat non-standard....so the article was written and published.


----------



## northern rednek (Oct 24, 2008)

I wish the manipulation method would work for me but it doesn't. I find when I use any method than pbt I may as well have a trigger. Ron's post above sums it up pretty well. Again this is not to start an argument but to help others. Trying the manipulation method for 3 months gave me wicked target panic. I'm glad I've used pbt for years before hand because it was pretty easy to hit the reset button and get back on track.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Since the topic has some support, it would be helpful to give it some context. I think it is a fair question to ask what level shooters are in support of this method? Are any of you advanced shooters?


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

EPLC said:


> Since the topic has some support, it would be helpful to give it some context. I think it is a fair question to ask what level shooters are in support of this method? Are any of you advanced shooters?


 what qualifies you as an "advanced shooter", or for that matter, to question anyone's level of accomplishment, besides "self -assignment".
it's easy to ask questions that are un-answerable, the catch 22 is that the question usually applies to the person asking it, as well.


----------



## WCork (Apr 22, 2010)

I'm not an advanced shooter, but it always seemed like when I tried PBT it caused too much movement in my shot and sight picture. I would say I'm in the group that holds into the back wall with my back, relax the forearm, and relax the hand. Before I know it the shot goes off. It has worked quite well for me and it's been the only firing engine that has worked repeatedly for me with a hinge.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

the most common reason for adverse and excessive movement in the sight picture when using rotational back tension (PBT). is an ill adjusted draw length.


----------



## bowfisher (Jan 21, 2003)

northern rednek said:


> I wish the manipulation method would work for me but it doesn't. I find when I use any method than pbt I may as well have a trigger. Ron's post above sums it up pretty well. Again this is not to start an argument but to help others. Trying the manipulation method for 3 months gave me wicked target panic. I'm glad I've used pbt for years before hand because it was pretty easy to hit the reset button and get back on track.


Still curious about your method. There seems to be two different thoughts on this. Is your elbow moving only, or are you adding to the back wall and relaxing the hand or?


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Since the topic has some support, it would be helpful to give it some context. I think it is a fair question to ask what level shooters are in support of this method? Are any of you advanced shooters?


I agree this is probably not a question that can be answered as-is without a solid idea of what is meant by "advanced shooter". So the context being wished for here may not be meaningful.

Maybe I can offer a brief alternative to put it in some perspective? My metric is currently competition with myself - if something improves how I shoot against how I shot before and does so in a consistent manner, I consider it a productive technique.

I shot the above groups and more like it at a rate of about 70% (wild guess LOL) yesterday using PBT and a pull-through release. That shooting is a definite improvement over how I shot using other methods, though a hinge release was involved in my past shooting I'm comparing it to. So admittedly there's an equipment change intervening in there. But even when I shot a hinge, despite the other (ultimately fatal) problems I had with a hinge, the PBT method generally improved my shooting over what my shooting was before with other methods.

So dunno if that serves as a good data point or not. If not, this question probably needs to be refined with better definitions.
LS


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

EPLC said:


> Since the topic has some support, it would be helpful to give it some context. I think it is a fair question to ask what level shooters are in support of this method? Are any of you advanced shooters?


While it may be difficult to define what an "advanced" archer is, there is some merit to the question.
The OP has mentioned that PBT may be a very good method of shooting for some, but may have limitations preventing some from advancing to top levels of shooting.
Obviously PBT works best for some, yet many pro level shooters have gotten away from it.
Maybe next year at Vegas someone can bring the question up at the TruBall seminar or some similar function where a number of pros can tell you why they do or don't use it and why.


----------



## TNMAN (Oct 6, 2009)

unclejane said:


> Oh speaking of release, BowJunky just posted this. When I watch these guys I'm reminded that my Feeble Skills Are No Match for the Dark Side of the Force. This is the kind of video I can watch all day...
> 
> Not really on topic, except to notice all the different techniques....
> 
> ...


Great video! A large majority of the pro's that I have watched shoot hinges over the last 38 years (hundreds of them) were similar to Rob Morgan at 0.33 and Steve Anderson at the end---or somewhere in-between those two. Not sure about all the definitions in various minds, but if those are examples of "pure back tension", then I'm all for it. I really think that peoples definition of the term varies considerably.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

Mahly said:


> While it may be difficult to define what an "advanced" archer is, there is some merit to the question.
> The OP has mentioned that PBT may be a very good method of shooting for some, but may have limitations preventing some from advancing to top levels of shooting.
> Obviously PBT works best for some, yet many pro level shooters have gotten away from it.
> Maybe next year at Vegas someone can bring the question up at the TruBall seminar or some similar function where a number of pros can tell you why they do or don't use it and why.


For what it's worth, this was sort of my thinking about the motivation for the question. I don't have a dog in the PBT-as-a-firing-engine race anymore because I no longer shoot a hinge and now use a release type where PBT is the only choice - technically speaking I think that means I don't care anymore LOL. 

So if what is meant by "advanced shooter" is firmed up, it may be a productive question to ask. That is, if it's determined to be a technique that's out of favor compared to other methods among whatever "advanced shooters" are, it might be worthwhile to pursue why that is. In some of the other threads on the topic, I recall that efforts were made in this regard, but I think they ultimately failed. But perhaps we can get a firm definition from EPLC this time on what is meant by "advanced shooters"?

Personally, I'd go on the trajectory of why my now-favored release aid is so unpopular period LOL, but that's an entirely different thread...

But still this is a good point, IMO.

LS


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

TNMAN said:


> Great video! A large majority of the pro's that I have watched shoot hinges over the last 38 years (hundreds of them) were similar to Rob Morgan at 0.33 and Steve Anderson at the end---or somewhere in-between those two. Not sure about all the definitions in various minds, but if those are examples of "pure back tension", then I'm all for it. I really think that peoples definition of the term varies considerably.


I really think it's going to be difficult to tell exactly what firing engines people are using by watching a video unless they have large amounts of rotation from the fingers.
It was mentioned earlier that some of them are using PBT because there was no perceptible movement... while possible that is the case, it's also equally possible that they have their hinges set so very little movement is required to fire the hinge.
It's not what you can see on video... It's what's going on between their ears.
I'm pretty sure most could not see a deliberate hand motion in my release, but it's also not PBT.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

TNMAN said:


> Great video! A large majority of the pro's that I have watched shoot hinges over the last 38 years (hundreds of them) were similar to Rob Morgan at 0.33 and Steve Anderson at the end---or somewhere in-between those two. Not sure about all the definitions in various minds, but if those are examples of "pure back tension", then I'm all for it. I really think that peoples definition of the term varies considerably.


Ah, I should mention I didn't post this as examples of PBT-as-a-firing-engine. I meant it mainly as entertainment value to watch some of The Jedi in action, as well as just the variety of techniques they use. For example Nathan Brooks with his famous weird spring thingy on his release, etc.... 

I also have to grant that most of them appear to be using some form of hand manipulation, just going by what it looks like visually.... And some are using buttons too.

LS


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

exactly right. 
as well, I have had people watch me for enough time that they had to ask me how I am firing my release, because they see no perceivable movement going on. in either case, the execution of movement is outwardly, very subtle, when the process is well developed and running right. 
the truth of the matter is that the shooter, gets to the point where he/she doesn't perceive much of anything going on, as well. there are many shots where it simply feels like I draw, anchor, and just wait for the shot to leave. I imagine, the more developed the execution is in the subconscious process, the more common this feeling is, because of it's reliability to run without conscious guidance. 
the fact that, as we ingrain the execution into the subconscious for the purpose of being able to concentrate our focus on aiming, we are also building and immunity to the recognition of the administration and physical activity that is going on. I believe that is why , when the shots are running right, we experience very little effort being made to get the shots to go and when they aren't going right, we realize the effort, because we recognize that the shots aren't running the way they should, so we are constantly internally monitoring every aspect of what is going on, looking for the problem.
I also believe that is why the pros that have been asked what they do, have a hard putting it into clearly understood verbal description.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

ron w said:


> exactly right.
> as well, I have had people watch me for enough time that they had to ask me how I am firing my release, because they see no perceivable movement going on. in either case, the execution of movement is outwardly, very subtle, when the process is well developed and running right.
> the truth of the matter is that the shooter, gets to the point where he/she doesn't perceive much of anything going on, as well. there are many shots where it simply feels like I draw, anchor, and just wait for the shot to leave. I imagine, the more developed the execution is in the subconscious process, the more common this feeling is, because of it's reliability to run without conscious guidance.
> the fact that, as we ingrain the execution into the subconscious for the purpose of being able to concentrate our focus on aiming, we are also building and immunity to the recognition of the administration and physical activity that is going on. I believe that is why , when the shots are running right, we experience very little effort being made to get the shots to go and when they aren't going right, we realize the effort, because we recognize that the shots aren't running the way they should, so we are constantly internally monitoring every aspect of what is going on, looking for the problem.
> I also believe that is why the pros that have been asked what they do, have a hard putting it into clearly understood verbal description.


Agree, though I still have some general discomfort with not being able to actually describe what I do. This is probably from all those decades of musical instrument playing/self-training possibly. For me, not being able to be clear on exactly what I'm doing when performing a particular skill is often a diagnostic of a problem. It's either a) I didn't learn or practice the skill correctly or b) the skill isn't the right tool for me for that particular job. 

That was sort of what was going on with me when I shot my hinges. I explored a) as exhaustively as I possibly could, and I hope I left no stone unturned there. But after that, and I was still having trouble with anticipation issues, I had to resort to looking at b). That's when I picked up my Evo + again and I haven't gone away from it since. So far, no reoccurrence of my previous issues with anticipation issues and I seem to finally be on the road to a full trust in my release method.

That's apart from the issue of shuttling a skill to the subconscious, I think. And it may just reflect my general learning method - I pick it apart and develop it consciously at first, then practice until it starts to become subconscious. In the end, if I've done it according to my preferred method, I'm unaware that I do it but I can still produce a description of it if I'm called upon to do it. At no time should anything I do be a mystery that I can't describe.

But that's just my general approach to motor skills, that may not reflect how others learn and perform them.

LS


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

the more organized a process is, the easier it will be to learn subconsciously. when you pick it apart, you are organizing it, to the requisite organization, you know your subconscious will learn the best and easiest. 
when you learn music, you don't just start at the beginning and learn note by note,... you learn short (excuse my lack of knowledge of proper terminology, here) combinations of tied together notes that produce little tunes that you can learn the quickest and the easiest first, and then work on the parts that connect those sections. the connecting parts, being somewhat harder to learn, need those familiar sections that were easier, as supporting starts and ends to the harder parts.
when you scan the music sheet, you recognize thoas small sections immediately and mark them as the starts and ends . this is your "organizing" at work.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

Yep, and sometimes you break it down even more - some musicians advocate learning a piece "out of time" on the first several approaches. that is, with no attention paid to the rhythm or note length - no metronome. The goal is only to learn where the fingers go, when to shift, etc. Only when that muscle memory is achieved, is any attempt to play the piece in time made (according to this methodology, which BTW is my practice).

An analogue in archery, to me, would be learning a new release aid, or practicing even with a familiar one, with a training string. Here the objective is to get the most very gross familiarity with how the release works, and it can be done in even a very foreign environment of a simple string that you hold in the hand. Then, once you're familiar enough with it that you won't whack yourself in the face, you try it on an actual bow.....

Anyway, this may be a bit of topic drift, for which I apologize, but it's kind of an interesting parallel IMO...

LS


----------



## northern rednek (Oct 24, 2008)

bowfisher said:


> Still curious about your method. There seems to be two different thoughts on this. Is your elbow moving only, or are you adding to the back wall and relaxing the hand or?


Really all I'm doing is contracting the rhomboids. My elbow may be going around but def not noticeable. Def no relaxation of the hand.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

ron w said:


> what qualifies you as an "advanced shooter", or for that matter, to question anyone's level of accomplishment, besides "self -assignment".
> it's easy to ask questions that are un-answerable, the catch 22 is that the question usually applies to the person asking it, as well.


To start with, I never claimed to be an advanced shooter. My shooting level is right out there for all to see. I'm an open book and haven't hidden anything. As far as asking for someone else's level of shooting... well this "is" the intermediate to advanced forum so it's a fair question. I for one like to know who I'm listening to, not to condemn one's shooting ability, but to simply understand when a promotion such as this one comes along, what level shooters are supporting it. It's an honest question, one that I believe should be asked more often around here.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

there are no "qualifiers" for anyone to be on this forum, so the question is not valid in any way, what so ever. the question is one that which the body of this forum was and is, specifically concerned with not developing an aura of "elitist membership". if you care to remember,..... before this forum was formed,..... the issue of the "level of question asked", vs. the "level of shooter allowed to participate in this forum", was of great concern. 
there is considerable difference between the suggested "level of question", compared to the "level of shooter" allowed on this forum. 
a disclosure such as yours above, clearly demonstrates what level of shooter "that should be allowed to be on this forum", one's preferences are on. as I understand the agenda of this forum, there is no place for a question like that here.
there is very distinct difference between the suggested level of question asked on his forum vs. the level shooter allowed to participate on this forum.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

EPLC said:


> To start with, I never claimed to be an advanced shooter. My shooting level is right out there for all to see. I'm an open book and haven't hidden anything. As far as asking for someone else's level of shooting... well this "is" the intermediate to advanced forum so it's a fair question. I for one like to know who I'm listening to, not to condemn one's shooting ability, but to simply understand when a promotion such as this one comes along, what level shooters are supporting it. It's an honest question, one that I believe should be asked more often around here.


No, I do not believe you are being entirely honest with this statement, and I believe the question is far from fair and in the spirit of this forum. 

You once stated on this forum that you preferred to know another person's shooting ability so that you would know who to weed out in your consideration. And that it would be pointless for you to take advice from someone who was not at least shooting at an advanced level since that was what you were trying to achieve yourself. 

To ask other contributors in an open forum such as this, "Are any of you advanced shooters?" is an incomprehensible affront! IMHO No, I am not offended, perhaps just better mannered.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

EPLC said:


> To start with, I never claimed to be an advanced shooter. My shooting level is right out there for all to see. I'm an open book and haven't hidden anything. As far as asking for someone else's level of shooting... well this "is" the intermediate to advanced forum so it's a fair question. I for one like to know who I'm listening to, not to condemn one's shooting ability, but to simply understand when a promotion such as this one comes along, what level shooters are supporting it. It's an honest question, one that I believe should be asked more often around here.


Well, your manner gives of you thinking you're above and beyond us.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

montigre said:


> No, I do not believe you are being entirely honest with this statement, and I believe the question is far from fair and in the spirit of this forum.
> 
> You once stated on this forum that you preferred to know another person's shooting ability so that you would know who to weed out in your consideration. And that it would be pointless for you to take advice from someone who was not at least shooting at an advanced level since that was what you were trying to achieve yourself.
> 
> To ask other contributors in an open forum such as this, "Are any of you advanced shooters?" is an incomprehensible affront! IMHO No, I am not offended, perhaps just better mannered.


Provide a link. Since you have taken most of what I have had to say since day one around here out of context I have to assume this is still the case. 



SonnyThomas said:


> Well, your manner gives of you thinking you're above and beyond us.


I believe you all suffer from some sort of reading comprehension disorder. I never said I was above anyone around here. What I did say was I like to understand who I'm listening to. With regard to the specific question here, when a specific process is being promoted in an intermediate to advanced forum, to ask what level the supporters of that process are at is a valid question.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

EPLC said:


> As far as asking for someone else's level of shooting... well this "is" the intermediate to advanced forum so it's a fair question. I for one like to know who I'm listening to, not to condemn one's shooting ability, but to simply understand when a promotion such as this one comes along, what level shooters are supporting it. It's an honest question, one that I believe should be asked more often around here.


You'll need to define what you mean by "advanced shooter" then. If you're really honestly looking for real answers from persons with credentials that meet your satisfaction, you're going to have to define what those credentials are. I think this was self-evident when you first asked this question, but this concrete qualification that you want a certain level of respondent and nothing "below" that means you'll have to clarify who that respondent has to be.
I'd suggest being as specific as you can be in your description.

LS


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

unclejane said:


> You'll need to define what you mean by "advanced shooter" then. If you're really honestly looking for real answers from persons with credentials that meet your satisfaction, you're going to have to define what those credentials are. I think this was self-evident when you first asked this question, but this concrete qualification that you want a certain level of respondent and nothing "below" that means you'll have to clarify who that respondent has to be.
> I'd suggest being as specific as you can be in your description.
> 
> LS


You know exactly what I'm asking, I'm not playing your game.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

EPLC said:


> You know exactly what I'm asking, I'm not playing your game.


Of course I don't - I don't have ESP and cannot read the minds of others. Does this mean you're refusing to define what you consider to be an "advanced shooter"? This isn't a game, but it definitely *is* an assessment of the honesty behind your question.

PS: your continued silence on which *definitely* indicates your question is *not* honest or actually intended to seek information, but probably has other motives known only to you....

LS


----------



## mod10g (Dec 18, 2006)

I can understand to a point that the question is relative to ask a person's ability as a shooter, but you also have to take into consideration the amount of time a person dedicates to practice. Myself for example, in the winter time I get to shoot maybe 3-4 hours a week, spring time I probably shoot 1 hour a week and maybe a 3d shoot once every 2-4 weeks, summer time is all racing zero shooting, fall is racing and I might shoot my hunting bow a little, then pickup the indoor bow around December. I shot 297,297,296 at Vegas this year, I didn't make any ProAm last year but the year before I shot k45, 16up at W.Monroe and 17up at Paris. I don't know if you consider that intermediate or not but that's where I'm at. But if I had 3-4 hours a day to shoot I would assume that those scores would be better. Now if a guy that shoots every day those 3-4 hours and shoots the same scores or just under what I do doesn't make him less knowledgeable, in fact he probably has way more time behind a hinge than me. So you can't discount a person's knowledge based on score alone.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

And that said, lets get back to the topic. 
If someone wants to know the level of the shooter posting, it's probably best to PM that shooter....or start a thread on the topic.


----------



## pwyrick (Feb 13, 2011)

I read a lot and don't respond much. But, I have noticed that the best coaches in any sport are rarely the best in that sport. Rarely are they even able to make a living at the sport they coach in. So, in archery there are different abilities. One is the ability to shoot. Another is the ability to teach. Sometimes these abilities get confused on this forum. I don't need a better shooter to teach me. I need a better teacher to teach me. Back to the topic. The simplicity of the pbt is a plus for many. The added complication of manipulation may be mastered by those with more shooting ability than I have.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

Mahly said:


> And that said, lets get back to the topic.
> If someone wants to know the level of the shooter posting, it's probably best to PM that shooter....or start a thread on the topic.


IIRC, this is where a similar discussion stalled the last time (forget which thread) - there ended up being no settled way to define the level of a shooter for the purposes of determining if PBT was popular among these level X shooters at rate Y.... So maybe this isn't really a valid avenue of discussing the popularity of a technique like PBT after all? Oh well, I was sort of hopeful this time LOL...

LS


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

pwyrick said:


> I read a lot and don't respond much. But, I have noticed that the best coaches in any sport are rarely the best in that sport. Rarely are they even able to make a living at the sport they coach in. So, in archery there are different abilities. One is the ability to shoot. Another is the ability to teach. Sometimes these abilities get confused on this forum. I don't need a better shooter to teach me. I need a better teacher to teach me. Back to the topic. The simplicity of the pbt is a plus for many. The added complication of manipulation may be mastered by those with more shooting ability than I have.


You have nicely pointed out why I asked the question. I simply want to understand who is supporting this process. If the process is mostly used by beginner to average shooters, then that's important information for someone that has goals that are higher than that. If it's a process or method that supports higher level shooters, then I want to know that as well.


----------



## Sasquech (Dec 15, 2014)

595 101 x at Nats the other 5 pts were a spiders on wrong bale not the fault of the release engine


----------



## northern rednek (Oct 24, 2008)

Once again this is headed in the wrong direction. I only started this to maybe help someone like me that was having trouble trying to copy the techniques of top pro's. Pbt is a great way to get over target panic and improve your shooting. It's not near as difficult to do as many make it out to be.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

EPLC said:


> You have nicely pointed out why I asked the question. I simply want to understand who is supporting this process. If the process is mostly used by beginner to average shooters, then that's important information for someone that has goals that are higher than that. If it's a process or method that supports higher level shooters, then I want to know that as well.


But since you can't or won't define what a "beginner", "average" or "higher level" shooter is, we can't give you a meaningful answer to your "who" question and I think you know that. That's why your question is probably loaded and not honestly in search of real information.

OTOH, it may actually turn out that the type of technique used doesn't make a difference in the level that you actually achieve. That's pure speculation, but without any science or a really grounded, meaningful question to apply a scientific inquiry to, that may remain pure speculation...

LS


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

To me it is simple. The teacher in this sport is experience. Time behind the string with sound form and execution. Sticking with a comfortable method that works with your cognitive approach to shooting a quality shot consistently. If I were new, and struggling with figuring out a stable process that would keep it as simple as possible, and repeatable, so that I could work on the most difficult part of the game, which is the mental part. That is if I were new at it........ just starting out.

Being more advanced and looking for little things that may assist in elevating one aspect of my game...... ie, looking for a smoother release, or a steadier hold, then I would be looking for advice from someone who obviously has moved beyond the basics, and can prove it. Take Levi Morgan for example. He says that rotating the release is more common amongst he and his peers, rather than attempting to activate the release with back tension alone. Then here we have some recreational shooters that are either just starting out, or have been shooting for many years and have nothing to show for it, claiming that his method is foolish, and that nobody should follow that advice.

Me being the simpleton I am, would naturally count the medals and trophies in hand of the gentlemen on both sides of the debate, then form my own assessment of the validity of each. I would put more faith in the more successful guys, because they have put it on paper. They are doing it. They are winning. 

Now ultimately you have to decide what works best for you and stick with it until you peak. Then at that point either accept that that is the best you are ever going to be, or change something. That peak point is where you have to decide.


----------



## bowfisher (Jan 21, 2003)

northern rednek said:


> Really all I'm doing is contracting the rhomboids. My elbow may be going around but def not noticeable. Def no relaxation of the hand.


Congrats on your shooting! Everyone has to find what works for them. The reason I ask is there seems to be several different methods touted to be PBt. I think we all need to work on the correct definition.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

bowfisher said:


> Congrats on your shooting! Everyone has to find what works for them. The reason I ask is there seems to be several different methods touted to be PBt. I think we all need to work on the correct definition.


For what it's worth, in other threads on this topic the definition circling the drain towards the end was something along the lines of (I'll paraphrase): "the use of back-tension with no intentional manipulation of the release with the fingers". The distinction was the lack of a purposeful (eg. skilled) rotation with the hand, with the main reliance being on the naturally induced rotation of the arm as you pull through the shot.

I found, towards the end of my hinge career, that there was some natural flexing of my fingers going on anyway, not on purpose, that I believe aided in the rotation. It's unclear to me if that put what I was doing into another category than PBT, but I could also get my hinge to go off with a Kung Fu Grip on the handle as well.

Anyway, thought I'd toss that quick definition out there in case we want to kick it around. Ron talks about this part with the hand in more detail, since he's more acquainted with the technique than most.

LS


----------



## LMacD (Mar 16, 2015)

Hi everyone, I'm brand new to the forum, so please go easy on the tar and feathers! ;-) I make no claim to being an expert, but I want to offer something, coming from the very top of the pro ranks, to consider that doesn't agree with the Levi video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leeYIaOCKl4

Pay close attention to what Reo Wilde says starting at the 4:44 mark about how "PJ uses a back tension, and pulls and builds pressure to set it off..." which is clearly different from what Levi speaks about with the hand rotation or Chance Beaubeouf saying that "I just hang out" at full draw. Also, in the Deloche/Pagne video, at the 11:13 mark, really watch his release arm. His follow through has "strong" shot written all over it, whereas Pagni's follow though is very short, which makes sense given that he's using a non-back tension release (Reo talks about that as well in this video).

More to the point, though, on PJ's website [http://www.pjdeloche.com/en/techniques/le-tir-au-back-tension] which is all in French, he discusses his back tension method at length, and while he refers to other things happening than just the back [i.e. also arms and shoulders], it's most certainly not just a relaxed rotation of the hand for PJ as the Levi video suggests. He comments about how physical conditioning is a key factor, etc, and even refers to the image of elongating the line of the arrow [a metaphor I haven't heard before, but refers to a continued pull as opposed to a static approach] All to say, despite what the Levi video says, *it's not true* to say that "none" of the top pros are using BT. Perhaps a lot of folks - myself included - were too quick to take Levi literally when he said "none" or "no one". So, even though the size of the BT club might be smaller than we thought, and as much as it appears to be true that a style that doesn't require building tension works extremely well for - I assume - a lot of pros, I don't think everyone who uses BT needs to hit the panic button and ditch the approach.

My own story: I've spent the past 3 months waiting out the coldest winter in recent history in my 12 meter heated garage by working on developing a back tension shooting style with a Stan Black Ice release. Looking back,the first couple of weeks was a gong show of fear of accidental releases and - to my horror - increased target panic. After two weeks of nothing but frustration, I was ready to toss the Stan, but instead I got the clicker sear, and at least the fear thing was gone, which took away a lot of the target panic. By early December, I had found some of Larry Wise's posts online, all of which reinforced that I was on the right track. I was practicing lots of blank bale ends, getting a feel for hitting the click and then committing to the back tension "engine" to release the arrow. By the end of January, I was pretty comfortable and moved to actual shooting and no target panic to speak of. So, for the past 6 weeks or so, I've been shooting full games with some really good results. Aside from the odd horrid miss [an 8 on a reduced dimension target], the groups have been getting tight, lots of X's, and a great feeling shot. All was bliss! 

And then about two weeks ago, I saw the Levi Morgan video. I felt dizzy. Maybe Larry Wise didn't pass out, but I came close 

But, thankfully, I recalled watching that tournament video above which led me to check out Deloche's website, because I might have otherwise tossed away a lot of hard work. I'll be sticking with the BT method for the most part, and will experiment with adding a small amount of relaxing the right index finger - sort of a mix - to see what happens. 

Cheers and hey if nothing else, happy end of winter


----------



## bowfisher (Jan 21, 2003)

unclejane said:


> For what it's worth, in other threads on this topic the definition circling the drain towards the end was something along the lines of (I'll paraphrase): "the use of back-tension with no intentional manipulation of the release with the fingers". The distinction was the lack of a purposeful (eg. skilled) rotation with the hand, with the main reliance being on the naturally induced rotation of the arm as you pull through the shot.
> 
> I found, towards the end of my hinge career, that there was some natural flexing of my fingers going on anyway, not on purpose, that I believe aided in the rotation. It's unclear to me if that put what I was doing into another category than PBT, but I could also get my hinge to go off with a Kung Fu Grip on the handle as well.
> 
> ...


I guess some of what I don't understand is adding to the back wall or not. I went back and read some of old post of one of the experts here and he has talked about it many times as elbow movement with nothing added to the back wall.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

bowfisher said:


> I guess some of what I don't understand is adding to the back wall or not. I went back and read some of old post of one of the experts here and he has talked about it many times as elbow movement with nothing added to the back wall.


My memory is fuzzy on those points, but IIRC, it had to do with alignment and where you started the "firing engine" vs the hardness of the back wall. There was also some controversy about draw length too, but I'm forgetting where we ended up on that point.

Now, to give credit where it's due, I did find that PBT with my hinge was more comfortable for me with my Hoyt wheel bow. It has a mile-deep back wall so I got more movement in the final part of the shot. So I'd release the safety slightly further out of alignment than I would on my PSE, and pulled through the shot with more movement overall. My Supra Max has a what I'd call a medium hard back wall and I found it harder to use that technique with. I went back to my pull-through releases before I got round to finessing my setup to make that easier (probably adjustments to the draw length would have helped).

So that's my recollection on the involvement of the back wall with PBT; ron may have more detailed information about that tho. Now that I shoot tension-style releases, it's a different ballgame altogether with respect to the back wall, but it's the purest of the pure back tension LOL...

LS


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

cbrunson said:


> Then here we have some recreational shooters that are either just starting out, or have been shooting for many years and have nothing to show for it, claiming that his method is foolish, and that nobody should follow that advice.


No such claims were made by anyone in any thread, including this one, to my knowledge.

LS


----------



## AJ the TP Guru (Jul 29, 2011)

Some guys swear by it, others at it. Truthfully, I used to think it was technology's answer to target panic. But then I began asking my users what kinds of releases they were using, and found that a huge majority had already tried at least one BT release with no appreciable relief from TP.

That's when I decided to design a subconscious message _just _for BT users. Today, almost two years later, it accounts for well over 1/3 of all sales. 'nuff said.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

back tension by itself will do nothing for target panic, just the same as a hinge, by itself will do nothing for target panic. you can have target panic as bad as the next guy that uses his finger to trigger a release with back tension. 
the confusion lies in the fact that back tension is a method, that allows the release execution to be ingrained into the subconscious process easier, be cause of the type of muscular activity, back tension relies on. the larger skeletal muscles that are used in back tension are simply more oriented to subconscious process, because they operate in that realm of motivation all the time.
this ease of ingraining to subconscious process, simply makes more room for the execution to be able to run by itself, allowing a separation for the conscious process to focus more intensely, on aiming.
when that separation is present and clearly defined, target panic does not exist....the lack of that separation is what and where target panic manifests itself on.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

cbrunson, 
I guess I have to ask you, how does "having something, or nothing to show for your shooting", either justify, or not justify, either using or not using any specific method ?.
people shoot because they want to, not because they are going to get something other than satisfaction out of it. there is endlessly more evidence of this, than there is evidence that if you shoot well, you should get something for it.


----------



## LMacD (Mar 16, 2015)

EPLC said:


> You have nicely pointed out why I asked the question. I simply want to understand who is supporting this process. If the process is mostly used by beginner to average shooters, then that's important information for someone that has goals that are higher than that. If it's a process or method that supports higher level shooters, then I want to know that as well.


As mentioned in my post above - the painfully long one  - it's pretty clear that PJ Deloche is using BT [it's in French, but just so you know I'm not making it up see http://www.pjdeloche.com/en/techniqu...-back-tension]. Even if he were, theoretically, the only person alive using it - obviously highly doubtful - then it must be capable of supporting shooters quite literally to the level of world number one.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

ron w said:


> cbrunson,
> I guess I have to ask you, how does "having something, or nothing to show for your shooting", either justify, or not justify, either using or not using any specific method ?.
> people shoot because they want to, not because they are going to get something other than satisfaction out of it. there is endlessly more evidence of this, than there is evidence that if you shoot well, you should get something for it.


It justifies it with results. When a shooter that is better than I am says he does something a certain way, I would be more willing to try it, if I haven't before. That doesn't take away from the countless articles promoting another way, it just makes the way that guy is shooting a viable alternative to other more accepted or popular methods. You and your buddy don't seem to get that I'm not saying that using back tension alone can not be done successfully. It's just not my preferred method. I do shoot well enough to justify using a different method, and some notable pros do as well. If you never did shoot very well, I'm going to easily accept that when you say another method can not be done successfully, that you are not good enough to rule out anything.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

I guess my response to "who is supporting it and who isn't", is ...."what does it matter ?. it's a discussion not a debate and not a popularity poll and not a qualifier for "who knows what" about the subject. if there is constant inquiry to "who is" and "who isn't" , people will get tired of feeling judged and compared to some "quotient of usefulness", and leave the forum.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

cbrunson said:


> You and your buddy don't seem to get that I'm not saying that using back tension alone can not be done successfully. It's just not my preferred method.


Nobody, including ron and myself, is disputing your statement here or ever has to my knowledge.



> ...when you say another method can not be done successfully...


No one has ever said this either. Still don't know why you continue to attribute these straw men to ron and I.

LS


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

i can certainly understand justifying a method, if it works for you. what i cannot get is the connection that you have made several times in the past, about something to show for using a particular method. not everybody needs to have something to show for what they enjoy doing and for that matter, there does not really have to be any justification for preferring to use one method or another. i know several people, myself included, that can shoot with several methods switching between them at will, shot by shot, with no justification for any particular method used, other than they want to. they don't do it because someone else does it, or someone better than them selves does, or says they do, they do it because they want to and they can.
further more, ...what method did i say can't be done successfully ?.


----------



## rn3 (Jan 4, 2008)

LMacD said:


> As mentioned in my post above - the painfully long one  - it's pretty clear that PJ Deloche is using BT [it's in French, but just so you know I'm not making it up see http://www.pjdeloche.com/en/techniqu...-back-tension]. Even if he were, theoretically, the only person alive using it - obviously highly doubtful - then it must be capable of supporting shooters quite literally to the level of world number one.


Levi is also using back tension.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

P


ron w said:


> i can certainly understand justifying a method, if it works for you. what i cannot get is the connection that you have made several times in the past, about something to show for using a particular method. not everybody needs to have something to show for what they enjoy doing and for that matter, there does not really have to be any justification for preferring to use one method or another. i know several people, myself included, that can shoot with several methods switching between them at will, shot by shot, with no justification for any particular method used, other than they want to. they don't do it because someone else does it, or someone better than them selves does, or says they do, they do it because they want to and they can.
> further more, ...what method did i say can't be done successfully ?.


I answered your question well enough. No more off topic. If we are in agreement that "your" way is not the only way, then there is no further reason to go on about it. It's a warm sunny day today, so I'm going outside to enjoy it. You have a wonderful day!!!

(Tell your cohort to have a nice day too) :lol:


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

northern rednek said:


> Once again this is headed in the wrong direction. I only started this to maybe help someone like me that was having trouble trying to copy the techniques of top pro's. Pbt is a great way to get over target panic and improve your shooting. It's not near as difficult to do as many make it out to be.


I'd ask Mahly to wipe the slate clean back your #24 post  This place just can't stop. It just goes into a shark feeding frenzy.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> I'd ask Mahly to wipe the slate clean back your #24 post  This place just can't stop. It just goes into a shark feeding frenzy.


That's right, all you have to do is take a position that doesn't support back tension as a firing engine and the sharks are all over you. This is not a new trend on AT though, the new trend is actually those that are finally speaking up and telling another point of view. Unfortunately there are those that feel insulted when challenged about anything that doesn't fit their rigid little view on things. And don't have the nerve to ask anyone how they shoot, OMG the audacity! What does that have to do with anything?


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

SonnyThomas said:


> I'd ask Mahly to wipe the slate clean back your #24 post  This place just can't stop. It just goes into a shark feeding frenzy.





EPLC said:


> That's right, all you have to do is take a position that doesn't support back tension as a firing engine and the sharks are all over you. This is not a new trend on AT though, the new trend is actually those that are finally speaking up and telling another point of view. Unfortunately there are those that feel insulted when challenged about anything that doesn't fit their rigid little view on things. And don't have the nerve to ask anyone how they shoot, OMG the audacity! What does that have to do with anything?


I wasn't just speaking of back tension. This place would go nuts if "what color vane" to use. AS far as asking how someone shoots, you and I don't have to ask each other. In PM you acknowledged I had accomplishments on the same order of yours though a good majority of mine lean towards 3D and the minority of paper target shooting, but then I did very well shooting paper. I just chose to drop paper and stay with 3D.

I consider myself lucky. I didn't have all this back tension and "you gotta do stuff" stuck in my ear. I just hauled back and shot and with cam leaning, non-bare shaft tuned bows and arrows not fletched to the spine (so they all greats say).


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

sharks?....yea, all two,...or maybe three of us. do you want me to pull up all the names that puked all over my posts as I was trying to talk about back tension ?.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Disagreeing with ones position isn't puking all over it.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

SonnyThomas said:


> I consider myself lucky. I didn't have all this back tension and "you gotta do stuff" stuck in my ear. I just hauled back and shot and with cam leaning, non-bare shaft tuned bows and arrows not fletched to the spine (so they all greats say).


Well if it'll help break the monotonous cycle, I did some Sonny HB&S today that I'll share (you who are above "beginner shooter" input are free to ignore). 
In between the wind gusts, I finally got the bare shaft straightened out on The Widowmaker, which has been a bit of a project. Lots of back and forth adjusting cables and getting the lizard-tongue rest setup where it's supposed to be. But see the groups here at 20 yards and note the bare shaft is finally grouping with the others. The Widowmaker + my Evo is quickly becoming my favorite setup. 

Took pictures of 2 groups + bareshaft to prove it wasn't an accident.

Aint' they purty?

Ok, ya'll can go back to it 

LS


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Nice shooting, unclejane. Outside and even the tiniest of breezes can wreck havoc on one's shooting.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Northern *******, I am glad to see you have found the method that you can enjoy and hopefully continue to advance your shooting. You have got to love it when things start coming together.

I shot for a while with back tension only during warm up today and it sure does have a unique feel as the shot breaks and it is something that all shooters should experience weather it is their dominant choice or not.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

ron w said:


> sharks?....yea, all two,...or maybe three of us. do you want me to pull up all the names that puked all over my posts as I was trying to talk about back tension ?.





EPLC said:


> Disagreeing with ones position isn't puking all over it.


Well, one can state one's position for the subject and leave it as that. There is no contest here, just giving what seems to be the best of the ages or what gives the best for one replying.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

northern rednek said:


> Hello, not trying to start the debate over again, just trying to maybe help out someone else like me. Pure back tension firing engine is the only one and the most enjoyable for me. I just finished dedicating 3 months to learning some kind of manipulation with the hand and all I got out of it was target panic. Not saying pure back tension is the only or best way but for me it is. All I have to do is draw settle, start the back then watch the x. That easy. I'll prob take a bashing for this but I hope it will help someone that's been struggling like I have.


Very good. Glad you are enjoying your shooting. :cheers:

I do have a question, you said "All I have to do is draw settle, start the back then watch the x." The question is, can you define for us what actually "fires" the release? You may be doing this all subconsciously, but can you break from that and become aware of what's happening and analyse what is actually causing the release to fire? I'd be interested to know. 

Thanks! Laz


----------



## northern rednek (Oct 24, 2008)

I know ultimately that it is the hand giving way in some form or another that actually fires the release. What I do is draw and anchor at the same time setting the back tension up. I then settle on to the target but really the back tension is what is settling the pin down, then I aim and the shot goes off soon after. There is no moment after I start aiming where I consciously add tension it's a steady build up from anchor to release.


----------



## northern rednek (Oct 24, 2008)

In the line you quoted I made a mistake, I don't settle then start my back, if that happens I have to let down and start again. I have used that in the past though but I don't think it's not proper and can become a punch.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

Thanks, that's what I was wanting to know! :cheers:


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

Lazarus said:


> Very good. Glad you are enjoying your shooting. :cheers:
> 
> I do have a question, you said "All I have to do is draw settle, start the back then watch the x." The question is, can you define for us what actually "fires" the release? You may be doing this all subconsciously, but can you break from that and become aware of what's happening and analyse what is actually causing the release to fire? I'd be interested to know.
> 
> Thanks! Laz


 specifically , rotation of the release's body is what fires the release. it's pretty much an understood reality with a hinge, that if nothing is done to produce rotation at the hinge's body, it will not fire. 
this universally applies to what-ever method is used to produce the rotation. "no rotation = no fire".
I suppose you could break even that down further into the relationship between the actual rotation of the release and it's relationship to the stationary position of the string due to the holding weight of the bow. but I would think, in a an advanced forum, that is pretty well understood and taken for granted as obvious. then again maybe not by everyone because there is a certain faction that thinks rotation through rhomboid contraction, or "back tension", is a myth, regardess of the fact that if the rhomboid doesn't contract, and cause the forearm to swing to some degree, rotation at the body of the hinge will not develop. the odd identity here, is that it is precisely the anatomical and biomechanical function of the rhomboid muscle to produce the action that causes the forearm to swing, whether subconsciously administered, as in the release execution as a element within the shot process, or consciously administered, as in using back tension to draw and hold , the action is the same and it is universally called, "back tension". if the rhomboid doesn't contract, given the parameter of "pure", or "rotational" back tension (which-ever one prefers to call it), there can be no rotation of any kind, developed.
simply put, the release will not rotate by itself.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

SonnyThomas said:


> Nice shooting, unclejane. Outside and even the tiniest of breezes can wreck havoc on one's shooting.


Especially at only 30lbs draw weight and a 274fps IBO bow lol... I am finding it doesn't get blown around in the wind that much, tho. My PSE is like trying to hold onto a kite outdoors, but this thing is a lot steadier for some reason. Could be the huge cams on the PSE - those things are the size of dinner plates and are probably what catch the wind on it.

Now I need to start working on a stabilizer system for it....

LS


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

ron w said:


> specifically , rotation of the release's body is what fires the release. it's pretty much an understood reality with a hinge, that if nothing is done to produce rotation at the hinge's body, it will not fire.
> this universally applies to what-ever method is used to produce the rotation. "no rotation = no fire".
> I suppose you could break even that down further into the relationship between the actual rotation of the release and it's relationship to the stationary position of the string due to the holding weight of the bow. but I would think, in a an advanced forum, that is pretty well understood and taken for granted as obvious. then again maybe not by everyone because there is a certain faction that thinks rotation through rhomboid contraction, or "back tension", is a myth, regardess of the fact that if the rhomboid doesn't contract, and cause the forearm to swing to some degree, rotation at the body of the hinge will not develop. the odd identity here, is that it is precisely the anatomical and biomechanical function of the rhomboid muscle to produce the action that causes the forearm to swing, whether subconsciously administered, as in the release execution as a element within the shot process, or consciously administered, as in using back tension to draw and hold , the action is the same and it is universally called, "back tension". if the rhomboid doesn't contract, given the parameter of "pure", or "rotational" back tension (which-ever one prefers to call it), there can be no rotation of any kind, developed.
> simply put, the release will not rotate by itself.


Well, that. Or the rhomboid simply holds the arm in position as the release is rotated either by 1 or more fingers yielding to the weight, 1 or more fingers contracting, or a combination of the 2. In fact, it could be a combination of all those things.

In the end, not knowing exactly how much the elbow is moving (if at all) doesn't matter.
The OP is having good luck shooting without any conscious input to rotate the hinge with his fingers, and wants others to know what is working for him.
To me, that's the point of this all.


----------



## Maine Iceman (May 30, 2012)

it's all opinion. I use back tension with a click and love it. And honestly, there is no right or wrong answer. It is your opinion what you like and dislike and being told otherwise makes as little sense as being told what you should like and dislike for sandwiches. I like PB&J. Some support, and some oppose. But that does not mean I am wrong. Shoot what you like and what likes you. Period.


----------



## Duckdawg (Nov 10, 2003)

Well said Iceman.


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

I shoot what I would consider PBT. I draw the bow, begin anchoring, I engage my back by positioning my elbow, I get it in position, and I aim until the shot fires. As far as my level of shooting, my name is at the bottom of my posts, if you want to know, look me up. I mostly shoot ASA Pro Ams.

Here is a link to me shooting a shot in slow motion.

https://youtu.be/njBneBuWles


----------



## bowfisher (Jan 21, 2003)

shootist said:


> I shoot what I would consider PBT. I draw the bow, begin anchoring, I engage my back by positioning my elbow, I get it in position, and I aim until the shot fires. As far as my level of shooting, my name is at the bottom of my posts, if you want to know, look me up. I mostly shoot ASA Pro Ams.
> 
> Here is a link to me shooting a shot in slow motion.
> 
> https://youtu.be/njBneBuWles


Ok, What is going on while you are waiting for it to fire?


----------



## shootist (Aug 28, 2003)

bowfisher said:


> Ok, What is going on while you are waiting for it to fire?


I maintain the "stretched" feeling in my back and I have the slightest push to the target with my bow arm. When everything is firing on all cylinders, my shot is fairly active.


----------



## bowfisher (Jan 21, 2003)

shootist said:


> I maintain the "stretched" feeling in my back and I have the slightest push to the target with my bow arm. When everything is firing on all cylinders, my shot is fairly active.


Thanks!


----------

