# Hoyt Stealth Shots



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

If you like them, keep them. Some do, some don't. They seem to have vanished from the competative circuit though.


----------



## OCBrent (Sep 27, 2007)

There are some past Threads in this forum you can search for.

Personally, with my new Ion-X and new Quattro limbs, the Stealth Shots were the only thing that could take out the vibration and "crack" noise. I shot them for year.

I took them off a couple months ago, to take another try at playing with brace height and different strings, and it was ALREADY quiet! Same string, same brace height, same arrows, same stabilizer setup, the "dowel" positions were the same, same me,... I have no idea how it got quiet and less vibration. I've left them off. Maybe the Stealth Shots some how trained it to be quiet. 

If you run out of options for getting your bow quiet, they will do that. 

Good Luck,
Brent


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

There's a thread here from a few years back where many of us questioned their use and the claims that were made about them, both by Hoyt and by a certain sponsored athlete who was posting here to promote them. He doesn't post here anymore. Probably because he was called out on that thread.

I'm sure they improve the feel and sound of the shot. But that is all. Again, this is a "what would Brady do?" question. Does he use them? Nope. If they offered any kind of real advantage on the scorecard, you had better believe he and all the Koreans would. But they don't.


----------



## Jake Kaminski (Mar 10, 2007)

John,

I left because of trolling from individuals such as yourself. You always assume... And you know what that does. 

I give honest feedback and make decisions purely on performance, does a paycheck help? You tell me. 

I use the stealthshots for numerous reasons the primary reason is that it really helps take out inconsistencies in my release. When I was doing testing with them it was at 90m which everyone can agree really brings the faults in your game to the limelight. Now the death of me at 90m is a collapse/pluck which results in a high right 6ish arrow. I've noticed with the stealthshots it was a 50/50 chance to hit that high right 6 and to still be a 10. In the beginning I couldn't figure out why it appeared to be random but after much soul searching I found that when it was still a 6 I was also collapsing my bow arm. When I remained strong in the front half no matter how badly I plucked the arrow still went in the ten ring. 

Now on that note I feel like there is very very few people in this archery world who can be as objective in their honesty with themselves over how well or poorly a shot went and what were the causes. So in my opinion many people cannot feel they collapse let alone which side they do or do not collapse on so as to be objective in their observations of the outcome of a shot. 

The claims that were made in the video were true and verifiable. Showing a 1/2fps gain was not to say "hey it makes your bow faster" it was to show that with this potientially performance enhancing piece of equipment, there is no catch or drawbacks. The arrow came off more consistently and produced a more consistent speed from shot to shot by almost 50%. (Can only be measured on Easton's chrono that cost in the tens of thousands and measures to the hundredth of a FPS) the bow also jumped harder and had less vibration then before. 

Many people choose to not use them for as many different reasons as there are people not using them. I can list a few, there is six more screws to deal with, they are not self explanatory to set-up (which causes people to use them wrong and see performance decreases because of it), it creates string wear (which I promise is from the Gore material in strings these days. I use 8125 without gore and the string looks new over a month later), you have to take them off to put the riser in your bow case and which I am sure is a partial factor, I had a strong influence of these being created. You don't see Reo shooting Jesse's release and you also don't see Jesse shooting Reo's release. 

Did I get paid for the stealthshots? No, do I recieve royalties from them? No. Am I required to use them? No. 

So why do I use them?

The aforementioned forgiveness for a pluck.
The instant feedback on tiller and BH changes without using a bow square. 
More consistent arrow detachment.
The bow reaction.
Because I choose to.


Don't be passive aggressive John and call an apple and apple not a "certain red fruit" 

What would brady do? So following that logic where is your prodigy RX and Xs Vanes? ...yeah I thought so.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Some interesting points made by Jake, but I have to say that the Hoyt marketing would be better if they included some of the details Jake just mentioned. 

I think Jake's post highlights a problem that non-professional archers have in evaluating claims of gear efficacy, which deciding between the wisdom of crowds (which assumes that the status quo is always the best way) vs. the subjective impressions of a single archer (which can be subject to inaccurate human cognitive bias, but can also be right and the status quo wrong).


----------



## Jake Kaminski (Mar 10, 2007)

Agreed. 

To each his own.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I left because of trolling from individuals such as yourself. *You always assume*... And you know what that does.


LOL. Yea, you're right. I always assume. I don't have any personal experience to draw on. Thanks for setting that one straight. 

Jake, I didn't name you personally because I figured that upon reflection, you might have regretted some of your comments on that thread and I didn't want to draw attention to you unnecessarily. However, since you do apparently lurk...

WWBD? Yup, I've noticed he's gone back to a conventional Hoyt Geometry (like my TR-7) and he's using XS vanes that look conspicuously like the Eli S3 vanes I used in 2012 and the oversized vanes Vic used from 2004 on 

So there's my logic. I smiled the first time I saw those XS vanes. Vic was the first one I saw using "oversized" vanes and I took notice in 2004 when he won the trials by an easy margin with them. Based on that observation, I later tested the S3 Elivanes at 70M in the wind even though they were not recommended for 70M outdoor shooting, and found my arrows grouped quite a bit better with them. Then all I did was go on to shoot all my personal best outdoor scores that year, including a 341 with my first 36 arrows in match play in Chula. You might remember that day? Did you not notice the "oversized" S3 Elivanes on our bale?

Instead of accusing me of "assuming" and being "passive aggressive" how about answering why we see so few Stealth Shots on top of the podium at WC or Olympic or World Cup events these days? Have your contemporaries simply not seen the benefits you've seen from them? What are they missing out on? 

See you in Decatur.


----------



## Jake Kaminski (Mar 10, 2007)

The TR-7 is actually less reflex then the GM geometry. By about .200"

Eli vanes are no where close to x's vanes. The XS are closer to the old Mylar vanes then to spin wings.


----------



## tbrash01 (Oct 7, 2010)

I have been using them on my Ion-X for about 7 months now and Jake is not wrong with a lot of the claims that are made. I agree with a bit more forgiveness on a pluck, there is the instant feedback on tiller and BH, can't argue about the arrow detachment as the string just stops lol, how the bow reacts to them, and the sound that is made. All of these things are 100% true and you can't argue with it at all. 

With everything there is the good, bad, and ugly. Dating myself back 30 years in archery and I have played with just about every toy out there. Yes I can be a nerd but that is what engineers do.

Here is my feedback using the Ion-X and both Hoyt Quattro's and Uukha limbs.

Hoyt limbs with stealth shots are quieter and the limbs don't flop around after the shot. I personally like that solid feeling. The groups are not much different with or without the stealth shots, but on a plucky release there is a better consistency with the arrow leaving the string which helps some... not a lot though. I personally can't shoot the Quattro's now without the stealth shots because the limbs to me feel sloppy by themselves. Just the nature of recurve. The distance from the string with the Quattro's needs to be as close as possible otherwise you can hear the string vibrate. Personal annoyance, but be within WA rules and it is fine.

Uukha limbs with stealth shots seem louder to me than without them on the riser. Uukha has a very distinctive snap and the stealth shot does not really help these limbs. With the stealth shots the bow just feels more solid after the shot. Without the SS the Uukha limbs have a vibration that loosens everything, but with the SS the loose parts are few and far between. So I prefer to still shoot the bow with the SS. The distance from the string with the Uukha can be a bit further away compared to the Quattro's. As much as a 1/2 inch away and it still sounds ok. I actually find the sound and reaction of using the SS are better with the Uukha around 1/4" away from the string. 

The ugly part is that if you want to do some tuning, you have to take it all apart! If they are not tight enough they will come loose and can be frustrating. 

Things to note in my findings is that the string gets a little wear but nothing major at all. After 5k plus shots they still look good but are starting to show signs of wear that could be causing the string wear. I make strings all the time so I don't really care and I have new bumpers coming anyway. Another thing to note about quick check on BH or tiller is that a visual glance is all you need. It gets hot outside and I can see my BH change without ever grabbing a bow square. I also had a tiller issue that I found thanks to the SS! 

Are they going to make you a better archer... most likely not. Are they on every medal winning bow... no, but then again not every winning bow is Hoyt. Each to their own. I personally like the Stealth Shots for how they make my bow sound and feel. I am also probably on a one handed list of archers who shoot an Ion-X with Uukha limbs, stealth shots, and don't like the X10s. Just my .02

BTW great job in Cali Jake! Way to keep fighting being under the weather! Huge props.


----------



## Jake Kaminski (Mar 10, 2007)

The answer to the question about why you don't see them atop the podium is simple. Statistically those who are on the podium are far and few between. Of those it's far and few between who use stealth shots. Myself and Rick Van der ven are about it who are near the top and he has podiumed multiple times with them. You can argue those at the top do not make many mistakes and do not need something to clean up their release because it is so clean. Mine is not, that's why I use them. You won't gain points from them, but it helps keep me from losing points.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

So I guess the more specific question is why are those at that level who use them few and far between?

No question that there are plenty of guys who don't need the "help." I probably do. Maybe I should try them! LOL.



> You won't gain points from them, but it helps keep me from losing points.


That may be the most convincing argument I've heard yet. Anyone who's shot at a high level can relate to that - a piece of equipment that doesn't necessarily help you shoot better, but it does keep you from shooting worse. I had a prototype riser in Vegas a few years ago that "could" shoot as well as any I've used if I did everything right, but when I didn't, the results were worse than poor. Most folks call that less "forgiving." 

If the SS's create a more forgiving bow, then for some archers, that may be a good enough reason to put up with the additional hassle of maintaining and adjusting them.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Jake Kaminski said:


> The TR-7 is actually less reflex then the GM geometry. By about .200"


Which TR-7?  There have only been about 7 versions of that riser. Not all of them share the same geometry. 



> Eli vanes are no where close to x's vanes.


Clearly you don't remember my S3's then. They are not the same as the more common P3's you see. Very little difference in profile and costruction between the S3's and the XS. But the larger point is that oversized vanes are nothing new. Both Vic and I used them with success in the past.

[QUOTE} The XS are closer to the old Mylar vanes then to spin wings.[/QUOTE]

Nobody is disputing that.


----------



## beefstew27 (Mar 18, 2008)

Thanks for all the help folks!


----------



## [W.S.Z] (Aug 6, 2012)

Jake Kaminski said:


> Rick Van der ven .


He stopped using them, as did a lot of other relatively early adopters. I think that's the point most people make, that even the top archer who were using SS are now abandoning the technology.

However, I don't think there's a clear deficit of using the SS, so if it works for someone, it works.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

[W.S.Z] said:


> He stopped using them, as did a lot of other relatively early adopters. I think that's the point most people make, that even the top archer who were using SS are now abandoning the technology.
> 
> However, I don't think there's a clear deficit of using the SS, so if it works for someone, it works.


Hmm...I wonder if I can pick up a pair cheap to retrofit on to some of our plastic student risers - we could tap the risers just to do it, because it would be ridiculous to load them up with premium accessories...and I have a fondness for ridiculous. :embara:


----------



## arc2x4 (Jun 4, 2007)

In the compound world they call it a string stop. Trad shooters use string silencers like spyders and furballs to acomplish the same thing; Damp string vibration. I wonder why I never see beaverballs or string spiders on Olympic recurves if string vibration is an issue? Anyone try a string silencer to address the vibration issue on a target bow?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

arc, I think what Jake is saying is that they don't just dampen string vibration, but make for a more consistent shot - possibly by releasing the arrow at the same point every shot. 

The last comments Jake made on the subject are somewhat intriguing to me, and I may have to give these string stops a second look. The problem I and many others have - who are not full time archers - is that it takes a lot of time to tinker with things like this and really see what they accomplish. Many of us part-timers take the shortcut by instead, watching to see what the full-time professionals are using to earn their living. So far, the odds are not in favor of the string stops.

However, this may be a case like the forged blade vs. the cavity back iron in golf where the pro's don't need the added forgiveness of a cavity back, and choose forged blades because they can. It sure sounded like Jake was saying that a bow with string stops is the archery equivalent of the "forgiving cavity back iron" in golf?


----------



## arc2x4 (Jun 4, 2007)

Here are a few good points fom another discussion on the Matthews forum:

String stops are like any other accessory, it has to be setup properly to work correctly. Its purpose is to ostensibly quiet the bow by reducing the string oscillations. For that to happen, and to not just transmit the energy through the rod into the riser, the material has to have the exact correct amount of compressibility. Just like shocks on a truck, too soft and they bottom out, dampening is insufficient and energy is transmitted to the frame, to stiff and it transmits the energy to the frame more than it dampens. Like shocks, the string stop has to be tuned to be effective … and that means if you change DW, arrow weight, etc. the tuning requirements also change. I consider the design or the Dead End and C.T.A. to be better than just a hunk of Navcom material on the end of a stiff metal rod.*

Assuming the string stop is tuned perfectly, then the question arises about how effective it is on a particular bow. If a bow has a lot of vibration (noise) or string oscillation, most older non-parallel limb bows fit into that category, then a string stop can make a noticeable difference. If a bow has little vibration or string oscillation, most parallel limb bows fit into that category, then there is little work for the string stop to do and any effect would be small.

Claims that the string stop improves accuracy lack any evidence that can’t be explained by poor nock fit, IMHO. Accuracy only depends on the nock separating consistently from the string at the same moment in the string’s travel to achieve consistent arrow velocity. Proper fitting nocks do that. A string stop theoretically could force a poor fitting nock to do that also, thus an accuracy improvement would be noticed. But, this is accuracy at extended ranges, not at 18m where variations in velocity mean little. At best the argument for string stops improving accuracy is that they are a band-aid on a problem.

Claims that the string stop increases arrow speed likewise lack any evidence that can’t be explained by poor nock fit. I have shoot through a chronograph with and without a string stop to show there is no velocity change with a proper fitting nock. I have also shot test groups at 20 yds with a Drenalin fitted with an STS and without an STS and consistently stayed in the X-ring. Any accuracy improvement came from arrow vane control and FOC…

With and Without

With…

Without …

I see no useful purpose for a string stop for target shooting unless you are shooting an older, non-parallel limb bow that is beating you to death, like my Browning 6T6 with the hatchet cams. Frankly, I have tried an STS on it, with Limbsavers and String Leeches, and the bow destroyed the String Leeches in less than 100 shots, and the Limbsavers didn’t last more than about 500 shots, and the EDS stopper was too soft with most of the energy transmitted into the riser and the string blowing by it, wearing it out … the end result was disappointing.

… but I use a string stop on my hunting bows to prevent string slap on bulky camo clothing, raingear, 3D leafy suit, etc.

Just my*


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Not sure how much value there is in comparing the effects of string stops on a compound to that of a recurve.


----------



## rharper (Apr 30, 2012)

This is why I use them and noticed at longer distance it helped "forgiveness for a pluck and The instant feedback on tiller and BH changes without using a bow square." In the grand scheme of things, I am a beginner compared to some on this forum. But I can tell when my form is on why things do what they do. Personally, I could care less about any noise.

I don't break my own down as I have a full size bag to store by bow in. The only issue I have had was one of the set screws came loose. Loctite on the thread now. Lesson learned but now it's part of the pre-check to make sure everything is ready to rock.

Rod


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

You know Rod, I never even thought about breaking the bow down and putting it in a case. Do folks take them off every time, or leave them on the riser?


----------



## arc2x4 (Jun 4, 2007)

So the string stop is being used to enforce a consistent relase of the arrow nock from the string. Is that not better addressed by proper nock fit? Is it most helpful to accuracy at long range for the string to be suddenly stopped and that serve as the mechanism for arrow release? Does stopping the string increase arrow speed? Or does the string hit the stop after the arrow leaves the string?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

All questions that were addressed in the 1st Stealth Shot thread. Answered? I'm not sure, but they were addressed. 

Quite a few claims have been made about what Stealth Shots can do. Frankly, without the benefit of 1) having tested them extensively and 2) seen the high speed video footage, I don't think any of us will know for certain. Jake has done both of those things, and he's formed his opinion.

I'm not sure how extensive the testing was done with SS's by other top level archers who have chosen to not use them. Perhaps they have, or perhaps they didn't like the idea from the beginning, realized they could win without them, and were satisfied with that? Who knows. Only they do. 

The trouble with getting opinions on products like these from sposored athletes, is that you're never going to hear a sponsored athlete say on the record "I tried them and didn't think they helped me." or, "I am not interested in trying them." The will instead just stay mute on the issue, and then nobody really knows why the athletes who don't use them, don't use them.


----------



## tbrash01 (Oct 7, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> You know Rod, I never even thought about breaking the bow down and putting it in a case. Do folks take them off every time, or leave them on the riser?


I only take off the bumper with rod and leave the bracket mounted to put it in the case. Even with the Tec bar the riser still fits in the Hoyt soft bag and easily in the case. I marked where the rod goes into the bracket so it is the same when broken down and still check the tiller and BH like normal each time. I will admit that it is a pain to set them back up each time I break the bow down. Just another thing fidget with.


----------



## beefstew27 (Mar 18, 2008)

So far I've been busy putting mine in the backpack. It fits just fine, though the ss stocks out a bit from the inside sleeve of the hoyt pack.


----------



## OCBrent (Sep 27, 2007)

limbwalker said:


> You know Rod, I never even thought about breaking the bow down and putting it in a case. Do folks take them off every time, or leave them on the riser?


Mine would not fit in my Hardcase, so when I fly I take them off the bow. I have a mark on my bow, the Stealth shot body, and Stealth Shot Tapered Washer, so they can all be quickly aligned and installed. I have a "nut" I put on the Stealth shot Bolt when removed from the Riser, so all the parts stay together. On the Ion-X the Top Stealth Shot needs a tapered washer so it will be square to the String. The bottom Stealth Shot does not need a Tapered washer, but it comes with a flat washer if you want to use one. I choose not to use it. One less thing to worry about. If you've got a good eye, or can scribe, you could take the Top Stealth Shot to a Sander/Polisher and grind it to the proper profile so it wouldn't need the tapered washer. I also made sure to carry all the needed Allen Wrenches in my Quiver so I could quickly tighten things up, Re-Align, etc... if needed.

Brent


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

arc2x4 said:


> So the string stop is being used to enforce a consistent relase of the arrow nock from the string. Is that not better addressed by proper nock fit? Is it most helpful to accuracy at long range for the string to be suddenly stopped and that serve as the mechanism for arrow release? Does stopping the string increase arrow speed? Or does the string hit the stop after the arrow leaves the string?


With a recurve at the end of the power stroke the limbs/string decelerate. This deceleration slows the arrow down via the nock attachment over a distance/time until the deceleration force is enough to force nock string separation. The idea of the stealth shot is that the string hits the stops at the beginning of the string deceleration process resulting in a massive "instantaneous" deceleration causing "instantaneous" separation of the nock from the string. As you are reducing the arrow string deceleration time you can in theory reduce the arrow speed loss by a small amount so net you might gain a small increase in measured arrow speed. Note for the stealth shot to do anything useful it has to act as a mechanical string guide (the string hits the stops while the arrow is still on the string) which pretty much by definition means that it is illegal for use on on an Olympic bow. That FITA technical committee approved this device seems to indicate that when Hoyt say jump Fita's only response is "how high".


----------



## arc2x4 (Jun 4, 2007)

> Note for the stealth shot to do anything useful it has to act as a mechanical string guide (the string hits the stops while the arrow is still on the string) which pretty much by definition means that it is illegal for use on on an Olympic bow.


It would be interesting to see a video of a couple different archers using the stealth shot for the purpose of seeing if the properly fitting nock releases the arrow from the string before it hits the stealth shot. Maybe FITA approved it because the arrow leaves the string before it hits the string stop...


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Love ya' Joe, but I'm afraid you might both be wrong.

The nock stays on the string well below brace height. Probably 1/2" below. You could set the SS's so there is 3/8" of clearance from the string and the nock would still be on the string when it impacted the stops. 

However, I'm pretty sure you are correct about this:



> when Hoyt say jump Fita's only response is "how high".


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Love ya' Joe, but I'm afraid you might both be wrong.
> 
> The nock stays on the string well below brace height. Probably 1/2" below. You could set the SS's so there is 3/8" of clearance from the string and the nock would still be on the string when it impacted the stops.


I thought that was JT's point, that even though the string stop touches the string below the brace height, the arrow nock is still attached to the string at the time of hitting the string stop - which is the whole point of the string stop, and, from JT's post, apparently something that would usually be considered a violation of FITA regs. :dontknow:

I can say this, though. The Technical Committee has given out some surprising rulings, ones that weren't related to Hoyt. Allowing cell phones to be used to be used at the target to plot arrow groupings, but not perform analysis, is one such ruling. So is the ruling in favor of a laser etched 3-under tab that has, in effect, multiple levels of graduations.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

The point is this: There is a confusion between "Deceleration", and "Decreasing Acceleration".

And Joe T is right.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Love ya' Joe, but I'm afraid you might both be wrong.
> 
> *The nock stays on the string well below brace height. Probably 1/2" below.* You could set the SS's so there is 3/8" of clearance from the string and the nock would still be on the string when it impacted the stops.
> 
> However, I'm pretty sure you are correct about this:


Exactly my point. The Fita requirement that at brace height the string doesn't touch the stops is piece of meaningless smoke and mirrors, just an indicator the the Tech. committee were aware of the illegality.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ah, okay. I see what you're saying now Joe.


----------



## RURC (Sep 15, 2012)

Jake,
My son Chris (he was next to you at the Sunshine Stste Games a few weeks ago) is looking at trying the string stops. I am wondering what the procedure would be to set them up. You state that people use them and have not set them up correctly. What can you do or tell me in setting these up. He also shoots bare bow and we are wanting to put these on his Gillo riser. Any information you can give us will be greatly appreciated.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

So, how many "stealth shots" in Rio? Any?


----------



## MartinOttosson (May 31, 2011)

limbwalker said:


> So, how many "stealth shots" in Rio? Any?


Probably the athletes that were aware of the revolutionary extreme advantage that the Stealths provide, felt that this ten-making device was not considered fair in regard to the olympic oath.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

is this becoming like the shoe thread? 


Chris


----------



## Ar-Pe-Lo (Oct 16, 2011)

limbwalker said:


> So, how many "stealth shots" in Rio? Any?


I would say as many as Pilla light management system won medals.....


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ar-Pe-Lo said:


> I would say as many as Pilla light management system won medals.....


Glad you said it. 

And oh how I got flamed for questioning the snake oil...


----------



## Matt Z (Jul 22, 2003)

I love that you won't let this go John! :smile:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Matt Z said:


> I love that you won't let this go John! :smile:


Who, me?  

I probably would have dropped it long ago if I hadn't been flamed for daring to share my opinion.

Once again, my "WWBD" rule proves it's usefulness. The beauty is in it's simplicity.


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

Jake Kaminski talked about taking off the Stealth Shots in the Q and A he did on facebook from Rio right before Olympic competition started.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I missed that. Will have to go back and see it. What reason did he give for removing them TER?


----------



## Ar-Pe-Lo (Oct 16, 2011)

limbwalker said:


> I missed that. Will have to go back and see it. What reason did he give for removing them TER?


Maybe he thought that will be too much advantage....you know ... stealth shots, angular draw...


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

He said he went through a period of struggling with poor grouping. He was confident in his form and mental game so he starting experimenting with equipment. He took off the Stealth Shots and his scores and grouping did not change in any way. So there was no reason to put them back on. It's at about 16:40 in the Q and A.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Thanks TER. Sounds reasonable.


----------



## TwentySix (Feb 25, 2011)

limbwalker said:


> Once again, my "WWBD" rule proves it's usefulness.


Watch what Brady does?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

TwentySix said:


> Watch what Brady does?


Close. What would Brady do?  

Before Brady, it was "what would Butch do?" 

Served me pretty well over time. Neither of them would ever sacrifice a point for a sponsor. Ever.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Close. What would Brady do?
> 
> Before Brady, it was "what would Butch do?"
> 
> Served me pretty well over time. Neither of them would ever sacrifice a point for a sponsor. Ever.


No real top level archer will ever sacrify a point for a sponsor. Never happend, never will happen.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Vittorio said:


> No real top level archer will ever sacrify a point for a sponsor. Never happend, never will happen.


I guess it depends on what you consider "top level" then. There is a small elite category of archers who the sponsors come to, and they can take or leave the offers. Then there is a much larger category of even full-time professional archers who will never bite the hand that feeds them because they frankly have no other career option to fall back on. 

Archers like Butch and Brady are secure enough both financially and from a "legacy" point of view that they will ONLY use what gives them the greatest advantage and not waste time with anything else. A part-time amateur archer would do very well to discern between those archers who have to depend on sponsor support vs. those whose track records are so solid that they will always be sought out by the market. This is not a slight of those archers who have to promote their sponsor's products to make a living. Just rather an observation of different approaches to being a "sponsored" athlete and how they allow that to affect their equipment choices.


----------

