# Total Archery by Kisik Lee



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

Obviously Lee Ki-Sik is doing something very very right. As is the entire Korean archery programe.


----------



## Shane S.D. (Nov 23, 2004)

There are many Italians in the top ten, men and women, recurve FITA, do they shoot like the Koreans? and if not why are we not looking over there for answers also?


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

Well, we've got to look at Simon Fairweather. One olympic gold medal in 2000.

17 years old at the time, Dave Barnes won bronze at the last outdoor world championships.

17 last year Tim Cuddihy won Gold at the Junior Worlds, beating out Koreans and Italians alike. Then Won Bronze at the Olympics, eliminating two Koreans and tying an Olympic record at the same time in the quarter finals.

Most of the outdoor world records are held by Koreans. Womens side especially.

The Italians are definitely strong. Michelle, Carla Frangilli, DiBuo, Galliazo. They have alot of experience and they shoot alot. Experience can definitely factor in when technique is not the most efficient. Carla's technique looks the best I've seen from those I named of Italians. 

But without the experience of shooting in these high pressure situations, like Grand Prix, other European and Asian events. I would go with having a strong high scoring technique in place of not having the experience. With the technique you can become good enough to gain the experience.  

my thoughts. 

Dylan


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Shane S.D. said:


> There are many Italians in the top ten, men and women, recurve FITA, do they shoot like the Koreans? and if not why are we not looking over there for answers also?


um, because, out of the 43 or so FITA WORLD and Olympic records on the books, the Koreans hold 39, and at least one of the others is held by a disciple of K.Lee? 
 
I have not seen the Italians shoot up close and personal enough to know whether they follow the precepts of K.Lee, can you tell me whether they do? (Asking seriously, not trolling) Where is Vittorio when you need him ?  
Thanks.... Ron


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

and M.A.D. is pointing out that Simon Fairweather, and all the Aussies who have come so far in such a short time, are a product of Kisik Lee's philosophy. 

Sure wish the U.S. would hire him to head up the National Coaching Renovation Project here....  can you imagine what we could do with a system of JOAD and mid-level coaches, all using this system of his to grow US archers?


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

Just wondering, but what does everyone think the Koreans do that makes them better than everyone else?

Not their system, but what do they do form/technique wise that differs from everyon else?


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

Everything that Marcus has been trying to explain to you on previous threads is whats happening in Australia.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

MerlinApexDylan said:


> Everything that Marcus has been trying to explain to you on previous threads is whats happening in Australia.


And exactly what is that? What Marcus is trying to explain to me as you so put it, is nothing new under the sun.

with the exception of crunching the abs. I never heard of that in the US before.


----------



## Shirt (Aug 31, 2002)

What do the Koreans do that makes them so much better?

They do it properly, seriously, and ALL THE TIME, as opposed to the halfassed approach of most other countries. 


"Well, I don't like doing XXXX so I won't, but I'm still shooting like a Korean because everything else is there..." Give me a break.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

TexARC said:


> This book will be regarded as the primary reference tome for recurve archery in the US, in the next few years.
> 
> You either "get it" and support this tao, or you don't.


So where do we get a copy?

I signed up on Lloyd's "Total Archery" thread but haven't heard anything back. I'm getting impatient.


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

In regards to Tim and Dave, these guys went from nothing to World Class within 4 years being coached by Mr Lee. I don't think many people really understand how new to the sport these guys actually are. 
Most of the archers on here who blow off the concepts and technique that is promoted by Mr Lee and others who teach similar techniques are shooting pretty much the same scores as they were 4 years ago. 

Shane: Good question, try it and let us know how you go. 
"The Korean Method" is based on biomechanics, what is the core basis of 'The Italian Method"?

MAD: Don't worry about trying to explain it, not worth the time.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> They do it properly, seriously, and ALL THE TIME, as opposed to the halfassed approach of most other countries.


I think this is as much a part of the answer as is the technique. Technique is very important, but how you apply it and how you train is the rest of the formula. We have lots of folks who practice, but very few that train.

John.


----------



## Levl4e (Feb 17, 2004)

Let's put this subject in perspective. This is how much further ahead the Koreans were in the 80's. Mr. Lee told us that they monitored the women's team menstral cycles in relation to their performance for 7 months prior to the 84 Olympics so the could have them in their period of the cycle where they had performed best. He also told us that they had used heart monitors with transmitters at World Championships for heart rate studies. He had the Korean Sports Science institute at his disposal in Seoul at the University. The amount of study that he has been involved in the last 20 plus years is un-rivaled. Keep in mind that he says that his method is not the Korean method but rather the Bio-mechanical method. You need to keep an open mind regarding his technique. Since I have come back from the seminar I have spoken with a few people about the seminar. Almost everyone has told me that is what they are already doing, but when I see video or pictures it is obvious that they are no where close. The info in the book will help you understand what his method is. I feel very fortunate to have been able to speak with him personally and have him answer my specific questions from a coaches standpoint. He also told us that he never shot above 1250 and didn't feel that it was necessary to be a good coach. He did feel that you need to have some competition experience. He also said that a coach needs to be Omnipotent. I don't think that would fly here in the US. Could we put a coaching system like the Koreans in the US? Maybe but it would take years.I personally think we should educate the coaches we have with the latest technique and follow up on a regular basis( 4 times a year like the Koreans do). Mr. Lee told us that without the coaches you have nothing. Coaches in the US are secondary or possibly further down the list of importance and if you don't believe this, where are all our previous Olympic coaches today? Successful or not our organization seems to push them away along with their experience and knowledge.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

Levl4e said:


> Coaches in the US are secondary or possibly further down the list of importance and if you don't believe this, where are all our previous Olympic coaches today? Successful or not our organization seems to push them away along with their experience and knowledge.


It's not only coaches. It's any kind of teacher. (That includes seniors who have a TON to teach us if we only listen.) Teacher is one the least respected professions in the US. We have some pretty screwed up priorities in the US.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Bob - you wrote - "Almost everyone has told me that is what they are already doing, but when I see video or pictures it is obvious that they are no where close" 

This is a part of the conundrum. Many may have the desire to shoot "this way", but even with trying, they do not get there. 

It is so easy to read how in this book, but transforming that into actual practice is soooooo hard to do! And really, even with the best intentions, most coaches probably do not grasp in a fundamental way the things that K.Lee espouses. It is good if they/we have the willingness to adapt, to change, to evolve, though. 

Regardless of what has happened in the NAA in the far and near past, I sincerely hope that with this book, and some good seminars and implementation of a good plan by the high performance director, to spread this properly into our NAA system, the inertia of the NAA's resistance to change can be overcome and we will begin to evolve in a way that benefits ALL the membership that wish to grow.


----------



## Boltsmyth (Nov 16, 2002)

So (wondering if I really need to buy the book) is there anything in this book that is not covered by McKenny?


----------



## Levl4e (Feb 17, 2004)

Get the book it can only help.

Ron, there are a few people in the US that claim to be able to teach the way the Koreans execute a shot, maybe so, but this according to Mr. Lee is not the Korean method. The reason archers try to achieve this technique and can't achieve it is simply because it has not been taught here. Have your coach read the book or in your case have him contact Mr. Lee and discuss their differences. Mr. Lee seemed very willing to share his knowledge.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

Shirt said:


> What do the Koreans do that makes them so much better?
> 
> They do it properly, seriously, and ALL THE TIME, as opposed to the halfassed approach of most other countries.
> 
> ...


Yes, exactly. I am curious still as to what is different about their technique. I classify that as part of their system.

I'm still getting a copy of the book. I just want to know what the Koreans are doing technique wise that is different.


----------



## barico (Nov 21, 2004)

Leighton said:


> Yes, exactly. I am curious still as to what is different about their technique.


The difference is efficiency. The Koreans know about correct bone alignment and best possible muscle usage. You seem to have some kind of mental block about understanding what Marcus often tell you Leighton. They don't subscribe to the common idea that everyone is different so should have a different technique excepting slight minor differences. There is one correct way to shoot and that is the efficient way. They also listen to fact and don't make up lots of crap along the way.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

barico said:


> The difference is efficiency. The Koreans know about correct bone alignment and best possible muscle usage. You seem to have some kind of mental block about understanding what Marcus often tell you Leighton. They don't subscribe to the common idea that everyone is different so should have a different technique excepting slight minor differences. There is one correct way to shoot and that is the efficient way. They also listen to fact and don't make up lots of crap along the way.


thats still not answering the question. You are describing their system. But you do mention that their technique uses biomechanics. Ok, so what exactly do they do differently biomechanically than other top archers around the world? US not included.

And what exactly is Marcus trying to tell me that I didn't already know? Besides crunching the abs, which I am still experimenting with.


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

What we got here, is a failure to communicate!  

So basically the Koreans are all identical archery shooting machines using the best technique/form discovered thus far...


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

InKYfromSD said:


> So basically the Koreans are all identical archery shooting machines using the best technique/form discovered thus far...



I wouldn't say they are identical, but everything else is pretty close to my hypothesis about the Koreans.


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

What about your hypothesis about the Australians? Seems Tim didn't have any problems with the Koreans at Junior worlds, Nor Olympics. I'd be willing to learn what ever he or Dave is doing and I'd be willing to train like they do, if it ment a medal at the Olympics.  

But then I have to wonder what makes the Olympics such a drawing force for me. Or anyone? Do we want to be the best in everyone elses mind? Or do we simply want to know within ourselves that we can do it?


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

MerlinApexDylan said:


> What about your hypothesis about the Australians? Seems Tim didn't have any problems with the Koreans at Junior worlds, Nor Olympics. I'd be willing to learn what ever he or Dave is doing and I'd be willing to train like they do, if it ment a medal at the Olympics.
> 
> But then I have to wonder what makes the Olympics such a drawing force for me. Or anyone? Do we want to be the best in everyone elses mind? Or do we simply want to know within ourselves that we can do it?


My hypothesis about Tim & Dave & Simon is that they got Ki Sik Lee, listened to everything he had to say, corrected their form accordingly and spent more hours of shooting than at least 98% of archers have in their lifetimes.


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

They also weight train. Do SPT's and more then likely get an education whilst shooting. I know Dave is finished school. I'm not sure about his post secondary at the moment nor Tims.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

MerlinApexDylan said:


> They also weight train. Do SPT's and more then likely get an education whilst shooting. I know Dave is finished school. I'm not sure about his post secondary at the moment nor Tims.


Yes, exactly. They are very serious athletes in top physical condition. I would surmise that the Koreans are the same. I would also hypothesize that everyone else at the top is in similar condition.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

MerlinApexDylan said:


> They also weight train. Do SPT's and more then likely get an education whilst shooting. I know Dave is finished school. I'm not sure about his post secondary at the moment nor Tims.


Lee indicates on page 82 that Korean archers do NOT use weight training to strengthn their shooting muscles. It's probably typical of me and you to read our own expectations into things. I surmise though carefully, that he's indicating that they achieve their capacity for 1000 arrows a day by....shooting 1000 arrows a day, repeatedly. What he calls specific physical training (SPT). 

Another thing that is readily apparent in the book is the bilateral asymmetry, the scapular hypertrophy, visible in the photos of various Korean archers.


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

SPT is specialised physical training. Dave was weight training and at the AIS they have access to physio, a gym and other such things.


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

I'm sure I read on the Aussie forum that Lee told David to stop weight training for a while before the Olympics because he was getting too bulky. I'm going to try to find that.

But TexArc's observation of asymmetry in the Korean archers musculature is interesting. I was advised when I began shooting that weight training helps balance out the muscular development that can be made asymmetric by doing a great deal of shooting for a long time. This asymmetry can have long term side-effects. Seems to make sense that some weight-training for the whole body would be a good thing.

I'm also trying to remember where I read that pound for pound the only Korean athletes that have stronger legs than the archers were the weight-lifters. Gotta think some kind of training was necessary to get legs that strong.


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

Most of the training that Tim and Dave did is possible for everyone to do, it's dedication. I meet so many 'dedicated' archers who spend more time in front of the TV or going out with mates than training. These guys do school and train hard. Around 84+ hours a week of school and training. 



> Ok, so what exactly do they do differently biomechanically than other top archers around the world? US not included.


What are the Koreans doing differently? They are training from day one with solid biomechanically correct technique. Western archers tend to spend years shooting poor technique before they get serious. 
If you look at the Olympics the majority of western archers had clear fundamental flaws in the technique. They are very talented archers, but they could be more efficient. 
Any program that puts a bow in the hands of a beginner from day one and has them fire arrows is already putting those archers behind the 8 ball. Please show me a western 10 year old archer with solid biomechanically correct technique. There would be next to none out there. 

I need to find the pictures of the technique of Korean juniors, then compare them to westen juniors and you see the difference. 

The other problem is that many westen archers believe what they are doing is good enough. 

1405


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

I would classify that under their structure or system, rather than their technique.

That aside, I agree.


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

Then I think you need to learn about technique. Perhaps you will make the World Target team this year and can shoot with some of these guys and see for yourself.


----------



## Levl4e (Feb 17, 2004)

Ron,
I hope I didn't offend you with my previous post, but as you study the book and look at those pictures of the back it becomes pretty obvious that we are doing things very differently. I had previously thought that the bow shoulder position was being achieved by pushing the bow shoulder inwards toward the string, but when I asked Mr. lee to watch me do it he instantly told me that I was doing it incorectly. No shoulder push but rather keep the hips open to the target and rotate the ribcage above the waist to bring the shoulders into alignment.Keeping the bow shoulder down and stable. Pushing the shoulder inwards will lead to pain in the chest side of the rotater cuff due to impingement. Also most important to rotate the upper arm to bring the elbow to or near the 9:00 position.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

Marcus said:


> Then I think you need to learn about technique. Perhaps you will make the World Target team this year and can shoot with some of these guys and see for yourself.


Well, if I understand you correctly, their technique is the right way and everyone else does their technique incorrectly due to lack of a coherent system where archers are taught from day one the optimal technique. Did I understand your argument so far?

If that is the case, you still have not told us what is new about this technique, other than that it is the correct way. What makes this technique different from every other technique that came before it? Was it with the implementation of biomechanics into the analyzation of technique that the Koreans found something new and changed their form accordingly?


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

I will say this for the last time. After which I will finally put you on ignore. 

The Koreans were the first archers who ever looked at technique in a scientific manner and ONLY do things that are biomechanically sound. In the past everyone else tended to do it in an adhoc fashion and also tended to do it in a "well this is what worked for me". 
Everything that is done by Mr Lee is done with teams of researchers behind him. Every muscle is measured and everything filmed in great detail. This isn't farmer tom down on his corm fields shooting arrows and saying "gee that felt better". 

I think Levi describes it well. He thought it was done in a certain manner but it wasn't quite right. 
Most archers try to copy what they see the koreans doing but you can not visually copy unless you understand the reasons and structure behind it. In my past posts to you I have tried to explain the reasonings etc that things are done in a certain way, however you are hell bent on arguing that I am wrong and you are right or that it doesn't matter. 
Saying "it's just the same as what we are doing" is a simple arguement. Like arguing that a Hoyt Aerotec is just the same as a Longbow and then ignoring any differences people point out.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

I think I understand now. Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Levl4e said:


> Ron,
> I hope I didn't offend you with my previous post...


Bob, of course not! I try to keep myself in the "learning" mode, and my only offense is with my own difficulty at times in understanding others. One cannot learn when one is too busy being offended by a frank discussion  

My thoughts on the bow shoulder are that in many archers, rolling it just a very little may be necessary because they are initiating the draw with it out and back. But what I have been taught by Lindsey's Coach (and my mentor as well) is to keep it down, not to roll it, and that one tightens the muscles under the arm, from the armpit down to the edge of the rib cage, to draw the shoulder straight down into stability, and to _reach_ mentally towards the target some from the git-go. This creates the V that Lee speaks to in the book. If you check the pictures of Don R in Precision Archery, he indeed demonstrates this same crease in the top surface between the shoulder and the upper arm that Lee promotes as positive, likewise Rick McKinney shows this in his form, I believe. I can still say, having gotten even deeper into the book, I have found VERY LITTLE to differentiate this book from Don's philosophy and instructions. 

One thing that I do find of interest is Lee's assertion that archers should choose their left/right bow based on their hand dominance rather than eye dominance. 

You have MUCH more experience than I in this matter- does this concept of an archer doing better by choosing a bow, generally speaking, by relying on hand dominance correspond with your experience? I know the NAA's stance in the past has been to choose based on eye-dominance.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

TexArc,
what is the reasoning he gives for choosing bow handedness?


----------



## marty (Jun 4, 2002)

Just an irreverant note.

I bet the reason for choosing handedness is that in Asia there is still a very strong bias towards right handedness. I have no Asian friends or family who aren't right handed, although many are left eye dominant.

I'm sure it has changed but at one time there was a very strong social stigma against left handed folks.


----------



## Dave T (Mar 24, 2004)

geoff asked where we get a copy of this book. If anyone answered him I missed it. If this is common knowledge, please take pitty on those of us who live sheltered lives and don't share that "common knowledge".

Dave


----------



## Levl4e (Feb 17, 2004)

Ron,
When I asked Mr. Lee about the bow arm and reaching to the target he said it was like pushing against a wall. 50/50 push and pull. I took it to be an isometric push. I asked him if it was scapula motion towards the target and he said no it was natural, stable, and that the tricep would be firm when done properly. Think of the center of the chest as a hinge as you expand.
I don't have any idea what your coach teaches and I am not saying he is right or wrong. If you feel that what he teaches is working then by all means you should continue. You may have stumbled on the only person in the US that knew the proper biomechanical technique. After all he is well traveled and respected worldwide. I definitely am no expert after one seminar and will work with my current and future students trying to get the technique in place as best as I understand it with the help of some of the other coaches that attended the seminar. Keep in mind that there is always something lost in translation and publication. I guess you had to be there.

As for the eye dominance thing, I might have to dissagree with the book. I personally switched handedness this last year and am here to tell you that I only wish I had done it sooner. I no longer see two sight pins. I no longer hit 10 inches to the left at 18 m when I use the wrong pin, and I am now on the spot when I reach my rear reference position. I have not had any clumsyness issues due to switching hands but then again I think that I was a true lefty at birth and was not allowed to use my left hand as a child. It really helped to get a lefthanded quiver by the way.


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

Dave T,

I got mine from Alternative Sporting Services. It arrived today after 5 business days. Here's the link:

http://www.alternativess.com/cgi-bin/htmlos.cgi/00203.5.3264528289016792664

This is a very impressive book.


----------



## Jim McPhail (Jan 8, 2005)

Didn't Mr.Park change some of the Australian National team's handedness before Sydney?


----------



## Jim McPhail (Jan 8, 2005)

Leighton said:


> You mean Mr. Lee?


No, I mean Kyung Rae Park. 

I remember several years ago that Simon Needham (the no.1 Brit at the time) attended a seminar and reported back that Mr. Park had switched some of the Ozzies to shoot dominant handed rather than dominant eyed (with good results).

The report used to be on the Links Archers website but I can't find the site. Murray Elliot probably has a copy.


----------



## Jim McPhail (Jan 8, 2005)

Eh? Where did Leighton's post go?


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Levl4e said:


> Ron, When I asked Mr. Lee about the bow arm and reaching to the target he said it was like pushing against a wall. 50/50 push and pull. I took it to be an isometric push. I asked him if it was scapula motion towards the target and he said no it was natural, stable, and that the tricep would be firm when done properly. Think of the center of the chest as a hinge as you expand.


 YIKES! I have not said and did not mean to insinuate at any time that I think a scapula is capable of moving towards the target! Reaching is far different than the notion of "pushing". What I am trying to explain is part and parcel of what K.Lee is expressing regarding the bow shoulder, scapula, and arm. I am just not very good at expressing this - my fault and no one else's. This is something of a hot button issue with me, having recently read another book that had almost outrageous statements on this topic! 



Levl4e said:


> I don't have any idea what your coach teaches and I am not saying he is right or wrong. If you feel that what he teaches is working then by all means you should continue. You may have stumbled on the only person in the US that knew the proper biomechanical technique. After all he is well traveled and respected worldwide. I definitely am no expert after one seminar and will work with my current and future students trying to get the technique in place as best as I understand it with the help of some of the other coaches that attended the seminar. Keep in mind that there is always something lost in translation and publication. I guess you had to be there.


Groan - If I only could have been there! (but it would have been pearls before the swine) I imagine it must have been a truly enjoyable experience! 

I hopefully can avoid arguing the personal merits of particular coaches, as that would be wholly improper and not a little counterproductive. Not the goal here. 

That said, I will again try to relate that the reason I find Kisik Lee's book so wonderful is that he lays out in precise terminology so many things I (and Lindsey) have already had the joy of learning first hand from someone who understands these precepts and is a superb diagnostician as well. I cannot say this in terms strong enough - the majority of this book could very well have been written in Los Angeles.  I see this as being a proof of the statement that this book does not teach "Korean" Style archery, but simply and not simply the best biomechanical means of defining an arrow delivery system. 



Levl4e said:


> As for the eye dominance thing, I might have to dissagree with the book. I personally switched handedness this last year and am here to tell you that I only wish I had done it sooner. I no longer see two sight pins. I no longer hit 10 inches to the left at 18 m when I use the wrong pin, and I am now on the spot when I reach my rear reference position. I have not had any clumsyness issues due to switching hands but then again I think that I was a true lefty at birth and was not allowed to use my left hand as a child. It really helped to get a lefthanded quiver by the way.


It certainly sounds like my own experience on handedness matches your own. 

I started simply using extra/old gear from Lindsey's gear closet and knew that I was sacrificing something, but didn't much care because the goal was NOT to shoot good scores but to simply shoot well in order to be a better coach to her. I also wished to see if I couldn't overcome the intrinsic problem of the wrong eyeball dominating the subconscious and it wasn't as much fun as a result. (Yew might say I didn't do that very well). My youthful excellence in the martial arts of tae kwan do and judo did not stand me in good stead in my dotage. 

I recently switched to my own left-hand riser, and so far I'm not as strong, but I am much more happy and comfortable shooting (worse) with it. That will change with time and practice, I suspect, though as I approach 50 I find things do not have the same learning curve I once knew and enjoyed.

It is so much easier seeing and coaching someone else who is so good, than it is teaching yourself to mitigate flaws. But you already know how good Lindsey is - everyone should have the opportunity to work with someone as talented as she is. (my own parental bias notwithstanding) :lol:

K.Lee does not mention this that I have found yet, but I use as a metier the string against the chest protector. 

Once the anchor is reached, and the archer makes that transistion (page 57) to "Holding", he does say that there is no perceptibile movement of the string, but does not mention where. I presume the chest protector is ok to use as the reference point.

By way of conformation and confirmation I have long taken this to mean that if the archer is reaching properly with the bow side and drawing properly with the string side, both scaps in proper lowered position and moving to the spine, that the minute expansion will be bilaterally symmetrical (as he describes), and no further movement of the string on the chest protector will occur even as the arrow moves through click. 

Be well, Bob, and thanks for your time and efforts. We are definitely on the same large page.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

MerlinApexDylan said:


> They also weight train.


This would be covered on page 143.


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

I asked Mr Lee this last month and he said this:
Right handed people use their right hand for most small movement tasks, such writing etc. The left arm is bettr for larger movements etc. 
So if you apply that to archery they found that reaction times on the clicker were better with people shooting with their natural hand rather than the other way around. In the vast majority of cases archers shooting the other way around did not achieve the same results. 

This was also suported by research done by FITA. Check your current FITA coaching manual and they rrecommend go with the correct hand, not the correct eye.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

TexARC said:


> Once the anchor is reached, and the archer makes that transistion (page 57) to "Holding", he does say that there is no perceptibile movement of the string, but does not mention where. I presume the chest protector is ok to use as the reference point.
> 
> By way of conformation and confirmation I have long taken this to mean that if the archer is reaching properly with the bow side and drawing properly with the string side, both scaps in proper lowered position and moving to the spine, that the minute expansion will be bilaterally symmetrical (as he describes), and no further movement of the string on the chest protector will occur even as the arrow moves through click.
> 
> Be well, Bob, and thanks for your time and efforts. We are definitely on the same large page.


I have found this to be the ideal clicker position for me as well. Less than a millimeter of pull and the clicker goes off.


----------



## Jorge Oliveira (Aug 13, 2004)

baldmountain said:


> It's any kind of teacher. (That includes seniors who have a TON to teach us if we only listen.)


A friend of mine went in a business trip to Korea some yrs ago.
He was in his mid thirties, and wore a beard (black at his age).

He noticed peple would stare at him as something unusual, so he asked to Koreans why people would keep staring at him.

He was told black beards were highly unusual, only older, wiser people would use a (gray) beard as a signal of acquired wisdom...


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Marcus said:


> Right handed people use their right hand for most small movement tasks, such writing etc. The left arm is better for larger movements etc.


 Another way to say it might be: that through years of primary use, the preferred arm and hand (the right in this case) have developed more neural pathways to smaller muscle bundles, giving them more granularity in control and sensing, therefore that arm/hand is much more dexterious (sorry for the latin pun). The other arm likewise gets much less activity, therefore does not have as much innervative development, is weaker and lacking in the fine motor control as a result. 



Marcus said:


> So if you apply that to archery they found that reaction times on the clicker were better with people shooting with their natural hand rather than the other way around. In the vast majority of cases archers shooting the other way around did not achieve the same results.


 I've heard that the smaller the reaction time, the better the archer (or is it the other way 'round?)
Working from that assumption, I translate the above to say that: "they" (is this Lee, or others?) have concluded the larger determinant for accuracy with a bow is not the link between the EYE and the BRAIN, but rather the BRAIN and the FINGERS, as documented by which hand can release the arrow faster, discounting all other factors. 
I'm uncertain about this being true, since I have also accepted and prefer the axiom that the aiming process is best accomplished when the subconscious is allowed to dominate that process. 
To me at least, this means using the best, most predominant, most functional neural pathways between the eye and the brain in the decision process to decide how to control the bow, and that if the stronger arm with more innervative control is holding the bow that might (!) give the more stable aiming system platform. I suspect there are tradeoffs in these matters that mean that it becomes a "case-by-case" situation, where what is true for one archer may not be true for another. 
For example there are several types of reflexes - innate and learned - one kind only needs to go from say, the kneecap to the spine and back again. The brain is not involved in these. But for MANY reflexes the brain is indeed part of the pathway - these are learned reflexes, and I think the release can be such a reflex, if it is repeated enough. In this case, ultimately, I suspect from my martial arts training and limited medical training that the speed of the release can be trained by repetition to be every bit as fast as it was on the other hand. If the speed can be accomplished by either arm/hand, then is that really the determinant for excellence in shot execution?
The table on 133, dealing with time between shots, could probably be brought into this discussion I think. 



Marcus said:


> This was also suported by research done by FITA. Check your current FITA coaching manual and they rrecommend go with the correct hand, not the correct eye.


 Any idea if there is a summary of the research, laying out technique, study design parameters, and such about how they (who was it that decided this - a committee perhaps?) arrived at their conclusions?

I am not saying "they" are wrong, just trying to get an understanding of what makes them "right".


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

TexARC said:


> Another way to say it might be: that through years of primary use, the preferred arm and hand (the right in this case) have developed more neural pathways to smaller muscle bundles, giving them more granularity in control and sensing, therefore that arm/hand is much more dexterious (sorry for the latin pun). The other arm likewise gets much less activity, therefore does not have as much innervative development, is weaker and lacking in the fine motor control as a result.


He said that the left arm is more often used for gross movement and is better suited for gross actions like aiming. The right arm is better at micro movements and tends to try to aim too hard. 



TexARC said:


> as documented by which hand can release the arrow faster, discounting all other factors.
> I'm uncertain about this being true, since I have also accepted and prefer the axiom that the aiming process is best accomplished when the subconscious is allowed to dominate that process.


Mr Lee puts far more importance on the process, not on minor parts like aiming, but outs high value on clicker usage, as does James Park. Basically the feeling is, the better you use your clicker, the higher your scores, while aiming is not as important. 
My feeling is that if you have to spend 6 months training your left hand to be as good as your right hand was then that's 6 months wasted that could have been spent on making your right hand better. 



> Any idea if there is a summary of the research, laying out technique, study design parameters, and such about how they (who was it that decided this - a committee perhaps?) arrived at their conclusions?
> 
> I am not saying "they" are wrong, just trying to get an understanding of what makes them "right".


Just read it in their coaching manual. I believe they did surveys at the World Champs. But I do not have that information in front of me.


----------



## Dave T (Mar 24, 2004)

TER,

Thanks for leading me in the right direction. I have done business with Alternative Sports before so will order the book, muy pronto!

Dave


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Marcus said:


> He said that the left arm is more often used for gross movement and is better suited for gross actions like aiming. The right arm is better at micro movements and tends to try to aim too hard.


 He doesn't use "dominant hand" or "dominant eye", but RIGHT and LEFT. ahhhh (Korean light bulb goes on)  
This might be one of those few things on archery that doesn't translate from one culture to another as readily..
Ron


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

I can't remember, I'm just recalling from my head. He most likely would have used right and left but just for ease. Remember that from the AIS last year almost half were left handed so he doesn't have a problem with lefties (Barnes, Waller, Englebright, Beatty). But if they are natural right handers he may change them over.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Marcus said:


> Remember that from the AIS last year almost half were left handed so he doesn't have a problem with lefties (Barnes, Waller, Englebright, Beatty). But if they are natural right handers he may change them over.


That actually is good news. I was thinking it was a "right" vs. "left" thing. COOL!


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

*samick ultra agulla*

there is a korean archer who posts regularly in the sagi forum named samick ultra agulla and nicknamed sam...i believe he is a member of the korean national archery pool which is being subsidised by the government..his real name is park kim mo and is 20 yrs old..if you read his posts you will get an idea of how the korean archers train...his schedule 6 days a week is as follows:..6am to 7am--running and exercising..7am-1pm--school..1pm-10pm--shooting...he shoots 1000 arrows ave a day..he averages 1340+ with a recent pb of 348 at 70m..their coach hits them on the head and they have to leapfrog to the target when they make an 8!!....and he is not even on their first team!!!


----------



## Miika (Jun 29, 2003)

Yes, and if they shoot a 7, they will get electrick shock treatment, anything worse and they will be executed.

You guys really believe everything you read?


----------



## TJ Mason (Mar 25, 2004)

jmvargas said:


> there is a korean archer who posts regularly in the sagi forum named samick ultra agulla and nicknamed sam...


He hasn't posted for quite a while, not since his coach found out he was posting on Sagi.  Presumably the "discipline master"  had a few words to say to him.

Shame. One of the things I like about archery is its "open book" nature, but certain Korean coaches seem to prefer to keep their insights secret.


----------



## Jorge Oliveira (Aug 13, 2004)

jmvargas said:


> their coach hits them on the head and they have to leapfrog to the target when they make an 8!!


That solves the coaching problem.

The ideal coach is a sargent!


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

It's not their coach that does it. It's their dicipline master. Their coach coaches them.

Dylan


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

Before people here start to have stereotypes that the South Korean archery system has analogies to being a tyrannical dictatorship state (with South Korea as a country is not), rest assured 1) these people do this because they want to shoot better and have dedicated their entire lives to do so and 2) it's not as far fetched as people in other sports in the US going through similar training methods to get the results to be the best they possibly can be (pro players).


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

hkim823 said:


> Before people here start to have stereotypes that the South Korean archery system has analogies to being a tyrannical dictatorship state (with South Korea as a country is not), rest assured 1) these people do this because they want to shoot better and have dedicated their entire lives to do so and 2) it's not as far fetched as people in other sports in the US going through similar training methods to get the results to be the best they possibly can be (pro players).


Reminds me of a story about a group of Chinese rowers. A foreigner commented on the rowers and how they were being whipped by a "boss", saying something along the lines of "that is why my country is better." His Chinese guide told him that in fact, the rowers owned the boat and hired the "boss" to whip them.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

I hope the JOAD coaches around the US take note of Chapter 7 on warmup for archery - This was not something that I was ever taught or saw taught in the first years of JOAD I was part of. 

I wonder how many young archers have to sit out shooting, or even end up leaving the sport because of injury, due to not being aware of the need to warm up?


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

hkim823 said:


> Before people here start to have stereotypes that the South Korean archery system has analogies to being a tyrannical dictatorship state (with South Korea as a country is not), rest assured 1) these people do this because they want to shoot better and have dedicated their entire lives to do so and 2) it's not as far fetched as people in other sports in the US going through similar training methods to get the results to be the best they possibly can be (pro players).


Good post. 
When I coached American football I liked the fact that if a kid messed around they had to do pushups, run laps or a number of other physical activities they would hate. If they really messed up the pads went on and it was them vs the O line. 
In archery this kind of thing is rare. Kid misbehaves and they are told off. Does nothing. Hense in my jr classes you mouth off of back talk it's SPT's. Persist and you are running laps of the target range. 
Disipline is vital in all sports, and archery is no exception. Any kids who are not up to it can find another coach, don't have time to cater to people who are not prepared to work.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Just got my copy (signed!...Thank you Amy!) today. Flying to Minnesota tommorrow, so that should give me time to look it over. 

I'm surprised how many photos are from the Athens games. I like that.

John.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> Just got my copy (signed!...Thank you Amy!) today. Flying to Minnesota tommorrow, so that should give me time to look it over.


That's it. Rub it in.    

I don't know if Lloyd has a copy for me or not. (Probably not, since I haven't heard back from him.) I also have a friend who is in Korea on a business trip and I don't know if he was able to get me a copy. I don't know if I need to wait or order one from Alternative in the UK.  



limbwalker said:


> I'm surprised how many photos are from the Athens games. I like that.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

baldmountain said:


> That's it. Rub it in.
> 
> I don't know if Lloyd has a copy for me or not. (Probably not, since I haven't heard back from him.) I also have a friend who is in Korea on a business trip and I don't know if he was able to get me a copy. I don't know if I need to wait or order one from Alternative in the UK.



He PM'd me about it today (right after I told my friend I'd take his copy....) :\

If InkyfromSD doesn't take my copy from Lloyd, you can have it.


----------



## Dave Barnes (Jul 25, 2003)

Leighton said:


> My hypothesis about Tim & Dave & Simon is that they got Ki Sik Lee, listened to everything he had to say, corrected their form accordingly and spent more hours of shooting than at least 98% of archers have in their lifetimes.


Not quite. Of the 4 years i was at the Aus Institute, I spent 3 of them doing school which limited my training (weights, shooting, etc) to 10-15 hours per week (even less sometimes) for some years. If we were in Korea sure we could train all day and not worry about school cause we could earn a buck out of this game, but unfortunately that is not the case over here and we have to learn how to string a sentence together.  



Merlin said:


> I know Dave is finished school. I'm not sure about his post secondary at the moment nor Tims.


 I have finished school and have started uni (college) this year, having a little break from this game and still havent put my bow together since the games which has been great. As for Timmy, he's still flinging his darts at the sports institute and wokring i think.



Leighton said:


> I would also hypothesize that everyone else at the top is in similar condition.


You would be amazed how many of the top people are smokers and prob not in the greatest shape, you can look through the list and pick out (not saying all) the ITA, FRA, NED, KOR (yes they smoke), etc, and most of the top European/Asian countries. And of course most of them can handle a belly full of piss which is great to see  

But anyway, definately the best (only  )archery book I have ever read.


----------



## TexARC (Mar 5, 2003)

Thanks for jumping in! What are the most important things in the book, from your point of view?


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

David,
Good on you for making your schooling first. Lots of your friends here in the states are doing the same thing. Good luck with school.

tom barker


----------



## G33k (Jul 16, 2003)

I missed alot of this discussion but I had a throw out a few questions that people might want to consider when they discuss the Korean method of teaching.
What age do the Koreans decide that they want to be an archer?
If an archer in Korea decides that they no longer want to be an archer at say age 14, can they go to a normal high school?
If they graduate and don't want to shoot archer or teach archery, can they go to college or change careers?
How many hours a day do the amateur teams practice? Pro teams?
Do they get time off?
Is physical punishment used in schools?

I am kinda surprised at Americans are so eager to jump into the Korean method (not Technique but the whole method) Maybe everyone is just not fully educated on what a Korean Archers life is really like. I thought that we valued well-roundedness. We encourage athletes to go to college. We require that students study all areas, not just their major, in order to earn a college degree. Don't get me wrong, I REALLY REALLY respect the knowledge they have but I would never let my child be an archer if they followed the exact method that a child in Korea would. They are some severe differences in culture. I am not sure how the method was adapted for Australia so I cannot comment on that. I am also not suggesting we throw out the baby with the bathwater BUT I wish people took a less fanatical view that whatever is Korean is correct.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

G33k said:


> Don't get me wrong, I REALLY REALLY respect the knowledge they have but I would never let my child be an archer if they followed the exact method that a child in Korea would.


You're thinking like an American where Archery is a hobby.

In Korea archery is a profession. One that has a HUGE amount of national prestige. Don't think of archery training in Korea as something to do for fun. Think of it as professional training at a prestigious college like say Stanford.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

baldmountain said:


> You're thinking like an American where Archery is a hobby.
> 
> In Korea archery is a profession. One that has a HUGE amount of national prestige. Don't think of archery training in Korea as something to do for fun. Think of it as professional training at a prestigious college like say Stanford.


And in America compound archery can be a profession...

Recurve archery...I don't think so.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

Leighton said:


> And in America compound archery can be a profession...


No, it can't. I've talked to too many people who have tried. You'd make a better living flipping burgers...


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

I'm Korean, born in Korea, raised in NYC since I was 4, which basically makes me American. I can't even speak Korean fluently anymore. But I was still raised "Korean" in a lot of ways. 

The typical korean childhood I gathered from my cousins isn't exactly the time to be free and explore your options (that's what college is for), it's a highly regimented system from a fairly young age. School lasts a lot longer than they do here in the states (in terms of hours and in terms of days per year), the use of corporal punishment by teaching staff isn't unheard of.

If your an athlete like an archer? That's your life. That's it. There is no other life. Nothing else matters. Kids get sent off to "sports schools", everyone else has to excel at their local school to obtain a spot at a popular university like Seoul or Yonsei if they have any hope of being any sort of professional or businessman. Unless you posess a special skill, education and grades are the only thing that matter as a Korean child. That may seem great and all until we hear about the Korean teenage suicide rate due to academic pressure, and the rising rate of disenfranchiesed youth in Korea. 

We encourage athletes to go to college before they turn pro? Division IA sports isn't college for athlete's, it's the minor leagues before they get drafted to the NFL or NBA


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

hkim823 said:


> I'm Korean, born in Korea, raised in NYC since I was 4, which basically makes me American. I can't even speak Korean fluently anymore. But I was still raised "Korean" in a lot of ways.
> 
> The typical korean childhood I gathered from my cousins isn't exactly the time to be free and explore your options (that's what college is for), it's a highly regimented system from a fairly young age. School lasts a lot longer than they do here in the states (in terms of hours and in terms of days per year), the use of corporal punishment by teaching staff isn't unheard of.
> 
> ...



25 years ago I was coached by Lee, Dal Joon (AKA DJ Lee) 6 time US table tennis champion who came here after he had been one of South Korea's top players. I spent two weeks at camps he ran. While I can't say i became expert at the Korean "method" I spent enough time talking to DJ there and subsequently at tournaments to understand what you say is absolutely true.

Korea was a power in TT long before they became the current FITA gods-Korean players still do well in TT-men's gold medal in singles in 1988 and 2004 and I suspect some of the wisdom gained in that major league sport carried over to their archery program since, along with Tae Kwon Doe and (more recently) short track speed skating, TT has been one of the few sports that Koreans consistently win world medals and major titles in prior to the archery victories that started in the mid to late 80's


----------



## G33k (Jul 16, 2003)

baldmountain said:


> You're thinking like an American where Archery is a hobby.
> 
> In Korea archery is a profession. One that has a HUGE amount of national prestige. Don't think of archery training in Korea as something to do for fun. Think of it as professional training at a prestigious college like say Stanford.


Even in America we do not start training our children for their future career at age 10, they do no train for over 12 hours a day. We still encourage our children to have hobbies, to go out and play, to have friends with all different interests. I do think of archery as a profession, in fact I teaching archery for a living and I train daily (ok when I behave I train daily) But I still believe that people should be well rounded. We have to look at ice skaters, gymnasts or ballet dancers, those are people that never lived a 'normal' life. But even they can quit and go to a college to get a different career.


----------



## baldmountain (Apr 21, 2003)

G33k said:


> We have to look at ice skaters, gymnasts or ballet dancers, those are people that never lived a 'normal' life. But even they can quit and go to a college to get a different career.


Unless that is what they want to be.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

baldmountain said:


> Unless that is what they want to be.


I think her point was that they could quit if they wanted to.


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

G33k said:


> Even in America we do not start training our children for their future career at age 10, they do no train for over 12 hours a day. We still encourage our children to have hobbies, to go out and play, to have friends with all different interests. I do think of archery as a profession, in fact I teaching archery for a living and I train daily (ok when I behave I train daily) But I still believe that people should be well rounded. We have to look at ice skaters, gymnasts or ballet dancers, those are people that never lived a 'normal' life. But even they can quit and go to a college to get a different career.


yeah but wouldn't it be great to have the option to go after something like archery with full gusto. When I was 12 I would easily have dropped everything and trained only archery. 
If I didn't have to work I would still do that. Professions are WAY overrated.


----------



## G33k (Jul 16, 2003)

Marcus said:


> yeah but wouldn't it be great to have the option to go after something like archery with full gusto. When I was 12 I would easily have dropped everything and trained only archery.
> If I didn't have to work I would still do that. Professions are WAY overrated.


and you could have if your parents had been willing to home schooled. And I agree about professions, they are over rated. All I have to do is marry rich and I will give up work all together. Just hang out and shoot all day and teach..... oh wait, I already do that


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

G33k said:


> and you could have if your parents had been willing to home schooled. And I agree about professions, they are over rated. All I have to do is marry rich and I will give up work all together. Just hang out and shoot all day and teach..... oh wait, I already do that



So your married then?


----------



## G33k (Jul 16, 2003)

Leighton said:


> So your married then?


Not the married part, but the coaching and shooting part.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

G33k said:


> Not the married part, but the coaching and shooting part.


How did you pull that off? And find the money to pay the rent!


----------



## G33k (Jul 16, 2003)

Leighton said:


> How did you pull that off? And find the money to pay the rent!


Living at the parents til I get my masters in sports psychology.    then I can be a full time professor. Right now I have about 160 students in my classes and another fist full on the time that I coach weekly. Never be rich but I am doing my part.


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

I still have a few books left that I brought back from Korea. I'm shipping them out this week and next week. Send me a PM if you want one, and I'll send you the details.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

great book, received my copy from Lloyd today. Thanks Lloyd. well worth the money for any serious archer or coach of recurve archers. easy to read.


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

An incredible amount of information and very large pages. Not to mention almost all the pictures are in Color!  

$52 is dirt cheap for the amount of information in this book. Get your copy from Lloyd soon!


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

Got my copy today too. Thank you Lloyd and Leighton. My NFAA score went up 10 points just by touching it


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

TexARC said:


> I have not seen the Italians shoot up close and personal enough to know whether they follow the precepts of K.Lee, can you tell me whether they do? (Asking seriously, not trolling) Where is Vittorio when you need him ?
> Thanks.... Ron


Vittorio is staying as usual in Gallarate, 35 km west of Milano, North Italy   
I have mentioned many times that IMHO there is no such thing as "Korean way" to archery, but simply a professional system handled in professional way by professionals, archers and coaches. Impossible to imitate in other ebvironments for lack of full time archers and coaches. So, I prefer to cope with the "Italian" way, that means to optimize our limited resources and limited number of semi-professsional archers and coaches to get out a reasonable even if limited number of top level archers in a reasonable and manageable way (here).
Presently Italy is holding toghether following FITA world titles:
-Olympic Gold men
-World Target Champ men
-World Indoor Champ men
-World Field Champ women
-World Cadet Champ women
Then we have a bunch of European champs, and so on...
Not bad, I think ....
Please note that these archers are all coached by their own personal coach, and they shoot in a quite different way each other (apart for my son & daughter). Do they respect the basic principles of byomechanichs? Of course they do. First study about it was made in Italy in the late 80's...
Do they all push, or pull, or expand, or compress, or shoot slow or shoot fast? None of them is equal... 
Nor Dave is shooting same as Tim or Simon, or Park same as Jang and Im...
If you can get to handle a very good archer at pro level s for some years, and you are not an unexperienced coach, you will probably be able to get out a potential champion. 
But you will never be able to make a champion from a modest archer with limited coordination, dedication or strenght. So, if a good coach only has 2 good archers to coach, he has possibilty to generate 2 and 2 only chmpions, if 100% succesfull. 
I have the maximum respect for the work of Mr. Lee in Australia, but in 8 years he only had, as far as I know, 4 top level potential archers only, men only. Simon, Jackson, Dave and now Tim. 
Jackson was lost quite soon, Simon took a lot of time to get back to his 91 former level, Dave and now Tim are great, but as far as I understand, Dave is presently taking a break... Australia went to Sydney with Simon, Matthew and Scott, a team very week in comparison to Atlanta ... And 4 years after, women team was even less competitive and the 3 men were 3 and just 3, but the team was still inferior to the 96 one...
Mr. Lee has done a great work beacuse his success rate with good archers is close to 100%, but even his methods have not been able to generate more better archers from the existing Australian base. 
Again, I prefer the total "hesotheric" anarchy of our reality, as it is working since years and is continuing to generate top level archers with incredible frequency... But don't ask me to explain how it works,,,,


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

Vittorio said:


> Mr. Lee has done a great work beacuse his success rate with good archers is close to 100%, but even his methods have not been able to generate more better archers from the existing Australian base.


Take an archer, and a great coach and a great facility and put them together. In theory you should produce a great archer. ONLY if you have a dedicated and driven shooter to begin with. Australia is hamstrung by our club's doing a woeful job of producing and generating female members to work with. 
Basically our system works like so:
X approaches club about trying archery
X does beginners course. Get form screwed up
X Joins club and buys gear
50% go compound
X soon discovers that the club systems do not develop talent. X is on their own. 
X also discovers that she is one of a very few women in the club and sport. 
X then discovers that the club's only other female HATES her because she is shooting better. 
X works hard and actually beocmes competent, well shoots 1100. 
1-2 years later X is picked up into the AIS and taken away from home.
3-6 months of deprogramming begins. 


Not really what I would call a good system to feed talent into the AIS. 
My state has 660 members, one of the biggest in the country. We have 120 women. Of those 23 at Veterens (too old) and at least half are compounders.
If you look at Juniors as the source of development, cut out the compounders, then we have 15 Jr recurve girls spread over 22 clubs. 

Rather discouraging statistics. 
If this treand follows through to the whole countr then my guess is that we have approx 54 Jr girl recurvers to work with. 
Take into account that many are not interested in being dedicated. Many have been messed up by their poor coaching and suddenly we have nothing to work with. We get left with prima donnas who think they are the best thing to happen to archery. That was our problem in Athens. We got stuck with a girl who didn't train once she got selected and another who pulled the plug on us. 
Hopefully our latest batch do much better. 

My club has the top 3 women recurvers in the state, and we produced them in less than a year using the technique preferred by Jim Park and Mr Lee. 2 are 1200 archers and the third is an 1100 archer (a junior). I have another Jr girl that could medal at our National Indoor and she's been shootng for a month. 

However every step of the way we are hamstrung by our state and national body. They get no support for development from the state body, who lists Veterens as a priority for development. 

Being from Australia I can tell you it's amazing that we have produced Simon, Tim and Dave. Huge credit to Mr Lee. He has had no support from the Australian Archery community. 

Out of interest how many archers does Italy have? Women recurvers as well?


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Marcus, you can analyze Italian situation by yourself from FITARCO web site.

Following page will give you the running ranking for the admission to the Italian champs. 2 best scores from 4 week before the last champ to 4 weeks before the new one. Presently only the Indoor figures have some meaning, for obvious dates reasons.

http://www.fitarco-italia.org/ranking/pivot.asp

Following page can give you any kind of dynamic ranking you want:

http://www.fitarco-italia.org/gare/pivot.asp

Pls note that "Ragazzi" means from 13 to 14 and Giovanissimi from 9 to 12.

Why no Australians (recurve) to the world Indoor champ 2005? First time since ages that your country does not send a team...


----------



## Leighton (Aug 24, 2004)

I think Mr. Lee has answered my question quite thoroughly on what the Koreans do differently. The answer in his own words is this:

"To be able to perform at the highest level, clearly a lot of practice will be required. Once an archer has the correct technique and is ready to compete then 200+ arrows a day practice, 6 days a week should be the norm, even though in Korea, high school archers in years 10-12, shoot on average 500 arrows per day, sometimes even 1,000/day.

However, once an archer has reached a high level of competency than this may be reduced to 200-300 arrows per day, 6 days a week to maintain the feeling and technique.

Archery is very much a feeling sport; therefore there should only be one day off during the week otherwise the feeling will quickly be lost. This is the same for professional golfers, world class tennis players and most other professional sports."

Taken from page 127 & 128


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

Marcus it is very similar here in the US.

There were only 75 or so men who qualified for the Olympic trials with a 1200 fita or 600 70m double last year in the US.

I shot 550's at last years NAA indoor nationals and finished 39th. It's not too deep of a talent pool when you can shoot a recurve for 3 months and finish in the top 50.

Many of the top US women are being coached by Alexander Kirlov via long distance. It seems to be working pretty well. I think the women as a group shoot much more consitantly high scores last weekend in Vegas than our mens group. Many of them are being coached by Alexander and doing really well, it appears.

Maybe that is the solution to the geographical issues we both see in our countries.

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

Vittorio said:


> Why no Australians (recurve) to the world Indoor champ 2005? First time since ages that your country does not send a team...


A couple of reasons. 
We don't shoot much indoor in Australia. Only 1-2 clubs per state have indoor ranges and many of those use them only once a week. (My club is the exception, we have our own range and use it every day.)
So basically while our archers are very competent outdoors, indoor we don't do as well. 

The other is funding. To get from Australia to Denmark is about $5000. If you fail to make the cut that equals $83 per arrow. Alot of money for such brutal competition. 
Our Olympic program isn't funding a team so none can afford to go. We are sending 3 compounders who are paying their own ways. 




> I shot 550's at last years NAA indoor nationals and finished 39th. It's not too deep of a talent pool when you can shoot a recurve for 3 months and finish in the top 50.


Well we had 5 Men Recurvers shoot our National indoor last year, top score was 565. You would have placed 2nd averaging 550. 
However none of our Olympic guys competed. Simply not popular here. We had 26 men compounders compete.


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

I'm very disappointed as is my coach. My coach conversed through email with Lloyd and then got Paypal to try and get a book. Sent an email to Lloyd to let Lloyd know he had gotten paypal and got no reply about buying the book. Perhaps Lloyd is a busy man being a coach. But no reply? thats a little disappointing to say the least. This was quite a while ago.

Dylan


----------



## Lloyd (Aug 30, 2004)

I'm not a retailer and was just trying to help out by bringing back as many books as I could carry. I was sure I had taken care of everyone. I wish you would contact me rather than use a public forum. I'm sure I have not had any contact from you or your coach regarding the book in quite a while.


----------



## MerlinApexDylan (Oct 14, 2002)

My apologies Lloyd. I've sent you a PM.
Dylan


----------

