# Blue X



## mshockey (Nov 24, 2013)

Any one know what happened to Blue X on here. Always enjoyed his posts. He hung out here in the Competition Archery section most of the time. I believe one of his favorite sayings was "Shoot first then aim".


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

He got tired of the BS from people that couldn't hit the side of a barn if they were standing inside it. Just like most of the good folk. 

^This is not hearsay.


----------



## TNMAN (Oct 6, 2009)

Only know the Blue X AT personality, but like to think he followed his own good advice, and shooting his bow and enjoying archery more than ever.




Blue X said:


> You have to view archery talk post like eating ham.
> 
> Eat the ham and leave the bone. If it helps u keep it and if it don't leave it on the plate.
> 
> ...


----------



## aread (Dec 25, 2009)

A few years ago I had the good fortune to spend a weekend with John coaching me. He did more to help my shooting that several other big name coaches. The man knows archery and understands the shot better than anyone else I've worked with. Unfortunately, Lazarus is right about the frustration with the BS. He's a hell of a shooter too.

John is a great guy and AT is the poorer for it that he quit posting here.

Allen


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

aread said:


> A few years ago I had the good fortune to spend a weekend with John coaching me. He did more to help my shooting that several other big name coaches. The man knows archery and understands the shot better than anyone else I've worked with. Unfortunately, Lazarus is right about the frustration with the BS. He's a hell of a shooter too.
> 
> John is a great guy and AT is the poorer for it that he quit posting here.
> 
> Allen


Who is he in real life? Can someone PM. I like talking to good guys when I go to the shoots. Maybe I already have....


----------



## mshockey (Nov 24, 2013)

Thank you for the replies. Maybe we will get lucky and he will show back up. As said above, I always enjoyed his posts, there was always a message with a little humor on the side.


----------



## aread (Dec 25, 2009)

I recently heard from Blue X. Archery has taken a back seat to his other priorities. He's running two businesses and has his first grand child at age 43. He still shoots occasionally, but no longer competes. I asked him to drop by & he said that he'll try to fit it in.

Allen


----------



## Reverend (Nov 2, 2004)

He's one of the good guys for sure...


----------



## sublauxation (Nov 21, 2013)

I've never understood the attitude of being annoyed by the advice of somebody who can't hit the broad side of the barn door. Does ability necessarily matter in advice and coaching?

Here are the lifetime stats over the 10 year NFL career of Alex Van Pelt, coach for Aaron Rodgers. I'll sum them up for you......not very good, and yet when Van Pelt was let go Rodgers was upset.

Completions: 262
Attempts: 477
Comp %: 54.9
Yards: 2985
Average: 6.3
Touchdowns: 16
Interceptions: 24
Fumbles: 8

Despite those stats he made a pile of money coaching one of the best QB's the NFL has seen, and that QB is not happpy his coach was fired. 

From TNMAN's quote of Blue X above I'd say he agrees that coaches like Van Pelt have something positive to offer, and in fact if he actually left here due to the culture (sounds like that isn't the case) I'd say it would more likely be the result of the ego of those who disagree?


----------



## Archerybuff (Oct 6, 2002)

sublauxation said:


> I've never understood the attitude of being annoyed by the advice of somebody who can't hit the broad side of the barn door. Does ability necessarily matter in advice and coaching?
> 
> Here are the lifetime stats over the 10 year NFL career of Alex Van Pelt, coach for Aaron Rodgers. I'll sum them up for you......not very good, and yet when Van Pelt was let go Rodgers was upset.
> 
> ...


Horrible analogy!!! For Alex Van Pelt to make it to the NFL he had to be a top level competitor, Top 1%. The people he referred to that can't hit the broad side of a barn have never been top level archers to start with.


----------



## sublauxation (Nov 21, 2013)

Archerybuff said:


> Horrible analogy!!! For Alex Van Pelt to make it to the NFL he had to be a top level competitor, Top 1%. The people he referred to that can't hit the broad side of a barn have never been top level archers to start with.


Maybe it is, maybe it's not. Would you rather have Brett Favre as your QB coach or Alex Van Pelt? From my understanding Brett aint the brightest bulb, just an incredible instinctual player. Can he pass on that instinct to the next player? Read up on him, it's rumored he had no idea of the difference between a nickle and dime defense. How about Brett Favre vs Payton Manning, who's known as a more intellectual type? 

I don't know anybody who frequents this page. Are you guys all in the top 1%, top 5%, top 10% of the pros? 

Where is the cut off in personal shooting skills that starts to make a person's input useless buzz clouding out the more useful advice of the those who "really now what they're doing?" 

Do all the pros try to emulate each other? If you told Reo Wilde to stand up straight should Reo listen? If Reo Wilde told you to lean backwards would you listen? Should you listen?

Regardless, maybe the rest is true?


----------



## erdman41 (May 6, 2009)

sublauxation said:


> the 10 year NFL career of Alex Van Pelt


Saying not a good NFL qb and some random person on an internet forum is quite different. 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## sublauxation (Nov 21, 2013)

erdman41 said:


> Saying not a good NFL qb and some random person on an internet forum is quite different.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


........that long moment of silence as everybody realizes that, to almost everybody else on this forum, we're all some random person on the internet...:wink:


----------



## erdman41 (May 6, 2009)

sublauxation said:


> ........that long moment of silence as everybody realizes that, to almost everybody else on this forum, we're all some random person on the internet...:wink:


Isn't that the point. Having to figure out who you are listening to? Not all on here or this thread are random people to me.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

erdman41 said:


> Isn't that the point. Having to figure out who you are listening to? Not all on here or this thread are random people to me.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


If you are a random, and the random guy you listened to are combined, do the two randoms cancel each other out?


----------



## sublauxation (Nov 21, 2013)

erdman41 said:


> Isn't that the point. Having to figure out who you are listening to? Not all on here or this thread are random people to me.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


Then maybe you can tell us all who we should listen to and who to avoid. That's fair. :wink: 

This whole direction only got started because somebody above stated that possibly Blue X left because he was sick of BS from people who can't hit the barn door. 

Clearly that person thinks a certain skill level in performing archery is needed in order to teach archery or help others. 

On this forum 10 years ago if somebody told you to lengthen your draw length 2 inches and lean way back because you'll shoot better. would you have listened? Apparently according to some here if that person was, for whatever reason, just a random average guy he would have been laughed out of here and he would have apparently scared off those who insist you must stand in a more traditional straight up posture. Along comes Reo, well it turns out he listened to that guy and look at him go! 

Now, as I asked above, if Reo told you to lengthen your draw and lean way back, would you listen to him? Is Reo an anomaly in his ability with his form or should would we all be better off shooting like him? How many have truly tried and put in the effort to find out? One could say, "if it doesn't come quickly it must not be right" but then the "hinge guru" on here says it takes years to properly learn a firing engine and become proficient. with a hinge, and that for a period of time you'll likely shoot worse but that's okay because the hinge is best!

I for one like Blue X's quote: "Eat the ham and leave the bone. If it helps u keep it and if it don't leave it on the plate. ...............Eat the ham and leave the bone. Take nothing personal, Click the red x and keep on living and shooting." 

He seems like a smart, open minded guy. It seems to me that had he not left for other reasons, he would have been more likely to leave because he was sick of listening to those who think you should only listen to those who can hit the barn door than because he was sick of listening to the advice offered by the ones who cant.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

^^^

If you knew Reo, you’d know he wouldn’t tell you that. Which lends to the point Erdman was making. I dont know sonnythomas from the kid down the street, but I know Erdman, and we’ve never met in person. We live 2000 miles apart. But just through conversations and posted tournament results, I know he shoots very well and knows what he’s talking about. That takes the “random guy” out of the equation.


----------



## erdman41 (May 6, 2009)

sublauxation said:


> This whole direction only got started because somebody above stated that possibly Blue X left because he was sick of BS from people who can't hit the barn door.
> .


It wasn't said as possibly.

As far as who I listen to on here there are very, very, few. This forum is more entertainment to me than informational.

Pretty sure Reo wasn't told to lean back but figured out that it worked for him on his own. Good lesson right there.

Anyone who talk about absolutes in archery is a good example of someone to ignore.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

erdman41 said:


> It wasn't said as possibly.
> 
> As far as who I listen to on here there are very, very, few. This forum is more entertainment to me than informational.
> 
> ...


Which is really saying something because for the better part of his life all he had to do was walk down the hall to a World Champion and ask his advice (or even just "be told to do it THIS way"). I can see a lot of benefit to having a live-in archery coach, but I could also see a lot of detriment if it's your dad. Those two boys have done well...for themselves. 

This place is entertaining!

I don't necessarily think you had to have a stellar shooting career to be a good coach. George Ryals and Larry Wise had pretty good shooting careers, but neither were really world dominators, even in their day. Tim Strickland was pretty good for a spell...but mostly in recurve. Terry Wunderle, Mel Nichols, Allistair Whittingham, and Alexander Kirilov have taught lots of National and World champions, but I don't know of any that they've held, maybe Allistair has one or two. 

I doubt anyone has taught more world champion archers than Coach Kim and Coach Lee, but neither of them were top rung shooters either. 

Resources like those can speed up the learning curve and/or augment the "learn it on your own" path. There's lots of examples of coached success in today's archery world. The future is even brighter with what Jeff Sanchez, Michael Braden, and George Ryals are helping to produce. I would not want to be a 20-something aspiring pro knowing I have to deal with the teenage crop that is right behind you you're whole career. 

Most of the above resources aren't on AT either....at least not anymore. When they were, Joe-Bagadonuts told them how wrong they were...

A better NFL coaching comparison would have been Bill Belichik...

A good coach has technical knowledge, not necessarily technical skill. They also have great communication and demonstrative abilities. (If you want to see a coach get in the middle of it to teach something https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG_hvW1tIc0) They have a diagnostician's eye and an extensive cookbook of remedies. The very best are also psychologist, mentors, and maybe even buddies. There are a ton of guys out there with great technical skill, but are about worthless at communicating.


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

Bobmuley said:


> Most of the above resources aren't on AT either....at least not anymore. When they were, Joe-Bagadonuts told them how wrong they were...


This is actually a good way to tell The Best From All The Rest (Lloyd Brown's term): the reaction of the resource candidate when Joe-Bagadonuts tells them how wrong they are. The poor, incompetent teachers/mentors/coaches are the ones that throw the tantrums when you contradict them, usually immediately in a knee-jerk kind of way. Everyone's patience has limits, of course, but instant, angry "how dare you criticize me!" responses are the diagnostics of severe insecurities among other things - It means that a) they're not really as good as they say/think they are and b) one should go somewhere else for advice and training. Caveat Emptor when they start asking you what your scores are, etc., instead of actually addressing the topic of conversation. That indicates a strong insecurity about authority, rather than being sure about their abilities and a willingness to share information or teach.

But thats just one of many items any student of a sport or other discipline has to be wary of when looking for a mentor or soliciting advice. I can't count the number of times I've done this with great performers of an art or sport and the response was like something out of a really bad chat room. I had an experience like that with a celebrity some years ago in another art form that was absolutely shocking. The guy doesn't post on online forums anymore at all, and he turned off a great many to what he was trying to encourage.

So respectful and patient behavior may sound like a trivial thing to be attentive to, but it's actually exceedingly important when it comes to getting the most bang for your "buck" so to speak. 

As for the topic, it's been my experience also that being a great practitioner doesn't necessarily imply being a great teacher or mentor, or the other way around. Sometimes it is but sometimes it's definitely not. These are often practically disjoint talents and skills and it's kind of art in itself picking out the right one of each....

lee.


----------



## erdman41 (May 6, 2009)

The irony in the last post is spectacular.

Quality AT entertainment!!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## sublauxation (Nov 21, 2013)

erdman41 said:


> The irony in the last post is spectacular.
> 
> Quality AT entertainment!!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


Please, for the sake of those like myself who are random and/or ignorant, point out the irony/ironies in lee's post. I'd hate to hang around here being all uneducated:wink:


----------



## Rick! (Aug 10, 2008)

erdman41 said:


> The irony in the last post is spectacular.
> 
> Quality AT entertainment!!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk





sublauxation said:


> Please, for the sake of those like myself who are random and/or ignorant, point out the irony/ironies in lee's post. I'd hate to hang around here being all uneducated:wink:


Some folks are on their third or fourth of fifth username 'cause they haven't learned how to play well with others, hence the irony.

Staying on topic, haven't had a pm interchange with BlueX for a few years, about the time he left the I-A forum.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

I would have to agree with what Lees is saying despite his username debacle. Again, ironic. Regardless of his whimperings over the years and sometimes awkward man crush with sonnythomas, the forums here and elsewhere are full of useful and useless information alike. It’s truly up to the person reading to decide whether or not the information is something worth considering. 

As far as the bickering and arguing goes, it’s all talk. That’s all it’s good for, because at the end of the day, performance is measured with results, not talk. If some little nugget gets through our thick skulls and produces results, then all the talk was worth it. If you look at it as talking that includes everyone from beginners to pros, it might be a little easier to swallow when the lemmings squeek.


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

cbrunson said:


> his


Am I wrong here...all this time I thought Lees was a lady?



cbrunson said:


> it’s all talk. That’s all it’s good for


There aren't any magic pills we can take to get those results. I think if people would figure that out they could save themselves considerable time looking for 'em. The two best things a person could have to becoming their best version of a shooter is a notebook and a mirror.


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

Bobmuley said:


> Am I wrong here...all this time I thought Lees was a lady?


No idea who those posters are or what they're going on about. Probably instances I warned about in #20 who post more than they shoot, given the lack of subject matter in their posts. Since it's the Internet, no way to know for sure. I just scroll past, myself, and would suggest the same in these cases....



> There aren't any magic pills we can take to get those results. I think if people would figure that out they could save themselves considerable time looking for 'em. The two best things a person could have to becoming their best version of a shooter is a notebook and a mirror.


I do like the quote from sublaux, though I haven't looked through and read any of "Blue X's" posts. Eat the ham and leave the bone is about the best advice possible for information you get on on the internet on online forums like these. Some of it's great, some so-so and some not so good. Trial-and-error and see what the results are at the target is probably the best way to sort the wheat and the chaff. And totally agree about the logbook and mirror, great tools for sure.

lee.


----------



## sublauxation (Nov 21, 2013)

The way I see it society has a problem where like minded people tend to cling together, then the more they talk among themselves the more they start to think they actually do know what they're talking about because, hey, they all agree! Eventually the constant reinforcement leads them to believe they are the true authority. Then, along comes poor Joe Bagadonuts with an idea that's slightly different. Thing is, that challenges our little group as being the authority and we can't have that so we poke fun at poor Joe because he has a funny name which instantly discredits what he has to say, thus ensuring our reign on top as the true authority. 

That could be a great program for the very basics, and for ego, but it doesn't leave much room for growth and change. That's why I kept going back to Reo. Maybe we all have it wrong, maybe we should all lean back? I read somewhere where he states that form is common in the world of rifle shooting, makes me wonder if Joe Bagadonuts got his start in rifles before finding AT?


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

sublauxation said:


> The way I see it society has a problem where like minded people tend to cling together, then the more they talk among themselves the more they start to think they actually do know what they're talking about because, hey, they all agree! Eventually the constant reinforcement leads them to believe they are the true authority. Then, along comes poor Joe Bagadonuts with an idea that's slightly different. Thing is, that challenges our little group as being the authority and we can't have that so we poke fun at poor Joe because he has a funny name which instantly discredits what he has to say, thus ensuring our reign on top as the true authority.


Agree. It's almost like a mild form of Stockholm syndrome - you get a couple of "charismatic leaders" on the group with dogmatic ideas about the right way to do things and the rest are kind of seduced by the faux authority and tales of glory in battle at the target. If anyone contradicts the charismatic leaders, the response is swift and certain. Examples are commonly made of Joe Bagadonuts for not toeing the line; sometimes Joe is legitimately corrected but more commonly they just call him cute names until it all dies down.

But the key thing about it is it's not unique to this forum; it's really common on all these online forums on a huge variety of topics all the way out to bicycle racing and even coin collecting and such. It's just a phenomenon of online forums and you just have to get used to it. I choose to ignore the charismatic leaders when they protest, and just say what I want and think is right anyway. But that's just my approach and not everyone's cup of tea.


> That could be a great program for the very basics, and for ego, but it doesn't leave much room for growth and change. That's why I kept going back to Reo. Maybe we all have it wrong, maybe we should all lean back? I read somewhere where he states that form is common in the world of rifle shooting, makes me wonder if Joe Bagadonuts got his start in rifles before finding AT?


It's possible. One thing I do hear commonly among the real top shooters (not the AT champions) is that there really are all kinds of different ways to shoot a bow and finding the approach that works for you is the best way to go about it. I know that "what works for you" is kind of vacuous and doesn't really convey much helpful information, but it does seem to be a common theme among top shooters when they're asked how they do things, etc. Reo leans back because it works for him. Some other guys like Stephan Hanson are starting to lean back a bit too, reportedly because they're starting to add more weight to their stabilizer systems. Whether they're imitating Reo or not I don't know, but I think that's kind of interesting....

lee.


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

sublauxation said:


> Then, along comes poor Joe Bagadonuts with an idea that's slightly different. Thing is, that challenges our little group as being the authority and we can't have that so we poke fun at poor Joe because he has a funny name which instantly discredits what he has to say, thus ensuring our reign on top as the true authority.


When Joe tells world champs, national champs, Vegas winners, multiple Vegas shootoff contenders that they’re wrong I think it’s a little more than “challenging authority”. It’s stupid. 

What matters are results. All Joe has to do is either go out and actually challenge those guys, or coach someone in that style to beat them...and probably beat them more than once for it to stick. 

Until then, there is nothing to discredit. 





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

sublauxation said:


> ...That's why I kept going back to Reo. Maybe we all have it wrong, maybe we should all lean back? I read somewhere where he states that form is common in the world of rifle shooting, makes me wonder if Joe Bagadonuts got his start in rifles before finding AT?


We see this all the time and think if we can imitate that particular form element that we should enjoy the same results. 

Examples:
Reo’s lean
Schloesser’s mega weight and chicken wing
Eyler’s anchor
Levi’s release rotation
Jesse’s follow through
Sergio’s soft shot, etc

The real takeaway isn’t the form element. It’s the experimentation to find what works for the individual, particularly the closer to peak performance you get; because it does get harder before it gets easier. Have we not heard many of the pros in recent podcasts that have experimented with heavy stab weights “going back to what works”. What about Gillingham and Jack Wallace. Both started out well with index triggers, saw success, and then thought that they had to shoot like everyone else with thumb buttons and/ or hinges. Both struggled (at that level) until getting back to what works for them. 

It’s good to experiment, but for the right reasons. Results is a good reason. To fit into the “perfect shooter mold” is not. Knowing when to ditch the experiment is pretty important too. 

There are some good people, that I still don’t like their message. One is Padgett. I really like the guy, but for me personally I dont think we need an encyclopedia about hinge release “firing engines”. Just grab the thing, shoot it, and quit thinking about it. I’ve never told him to stop, argued about it, or crapped on any of his threads. Some people feel they need to think about it and graciously thank him for it so there’s a perceived value in it for them (but still, in my mind I’d like to tell those folks to “JUST SHOOT!”)

I could go on all night about N&B. ...



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sublauxation (Nov 21, 2013)

I haven't mentioned specific names but that makes me laugh. I've shot a hinge since the mid/late 80's. They are not rocket science. I picked it up and shot the danged thing without putting too much thought into it. Honestly I'm still not exactly sure how I shoot it but that's the beauty, I don't think about it at all!

I've been told by the AT Target Panic gurus that how I fixed mine is crazy and doesn't/couldn't work and yet I tried everything they've done long before "they came up with the system," and none of it worked for me. And yet mine is fixed.....at least for now because of what I did 31 years ago. So I go a step further on those threads and compromise by saying "different things will work for different people" and again I'm told I'm wrong. 

So yeah, I'm Joe Bagadonuts. My competitive shooting ended 20 years ago when I shot at least one tournament per weekend and was at the range at least 5 days/week but I don't put up the scores now because I shoot once per week through the winter with my kids. I'm okay with that, Joe is a pretty good guy!


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

You gotta remember that probably less than 5% of the people that come on here are looking for answers. The other 95% believe they know the answers. 

The big difference being each person’s perception of what shooting good is.


----------



## sublauxation (Nov 21, 2013)

I'll buy that theory, probably true. I wish I knew all the answers, I suppose deep down we all do. 

So, as a self admitted Joe Bagadonuts former extremely competitive archer who can now hit the barn door but not always the middle of it, can I post up my dilemma on this forum or am I restricted to the general archery questions side? Or by starting this tangent on this thread and admitting that I don't always mind Joe.... am I forever banished to the position of lemming?:wink:

I bought a new to me Hoyt and it's kicking my arce!


----------



## aread (Dec 25, 2009)

Bobmuley said:


> .....The real takeaway isn’t the form element. It’s the experimentation to find what works for the individual, particularly the closer to peak performance you get; because it does get harder before it gets easier....... Knowing when to ditch the experiment is pretty important too. ....


This ^^ 
Good form is nothing more or less than repeatability. If you can do it the same every arrow, then it's just a matter of adjusting your sight.
Good post Bob!

Allen


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

sublauxation said:


> I'll buy that theory, probably true. I wish I knew all the answers, I suppose deep down we all do.
> 
> So, as a self admitted Joe Bagadonuts former extremely competitive archer who can now hit the barn door but not always the middle of it, can I post up my dilemma on this forum or am I restricted to the general archery questions side? Or by starting this tangent on this thread and admitting that I don't always mind Joe.... am I forever banished to the position of lemming?:wink:
> 
> I bought a new to me Hoyt and it's kicking my arce!


Well it seems you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder, which doesn’t necessarily change the outcome of your potential, but it does reflect a high likelihood of skepticism. Which is where a lot of the conflict here comes from. I suppose that’s a part of our nature typically, so I wouldn’t suggest you are alone with that. What I will say, is that it is a good idea to be open to some suggestions that you may initially believe are dead wrong. 

Take for example the reference to Padgett and his release articles. I’ve been in many, many arguments where I am alone in saying what is important to me is focusing on aiming and letting the release just happen. Here in this thread now both you and Bob are saying essentially the same thing, yet I know for a fact (because of scores and tournaments) that Erdman41 shoots as well or better than I do, and his focus is more on the release end, and there are many more like him. Virtually every part of his shot process is different than mine. 

So you laugh at what Padgett says, yet have you put in the time to try it? Have you focused on any part of your process to that level of detail that you know immediately if something is off, just by noticing something wrong in your sight picture or feeling like you made a good shot but the point of impact showed something different?

I can give you a dozen things to try with any question you have, with probably any bow, but ultimately when it comes down to figuring things out, it’s on you, and your ability to solve problems. If you don’t buy into someone’s “theories” because of your own skepticism, that’s also on you.

If you want to be good at this sport, you have to be a good problem solver. There is no blanket recipe for equipment setup or even mental challenges. All anybody can give you is ideas. Whether they are a successful coach, a top level pro, or a backyard champion on archerytalk, YOU have to beat your own demons. All anyone can give you is what has worked for them and others. And yes, if the AT pro is a barely hitting the barn, but not the door, I’m probably not going to put a lot of faith in “what works for me”. Not when I’m hitting the keyhole seven out of ten. And I’m not saying that to berate anyone. Just that I realize most everyone here wants to be the coach, and everyone has a different idea of what “shooting good” is.


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

cbrunson said:


> ... I’ve been in many, many arguments where I am alone in saying what is important to me is focusing on aiming and letting the release just happen. ...


I remember those a little different. My feelings on it are: process, process, process (conscious, conscious, conscious) right up until everything but the hinge is done; then stay out of the way for the shot that's about to happen. But no biggie; see the following.



cbrunson said:


> ...Edman41 shoots....his focus is more on the release end...


In archery, everyone has the potential to be right. That doesn't mean that everyone is always right, or knows what's right for someone else. Just suggestions and possibilities. I could only tell you why Erdman's method doesn't work for me...and maybe for other folks wired like me...maybe. I couldn't come close to saying why it works for him or a lot of other shooters. 

I don't know about anyone else, but I know what good shooting is. Even better is I know what good shooting feels like. I know what it looks like from the shooter's perspective. It's the most frustrating feeling I've ever had in archery, and ranks pretty high up there in life's disappointments, to not be able to physically replicate that good shot. I think it would mess with my mind if I had a good one.

Back to naming names; I would never laugh at Padgett. He's too good of a guy and cares too much about other shooters success to publicly mock and others do find value in his theories and he doesn't mind holding their hand down the entire path. 

Now lets drop another skeptic's name...EPLC. Not doing so to mock, it's not like we haven't told him directly to his virtual-face. He's had about every suggestion in the book and as far as I could tell always decided he had to try his own path not believing any of the lemmings, AT Champions, or stuff handed down from bonafide archery coaches. Where has it got him? I truly hope he finds his happy-archery place.

So, for now I too am a lemming I suppose. Just don't expect me to be that way for more than another 6 months or so, at least to start the upward progression to where I belong. Until then, or even after; take what I suggest as grains of salt. I try not to be argumentative...unless someone says "you have to do X". That's almost always wrong.


----------



## sublauxation (Nov 21, 2013)

We're all skeptics, if we weren't Joe Baggadonuts would get more respect. We should probably all be skeptics for that matter, it's a cruel world out there and one must think for themselves at least a little bit! 

One of the first questions I asked, if ability to perform is so important, what is that cut off of performance where Joe's word becomes credible, why is that cutoff point chosen, and is there any validity to that cut off point? I don't know that in other pro sports that performance requirement exists at the same level it does here.

As to laughing about Padgett, if his book benefits people, that's great. But it also seems to cause an awful lot of anxiety in people towards shooting one. It doesn't have to be that hard, and if it is maybe it's not worth it.....as has been stated, known when to say when with any change!

On one of the last ones he commented about how, until recently, there was nobody out there teaching people how to shoot a hinge properly. My Stan CNC has been around since the mid-late 70's, in WI they started showing up regularly by the mid 80's......so yeah, I'd say people did just fine in learning how to shoot them, and in teaching others, long before the book. 

Few things in archery are brand new, they usually start off with a group of people, probably including Mr. Baggadonuts, experimenting with something. They may not perfect it themselves or right away but few ideas haven't been tried before.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

All the talk and philosophies, are useless unless they are tied to performance. Performance is measured in results. Otherwise, competition means nothing. 

Everyone always brings up GRIV, and how he has never been a dominant world champion, but has coached some. That doesn’t mean he can’t shoot. He has made the shoot off in Vegas which makes him better than anyone that has EVER posted on this target forum. Now if cbrunson gets on here and starts telling people what GRIV does or says is wrong, are you gonna call BS because GRIV is a successful shooter, coach, or both? I’m going to first say Mr cbrunson needs to put up or shut up. Because success is measured in results, not what sounds good or makes sense to someone. People say to judge advice on the content rather than the character delivering it, well that’s all fine and good if you’re beyond it and can relate to how well it has served you, basing it SOLELY on measurable performance. Someone that has not yet seen the benefit of something can not validate it.


----------



## erdman41 (May 6, 2009)

cbrunson said:


> All the talk and philosophies, are useless unless they are tied to performance. Performance is measured in results. Otherwise, competition means nothing.
> 
> Everyone always brings up GRIV, and how he has never been a dominant world champion, but has coached some. That doesn’t mean he can’t shoot. He has made the shoot off in Vegas which makes him better than anyone that has EVER posted on this target forum. Now if cbrunson gets on here and starts telling people what GRIV does or says is wrong, are you gonna call BS because GRIV is a successful shooter, coach, or both? I’m going to first say Mr cbrunson needs to put up or shut up. Because success is measured in results, not what sounds good or makes sense to someone. People say to judge advice on the content rather than the character delivering it, well that’s all fine and good if you’re beyond it and can relate to how well it has served you, basing it SOLELY on measurable performance. Someone that has not yet seen the benefit of something can not validate it.


Dilly Dilly

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

cbrunson said:


> All the talk and philosophies, are useless unless they are tied to performance. Performance is measured in results. Otherwise, competition means nothing.
> 
> Everyone always brings up GRIV, and how he has never been a dominant world champion, but has coached some. That doesn’t mean he can’t shoot. He has made the shoot off in Vegas which makes him better than anyone that has EVER posted on this target forum. Now if cbrunson gets on here and starts telling people what GRIV does or says is wrong, are you gonna call BS because GRIV is a successful shooter, coach, or both? I’m going to first say Mr cbrunson needs to put up or shut up. Because success is measured in results, not what sounds good or makes sense to someone. People say to judge advice on the content rather than the character delivering it, well that’s all fine and good if you’re beyond it and can relate to how well it has served you, basing it SOLELY on measurable performance. Someone that has not yet seen the benefit of something can not validate it.


Does it have to be the individual that has seen the benefit? Can't it be validated by other's results? I'll base this portion of the response on our favorite AT line drawer. He puts shooters in a box, and honestly, I don't think it's a bad box for beginner's to learn from. It's like USA Archery 101. Do this biomechanically...with little to no room for experimentation, and you will have repeatable results if you do that the same way every time. Now that underlined part is what we all know is "the secret" to archery results. The method to getting there between some or most of us in this forum and the line drawer differs between biomechanical form and repeatable comfort. The two key ingredients that the line drawer has that gets results are 1.) an engaged audience - those guys and gals are looking for help, and 2.) he's not starting out with many experienced shooters. I don't like the term scraping the bottom of the barrel, but a lot of those folks don't have anywhere but up to go. If we all think that way though, it would help our shooting out. Heck, I even heard Jesse say he's looking for better shooting. The first ingredient is what makes the ALC Hornets successful. George's ability to foster and sell the archery competitor's learning environment. Many of his shooters started out as 2nd ingredient level. He's a lot of things, but he's a born teacher as much as a shooter. 

I always listen; to just about anybody (absurdities aside). I take mental notes (and if it's something I want to play with I'll take written notes) and mull stuff over in my mind on A) how said method would work, and B) if I think it'd work for me. It doesn't matter if it's Griv, CBrunson, EPLC, or whoever. I will at least log it for future reference and maybe play around with it.

I remember a long time ago, 'bout '91 I was talking with Frank Pearson and Terry Ragsdale at the old NAA 25-meter indoor nationals. Their methodologies couldn't have been any more different. Their results were the same. I had done both methods "on my owns" but with a few finer details picked up from them I retried them again and picked the best one for me based on results and what I considered to better for my long-term ability to avoid TP. It mostly worked, but I still have my annual or biannual experiment with Frank's advice...still hasn't proved "better" over the short term enough for me to convert. 

I have been to GRIV, I can't say that I really changed anything up technique-wise, but I did change up "how I think about and process the shot" and learn to "feel" more when shooting. Damn right he can shoot. Short of Chance, nobody has been in more Vegas shootoffs which is a real accomplishment. Kind of a crap shoot at that point on who the winner is gonna be. They're all capable of stringing together 15 or more X's in the heat of battle. You could hold the shootoff 5 times in a row that night and you'd probably end up with 5 different winners. IMO, he's just a half step behind Reo, Chance, Jesse, Ragsdale, Despart, Hopkins, Cousins and the like for archery shooting careers. 

Now if it's just a casual conversation (like at the shop with buddies or AT - kinda how I view this place) and we're having a discussion I may provide some feedback on what works for me, or even more important what I think would work for them, regardless of whether it works for me or not. I also don't want to mess with what is working for people, like our local young pro who's a full blown hinge manipulator (I'm more old-school back tension). It works for him and that is NOT one of his problems so...don't fix what aint broken.

Just another archery conversation piece started by wondering where Blue X has been...:teeth:


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

I think you’re suggesting I’m saying that not everyone has valuable information to share Bob, and that is not the case. What happens or at least in the past has happened, is when someone shares an idea, another person comes along and says that is bad advice and to do something different. Or perhaps, as an example, when I say I try to control my thoughts on the line to follow specific details right up to the point the shot is about to break, and some guy tells me to stop doing that and shoot subconsciously. Now when just a couple months ago that guy was boasting of a new PB in the low 280s, you can certainly agree that his and my mental games are not quite at the same level. It’s not personal. It’s not meant to demean or degrade, it’s just a simple fact that I’ve already crossed that bridge. I’ve gone back and crossed it a few times, and discovered that I perform much better doing it my way. By discussing it, I may also show someone else that it can be done that way as well. Not just done that way, but done successfully.


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

cbrunson said:


> I think you’re suggesting I’m saying that not everyone has valuable information to share Bob, and that is not the case. What happens or at least in the past has happened, is when someone shares an idea, another person comes along and says that is *bad advice* and to do something different. Or perhaps, as an example, when I say I try to control my thoughts on the line to follow specific details right up to the point the shot is about to break, and some guy tells me to stop doing that and shoot subconsciously. Now when just a couple months ago that guy was boasting of a new PB in the low 280s, you can certainly agree that his and my mental games are not quite at the same level. It’s not personal. It’s not meant to demean or degrade, it’s just a simple fact that I’ve already crossed that bridge. I’ve gone back and crossed it a few times, and discovered that I perform much better doing it my way. By discussing it, I may also show someone else that it can be done that way as well. Not just done that way, but done successfully.


I agree. When it comes to archery there's mostly just "advice. Should the advice be worthy of implementing; the result is either good (continue in that direction) or bad (stop doing that).


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

Bobmuley said:


> When Joe tells world champs, national champs, Vegas winners, multiple Vegas shootoff contenders that they’re wrong I think it’s a little more than “challenging authority”. It’s stupid.


I don't think you need to worry. It's about 100% safe to say that that level isn't represented by anyone here, so I don't think there's any hazard of missing out or challenging something you shouldn't on this particular forum.


> What matters are results. All Joe has to do is either go out and actually challenge those guys, or coach someone in that style to beat them...and probably beat them more than once for it to stick.
> Until then, there is nothing to discredit.


Agree. For me the best results are gained by simply shooting as much as possible. If for no other reason than that I run into problems a lot faster, which gives me opportunities to correct them as early as possible in the game. Sure, it helps to have knowledgable eyes watch me once in a while, but there's no better way to truly work it out than to actually work it out on the line with the bow in hand.

It also doesn't matter if Joe shoots better or worse than so-and-so. I think it only matter if Joe outshoots himself after making some change or undergoes a regimen of practice, etc. The other part takes care of itself, or not, as the case may be but to me the important thing is that I'm always improving.

lee.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I think you need variety right in front of you so that you can see it and hear it and feel it and hopefully come away with something you can use once in a while, for those of us that have gotten to a decent level of shooting it may not be a total break down to square one and building ourselves back up. It may be one subtle little thing that makes all the difference in the world.

A lot of the shooters who are asking for help are at the entry level and they don't have any background knowledge of any of the things we all do without even thinking about them. To me it is really hard from a keyboard and have never seen these people shoot to know what they do and do not know about. I know it sucks to have to hear a guy like me ask questions over and over and over when talking to people but I just don't know any other way to find out what they know or don't know.

I have a lot of people who read my stuff after talking to them in a thread and that is it, I have other people who will email and call me for a few months and I have a few who have kept in contact with me for years and we go over things as time goes by. Along with the people who don't like what I have to offer.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

For example, you guys see them. You know the threads I am talking about, the threads that start out I have been a wrist strap shooter all my life and now I want to know what thumb trigger to buy. There will be about 10 or so quick hits on the thread mentioning stan sx3 and carters and sigmas etc and then I will chime in with something to try and see if the guy has any idea what he is getting into. 

To me there is a high probability that the guy is not a back tension shooter of his wrist strap, he is more than likely a trigger puller. I was that guy years ago and I dropped good money on a thumb trigger and it was nothing but a bad experience, I didn't just pick it up and within weeks become a strong shooter. I had to take the thing back to bass pro and get my money back because it really was that bad of a experience. So, yeah some people can buy one and go right on with good or even better shooting. Some people benefit from having a discussion or reading what is possible with that release.


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

lees said:


> I don't think you need to worry. It's about 100% safe to say that that level isn't represented by anyone here, so I don't think there's any hazard of missing out or challenging something you shouldn't on this particular forum.


It's happened before (when genpop was THE place for pro's, advanced, intermediate, and beginners alike. Here's a good example...

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=245345

That's the 2010 Vegas Winner.


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

Bobmuley said:


> It's happened before (when genpop was THE place for pro's, advanced, intermediate, and beginners alike. Here's a good example...
> 
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=245345
> 
> That's the 2010 Vegas Winner.


Of course; I'm just saying it didn't happen and likely won't happen in *this* thread . And respectful, knowledgeable guys like Padgett won't care one way or the other if their mental game has gone past yours or not or ask you to "put up or shut up" or not - he'll just tell you what he knows and go about his business. That's how you know the good ones. 

BTW, the above is an example of why Friends Don't Let Friends post "how's my form" threads on AT. There're good reasons Dietmar Trillus and GRIV don't drop in here that often, I'll put it that way ....

Pretty entertaining tho, I enjoyed that....

lee.


----------



## aread (Dec 25, 2009)

Bobmuley said:


> It's happened before (when genpop was THE place for pro's, advanced, intermediate, and beginners alike. Here's a good example...
> 
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=245345
> 
> That's the 2010 Vegas Winner.


I think he picked up a world cup championship too. That was one of the best threads ever on AT. I wish we had many of those same guys still posting. Unfortunately, its threads like this one that started with "Where's Blue X these days?" Then ended up with guys squabbling over irrelevant stuff that drove them away. It's part of why Blue X hasn't been around much recently.

Allen


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Yesterday after reading that old thread about Dietmar I watched a good 2 hours of his competitions in fita and stuff and he doesn't look like the picture in the thread really. He looks just as strong and solid as everyone else with his shooting form.


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

Padgett said:


> Yesterday after reading that old thread about Dietmar I watched a good 2 hours of his competitions in fita and stuff and he doesn't look like the picture in the thread really. He looks just as strong and solid as everyone else with his shooting form.


I was just looking around trying to find recent info about DT. Seems like he kind of disappeared after about 2015; wondering if he's still shooting or taking a break or ? I followed him for a while when I first took an index finger release back up a few years ago, trying to get tidbits on his methods, etc. Hope he hasn't fallen into any health issues or anything like that...

lee.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I met him at a asa a few years ago but it was back when it was still k50 and not pro known.


----------

