# Target position relative to the shooter



## mag41vance (Mar 13, 2008)

Are the targets on sanctioned shoots suppose to be square relative to the shooters position?


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

mag41vance said:


> Are the targets on sanctioned shoots suppose to be square relative to the shooters position?


Not at all - if they were there would be no such thing as an uphill or down hill target unless the target was tilted. Remember, being square to the archer would mean on all axis.

But even more to the point, unless a target rotated it would be impossible for it to be square to the archer when shooting a fan. :shade:


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

pragmatic_lee said:


> Not at all - if they were there would be no such thing as an uphill or down hill target unless the target was tilted. Remember, being square to the archer would mean on all axis.
> 
> But even more to the point, unless a target rotated it would be impossible for it to be square to the archer when shooting a fan. :shade:


In addition to this, most field courses are set up with TWO stakes, set a couple of feet apart for EACH shooting position.
Some courses are set up to shoot four shooters abreast of each other, although most of the time, field shooters will shoot the 2 and 2 format; that is two shooters up at the same time, with the other two "spotting" for them, then they change positions. It is very uncommon to shoot "one shooter at a time" on a field course, since the shooting lanes are almost always cut pretty wide. This not only helps with moving along on the course, but also with reducing stirring up the insects, ticks, etc. The wider the lanes, the less the disruption of the insect population, haha.

The FANS are set with FOUR shooting stakes..."fanning" across the shooting lanes. The distances between those four stakes can be fairly closely spaced to space out several feet apart. ONE SHOT from each of the four shooting stakes...thus, it is impossible to be "square" to your target for every shot.

This is "field" shooting, so all sorts of "out of square" things come into play. Including having one foot way higher or lower than the other one in any plane.

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

I can go along with these guys, but don't think a target should be set at a significant angle from the median shooting line.

Otherwise, who could say you couldn't put the face up on the backside of the target butt.


----------



## pragmatic_lee (Jan 19, 2008)

Bobmuley said:


> I can go along with these guys, but don't think a target should be set at a significant angle from the median shooting line.
> 
> Otherwise, who could say you couldn't put the face up on the backside of the target butt.


Bob, you got to get out here to NC and shoot DCWC with us. Then you'd know why some of us call Jarlicker "evil". We had a newbie with us yesterday who nearly peed himself when we walked up to the birdie on the back half.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

Bobmuley said:


> I can go along with these guys, but don't think a target should be set at a significant angle from the median shooting line.
> 
> Otherwise, who could say you couldn't put the face up on the backside of the target butt.


Over the years, I've been involved with setting up new courses, renovating old courses, and changing around target sequences. In all those I've been involved with, we always tried to line up the targets "square" to the center of the shooting lane and then place the blocks/stakes a foot or two on each side of "center line" of the lane. We would line the fans up in pretty much the same manner.
Used to be that "fans" were spread out pretty far and utilized the terrain and/or trees that were available along the lane...Nowadaze however, since equipment prices are so high...the fans have been narrowed up a LOT compared to the way they were years ago.

We aren't talking about having targets so far out of line that you have a 45 degree angle to shoot to the target face, thereby effectively narrowing up the bullseye, or giving a quartering away shot, hahaha....Afterall it isn't "3-D"

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## mag41vance (Mar 13, 2008)

I just wondered about it since steep angle shots, shooting at an elipical dot is very challenging . Could change the dot size from 2-1/2 round to 1"tall x 2-1/2.


----------



## mag41vance (Mar 13, 2008)

pragmatic_lee said:


> Not at all - if they were there would be no such thing as an uphill or down hill target unless the target was tilted. Remember, being square to the archer would mean on all axis.
> 
> But even more to the point, unless a target rotated it would be impossible for it to be square to the archer when shooting a fan. :shade:


I hear what you're saying but, On this video, look at the target that Dave cousins shot and you will see the arrows are square in the target even though the angle was 23degrees. The target was Square in relation to the archer. He was shooting down and the target was facing upward.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3XeaWt7huQ&feature=related


----------



## JPE (Feb 1, 2004)

mag41vance said:


> I hear what you're saying but, On this video, look at the target that Dave cousins shot and you will see the arrows are square in the target even though the angle was 23degrees. The target was Square in relation to the archer. He was shooting down and the target was facing upward.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3XeaWt7huQ&feature=related


23 degrees is a pretty good drop at that distance. If my math is correct, that target is more than 15 yards below him (nearly 50 feet). I would guess that on a perfectly vertical target face it would become very difficult to hit the X.

I don't see anything in the NFAA rules about targets being square to the shooter, but I think a little common sense should come into play on the range setup.


----------



## mag41vance (Mar 13, 2008)

JPE said:


> 23 degrees is a pretty good drop at that distance. If my math is correct, that target is more than 15 yards below him (nearly 50 feet). I would guess that on a perfectly vertical target face it would become very difficult to hit the X.
> 
> I don't see anything in the NFAA rules about targets being square to the shooter, but I think a little common sense should come into play on the range setup.


Exactly.
I would like to hear from someone who sets up a course for a National event. I will drop an email to the NFAA.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

mag41vance said:


> Exactly.
> I would like to hear from someone who sets up a course for a National event. I will drop an email to the NFAA.


With all the courses I've helped design, setup, rebuild, measure, and reinstall new bales......we always made aggressive attempts to keep them "square" left/right to the center of the shooting lane.

In addition, we would also "lean" the target forward or back in an effort to attempt to have the bullseye "leaned" so that the arrow impact angle was as close to perpendicular to the TARGET FACE as we could get it...After all....it is THAT angle that is significant. We weren't always PERFECT, but we set those bales so that the angle of the arrow coming in was very, very close to perpendicular, based upon the DISTANCE of the target.

Once that was established, we would reaffirm that our measurements, with our tape, were NOT made by laying the tape along the ground. Measured from the center of the bullseye with stretching the tape as tight as possible to keep the droop out of it, and then used a plumb bob at the correct distance down to the ground to locate the center of the block/stake.

Lots of work, but....it is IMPORTANT, and we were aware of the zero tolerance for distance measuring accuracy, based upon the use of OUR measuring instrument (tape).

I will say, however, that not all clubs/ranges are set up quite this conscientiously..but most are pretty doggoned good. I've only known a few that were significantly "off"...and even those might only have one target on the entire 14 target unit. Occasionally, a bale is changed in a rush and they forget to re-measure the target to make sure it is set correctly.

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## The Swami (Jan 16, 2008)

> I will say, however, that not all clubs/ranges are set up quite this conscientiously..but most are pretty doggoned good. I've only known a few that were significantly "off"...and even those might only have one target on the entire 14 target unit. Occasionally, a bale is changed in a rush and they forget to re-measure the target to make sure it is set correctly.


That is why you absolutely carry one gadget for sure when shooting field courses...the rangefinder.

Oh my gosh, can you believe I said that?  I will ruin my tape using reputation for sure and maybe lose my Stanley sponsorship.  At least my rangefinder does half yards.


----------



## The X Moves (Mar 15, 2005)

Tom, sorry for the noob question, but on a target like the one Cousins shot on that video (downhill 23 degree), when you measure the distance, is it the straight line distance or the hypotenuse of the triangle (or as the crow or arrow in this case, flies)? I'm thinking it's as the crow flies, but want to be sure.

Also, when setting up a Field course, is tape absolutely the gold standard and if not, are laser rangefinders acceptable for a setup?

Thanks.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

The X Moves said:


> Tom, sorry for the noob question, but on a target like the one Cousins shot on that video (downhill 23 degree), when you measure the distance, is it the straight line distance or the hypotenuse of the triangle (or as the crow or arrow in this case, flies)? I'm thinking it's as the crow flies, but want to be sure.
> 
> Also, when setting up a Field course, is tape absolutely the gold standard and if not, are laser rangefinders acceptable for a setup?
> 
> Thanks.


By "rule" NO...laser rangefinders are NOT to be used for setting up an NFAA approved course.

Now....here's a "take" on those instruments that is very, very interesting.

First: the BEST hand-held laser rangefinders are good to plus or minus 1/2 yard...that means....a variance gap of ONE FULL YARD!

Secondly: That is ONLY with FRESH batteries in them...their accuracy deteriorates as the batteries become discharged!

Thirdly....YOUR rangefinder might say the distance to the target today is one thing....and your buddie's...might say yet something different....maybe 1/2 yard "hot" or 1/2 yard "cold" or maybe even a full yard? NOW...which to believe? 

Fourthly...while there are seemingly more 550+ scores being shot these days, personally, I do NOT think it has as much to do with the use of the rangefinders to "verify yardages" (cuz they are only good plus or minus 1/2 yard anyways)...as it is the QUALITY of today's shooters and equipment.

The first 560's shot at the National Tournament were done WITHOUT the used of ANY "electronics", computer generated site tapes, clinometers, or "cut charts." There have still only been LESS than 10 perfect 560 field/hunter scores shot in National competition after 34 years on this target face.

If YOUR laser is already off by 1/2 yard with fresh batteries...then who knows whatcha gots when you've used the thing a bunch and haven't put in FRESH BATTERIES at the beginning of a major tournament.

You gotta use YOUR instrument if you are going to site in using it. You gotta make sure YOUR instrument has FRESH BATTERIES in it when you get site marks, and come up with a system of 'checks and balances' so you KNOW how many "sightings" can be taken with it before YOUR instrument's accuracy starts to deteriorate, and stick to it.

Just MORE to keep track of, isn't it....but like the arrow nock...people are overlooking this item and depeding upon an electronic instrument that can and WILL have accuracy variations over a short period of time!

What do you use as your STANDARD to keep tabs on YOUR instrument (rangefinder)...better have one so you can compare to the known standard for checking YOUR instrument's accuracy! Then comes the accuracy variation based upon the reflectivity of the sighted "target", and the air/humidity conditions at the time....yet another subject.....
field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## JayMc (Jan 4, 2005)

field14 said:


> We aren't talking about having targets so far out of line that you have a 45 degree angle to shoot to the target face, thereby effectively narrowing up the bullseye, or giving a quartering away shot, hahaha....Afterall it isn't "3-D"
> 
> field14 (Tom D.)



Isn't that why we have side rings on the bales?


----------



## The Swami (Jan 16, 2008)

Field,

I sure I hope to redeem myself here on AT as to the use of a rangefinder.

I have a shooting range in my backyard set out to 70 yards to the inch with a tape and I have made sure my rangefinder jives with that range. My high end Nikon model is within .5 yards of the actual measurement. That range is where I get my marks. I will not get marks anywhere else unless it is a dire emergency. Then I will verify the place I shoot at to get my "dirty" marks with my rangefinder.

Never get your marks at a practice range!! Not unless you carry a tape to check it out or a rangefinder that you have compared to a well measured shooting range. Then you should still call them "dirty" marks.

Make sure you adjust after the first arrow is shot if it hits somewhere that doesn't jive with the yardage given or what your rangefinder says. Don't be stubborn!

I have extra batteries with me always.  Yes...I still carry a 100 footer with me too.


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

Even a steel surveying tape is calculated for expansion and contraction from a 70-degree calibration and don't believe that there is a zero tolerance policy. There'd be a whole lot more trig and measuring SOPs that the NFAA would have to institute.

Having a rangefinder and actually knowing how to use it effectively are two different things...


----------



## mag41vance (Mar 13, 2008)

field14 said:


> With all the courses I've helped design, setup, rebuild, measure, and reinstall new bales......we always made aggressive attempts to keep them "square" left/right to the center of the shooting lane.
> 
> In addition, we would also "lean" the target forward or back in an effort to attempt to have the bullseye "leaned" so that the arrow impact angle was as close to perpendicular to the TARGET FACE as we could get it...After all....it is THAT angle that is significant. We weren't always PERFECT, but we set those bales so that the angle of the arrow coming in was very, very close to perpendicular, based upon the DISTANCE of the target.
> 
> ...


That was what I was thinking should be done. I know that the ranges I have shot here in VA are not set like that. For one thing most clubs try to make target life a priority. In doing that leaning of a target butt would increase the possibility that the target would come apart sooner than if stacked Level and Mr. Gravity did his job. 
I guess it’s only unfair to your score as everyone shooting the target is faced with the same situation of shooting a egg shaped dot.


Thank you for the help


----------



## AllenRead (Jan 12, 2004)

field14 said:


> Measured from the center of the bullseye with stretching the tape as tight as possible to keep the droop out of it, and then used a plumb bob at the correct distance down to the ground to locate the center of the block/stake.


Tom is the distance from the bullseye measured on the horizontal or on the diagonal?

Having done a little surveying in the "old" days with steel tapes that had to be calibrated for temperature, I know that this measurement can be significantly different.

Thanks,
Allen


----------



## JPE (Feb 1, 2004)

Bobmuley said:


> Even a steel surveying tape is calculated for expansion and contraction from a 70-degree calibration and don't believe that there is a zero tolerance policy. There'd be a whole lot more trig and measuring SOPs that the NFAA would have to institute.


Exactly. Just because a steel tape gives you an answer to the nearest inch doesn't mean it's any more accurate than a laser rangefinder. And just like rangefinders, not all 100' tapes will measure the same (though admittedly they'll be closer than +/- 1/2 yard).

In the target example in the video, if a steel tape were used to measure the straight line distance from the target face, and then a plumb bob were dropped straight down to set the stake, instead of finding a line parallel to the tape, you'd be 18" short of a true 40 yards. There's a 1/2 yard error right there. 

If you neglect to calculate the sag, and no matter how hard you pull, there is sag, you'd lose another 6", assuming an average 12 pounds of pull. Temperature correction and the calibration correction would be less, but it all still adds up. If you use a 100' tape to measure stakes further than 33 yards, you'll have to make mulitiple setups which introduces more error, etc, etc.

I'm not saying that laying out a course with a 100' tape isn't good enough. I'm just saying that it's silly to think it would be all that much more accurate than a laser rangefinder.


----------



## The Swami (Jan 16, 2008)

JPE said:


> Exactly. Just because a steel tape gives you an answer to the nearest inch doesn't mean it's any more accurate than a laser rangefinder. And just like rangefinders, not all 100' tapes will measure the same (though admittedly they'll be closer than +/- 1/2 yard).
> 
> In the target example in the video, if a steel tape were used to measure the straight line distance from the target face, and then a plumb bob were dropped straight down to set the stake, instead of finding a line parallel to the tape, you'd be 18" short of a true 40 yards. There's a 1/2 yard error right there.
> 
> ...


Not all rangefinders are equal. How do you decide which one is the standard? You can't calibrate them all to read the same.

Just because one rangefinder reads the distance say at 40 yards, doesn't mean every type out there gives you that reading.

Yeah using tape isn't exact, but if done right, the margin is small enough to not be a huge issue.


----------



## The X Moves (Mar 15, 2005)

Thanks for the reply. VERY interesting.

I can see where the laser distances could vary quite a bit depending on battery charge and from make to make, model to model.

Even with a tape that is impervious to temp changes with regard to expansion or contraction, if the distances are measured from the target face to the shooting stake (or plates) the actual distance might be a little different for the archer depending on his/her height, and where he stands relative to the stake or plate. (or are there rules about having to straddle the plate or you MUST shoot directly behind the stake, etc.)

Seems to me that the best thing for each shooter is to have a range finder and first check to see if it's accurate on known distances, then use it to generate your marks, then use it consistently to verify distances at a shoot. If the lasered distances are different than the course is marked, then the shooter will have to decide whether or not to go with his rangefinder or with the published distance on the course. Sounds like the old saw, "know your equipment, trust your equipment" comes into play here also.

I was asking about the course set up and it sure appears that the distances need to be done with a tape. Thanks, I'm getting excited to try a field course this summer!! :darkbeer:


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

The X Moves said:


> Thanks for the reply. VERY interesting.
> 
> I can see where the laser distances could vary quite a bit depending on battery charge and from make to make, model to model.
> 
> ...


Yes, I think the current rule is that the shooter is supposed to straddle the stake/shooting block on a field/hunter/animal course. This keeps things consistent with indoor shooting where the rule is that everyon straddles the shooting line. Years ago, however, I think the rule was that you "toed" the shooting stake/block, so most courses were measured to the stake or to the "center" of the shooting block. I know our course is measured to the center of the shooting blocks...or at least it was 3 years ago when I helped to measure out and "re-block" the entire 28-target course.

YES! You are correct...use YOUR instrument that you have previously checked out to a known standard to compare things to. My laser rangefinder is dead on at distance per our "known standards"; thus, I know that I can "trust it"....for about 500 sightings before I deteriorates to the point of being off. However, I ALWAYS take 3 sightings when I use the instrument and toss out the "ringer" if there is one. I NEVER trust just one "shot" with my laser rangefinder, EVER! I've also found that sometimes you will read 1/2 yard off....and move forward or back six inches (some times less), and "suddenly" it is dead on???? Remember, it reads to 1/2 yard...and not 1/8, or 1/4 yard, hahaha. But HOW GOOD ARE YOU anyways? good enough that you know for certain that you can hold dead on the X...and if the arrow is 1/2" low at 40, 50 or 60 yards...that the LASER gave you the wrong information? Yeah, right, hahahahaha....tell me another one.
:wink:
field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## rock monkey (Dec 28, 2002)

instead of using a hunting laser rangfinder whose tolerance is +/- a half yard, use a construction grade laser rangefinder.

for example, http://www.cpotools.com/bosch-dlr16...t/bshndlr165k,default,pd.html?start=3&q=laser

reads down to 1/16 of an inch and is good to 165ft/55yds.

i understand the range guidelines state that you cannot use laser rangefinders, but that rule was implemented when the tolerances were +/- 2yds. with the construction grade rangefinders that are down to fractions of an inch, i think the nfaa could amplify the rule and specify which rangefinders are acceptable and which ones are not.

oh yes, i'm a troublemaker, how could i forget......i think i'll change my AT name to 'badger' since it can function as both a noun and a verb.


----------



## The X Moves (Mar 15, 2005)

field14 said:


> But HOW GOOD ARE YOU anyways? good enough that you know for certain that you can hold dead on the X...and if the arrow is 1/2" low at 40, 50 or 60 yards...that the LASER gave you the wrong information? Yeah, right, hahahahaha....tell me another one.
> :wink:
> field14 (Tom D.)


I'm sure that there will be plenty of "variables" in my shooting that will become glaringly evident at longer yardages.

Other than some local 3D's, I haven't practiced at the longer distances much, but have been working on it. Baby-steps. I'm a little worried about shooting through my scope at 80 yards (I have a 4 inch Sure-loc and the markings for an 80 yard shot put the housing pretty low!!!).


----------



## CRAZYRICK1 (Dec 26, 2009)

The Swami said:


> That is why you absolutely carry one gadget for sure when shooting field courses...the rangefinder.
> 
> Oh my gosh, can you believe I said that?  I will ruin my tape using reputation for sure and maybe lose my Stanley sponsorship.  At least my rangefinder does half yards.


All right, I'm fairly new to this,( 3months, shooting field, no competitions or tournaments) I didn't know you could use rangefinders to cut the yardage!!????:mg::set1_punch::angry:Maybe they should tell you stuff like that when you sign up at a club:iamwithstupid::iamwithstupid::iamwithstupid:


----------



## The Swami (Jan 16, 2008)

CRAZYRICK1 said:


> All right, I'm fairly new to this,( 3months, shooting field, no competitions or tournaments) I didn't know you could use rangefinders to cut the yardage!!????:mg::set1_punch::angry:Maybe they should tell you stuff like that when you sign up at a club:iamwithstupid::iamwithstupid::iamwithstupid:


I don't use a rangefinder to cut yardage. I use it to make sure the I am shooting the target for what the measurement actually is. You never know when the yardage stake might be wrong. You never really know how that target was measured.

To determine if you need to cut yardage, you need to know the angle of the target. If you are shooting a 20 degree uphill target at 60 yards, you going to need to cut yardage and shoot it for something less than 60. Somewhere close to 58 yards depending on your shot and your setup. The rangefinder is to ensure the target is 60 yards away to begin with.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

The Swami said:


> I don't use a rangefinder to cut yardage. I use it to make sure the I am shooting the target for what the measurement actually is. You never know when the yardage stake might be wrong. You never really know how that target was measured.
> 
> To determine if you need to cut yardage, you need to know the angle of the target. If you are shooting a 20 degree uphill target at 60 yards, you going to need to cut yardage and shoot it for something less than 60. Somewhere close to 58 yards depending on your shot and your setup. The rangefinder is to ensure the target is 60 yards away to begin with.


Many of the newer rangefinders are specifically designed for "archery purposes" and have "angle compensation" built right into the software! Thus, when you have "angle compensation" turned "ON"....you can get 3 readings, toss the ringer....and it will already tell you what to shoot it for! Of course....you gotta KNOW your capabilities, your rangefinder, and YOUR equipment, and how YOU handle those types of shots. Then, if you miss or shoot high or low...you gotta KNOW if it was YOU...or if indeed the rangefinder is "nutso", hahaha. 

ALWAYS keep your batteries as fresh as possible...these instruments go "South" in a hurry if the batteries start getting low. NEVER EVER take just ONE reading...sometimes you can move forward or back 6"...and get a different reading by 1/2 or sometimes even a full yard! This, even with fresh batteries in the unit!

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## The Swami (Jan 16, 2008)

field14 said:


> Many of the newer rangefinders are specifically designed for "archery purposes" and have "angle compensation" built right into the software! Thus, when you have "angle compensation" turned "ON"....you can get 3 readings, toss the ringer....and it will already tell you what to shoot it for! Of course....you gotta KNOW your capabilities, your rangefinder, and YOUR equipment, and how YOU handle those types of shots.
> 
> field14 (Tom D.)


I don't like those kind of rangefinders. I know they are out there. I don't own a inclinometer either. I pretty much use my eyeballs and when I ask others what their inclinometers say, I am pretty dang close most of the time.

I will eventually buy an inclinometer. No worries about batteries etc. I will use it to better train my eyes to see the angle without the use of one. I hate carrying a lot of junk when I shoot.

As far as cutting, I would rely on what my cut sheet says before a rangerfinder with that capability. My cut sheet is generated by the same app that I get my marks from and it knows the specifics of my bow setup etc. Besides, I have also tested my cut sheet against actual shooting so I know it is accurate.


----------



## field14 (May 21, 2002)

The Swami said:


> I don't like those kind of rangefinders. I know they are out there. I don't own a inclinometer either. I pretty much use my eyeballs and when I ask others what their inclinometers say, I am pretty dang close most of the time.
> 
> I will eventually buy an inclinometer. No worries about batteries etc. I will use it to better train my eyes to see the angle without the use of one. I hate carrying a lot of junk when I shoot.
> 
> As far as cutting, I would rely on what my cut sheet says before a rangerfinder with that capability. My cut sheet is generated by the same app that I get my marks from and it knows the specifics of my bow setup etc. Besides, I have also tested my cut sheet against actual shooting so I know it is accurate.


Swami,
You and I are from the same "School". Too many people out there these days are trying "short cuts" to supposedly catch up because they claim they don't have "time" to gain experience and want that instant gratification to seemingly "automatically" move up to the top of the leaderboard with gadgetry.
Problem is, the majority of them buy in the HYPE...but don't have the form or knowledge of themselves NOR their equipment to properly utilize the aids...so it ends up shooting them in the foot anyways, haha.

I'm sure you are aware that the "cut book" for Darrington that contains the cut charts for those targets....have them from, I think the likes of Dean Pridgen and Mike Leiter....and NEITHER of them used "clinometers" nor rangefinders to come up with those "cut charts"; nor did they use "computers" or computer generated information either....They did it the REAL WAY...from experience...and their cut charts are dead on those that were generated by a computer. Of course, Dean and Mike both were nearly unbeatable on any field course in their day...and still are in many instances!

I've been told by several top echelon shooters that they use their rangefinders on those targets that really puzzle them...and they use the instrumentation to "verify" their gut feelings just to make sure. Of course, on those courses over in EUROPE, the UK and places like that....those are REAL field courses that have extremes on up and down as well as sidehills...MOST all of our courses here in the USA when compared to those overseas...are FLAT by comparision!

NEEDING a cut chart? NAH....MAYBE nice to have, sure, why not? DEPENDING UPON THEM to cure ills? NEVER.

I checked out my "range compensating" rangefinder with the other model of the same brand that didn't have it. and guess what? The one with the angle compensation in it was dead on when compared to using a "cut chart" and the rangefinder w/o the angle compensation software.

I, too, would only use it to confirm my gut feeling and/or if the look at the target and the read of the target just didn't jibe with what my experiences are telling me. Of course, I KNOW my equipment, MY tendencies, and pretty much exactly how far to "cut" (or even add) to MY site if I see a mucky muck of holes a given distance out of that bullseye. I also know EXACTLY how much "Bubble" to give if a target appears to be shooting left/right based upon the holes in it. Range-finders and clinometers ain't gonna help you a bit on those kinds of targets...and there are more of those out there than ones with SIMPLE downhill/uphill!

The ANGLES will getcha more often than not...especially the toes up or toes down, or the poor stances with one foot higher than the other one! no "automatic" computer program to tell you this...you gotta LEARN IT.

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## The Swami (Jan 16, 2008)

The same school? Maybe if I was a student and you were the principal.  

Yeah, we are from the same school somewhat.

I have that book as I went to Darrington. I wanted it for the course layout and for the interviews from guys like Leiter Legend etc.

The readings for the actual distance are done by an Opti-logic rangefinder. I didn't use those values because I didn't generate them for my use. They are there for just ballpark figures I would think because they were not close to what I used.

Example - On Bobcat target 12, the one Mike Leiter calls his toughest target at Darrington. This is a 55 yard uphill at 18deg. The book says it is 20 deg plus and a 2.5 yard cut. Mike says he cuts 2 yards on it. My cut sheet said 1.8 approx. Mike had it right. Had I used what the book said, I wouldn't have walked off that target with a 20-3X. I knew my shot, form and tendency. I knew that my cut sheet was accurate from testing it out.

I will admit I don't have much field archery experience. I don't even have that much archery experience period. I got 6 years of that and have shot in less than 8 field archery tournaments. I have only shot on 3 courses ever. Darrington, Grangeville, ID and Hervey Bay, Australia. I haven't been able to really learn a course.

I do have a brain however. I realize that I can understand things quickly and on many things I don't need experience to teach me what to do, but you can't substitute that for experience on some things. Your shot is one of those things. I know I have to rely on what I have used and tested. I have to know that I can't take shortcuts because I have so much to learn and you don't learn or gain experience with shortcuts. I am very good at analyzing data, but I can only get that data by not taking shortcuts. I can only get the data from results generated by ME.


----------

