# Stabilizers, and damper placement



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

B - 

I can only give you my opinion.
A dampener there is pretty much a total waste of time, since the shock wave you're trying to dampen has usually hit your hand before it hits the dampener. Years ago, Hoyt and Bear had the dampeners on the other end of the rods, but that too fell out of vogue.

When setting up a stab for a new student, the first thing I do is remove the dampener, if present. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Dampeners are not necessary, but shooting a bow without them is usually much less pleasant than shooting a bow with them. I like shooting pleasant-shooting bows more than I like shooting unpleasant-shooting bows, therefore I use dampeners. Anything that makes me want to shoot more arrows is a useful and welcome thing IMO.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

the rubber damper allows the weights to move to counteract the shock on a recurve. Removing the dampers will remove that aspect. The stab will only balance. And you will probably find the stab does not dampen.

Depends on what you want the stabs to do. I would only remove the damper and weight on a stab for a new student to reduce the overall weight of the bow. I would not remove it as a worthless part of the stab. It is an integral part of the stab system. Way back when Viper shot archery, stabs were in their infancy and were just a rod with weights on the end. So that is the setup and stabs he is use to. Back then rods only balanced, they didnt dampen.

Stabs have come along way since then. No insult to Viper. 

Bee stinger was a compound stab. Compounds have a different shot recoil than a recurve bow. Most compound archers do not use a damper. Thus the verbage on the Bee Stinger website. 




Chris


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Don't any of you guys own a 1200FPS camera?


----------



## Kyudo Novice (Sep 9, 2014)

Stiffness is the goal when selecting a stabilizer rod.
Dampening is akin to adding sugar to taste.

The term, "stabilizer" is referring to steadying the hold on target, accomplished by placing disk shaped weights at the far end of rods to resist movements emanating from the archer. The stiffer the rod, the more minute kinds of movement are controlled. I've found them being used as far back as the late 1930's and being made by coaches and archers. Manufactured for sale as early as the 1940's. Patented many decades after they had first been sold by a variety of manufacturers, including Hoyt and Easton.

If you select a small diameter stabilizer rod (less than 0.65" dia) for its low windage profile, it won't be as stiff as a 0.75" or larger diameter rod (catches wind) unless the .65" rod has lots of expensive carbon which then makes it heavier and more expensive. You don't want the weight spread along the rods. You want mass extended at the ends. The lighter the rod, the more weight can be placed at the end increasing effectiveness. The weaker the rod, the more it will flex under weights and lose its effectiveness.

Some archers don't place a dampener on the end of their front rod, because some movement will occur at the flex joint, thus undoing all the stiffness they purchased with that rod. They don't mind the vib or report of the shot...they take their coffee without sugar...strong. One might be aware that a carbon riser has a dampening effect in itself. If you need to remove some of the report without reducing the effect of your stiff rod, add an up dampener and/or a stubby rubber Fivics dampener to the back of the riser. You can target different types of vibration by adding or removing weight to each dampener end, or add a dampening extension to the V bar. You might need a dampener on the end of a cheap front rod if it vibrates after the shot...that would be masking your problem. Only use dampeners if you discover you need or like the effect on the report.

Shoot your bow without stabilizers and dampeners to see what she feels like without help of a steady hold or the sweet feel of dampening. Then add the rods and weights (borrow if needed) to find the precise amount of weight and where to place it, to get your steady shot. Then try an up dampener first by itself. Then try a dampener at the end of the rod. Then try a dampener here and there and change weight on these dampeners to taste. Anything that jeopardizes the hold on target should be avoided. This could be too much weight or too little, cheap or short rods, too soft rubber in the dampeners or improper placement of dampeners.

Balance is another effect you can control with the adding or subtracting of weights. How the bow pivots and falls from the hand is found from these and other adjustments. Pressure on your grip can also be controlled. Adjustable V bars are becoming more popular as well as a lower positioning of weights for added steadiness.


Compare stabilizer rod stiffness by bending them over your knee, hands exactly the same distance apart on each rod, using the same feel of force. You'll be surprised at the differences.

I have developed and made some of the best carbon stabilizer rods I've ever found, .665" and .5" and experimented extensively with dampening on Olympic Recurve and Freestyle Compound.

Bee Stinger understands the issues precisely and cuts straight to the chase. Yes. Follow their advice. I think they want to steer you right. They're offering value and stylish equipment without gimmicks and fad.

Cool equipment is important. X counts are more important.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Most of us wish we could shoot as good for as long as Vic Wunderle has. Some folks who have responded to this thread should really inspect his setup over the years with respect to dampeners IMO


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Stabilizers contribute partly to the instability of aiming. Having the correct length, stiffness and mass partially absolves itself from its own liability. The primary role of stabilizers is shot stability through MOI.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Most of us wish we could shoot as good for as long as Vic Wunderle has. Some folks who have responded to this thread should really inspect his setup over the years with respect to dampeners IMO


You shot with him at Athens so you know his setup better than me. But he shot Sydney and Athens with a damper on his front rod. 


Sydney shooting top rod, bottom rod, back weight and front stab with damper and weights.
View attachment 5202241


Athens shooting v bar setup, front stab with damper and weights. 

View attachment 5202249


I would have to say his bow is the quietest bow i have ever heard during the shot.


Chris


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

I use mine behind the last weight. Just out of habit, more or less, as I find little need for any damping on my bows. But that means I can lean to my stabs while waiting on the line, without them being twisted and turned everywhere. I also use rubber end cap to prevent them sliding on the floor, if I'm bored and lean to them too much.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Chris, he also had TFC's on those side rods for many years. When he would shoot, a whole lotta stuff moved. But he's still got a competitive record most folks would kill for.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Chris, he also had TFC's on those side rods for many years. When he would shoot, a whole lotta stuff moved. But he's still got a competitive record most folks would kill for.


I missed your point earlier. Now i understand what you meant. 

Chris


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

Yes the weight is supposed to reduce the amount of movement while aiming. Having that weight out away from the bow and on the stiffest rod possible is how you maximize that stabilizing effect. If the rod and the weights can move independently of each other you undermine the effectiveness of the stabilizer. I personally have rubber dampening devices on my stabilizers but they are added to the outside of the stabilizer rod and don't effect the stiffness of the rod and it's connections to the weight. 

A video I did to help visually explain what a stabilizer does to the aiming process. It looks like that stabilizer has a dampener on the end but that is actual several rubber washers that don't affect the stiffness of the stabilizer.


----------



## justin_b67 (Jan 27, 2004)

I think part of the problem is that a stabilizer and a dampener have different mechanical objectives. 

The first goal of a stabilizer is to control aiming. The longer the stabilizer, and heavier the weight (assuming no significant muscle fatigue), the more that the setup will resist torque and quick movements. In addition, having the bow properly balanced also aides in the goal of steady aiming. Note that dampeners neither hurt nor harm this goal unless they are so weak that they create some sort of oscillation.

The second goal of a stabilizer is to dampen the shock of the shot in an attempt to reduce vibration and create a particular shot feel. Note that the arrow has left the bow before any real dampening effect can occur to influence the shot. 

The fact that both purposes are served, in part, by one device, can lead to confusion. 

IMHO Focus on steadying your aiming with the stabilizer. Worry about the dampener second (or never).


----------



## julle (Mar 1, 2009)

Just about every world record is set with some kind of rubber dampener on the end of a stabilizer... Shouldn't that be enough info for most of you guys.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

As a general comment, some system to damp after shot vibrations is ever recommanded. There are several frequencies of vibrations generted during the launch of the arrow and what is generally perceived are the low fequncy ones, that basically are not very dangerous. But medium/hig frequncy vibrations (those that you don't feel immediately) are the cause of the of the majority of the problems to bow shoulder, if not dampened properly. 
As without instruments is impossible to check what is really happening in terms of return of invisible vibrations to you body joints, the rule of thumb is to damp the bow in any case. Dampers on limbs will help, dampers on rods will help too, but of course should be "week enough" but not too week, in order to avoid to damage your aiming stability. 
Personally I do not allow any child to shoot even with a simple long rod without adding a damper to it, becaus of this.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

So if we did a double blind aiming test with 10 archers and asked them to rate the aiming stabilities with stabilizers of different stiffness, based on everyone's assumption that stabilizers are designed for the purpose of aiming and that the difference in stiffness would have perceivable effects, we would get to determine which stabilizers are better for aiming.

Is that the general consensus here?


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

Helping slow down the movement of the sight is definitely a function of a stabilizer, because of the extra weight added to the bow, but I would say a secondary function. Pull the stabilizer(s) off of your bow and see if you can shoot the same scores, and the odds are that if you don't have a near perfect release, you aren't going to do so. From my experience with shooting both recurve and barebow, the biggest thing I miss when shooting barebow is not the sight, but the stabilizers because stabilizers do a lot to make the bow more forgiving when it comes to your release. On a barebow, I can put enough weight on my bow to give me a pretty steady sight picture, as good as if I was shooting with stabilizers. But that weight, because it is so close to the pivot point (your bow hand), doesn't do a whole hell of a lot to resist the side to side torque caused by a finger release. Stabilizers for me help reduce the effect of my release, which is admittedly not that great.


----------



## justin_b67 (Jan 27, 2004)

Vittorio said:


> As a general comment, some system to damp after shot vibrations is ever recommanded. There are several frequencies of vibrations generted during the launch of the arrow and what is generally perceived are the low fequncy ones, that basically are not very dangerous. But medium/hig frequncy vibrations (those that you don't feel immediately) are the cause of the of the majority of the problems to bow shoulder, if not dampened properly.
> As without instruments is impossible to check what is really happening in terms of return of invisible vibrations to you body joints, the rule of thumb is to damp the bow in any case. Dampers on limbs will help, dampers on rods will help too, but of course should be "week enough" but not too week, in order to avoid to damage your aiming stability.
> Personally I do not allow any child to shoot even with a simple long rod without adding a damper to it, becaus of this.


That's a good point. I've heard that the TEC risers were too stiff and caused some to complain about shoulder pains when shooting with them alot. I've never suffered a shooting related injury, so I tend not to consider that angle. But it is a valid point. In addition, enough vibration can also cause equipment to come loose no matter how hard you try to lock it all down.


----------



## justin_b67 (Jan 27, 2004)

A picture is worth a thousand words. Watch these videos, and slow it down to 25% (an option on youtube).

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=270Me6LPltM


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Shoulder pains are mostly muscular. For a "stiff riser" to cause a joint injury, you've got to be talking about something of an order above type of recoil than an Olympic recurve. TEC risers weigh more on average, and requires more front weight. These all add up, and increases the muscular strain on the deltoids to hold up the bow. They tend to affect archers with shorter necks or higher shoulders due to the lack of leverage from the draw force. Not to be confused with impact injuries.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

julle said:


> Just about every world record is set with some kind of rubber dampener on the end of a stabilizer... Shouldn't that be enough info for most of you guys.


Don't ruin a good debate with facts Julle.


----------



## TheLastKnight (Dec 13, 2016)

What about keeping the dampener on the end of the weight vs. between the weights, what change would that make? I know a little bit of my physics and wouldn't the dampener when it is in-between the weights, make the weights resist motion because it wants to stay at rest. On that note if you where to give it a great deal of energy at that point would it cause stability issues because it is trying to correct itself. sooo, what about putting it on the actual end of the rod how would that change the effect?

Correct me if I am wrong, I'm new blood :3
My interest in this type of stuff has been peaked I would like to learn more about the finite details of recurve. (off topic: any reading recommendation, to get into this, limb compesition effects, dampening, how the bow works?)


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

the weights pull the vibration through the rubber damper. The weights move and counter the vibration. Putting the rubber damper on the end will not absorb the vibration. 


Chris


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> What about keeping the dampener on the end of the weight vs. between the weights, what change would that make?


Not enough to matter.

We talk about these things as if we're shooting machines, shooting in a vacuum.


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

julle said:


> Just about every world record is set with some kind of rubber dampener on the end of a stabilizer... Shouldn't that be enough info for most of you guys.


Perfect example of a self fulfilling prophecy riddled with confirmation bias. Understanding the mechanism and leveraging the benefits (so to speak) are how one improves on a system.


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

b0w_bender said:


> *Perfect example of a self fulfilling prophecy riddled with confirmation bias*. Understanding the mechanism and leveraging the benefits (so to speak) are how one improves on a system.


I guess it is a question of when those are prevalent enough to become fact?


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

i would imagine that over the last 40 years, adding a rubber damper between the stab end and the weights leveraged enough benefit to become prevalent and standard. 

Things that dont work have an odd way of disappearing pretty fast with archery bows. The current stab configurations you see that are standard and used are the ones that are the most effective. That is not confirmation bias. Its tried and tested over many years by many archers and withstood a test of time. 


Chris


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

theminoritydude said:


> Shoulder pains are mostly muscular. For a "stiff riser" to cause a joint injury, you've got to be talking about something of an order above type of recoil than an Olympic recurve. TEC risers weigh more on average, and requires more front weight. These all add up, and increases the muscular strain on the deltoids to hold up the bow. They tend to affect archers with shorter necks or higher shoulders due to the lack of leverage from the draw force. Not to be confused with impact injuries.


Shoulder pains are 99% rotator's cuff probelms coming form misalignements during shooting , not muscolar problems. A lot of top level archers have had to get surgery to the bow shoulder cuff and some to to the drawing shoulder cuff too. It is one of the most probable worst damage you can get shooting a bow, not necessarily at high poundage or mass weight. Some shoooting stiles are more risky than others in this respect, as everyone knows. 
Bow elbow pains are mostly coming from medium /high frequency vibration returning from the bow, as I already said. Stiff risers retun more vibrations, and this is the reason why almost no one is making recurve risers in 7075 alloys. When adding stabilzers, you shoud consider the bow as one piece, vibrations have to be dampend somewere and those you cnanot "see" are the mosot dangerous ones. If you do not rlax the hand and you don't let your bow going out from it at release, you will surely get back mpre tnagerous vibrations, so you need a much "softer" system to safely survive to them, that means usually more dampers everywere. Top level recurve archers that are still shooting after 15 or 20 years without passing from surgery (Vic and Michele are examples) have been ever very carefull about how to handle the follow trought and how to dampen stabilizer and the bow itself. 
Good readings about this matter are the books published by WA about achery injuries ...


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Vittorio said:


> Shoulder pains are 99% rotator's cuff probelms coming form misalignements during shooting , not muscolar problems. A lot of top level archers have had to get surgery to the bow shoulder cuff and some to to the drawing shoulder cuff too. It is one of the most probable worst damage you can get shooting a bow, not necessarily at high poundage or mass weight. Some shoooting stiles are more risky than others in this respect, as everyone knows.
> Bow elbow pains are mostly coming from medium /high frequency vibration returning from the bow, as I already said. Stiff risers retun more vibrations, and this is the reason why almost no one is making recurve risers in 7075 alloys. When adding stabilzers, you shoud consider the bow as one piece, vibrations have to be dampend somewere and those you cnanot "see" are the mosot dangerous ones. If you do not rlax the hand and you don't let your bow going out from it at release, you will surely get back mpre tnagerous vibrations, so you need a much "softer" system to safely survive to them, that means usually more dampers everywere. Top level recurve archers that are still shooting after 15 or 20 years without passing from surgery (Vic and Michele are examples) have been ever very carefull about how to handle the follow trought and how to dampen stabilizer and the bow itself.
> Good readings about this matter are the books published by WA about achery injuries ...


Rotator cuff problems have their roots in repeated over-utilisation of muscles during the final stages of full draw, not due to the vibrations of the bow. These are fatigue injuries, not shock related. The frequencies as you correctly pointed out do affect the elbow, especially so in cases of hyper-extended elbow joints. Even so, to cause injuries to the elbows, there must be sufficient pre-load in the first place for the vibrations to cause damage.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

http://www.webmd.com/pain-management/picture-of-the-rotator-cuff#1

"The rotator cuff is a group of tendons and muscles in the shoulder, connecting the upper arm (humerus) to the shoulder blade (scapula). The rotator cuff tendons provide stability to the shoulder; the muscles allow the shoulder to rotate."

"Rotator cuff tear: An injury tears a rotator cuff tendon that’s been weakened by age or wear and tear. Weakness in the arm (and usually pain) are the symptoms."

These tendons work by tension. Injuries that result from impact caused by vibrations typically affect the cartilage. Cartilage provides cushion against compressive forces between bone surfaces, which is what happens at the elbow joints.


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

chrstphr said:


> i would imagine that over the last 40 years, adding a rubber damper between the stab end and the weights leveraged enough benefit to become prevalent and standard.
> 
> Things that dont work have an odd way of disappearing pretty fast with archery bows. The current stab configurations you see that are standard and used are the ones that are the most effective. That is not confirmation bias. Its tried and tested over many years by many archers and withstood a test of time.
> Chris


Although I agree things that make your shooting significantly worse do disappear rather quickly but I find archers to be incredibly competent copy cats. When Joe blow shoots a good score at said tournaments that setup starts to appear all up and down the line at the next tournament. It may be that Joe's abilities are such that he can overcome a deficient setup. I'm sure the other Geezers in the crowd can attest to all sorts of things that were in vogue that everyone thought was the superior product but turned out to be nothing more than fad. Simply looking at what everyone else is shooting to make equipment choices is paramount to fashion selection. Understanding why a shooter is making an equipment choice is informed purchasing. 


If everyone is shooting the same thing it's amazing how often that particular thing will have the highest score.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> If everyone is shooting the same thing it's amazing how often that particular thing will have the highest score.


Truer words were never spoken.

Dampening stabilizers is so far down on the list of places to look for points, that I can't believe we're even discussing it here actually.

I suppose it's human nature, but I know people who will spend more time trying to figure out how to set up and dampen their stabilizer system, than they ever have on their mental game.


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

Having confidence in one's equipment (whether it is misplaced or not) is part of the mental game.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Clap. Clap. Clap. Clap.........clap.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

erose said:


> Having confidence in one's equipment (whether it is misplaced or not) is part of the mental game.


That's somewhat true. However, if it's to the point where dampening questions are causing an archer to lose confidence in their setup, then they have a pretty weak mental game IMO.

The "mental game" lesson here is that some equipment choices are so inconsequential that lending them any real value just demonstrates that the archer has a long way to go still in that area.

Example - Brady sets up a completely new bow and just days later shoots a world record. Now, how much time do you suppose he gave to whether his stabilizer setup was properly dampened or not? Hmmm?


----------



## rat4go (Apr 14, 2011)

For the extremely low frequency movements that occur during the aiming when a stabilizer is doing its job of adding Moment of Inertia, I have a very hard time believing any compliance from a rubber component at the far end of the stab would reduce the effectiveness (unless maybe the archer drank a couple Monsters before shooting and was shaking at a high frequency. 


The high level science for dampers goes like this:
Most isolators of any type have a frequency band that they are optimized for. Important for most dampers is that optimum frequency changes as you change the mass on the opposite side of the damper from the disturbance. Putting a damper as the last piece of the stab does almost nothing as it has no mass hanging off it. For a given damper, moving it closer to the bow and thus moving weigts to the other side to will change the "tuning" in terms of what disurbances it dampens best. Any alternate placement of a damper in the stab will continue to change its "range of effective operation". 

Different dampers (material/config/design) with different mass attached to them will behave differently. Also, effectively stab bars ARE dampers...but fairly stiff ones. A small diameter, more flexible long rod with lots of weight may perform similarly to a stiffer rod with a rubber isolator before the weight stack. Combine that with the likelihood that no 2 bows/archers generate the same disturbance and you get a tuning topic tht is highly subjective with lots of generalizations, opinions and no universally correct answer. (But fun for me to read!)

If cost and time were not constraints, it is fairly easy to measure the disturbance frequency spectrum and develop a damper config that targets certain components of that spectrum....but frankly, trial and error is more fun for most of us.


----------



## DK Lieu (Apr 6, 2011)

My thoughts are summarized in post #8 here (from over 4 years ago): http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1730545&p=1063787812#post1063787812


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

DK Lieu said:


> My thoughts are summarized in post #8 here (from over 4 years ago): http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1730545&p=1063787812#post1063787812


thank you Dennis!


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

DK Lieu said:


> My thoughts are summarized in post #8 here (from over 4 years ago): http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1730545&p=1063787812#post1063787812


I think everything i have posted is in line with your post. 


Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

rat4go said:


> For the extremely low frequency movements that occur during the aiming when a stabilizer is doing its job of adding Moment of Inertia, I have a very hard time believing any compliance from a rubber component at the far end of the stab would reduce the effectiveness (unless maybe the archer drank a couple Monsters before shooting and was shaking at a high frequency.
> 
> 
> The high level science for dampers goes like this:
> ...


agree..


Chris


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

limbwalker said:


> That's somewhat true. However, if it's to the point where dampening questions are causing an archer to lose confidence in their setup, then they have a pretty weak mental game IMO.
> 
> The "mental game" lesson here is that some equipment choices are so inconsequential that lending them any real value just demonstrates that the archer has a long way to go still in that area.
> 
> Example - Brady sets up a completely new bow and just days later shoots a world record. Now, how much time do you suppose he gave to whether his stabilizer setup was properly dampened or not? Hmmm?


I wouldn't be surprised that in that week he shot more arrows through that bow than the far majority of us do tuning ours over a few weeks/months. There are unique advantages folks have who shoot for a living.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

erose said:


> I wouldn't be surprised that in that week he shot more arrows through that bow than the far majority of us do tuning ours over a few weeks/months. There are unique advantages folks have who shoot for a living.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I actually talked to him at the OTC a few days after he shot that record. You would be surprised at how little he shot prior to that event. That was the topic of our conversation - about how sometimes you take a break and come back and shoot a huge score. 

But I think Rat4go nailed it. dampers have little to no effect while aiming. It takes more movement for them to come into play. So we need to just dispense with the silly notion that dampers can affect someone's aiming. Besides, this isn't an aiming sport anyway. Certainly not at 99.999% of archer's level anyway.

IMO this topic is a perfect example of when forums like this can generate more background noise than is really necessary in our sport.


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

Me I never claimed they were for aiming. Dampers are for IMO aftershot feel and noise. Not really for much else. 

I use them because I shoot really light arrows, and at release my bow sounds loud. If I shoot alums I don't use anything to dampen because I don't need it.

Since we are talking Ellison, as far as I can tell he doesn't use dampers. 

Weight and proper tiller has more to do with stabilizing the sight more than anything else outside the archer that is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Weight and proper tiller has more to do with stabilizing the sight


Not according to our national head coach.


----------



## cc46 (Jan 22, 2005)

I believe everyone is over thinking this. 

Take a look at the line at any large tournament.... nearly all have the same stabilizer configuration. Now look at photos from 10years ago and 20years ago, did it change? How about 40 years ago? Well maybe, remember TFCs (Torque Flight Compensators) at the bow end? Lot of good scores shot then and also today. 

It's like fashion.


----------

