# You've got to crawl before you walk, but for now I'll fill in the gaps!



## Stone Bridge (May 20, 2013)

Larry, you're a good guy for supporting Viper. He took an uncalled for beating by several members who should have been banned forever long ago. It was embarrassing to watch how some abused the Vipe for simply stating a position on "instinctive" archery.

You should beware of the things that lurk in the dark around here looking for "instinctive" threads and the boogey men who start them.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Love seeing ya here Larry 

Any elk ?


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Larry, if you get past the first barrage, I hope you stay on.


----------



## Bee Man (Feb 22, 2013)

As ar as what does the viper say? (Hahaha) 
Lets face it, instinctive shooting means shooting by instinct. For some that means string walking. My instincts tell me to use sights.


----------



## Rick Barbee (Jan 16, 2013)

Hey Larry. Great read.

Rick


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I actually agree, in the end to make a good shot it has to be subconscious - so in that respect, all good shots are instinctive on some level. I do however, think that string walking is slightly different, in that the string walker has the same sight picture regardless of the distance (assuming he judged the distance properly and did his crawl accurately) and this, in theory, should make the string walker a more accurate shot than any other method of barebow aiming and makes it as close to using sights as you can get. I don't have any issue with someone shooting this way, but I can see why most clubs have a separate class for string walking.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

Larry, cool post ... 
More importantly, you are going to go longbow for Yankton ?


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Great post Larry! Good luck with the longbow...:thumbs_up


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Bee Man said:


> As ar as what does the viper say? (Hahaha)
> Lets face it, instinctive shooting means shooting by instinct. For some that means string walking. My instincts tell me to use sights.


First off, thanks Stone, J, and Sanford! No elk this year I focussed on Mulies and Blacktail this year and I am still trying to put some meat in the freezer. I did miss hunting for elk this season.

BeeMan thanks for chiming in as your reply is classic and really embraces a common reply to various methods of non sight shooting. Shooting gap, pick a point, point of aim all require thought, memorization, calculation. Whereas point and shoot is a "no brainer", just draw the bow back and shoot. No fuss no mess, no thought, no effort. It's easy right?

But did you get into trad archery because it was easier? Did you opt to buy a bow rather than make your own because it was easier. For that matter do you prefer to buy pre-made strings, arrows, quivers, because making your own is too complicated and involved? Or maybe I am totally off base, do you not buy anything archery goods because they are too accurate. Do you make all your gear with hand tools, instinctively because it is raw and crude and natural?

Is it the purity of archery that you search for? The flight of the arrow as it arcs towards its mark? No sights, no calculation it's magic!

Because if you ponder these questions as I do we are in the same boat. But don't sell yourself short, give stringwalking a try before you nock it, I mean Knock it. Stringwalking isn't like sights, it's just another form of shooting without sights. I'm no advocate for Viper, but I would rather you and me realize that you and I are are brothers in archery rather than separatists that try to deny that other stickbow archers are kin.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Sanford said:


> Larry, if you get past the first barrage, I hope you stay on.


Darn it, I fear that I have posted a "stir the pot" thread and I apologize for that. I wish I could say that I was an elitist archer searching for the most accurate form of barebow archery known to man. A technique that is superior to all, and btw the rest of you are all wrong . But I'm not.

In reality I'm just on this archery journey, hunting for yew in the forest, shooting selfbows, meeting up with Jim Ploen and later with Ron King while elk hunting and figuring out a way to shoot their longbows. Still further back calling up Ann and Earl Hoyt on the phone and ordering my first Hoyt Pro Medalist recurve and shooting it barebow, even though it had many a hole in it begging for accessories. And through all these contacts there is acts and miss-acts of boiling, twisting, gluing, fleshing, skinning, stripping, sawing, chopping, truing,napping/knapping and laughing, bleeding, and crying. Wish I could say it was all instinctive, and maybe it was/is.

What's my point? I believe Ken osb summed it up the best. In the end whatever you have strapped on your bow, as we progress in our shooting skills, technique, and execution it all becomes solidified on another level, to me it feels like a floating sensation. I remember Darrell Pace describing it as a catatonic state. Ken talks about it being subconscious.

I might need to stick to threads about why I like 8190. And how to season a freshly cut yew log.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Larry..

I'm no master of anything and just love busting the brush to fill the pot for supper..but your more than welcome to share the stew at my campfire any day. .regardless of how or what you shoot. .

Mac


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

I definitely can't agree that all aiming techniques are the same...if that's what is trying to be said and promoted :wink:

Now...I can agree that all aiming techniques that don't involve a sight are considered basically the same under one tent called Barebow and that for some archers who use Gap and Point of Aim for examples can be aiming at a lower level of conscious awareness towards the end of their shot...but it's NOT the same as what True Instinctive Aiming is. 

I agree...why argue :wink: Instinctive Aiming is a specific aiming technique that falls under the barebow category...but is uniquely DIFFERENT as all the other barebow aiming techniques are.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Gapmaster (May 23, 2002)

Hi Larry. Great post and I couldn't agree more. No matter who you are, if you are shooting with fingers and no sights then I feel your in my group of colleagues. I could care less how you aim, if your three under or one over or if it comes from stiff arming the arrow tip on a leaf, gaping or standing on your head when the shot goes off, if it comes from your subconscious or conscious or if you use added weight or not, it's all the same to me. To me, fingers and no sight, wheels or no wheels, it's still the challenge of repeated consistency with my fingers, using any way I know of how to aim with no sight attached to my bow, beating myself first, and trying to be number one for the day if possible. Respect to all who have mastered or are still trying to master this most difficult and glamorous way of shooing a bow and arrow. After all these years I still get goosebumbs when I'm standing behind someone shooting this style of archery and I watch them take a bow and an arrow, nothing else, and bury two arrows in the dot at any given distance. It's like magic. It's all Traditional and ultimately I think we all should appreciate what each of us is trying to accomplish with limited equipment and what senses our bodies can master. Again, good post Larry and thanks for bringing it out. Gapmaster


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Larry...balanced, sane, fair and reasonable all in the same post with the word instinctive in it?...with due consideration and respect for others?

I usually don't achieve REM5 sleep until well after 2:00am...but if I am in fact not dreaming and this is for real...

Would you be willing to accept a nominated position as U.S. Ambassador in charge of relations with North Korea? :laugh:

Now I would say something like..."Great post man!"...but I think you already know that. 

Me?...I'm trying to get over my recent resentment with Matt (that he's not aware of yet)...where he posted all those pix of top shooters anchoring off their cheekbone...an just when I was feeling real good about hooking my jaw. 

L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## bilbowbone (Jan 15, 2011)

I'm glad you're here Larry!


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

I see aiming methods as a spread of colour from white through grey to black. The colour is an indication of the proportion of conscious:subconscious input goes into the shot. 

Which method suits you will depend on your mental make-up, essentially right brain:left brain. Pick whatever method suits your mind so you have a peaceful mind doing the shot.


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

Thanks Larry!


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I've come to the conclusion that I don't always aim the same way. Sometimes I consciously shoot a predetermined gap and sometimes I just look at the target and, after the shot, don't really remember really paying any attention to the arrow or gap.

Reading threads like this brought me to another conclusion about archery. One of the things that I really love about it is that, when I shoot, it's just me. People on the other side of the country don't get to vote on ways to screw up my shot. LOL


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Greysides said:


> I see aiming methods as a spread of colour from white through grey to black. The colour is an indication of the proportion of conscious:subconscious input goes into the shot.
> 
> Which method suits you will depend on your mental make-up, essentially right brain:left brain. Pick whatever method suits your mind so you have a peaceful mind doing the shot.


I like that...aiming via 50 shades of Grey (sides)! :laugh:



MGF said:


> I've come to the conclusion that I don't always aim the same way. Sometimes I consciously shoot a predetermined gap *and sometimes I just look at the target and, after the shot, don't really remember really paying any attention to the arrow or gap.*
> 
> Reading threads like this brought me to another conclusion about archery. One of the things that I really love about it is that, when I shoot, it's just me. People on the other side of the country don't get to vote on ways to screw up my shot. LOL


Dang!...I like that too!..you guys are on a roll this morning! :laugh:

But careful MGF...*sounds* like you are dangerously close to aiming instinctively.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Larry

Hope we get a chance to shoot a round or two this spring - California group is a blast to shoot with. Gary & Sandy should make it this year. 

Matt


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

JINKSTER said:


> But careful MGF...*sounds* like you are dangerously close to aiming instinctively.


I haven't gotten too caught up in definitions. I've tried to educate myself about different methods because ignorance is rarely an asset and different situations sometimes call for a different approach. 

A wise man once said "What works, works. I don't need a label for the way I aim. I just need to hit the target.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

MGF said:


> I haven't gotten too caught up in definitions. I've tried to educate myself about different methods because ignorance is rarely an asset and different situations sometimes call for a different approach.
> 
> A wise man once said "What works, works. I don't need a label for the way I aim. I just need to hit the target.


again...agreed...100%...cause if I ever find myself thinking about aiming while I'm shooting?...I need to set my bow down and stop shooting until I finish thinking. :laugh:


----------



## Dsturgisjr (Aug 20, 2004)

Masters Of The Archery Pun - featuring Larry Yien.


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

*I ever find myself thinking about aiming while I'm shooting.*

And herein TRULY brings us together. Even in Oly archery there is a time where the tip/sight is pointed somewhere with confidence and the brain needs to shut off to focus on the perfect process.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

bradd7 said:


> *I ever find myself thinking about aiming while I'm shooting.*
> 
> And herein TRULY brings us together. Even in Oly archery there is a time where the tip/sight is pointed somewhere with confidence and the brain needs to shut off to focus on the perfect process.


bingo.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Nice post Larry we are all non sighted no mater what bow we shoot. The flight of the arrow is a thing of Beauty
Gary


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Good to see you posting and shooting Larry. The world of archery is better off when you are involved in it that's for sure.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

Good to see you posting here Larry, what is your goals for Yankton 2014, Longbow, Bowhunter or Barebow?

I'm playing with Barebow through the Indoor season and see what develops in the Spring, it will either be Bowhunter or Barebow at Yankton for me, look forward to seeing you again, it's been too long since you shot a Worlds.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

benofthehood said:


> Larry, cool post ...
> More importantly, you are going to go longbow for Yankton ?


@Ben and Steve yes my goal is Yankton shooting longbow. I've had a ton of fun shooting my recurves and stringwalking, gapping, instinctive. I shot one of my osage/bamboo Torges style longbows yesterday. I still need to get excited about Yankton, am not quite there. 

Still need to do a bunch of refining on my shooting. Getting my sequence down and starting to feel more comfortable in the that zone right before release. I have a tendency to rush through it or worse yet trying to steady it more when it is fine if I just leave it as it is. It is working much better to embrace or allow movement rather than restrict it and just let the set up "be".

And I am just starting to keep score again.  Which, as most of you know is a real eye opener.

One neat trivia point was yesterday at the range I bumped into a local club member I haven't seen for 15 years at the range. He was the guy that got me into competitive archery (darn him ). Yep, he taught me how to score the indoor and outdoor rounds and low man for the day would buy the beers! He was there shooting with his son and it was heartwarming to catch up. Good stuff, great shots!


----------



## LongStick64 (Aug 29, 2009)

Very well said Larry, we can all discuss the step involved when we shoot and what we are "thinking about" during the shot process and I bet we all accomplish our goal in different ways. The goal is the same no matter the method. I personally believe you need to tailor your shot to what allows you to reach your goal consistently. Not what your Hero does or your bets friend or the greatest shooter of all time. It takes time and it takes a lot of quality trial and error to find what works better for you. If you use the mindset that Larry suggests that in principle we are all shooting barebow, no sights, it allows you to freely find your shot. But sadly there are many who want to define everyone to their shot and that is the wrong route to take.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

It amazes me how some people seem to get offended about defining aiming techniques and pointing out the inherent advantages and disadvantages with each one of them. It's as if they're not able to exploit a certain technique as well as others they some how feel that they are some how less of an archer or looked down upon as an inferior archer. IMO...that is sooo far from the truth. Sure...there are some archers who look down upon anyone who doesn't follow their ideals or personal choices...but defining and discussing aiming techniques should ONLY be used for educational purposes to help new or old archers wanting to improve their accuracy. Using an aiming technique, equipment choice or even some form choices to bolster your ego or put someone else down is childish.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Ray, at our local shop/range, which is 99% sighted compound, they made me a BIG sticker for my SKB bow case to read: "SIGHTS ARE FOR SISSIES". Funning aside, in the real world, there's no "more" or "less" archer comparisons, to wit, if I am at the top of my game sans sights and they are at the top of their game with sights, as long as I don't meet or top their game, we are all equal archers. Choice of equipment defines the archer's preference, not ability. That comes with practice.

Feigned indignation on the Internet over aiming definitions carries so for, laughable, but seems to stay in its place.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

I'm all in for light hearted humor and ribbing each other. It's the comments that are made to 'actually' try and put others down for their personal choices. You can usually tell who they are because they get offended when you throw a similar comment right back at them :wink:

Ray :shade:

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Stone Bridge (May 20, 2013)

BLACK WOLF said:


> I'm all in for light hearted humor and ribbing each other. It's the comments that are made to 'actually' try and put others down for their personal choices. You can usually tell who they are because they get offended when you throw a similar comment right back at them :wink:
> 
> Ray :shade:
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


How about you simply knock off your ceaseless need to hear your own voice and join in the joy that is Larry Y. Guy comes on with some new and pleasant light and once again you start pulling the shades down. What a drag.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

LOL...you can stop anytime now with the constant personal attacks anytime you don't agree with my posts.

You read waaay to much into the tone of my posts. In other words...you assume you know me personally and the tone of my words! There's no need to turn these threads into personal attacks claiming that I like to hear myself talk just because you don't like my posts.

If you can't handle reading my posts without trying to turn it into a personal attack...just ignore my posts. Pretty simple.

Ray :shade:

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Stone Bridge (May 20, 2013)

You prove my point every time you post.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Stone Bridge said:


> You prove my point every time you post.


Sorry...you haven't proved anything except to make more poor assumptions. Please try and keep this thread on topic instead of making it about me and what you think of me.

Ray :shade:

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

Stone Bridge said:


> You prove my point every time you post.


Personally, I find just the opposite.
Ray was spot on with his post and you attack him.
I have seen it many times.

​


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

Stone Bridge said:


> How about you simply knock off your ceaseless need to hear your own voice and join in the joy that is Larry Y. Guy comes on with some new and pleasant light and once again you start pulling the shades down. What a drag.


Im not sure I see the joy in Larry's post either. Yes, it was a great attempt in being pleasant and light, but that does not make it accurate.
Sure, we can all hold hands while running through fields of flowers while the sun shines down upon us..
I don't care at all what aiming technique anybody else uses. However, it is inaccurate to group them all under instinctive just because a conventional "sight" is not used.
If you want to unite everyone, leave aiming out of it. Unite as archers. Or better yet, Bowhunters!


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

irishhacker said:


> Personally, I find just the opposite.
> Ray was spot on with his post and you attack him.
> I have seen it many times.
> 
> ​


Yes, he could ...simply knock off _his_ ceaseless need to hear _his_ own voice and join in the joy that is _BLACK WOLF_. LOL


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

irishhacker said:


> Im not sure I see the joy in Larry's post either. Yes, it was a great attempt in being pleasant and light, but that does not make it accurate.
> Sure, we can all hold hands while running through fields of flowers while the sun shines down upon us..
> I don't care at all what aiming technique anybody else uses. However, it is inaccurate to group them all under instinctive just because a conventional "sight" is not used.
> If you want to unite everyone, leave aiming out of it. Unite as archers. Or better yet, Bowhunters!


Discussing, debating or even arguing specific aspects or archery doesn't necessarily mean that we aren't "united as archers" unless it turns into a fist fight or something. We're not required to see or do things the same way as the next guy. We don't need a "big tent" because we can all have our own tent.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

MGF said:


> Discussing, debating or even arguing specific aspects or archery doesn't necessarily mean that we aren't "united as archers" unless it turns into a fist fight or something. We're not required to see or do things the same way as the next guy. We don't need a "big tent" because we can all have our own tent.


I agree.. I was just trying to make a point..If you gonna throw us all under a big tent..at least be accurate.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

irishhacker said:


> I agree.. I was just trying to make a point..If you gonna throw us all under a big tent..at least be accurate.


Thank God there are people on this board like you....that can see the positive in my posts when I don't always agree with everyone.

Your last comment is EXACTLY my point. I can rub shoulders with anyone under the classification of archer....NO MATTER what they shoot or how they shoot...BUT I'm not going to pretend we are all EXACTLY the same. I can except the diversity that falls under the classification of 'archer' and can appreciate their personal choices unlike some others who will make fun of trad bowhunters, Instinctive shooters, String Walkers or whoever. 

Thanks again irishhacker and MGF :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

These days, diversity seems to only be regarded favorably as it pertains to race. Diversity of thought just isn't so well accepted.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

MGF said:


> These days, diversity seems to only be regarded favorably as it pertains to race. Diversity of thought just isn't so well accepted.


​That should be on a T-Shirt.. lol


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

irishhacker said:


> Im not sure I see the joy in Larry's post either. Yes, it was a great attempt in being pleasant and light, but that does not make it accurate.
> Sure, we can all hold hands while running through fields of flowers while the sun shines down upon us..
> I don't care at all what aiming technique anybody else uses. However, it is inaccurate to group them all under instinctive just because a conventional "sight" is not used.
> If you want to unite everyone, leave aiming out of it. Unite as archers. Or better yet, Bowhunters!


Irish, thanks for posting and as much as your opinion might be the popular one of the day or even the decade, I find error in it. First off my intent was not to be merely pleasant and light. More importantly, all barebow styles do fit under "instinctive" whether you like it or not. If we look at barebow archery from the 1950's till now we would realize that it all fits under instinctive and instinctors. If you take a shorter period in time let's say from Fred Asbell's book on you might have a stronger inclination to form opinions stated in your post.

Perhaps you would prefer to ignore history and create a reality based on archery when "you" first got involved (when did you get involved in "instinctive archery"?). From a physio-psycho-propio level we all have an element or elements of "instinctive" in our shooting style. Is it your point that we determine who is more instinctive by self-admission on what's going through our heads while we shoot our arrows?

Our forefathers in Archery had it right when they deemed all non-sight shooters instinctive/instinctor archers. I question whether some modern day archers know better with their spitting matches and need to demean. While I am not asking that you change your definition I suggest that you not hold on so tightly in defending that you are so different than me as we take aim on our target.

I'm not sure if that is what Viper meant from his post, but that's what I got out of it. There are many paths to instinctive, it isn't about a book you read, or a jig you dance, a secret handshake. It's about shooting barebow and realizing that it is OUTASIGHT! (No drums beating, no you cannot hold my hand ).

Still further, my post may be spot on, or may have missed the mark. If it has invited you and others to contemplate and broaden your perspectives, I trust it was worthwhile.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Larry Yien said:


> More importantly, all barebow styles do fit under "instinctive" whether you like it or not. Our forefathers in Archery had it right when they deemed all non-sight shooters instinctive/instinctor archers.


IMO...I agree...that was true in the past...BUT...meanings and definitions can evolve to mean something entirely different or something more specific...and I believe that is EXACTLY what has happened with the word 'Instinctive' as it relates to archery and more specifically...a unique aiming technique.

At one point in time...all aiming techniques that didn't involve a sight were classified as Instinctive...at least in regards to a specific class in some competitions.

Today...Instinctive primarily applies to a specific aiming technique...DIFFERENT from Gap, Point of Aim or ANY other aiming technique. It no longer necessarily encompasses or includes every Barebow aiming technique unless someone is holding onto the past classification of it's use...OR...we are also considering how it's still being used in Europe to describe a specific class in some competitions.

And before anyone jumps to some stupid assumption about me on how I feel or think...I have absolutely no issues with Larry just because I disagree with him and openly discuss it. From what I've seen and read about him...he's a great shot and seems like a fun guy :wink: 

The fact of the matter is....there are inherent advantages and disadvantages to specific aiming techniques under specific circumstances...BUT...it's up to the archer to find what works specifically for their personal GOALS, ABILITIES and PERSONALITY...which is also why there can be little tents under one big tent.

Diversity is a good thing. Thank God we are NOT all exactly alike.

Ray :shade:


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

Good post Larry. 

Last week I was talking to some Swedish shooters about Stringwalking and it's roots in Sweden, he said before ILF bows and Stringwalking it was known as Instinctive class, I can now see why WA3D call their Wood Rec div "Instinctive" as it has some connection with past European Archery styles, it was just a generic term for shooting all bows without a sight. You had sighted class and everything else (Recurves, Longbows, Primitive bows) were all Instinctive Class.

The term never upset me but it's nice to get the history and understand the logic of WA calling this Rec div "Instinctive"


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

I find it interesting....that most of the archers that want to classify ALL archers, who aim Barebow as Instinctive are the one's who aim using a different aiming technique besides True Instinctive.

Could that be based on years of them winning competitions or doing better than others archers and being called cheaters or ridiculed for taking advantage of a better aiming technique than the guys they beat?

It seems that one of the reasons why someone would want to get everyone to think we are all basically aiming the same way is to try and get people to stop the stupid unfounded accusations of saying that if an archer is using String Walking, Face Walking, Gap or Point of Aim to win an archery competition...they are cheating.

The fact is....ANY archer who wins a competition by following the rules....won it fair and square...and the archers who are complaining are the sore losers!

If someone wants to win a competition...it's wise to study and research the different techniques that are dominating that particular competition. That's the smart thing to do. Don't handicap yourself and than complain about it when you loose!

Ray :shade:


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Jesse Broadwater shot a 900 90x on the first 3 days at Vegas this year. That's ninety arrows into a spot the size of a quarter using a back tension release. I promise you his sole focus was his back tension and the spot he wanted to hit (sound familiar??). There are FAR more similarities, across the spectrum of archery, in how a bow is aimed than there are differences.

Matt


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Matt, that is spot on. Only the metric is changed with any aiming device, bow-organic or added. Getting a "floating arrow" into a "sized ring" is an art beyond our eyes, no matter.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> There are FAR more similarities, across the spectrum of archery, in how a bow is aimed than there are differences.


The same can be said about form techniques or equipment choices...but the fact of the matter still remains...there will be specific techniques or equipment choices that are inherently easier to use to produce more consistentcy...and therefore...ultimately more accuracy.

There's a reason why Instinctive Aiming is NOT the primary aiming technique used or suggested to an archer who's primary goal is competitive target archery...unless it involves aerial or moving targets :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

Larry Yien said:


> Irish, thanks for posting and as much as your opinion might be the popular one of the day or even the decade, I find error in it. First off my intent was not to be merely pleasant and light. More importantly, all barebow styles do fit under "instinctive" whether you like it or not. If we look at barebow archery from the 1950's till now we would realize that it all fits under instinctive and instinctors. If you take a shorter period in time let's say from Fred Asbell's book on you might have a stronger inclination to form opinions stated in your post.
> 
> Perhaps you would prefer to ignore history and create a reality based on archery when "you" first got involved (when did you get involved in "instinctive archery"?). From a physio-psycho-propio level we all have an element or elements of "instinctive" in our shooting style. Is it your point that we determine who is more instinctive by self-admission on what's going through our heads while we shoot our arrows?
> 
> ...



Our forefathers also thought the earth was flat. Indeed it is not.
Humans gain knowledge through time and pass that on to the next generation.
We now know the earth is in fact round.
Are you holding on to old ideas that are false as well?
We have since clarified what it means to shoot instinctively. No, you are right. You cannot ask me to change my definition. Its not mine. It is *the* definition.
Now I know WikiPedia is not the end-all-be-all,, but I feel it is spot on here.
"*Instinctive shooting is a style of shooting that includes the barebow aiming method that relies heavily upon the subconscious mind, proprioception, and motor/muscle memory to make aiming adjustments; the term used to refer to a general category of archers who did not use a mechanical or fixed sight"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archery#Aiming_methods
​*


----------



## Big Country (Apr 25, 2003)

Matt_Potter said:


> Jesse Broadwater shot a 900 90x on the first 3 days at Vegas this year. That's ninety arrows into a spot the size of a quarter using a back tension release. I promise you his sole focus was his back tension and the spot he wanted to hit (sound familiar??). There are FAR more similarities, across the spectrum of archery, in how a bow is aimed than there are differences.
> 
> Matt


Matt, walk into your bathroom, open the lid, repeat your post, close the lid………


You will enjoy the same satisfaction……..sadly.

Some folks simply want to disagree regardless of the degree of insanity involved.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I can see all sides of this.

In reality, everyone, even sighted shooters shoot instinctive on some level, at least if they shoot well.

But, the idea that there was only one classification of aiming barebow back in the day is simply not true. How many times have we heard the quote of Howard Hill where he said that he has never seen a good instinctive shooter? Obviously he saw a difference in aiming styles.

We know that there were names given to various aiming styles back in they day - POA Point of Aim, Gap Shooting, Split Vision Aiming, etc... and Instinctive was a seperate and distinct type of aiming.

Instinctive aiming is usually defined as someone who aims without any conscious reference to the distance, the arrow, the bow, etc... 

This is different from gap shooting, string walking, point of aim shooting, etc... And it needs to be taught and understood differently.

There is nothing wrong with stating that there are different ways to aim a barebow and instinctive is one of many ways to aim a barebow that is different from other methods.

The only thing that I disagree with is the often repeated fable that our forefathers or the ancients believed that the world was flat. This is complete nonsense. We know that the ancient Romans and Greeks knew that the world was a sphere, in fact a Roman scientist measured the globe very accurately, with in a few hundred miles. Here is a pic of an ancient god that proves the ancients knew that the earth was a sphere.












Also conider this passage from the Holy Bible: 

Isaiah 40:22 

_"It is he that sitteth upon the *globe of the earth*, and the inhabitants thereof are as locusts: he that stretcheth out the heavens as nothing, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in."_


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

Talking with Dave Cousins in Sardinia this week on how he aims, said he just looks at the exact spot he wants to hit and trusts that his scope will center itself, it's more feeling than visual he doesn't look for the scope dot, he is just waiting for everything to feel right so he can conclude the shot.

That said I feel trying to center a round scope on a round target makes it much easier not to peek, with Gapping you're rarely putting the arrow in the spot (mostly above/below) so it's a lot harder to "let go" and not peek, I think you need slightly more conscious input to get the aim right, hence we don't always shoot as good as sighted Archers. 

When I'm learning a new bow/gaps I start off very visual and very aware of the arrow tip, as those Gaps become ingrained I'm trusting the Gap more and less conscious effort is required, I imagine the best Trad shooters are at a very high level of trust with their Gaps and shoot like Dave, more by feel.

Larry you have plenty of time to get that level of trust back, also you had it when you won those worlds, so it's not like something you never had:thumbs_up


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

You've gotta love AT. Even a thoughtful, personal, inoffensive post by one of the modern day legends of our sport, and a true gentleman as well, gets turned into a pissing match by the usual suspects. Way to go


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Actually, even today, - there is, with the exception of string and face walking, really only one classification of barebow archers - usually just called traditional, but there is a distinction in aiming styles.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

BigJono- if you are accusing me of being in a "pissing match" you are sadly mistaken, I agree, for the most part with almost everything that has been said to one degree or another.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> I can see all sides of this.
> 
> In reality, everyone, even sighted shooters shoot instinctive on some level, at least if they shoot well.
> 
> ...


LOL.. You are right about the earth. 
You Bible verse is not worded exactly correct, but the idea is correct.
"*It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"*

My point about forefathers believing the earth was flat is still true though. Many euros did believe it was flat. 
Through exploration, they later proved they were wrong.
The same is true about barebow archery aiming methods. Our forefathers in archery have since been proven wrong as well. 
Some of the old guard are still clinging to the old beliefs and I completely get it.

The rest of your post.. I'm right in the front row.. cheering you on and waiting to hear more


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

Bigjono said:


> You've gotta love AT. Even a thoughtful, personal, inoffensive post by one of the modern day legends of our sport, and a true gentleman as well, gets turned into a pissing match by the usual suspects. Way to go


I get what you are saying.. But only feeble minds do not challenge the ideas of others. Just because someone is respected in their field does not mean they are always right. You shouldn't sit back and be spoon fed something you know is incorrect.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

It depends on the translation of the Bible one uses - mine comes from the Greek Septuagint, considered by many the most accurate translation of the Old Testament. Greek and Hebrew have a different word for circle and globe, as does Latin, so when Jerome translated the Vulgate from the Septuagint back in the 4th century, at a time when virtually everyone that was educated knew Greek and Latin, and many knew Hebrew as well, he would have been immediately called out if he translanted circle innacurately into Latin as globe. So, since Jerome also translated it as globe, I am pretty confident that this is the accurate translation.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> It depends on the translation of the Bible one uses - mine comes from the Greek Septuagint, considered by many the most accurate translation of the Old Testament. Greek and Hebrew have a different word for circle and globe, as does Latin, so when Jerome translated the Vulgate from the Septuagint back in the 4th century, at a time when virtually everyone that was educated knew Greek and Latin, and many knew Hebrew as well, he would have been immediately called out if he translanted circle innacurately into Latin as globe. So, since Jerome also translated it as globe, I am pretty confident that this is the accurate translation.


I use the same version as well. http://ecmarsh.com/lxx/Esaias/index.htm


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Larry,

I love that old NFAA logo. I even have one of the old enamel instinctor pins on my quiver. Good stuff.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

irishhacker said:


> My point about forefathers believing the earth was flat is still true though. Many euros did believe it was flat.
> Through exploration, they later proved they were wrong.
> The same is true about barebow archery aiming methods. Our forefathers in archery have since been proven wrong as well.
> Some of the old guard are still clinging to the old beliefs and I completely get it.


Only tangentially related, but that is the whole "myth". No civilized society is recorded as ever thinking the earth was flat. The "flat earth" myth, myth being that folks actually thought that way in the past (other than some very ancient or very remote civilizations), was actually a poke at the Church done in the late 1800's, which later was spread to school kids as one basis for Columbus to voyage. Our forefathers were just not that dumb as the myth implies. The earth has been and still is round.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

Sanford said:


> Only tangentially related, but that is the whole "myth". No civilized society is recorded as ever thinking the earth was flat. The "flat earth" myth, myth being that folks actually thought that way in the past (other than some very ancient or very remote civilizations), was actually a poke at the Church done in the late 1800's, which later was spread to school kids as one basis for Columbus to voyage. Our forefathers were just not that dumb as the myth implies. The earth has been and still is round.


See there.. I learn something everyday..


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Bigjono said:


> You've gotta love AT. Even a thoughtful, personal, inoffensive post by one of the modern day legends of our sport, and a true gentleman as well, gets turned into a pissing match by the usual suspects. Way to go


Agreed, and as usual, the people doing the pissing don't have the credentials to back up their positions. Oh, I forgot, just because someone has proven himself in the competitive arena, doesn't make him more credible than Joe Blow. What a joke! Does anyone on here really believe that weekend archers have as much to add to these threads than someone Like Larry Yien? Several posters have pointed out the obvious, some people have a need to see themselves on here, whether they have anything constructive to say or not. I applaud the archerytalk concept, but, when people come on here for the sole purpose of trying to put down someone who has a lot more experience, knowledge, and historical insight into archery than they do, then those posters need to get a clue. There are several regular posters on here who try to intimidate others with their posts whom, as far as I have been able to ascertain, don't have the least amount of archery credibility, unless of course, you include all their local archery wins and backyard championships. You can talk all you want to about propioception, kinesthesia, Instinctive, subconscious, conscious or any other term. The bottom line to what we do is putting the arrow in the spot or the breadbasket of whatever animal we are shooting at, and the archers who can teach you how to do that better and faster, are the ones you would be smart to listen to. Larry, as always, your posts are a cut above the usual. Keep up the good work.


----------



## Stone Bridge (May 20, 2013)

Bigjono said:


> You've gotta love AT. Even a thoughtful, personal, inoffensive post by one of the modern day legends of our sport, and a true gentleman as well, gets turned into a pissing match by the usual suspects. Way to go


Jon, you are so correct. When Larry first posted I immediately knew what would happen and by whom. If I had such foresight at Las Vegas I'd be banned from the casinos.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

irishhacker said:


> LOL.. You are right about the earth.
> You Bible verse is not worded exactly correct, but the idea is correct.
> "*It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"*
> 
> ...


Sort of curious as to what you mean by the section I highlighted? What old beliefs is Larry clinging to?? Sort of ironic calling Larry the old guard considering that he is a young man and set the longbow world on it ear with his new fangled way of shooting a long bow. I mean standing upright and aiming what was he thinking - burn the hieratic.

Matt


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

You have to watch yourself with Larry, his writing style comes across as humble (as he is in real life) and can often be mistaken as almost novice like when he talks about rebuilding his Form/Game, when you look back at his past achievements you remember just how great a shot he is, I suspect even now rebuilding his game and on his worst days, on a Field course he could still out shoot 98% of Longbows on this Trad Forum.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

steve morley said:


> You have to watch yourself with Larry, his writing style comes across as humble (as he is in real life) and can often be mistaken as almost novice like when he talks about rebuilding his Form/Game, when you look back at his past achievements you remember just how great a shot he is, I suspect even now rebuilding his game and on his worst days, on a Field course he could still out shoot 98% of Longbows on this Trad Forum.


So he's sand-bagging by way of....

"lulling his competition into a false sense of security"?

I can see that....heck...I've done that before. :laugh:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Bigjono said:


> You've gotta love AT. Even a thoughtful, personal, inoffensive post by one of the modern day legends of our sport, and a true gentleman as well, gets turned into a pissing match by the usual suspects.


Ya know what we gotta love...is human nature because this doesn't just happen on AT!

What's really funny...is when a person agrees with a post...it all of a sudden becomes thoughtful, personal and inoffensive...YET...when someone disagrees with that post...that person and/or that post is often viewed as being thoughtful, impersonal and offensive.

I think its time for some of you to man up and not get so easily offended or convince yourselves you know the exact thoughts and feelings of the person who is disagreeing.

Ray :shade:

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Yewselfbow (Jan 28, 2006)

Hi Larry .... 
Whilst the other chaps are busy discussing other aspects of your thread, I wonder if I could sneak in and ask a question while no ones looking and try and learn from the horses mouth .. so to speak. 
In your first post you commented


> *I've just got to keep it simple and not add all that extra stuff that gets in the way of a good shot.*


. Could I ask, what stuff is getting in the way and what techniques do you use to get rid of it. 
Thanks.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

steve morley said:


> You have to watch yourself with Larry, his writing style comes across as humble (as he is in real life) and can often be mistaken as almost novice like when he talks about rebuilding his Form/Game, when you look back at his past achievements you remember just how great a shot he is, I suspect even now rebuilding his game and on his worst days, on a Field course he could still out shoot 98% of Longbows on this Trad Forum.


Yeah but Steve , many of the guys on here are hunters , and as such there focus is totally different ...
Oh wait ... dang ... Larry is a successful bowhunter too ...

It was actually watching Larry shoot on MBB that got me thinking about shooting better ... my wife may not appreciate the money or time i have spent since , but I sure appreciate and acknowledge Larry's achievements in both Field and "in the field" with a longbow .....

I am also a tad jealous of him living where he does, and access to archery and archers who enjoy "archery" in all its forms and do well at it ..... and going by his post [ and more importantly some of the posts that followed in response] , just how disempowering "labels" can be when twisted to suit agenda's 

wish we had that round here sometimes i tells ya !!!

But sheesh , sometimes people will argue over the colour of orange juice


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

JINKSTER said:


> So he's sand-bagging by way of....
> 
> "lulling his competition into a false sense of security"?
> 
> I can see that....heck...I've done that before. :laugh:


I think it's called humility, something that's sorely lacking these days.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Matt_Potter said:


> Sort of curious as to what you mean by the section I highlighted? What old beliefs is Larry clinging to?? Sort of ironic calling Larry the old guard considering that he is a young man and set the longbow world on it ear with his new fangled way of shooting a long bow. I mean standing upright and aiming what was he thinking - burn the hieratic.
> 
> Matt


Thoroughly enjoy that perspective Matt, and I'd agree, there are some circles and eras that I'd be tarred and feathered and others that I might fit right in with. I often think I'd fit in best with Saxton Pope and Art Young, maybe Doc Elmer and Earl Ullrich. Fred Asbell is always polite to me, but I'm probably somewhat of a freak to him .

But what I'd really like to say is I don't expect any special treatment here or even undue respect here at AT. I understand and have come to accept the value, and the bane of the internet. It's a place where we can gather information, exchange ideas, invoke change, create opportunities.

I'm not asking you to dissolve the lines that define different non-sight techniques. I'd just like to invite you to take a look at where we came from when the whole archery world embraced instinctive archery. Don't hold on so tightly to your beliefs that they might prevent you from seeing beyond your nose.

Look for opportunities and the possibilities for paths you might travel. In this very month I've been traipsing through the forests of the Pacific Northwest, admiring several Yew trees for possible staves, re-tillering an osage bamboo backed bow that I made years ago, and I even ordered some high tech carbon fiber recurve limbs that are designed to reduce limb torque=anti-twist. If you can embrace a mindset that invites freedom and exploration, that's the path I suggest. If your mindset cements you to your easy chair and your keyboard to criticize and be narrow minded, well then... you've pick your poison. I realize BW and Irish aren't buying "it" and that's fine, there are plenty of folks reading this thread that might feel the same way. I figure there are just as many folks that are here to celebrate archery, a stick and string, and embrace our traditions and our future. TIMBER!


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Larry Yien said:


> I figure there are just as many folks that are here to celebrate archery, a stick and string, and embrace our traditions and our future. TIMBER!


Just to be clear...just because when I or anyone else disagrees with someone does NOT mean we don't share the same happy feelings about archery in general. I can celebrate EVERYTHING about archery with others....the similarities and the DIVERSITIES! :wink:

Ray :shade:



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

benofthehood said:


> But sheesh , sometimes people will argue over the colour of orange juice


If someone says orange juice is blue...ya better bet I'll disagree :wink:

Ray :shade:



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Larry Yien said:


> Don't hold on so tightly to your beliefs that they might *prevent you from seeing beyond your nose*.


And just what does that mean to insinuate?  Just kidding


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

J. Wesbrock said:


> I think it's called humility, something that's sorely lacking these days.


Oh...sorry....I thought it was something else that's sorely lacking these days...

a sense of humor.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Yewselfbow said:


> Hi Larry ....
> Whilst the other chaps are busy discussing other aspects of your thread, I wonder if I could sneak in and ask a question while no ones looking and try and learn from the horses mouth .. so to speak.
> In your first post you commented . Could I ask, what stuff is getting in the way and what techniques do you use to get rid of it.
> Thanks.


Good question Yew. Dirty laundry warning! Do not read on if you have a weak stomach or believe that the earth is round!

When I draw back the bow everything feels good, sight picture looks fine. One of my pitfalls is trying to sustain or freeze that steady aim by mini collapsing. Another error is the fear of moving off target as I increase back tension, so I don't pull into my back and get scapular motion. It feels like "chicken back" where I'm not quite into my back which makes me unstable at anchor, but then afraid to pull into my back because it might make me unsteady .

The solution is born from confidence, faith, alignment, and strength. There are plenty of cures for these maladies, and what I've been working on lately is when I come to full draw and things are looking steady. I look or embrace the movement I accept that there is movement which paradoxically steadies me even more, and I focus on shot execution. It feels like a floating sensation in the shot.

Addressing adding things to the shot I sometimes torque the bow right or left trying to steer the shot. Again trust in just allowing the bow to shoot and executing a pure shot is key.

It's all pretty basic stuff, and its perfecting the basics and shooting thousands and thousands of arrows that solidifies our aim to hit the mark.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Larry Yien said:


> When I draw back the bow everything feels good, sight picture looks fine. One of my pitfalls is trying to sustain or freeze that steady aim by mini collapsing. Another error is the fear of moving off target as I increase back tension, so I don't pull into my back and get scapular motion. It feels like "chicken back" where I'm not quite into my back which makes me unstable at anchor, but then afraid to pull into my back because it might make me unsteady .
> 
> The solution is born from confidence, faith, alignment, and strength. There are plenty of cures for these maladies, and what I've been working on lately is when I come to full draw and things are looking steady. I look or embrace the movement I accept that there is movement which paradoxically steadies me even more, and I focus on shot execution. It feels like a floating sensation in the shot.


Larry, do you feel any of this is related to the bow? IOW, the aid difference of a heavier, well stabilized bow (artificially stabilized, per se) versus the light, thin-stick? I know when my Oly rig with stabilizers and myself felt in tune/balance, at times, the bow almost floated and steadied independent of me.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

steve morley said:


> You have to watch yourself with Larry, his writing style comes across as humble (as he is in real life) and can often be mistaken as almost novice like when he talks about rebuilding his Form/Game, when you look back at his past achievements you remember just how great a shot he is, I suspect even now rebuilding his game and on his worst days, on a Field course he could still out shoot 98% of Longbows on this Trad Forum.


What I like about Larry is the fact that, I could try for the next 20 years, and still not be the gentleman and ambassador for our sport, that he is. But, when I'm around him, I find myself trying to emulate his respect and kindness towards others.


----------



## Speck1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Larry, loved that last post. It makes perfect sense to me, because the more I try to lock everything down, the worse I shoot. Keep it coming and thanks. Speck


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Sanford said:


> Larry, do you feel any of this is related to the bow? IOW, the aid difference of a heavier, well stabilized bow (artificially stabilized, per se) versus the light, thin-stick? I know when my Oly rig with stabilizers and myself felt in tune/balance, at times, the bow almost floated and steadied independent of me.


Not sure about that, I tend to treat all my bows the same, but I agree they can respond differently at full draw. I think it was Don Rabska that explained to me that tiller can affect how the bow comes to draw.

Here is a picture of me admiring yew. It was a fun camping trip even though we didn't make meat.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Larry,

Great post. I too shoot a variety of bows and have dabbled with string walking. However, I am always drawn back to the longbow and wood arrows, even though I seem to shoot them so poorly, lol. One of my most enjoyable moments was shooting with the current and former IBO longbow champions this year (somehow I managed to score well enough to earn that). They were super individuals and I learned alot, as they were gracious to share their experience and knowledge with me. You seem like the type of guy that would do the same. Hopefully, we will meet on the course somewhere, someday.

Keep on posting, your insights and experiences are a unique change of pace.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

I love the blending of the old and new forms of archery..it makes going out snd shooting different styles so much more enjoyable. .

What is dismaying to me, is many here have elected into arguing over the technical side of archery almost every time someone posts. .and is really getting to be a drag. .even when the op is not intending to do this. 

While I know I have been guilty of doing this in the past. .I feel everyone really needs to kick back a little bit. .and just allow everyone else a chance to just read and enjoy what is being said without attacking a different opinion on the subjects. .

With that said. .I personally think that there are ways to shoot more accurately and to those who feel making archery into a science to accomplish this, to me are killing the spirit of instinctive archery..Some styles of shooting need explaining. .instinctive doesn't. .at least to me..When it becomes so technically challenging..to require it to be done correctly. .it has lost it's meaning..

While most of us strive to become as accurate as possible. .many times folks forget the sheer joy many get in just shooting the bow....without striving to be the best. .

For many like myself. .it's not always about using the proper muscles..having the cleanest releases. .steadiest bow hand..or the perfect sight picture..it's about loosing oneself and enjoying the mysteries of hitting the spot drawing from the quiver and loosening a arrow without thought or hesitation. .with no aiming or standing at full draw contemplating the yardages. .

Many here have tried to make this all about accuracy..and the technics needed to be a champion..and to many of us. .we just love to go out and shoot. .

While I may be a relic from bygone times..I feel we have tried to kill off all of the beliefs and ways of the past in order to be technical in our approach to the sport ..and in essasance we are losing what the spirit of what it is to be a archer..

Mac


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Technical, simple, complicated, challenging, easy, traditional, untraditional...they are just all personal perspectives on each individuals thoughts regarding their personal views on archery. My perspective on my archery enjoyment shouldn't affect anyone else and vice versa.

Just because an archer likes to keep things simple and more traditional shouldn't affect anyone else because they like things more technical and more modern.

Diversity is part of what makes archery soo much fun :wink:

Ray :shade:

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

irishhacker said:


> Our forefathers also thought the earth was flat...
> Now I know WikiPedia is not the end-all-be-all,, but I feel it is spot on here.
> "*Instinctive shooting is a style of shooting that includes the barebow aiming method that relies heavily upon the subconscious mind, proprioception, and motor/muscle memory to make aiming adjustments; the term used to refer to a general category of archers who did not use a mechanical or fixed sight"
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archery#Aiming_methods
> ​*


Wanted to thank irish for supporting my statements and point. This is exactly what I am saying! Don't we all fit under this definition? It's as easy as connecting the dots.

BWolf no worries, I've got no problem with you discussing and disagreeing in friendly exchanges. I do appreciate it when you stay on course with the OP. I do see and respect your need to define and debate, evaluate and discuss and you are different, you've got your own tent. 

We don't need to be related, best buddies, or even shoot the same way. But with all your enthusiasm and knowledge and love for archery, I hope you can spread the stoke that makes barebow archery the best of the best can we at least agree on that point?


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

MAC 11700 said:


> I love the blending of the old and new forms of archery..it makes going out snd shooting different styles so much more enjoyable. .
> 
> What is dismaying to me, is many here have elected into arguing over the technical side of archery almost every time someone posts. .and is really getting to be a drag. .even when the op is not intending to do this.
> 
> ...


Great Post Mac! :thumbs_up



BLACK WOLF said:


> Technical, simple, complicated, challenging, easy, traditional, untraditional...they are just all personal perspectives on each individuals thoughts regarding their personal views on archery. My perspective on my archery enjoyment shouldn't affect anyone else and vice versa.
> 
> Just because an archer likes to keep things simple and more traditional shouldn't affect anyone else because they like things more technical and more modern.
> 
> ...


And I love that one as well Ray! :thumbs_up

I love it all...Some days I find myself holding like a rock, gapping 3under and getting off over what little control I've managed to master (which is a major milestone considering the TP I spent months suffering through) and pretending each arrow is a potential shot of the century while other days?...I just wanna slide into a glove, shoot split and go play Indians and Dead Cowboys. :laugh:

But "keeping it fun and relaxing" comes way ahead of all the other...uhem...stuff.


----------



## Ghost Dancer (Sep 21, 2008)

Hi Larry, 

Thanks for posting. I have a question. I do recall reading that you are cross-dominant. If this is correct, do you feel that shooting a bow cross-dominant is a handicap to you in any way, regardless of your style? Do you feel that you have to work harder as a result?


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Larry Yien said:


> Not sure about that, I tend to treat all my bows the same, but I agree they can respond differently at full draw. I think it was Don Rabska that explained to me that tiller can affect how the bow comes to draw.
> 
> Here is a picture of me admiring yew. It was a fun camping trip even though we didn't make meat.
> 
> View attachment 1784393


I wish I could. I guess when I move from 8lbs of recurve mass to my light longbows, I lose the mass the absorb all the extraneous muscle movement that reflects in settling on the shot, but I guess that's a good point for practicing with one if I would devote more time to it.

If you decide to cut it down, I'll trade you some mesquite staves for a yew.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Larry Yien said:


> BWolf no worries, I've got no problem with you discussing and disagreeing in friendly exchanges.


Same here. I have absolutely no problem when anyone disagrees with me during a friendly respectful exchange :wink:



Larry Yien said:


> I do see and respect your need to define and debate, evaluate and discuss and you are different, you've got your own tent.


As I respect your need to define and debate these issues...even though I may disagree with some of them. My friends and I can always make room for ya in our tent if you ever find yourself getting bored in yours :wink: And no...I'm not hitting on ya. 



Larry Yien said:


> We don't need to be related, best buddies, or even shoot the same way. But with all your enthusiasm and knowledge and love for archery, I hope you can spread the stoke that makes barebow archery the best of the best can we at least agree on that point?


Absolutely...but why would you even need to question me on that?

Ray :shade:


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

Larry Yien said:


> Wanted to thank irish for supporting my statements and point. This is exactly what I am saying! Don't we all fit under this definition? It's as easy as connecting the dots.
> 
> BWolf no worries, I've got no problem with you discussing and disagreeing in friendly exchanges. I do appreciate it when you stay on course with the OP. I do see and respect your need to define and debate, evaluate and discuss and you are different, you've got your own tent.
> 
> We don't need to be related, best buddies, or even shoot the same way. But with all your enthusiasm and knowledge and love for archery, I hope you can spread the stoke that makes barebow archery the best of the best can we at least agree on that point?


I think you missed this part..
"the term *used to* refer to a general category of archers who did not use a mechanical or fixed sight"
Which was precisely my point.
I will agree to disagree .. no big deal. We all have different views and ideas about archery.
I think we can agree that we love to shoot, no matter the definition or style.

For me, target and 3D shooting is nothing more than preparation for hunting. Bowhunting is my #1 priority in my archery life.
I know you will be shocked by this, but I am not an instinctive shooter. (by my definition, I guess)
I have chosen to adhere to the Byron Ferguson method (aka Howard Hill method). I switched to his method of gap shooting about a couple years ago. 
I gap off the arrow tip while also being very mindful of the intended target. Some, including Byron, call this split vision. 
I'm not sure, but I do know it works for me. My accuracy increased substantially after switching to this method and reading his book a few times.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Irish - you better go back and read Ferguson, you are not shooting the way he recommends. He says to only gap at the beginning and as you progress to pay less and less attention to the gap and only focus on the spot until you no longer pay attention to the gap at all or distance.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Irish - you better go back and read Ferguson, you are not shooting the way he recommends. He says to only gap at the beginning and as you progress to pay less and less attention to the gap and only focus on the spot until you no longer pay attention to the gap at all or distance.


You are 100% correct..! But I'm still progressing ....


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

*Irish - you better go back and read Ferguson, you are not shooting the way he recommends. He says to only gap at the beginning and as you progress to pay less and less attention to the gap and only focus on the spot until you no longer pay attention to the gap at all or distance. *

I read that as moving the gap to the subconscious while focusing on the spot, to allow the brain to make the final tiny adjustments uninterrupted. IE: 'pay less attention to the gap'


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

bradd7 said:


> *Irish - you better go back and read Ferguson, you are not shooting the way he recommends. He says to only gap at the beginning and as you progress to pay less and less attention to the gap and only focus on the spot until you no longer pay attention to the gap at all or distance. *
> 
> I read that as moving the gap to the subconscious while focusing on the spot, to allow the brain to make the final tiny adjustments uninterrupted. IE: 'pay less attention to the gap'


Brad, You are really coming around. I agree with you again!

But I'm not to the point where the gap is in the subconscious.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

irishhacker said:


> "the term *used to* refer to a general category of archers who did not use a mechanical or fixed sight"
> Which was precisely my point.


I think I see where there may be some confusion. I didn't major in English but I think some people use the term 'used to' to describe something the was used in the past but no longer is...and others read it as currently being used.

Internet communication can be tough.



irishhacker said:


> I switched to his method of gap shooting about a couple years ago. I gap off the arrow tip while also being very mindful of the intended target. Some, including Byron, call this split vision. I'm not sure, but I do know it works for me. My accuracy increased substantially after switching to this method and reading his book a few times.


That's exactly how I primarily aim and I personally believe...generally speaking...it's the best all around aiming technique for an archer to use who primary goal is to bowhunt but they also want to be competitive in some close range target competitions like most 3D are. It's called by a few different names depending on who you're talking to. Some call it Gapstinctive...while others will call it Instinctive, Split Vision or just simply Gap...which is why there can be soo much confusion about it.

Ray :shade:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I think that the issue here is this. Back in the day all nonsighted traditional shooters in competition were put into a class that was called "Instinctive" - this was just a* class*, it did not describe the method of aiming anymore than the IBO "traditional"* class *today describes how the archers in this class aim.

Back in the day there were names for different aiming techniques, Point of Aim, Gap Shooting, Split Vision shooting, Instinctive, etc... - all of these types of aiming were being shot in the "instinctive" *class*, just as all of these types of aiming are shot in the "traditional" *class* today.

If Larry or anyone doubts this fact, all one has to do is read Howard Hills quotes - he described many of these types of aiming and supposedly said that he never saw a good instinctive shooter, odd of him to say that if he considered himself an instinctive shooter.

Barebow shooters are barebow shooters, and there are several different methods that people use aim a barebow, instinctive is one of those methods.

But in the end, everyone aims at a subconscious level to one degree or another, so in reality we are all instinctive shooters on some level.


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

I'm seeing a cross-over of sorts.

Back in 'my' beginnings it was, know the arch of the arrow, put the point where we 'think' is best, and either account for wind or anticipate where the animal will be based on this arch.

Back in 'my' day of target archery it was, put the point/sight on the target and focus on holding it as still as possible, until release. If needed, hold off center left, right, up or down then put the tip of the arrow on that spot, focus narrow/hard and try to hit it (know the gaps)and ...sometimes we used a stick or card on the ground in front of the target...POA...but in many cases learned/ingrained these gaps instinctively. 

Then it changed to putting the tip on the spot POA and refocus concentration on the center of center and let the brain do the rest.

Now it's, put the tip of the arrow where it's supposed to be, let the brain do the rest, and focus on the process of making the best shot/release possible.

So, to me anyway, it seems like we are using all of the methods combined as the gap, split and POA is still left up to the final instincts of the brain?

I feel like there are a lot of people that have experienced these transitions somewhere in their archery careers, and are either returning to one or the other that suits them best now, or have stuck with a particular style that they are most comfortable with, and are expressing their own way as the possible to best, for them, -because it's most comfortable and provides their own expectation of results - when in actual fact all of them combined and knowing when or when not to use the techniques are the very best?


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

bradd7 said:


> I'm seeing a cross-over of sorts.
> 
> Back in 'my' beginnings it was, know the arch of the arrow, put the point where we 'think' is best, and either account for wind or anticipate where the animal will be based on this arch.
> 
> ...



​Agreed.. good post


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

POA is not putting the arrow on a spot on the target it is putting the tip of the arrow on a spot on the ground in front of the target depending on distance. And not all instinctive shooters "ingrained" gaps. I have never consciously used gaps in my life, I have no idea what the gap is for any given distance and for that matter I have no idea what my "point on" is. I could not tell you the difference between 25 and 30 yards or 30 yards and 35 yards if my life depended on it.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

bradd7 said:


> when in actual fact all of them combined and knowing when or when not to use the techniques are the very best?


Good post, this approach has served me well over the years and has allowed my to enjoy shooting many different forms of archery and styles of bow.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> POA is not putting the arrow on a spot on the target it is putting the tip of the arrow on a spot on the ground in front of the target depending on distance.


And the closer the distance gets to the archer's POD...the closer the spot gets to be on the target until the archer is finally at their POD. At the archer's POD..the spot is the target and the arrow tip is placed directly on it. At distances further than the archer's POD...the spot and the arrow tip are somewhere above the target.



sharpbroadhead said:


> And not all instinctive shooters "ingrained" gaps.


:thumbs_up

Ray :shade:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> POA is not putting the arrow on a spot on the target it is putting the tip of the arrow on a spot on the ground in front of the target depending on distance. And not all instinctive shooters "ingrained" gaps. I have never consciously used gaps in my life, I have no idea what the gap is for any given distance and for that matter I have no idea what my "point on" is. I could not tell you the difference between 25 and 30 yards or 30 yards and 35 yards if my life depended on it.


Sharp, you have some good insights into instinctive archery but then you lose credibility when you make a statement like" I have no idea what my point on is". You have stated many times in the past that you never see your arrow but you stretch believability when you say that you can't see your arrow when the arrow tip cuts the spot in half while you are looking at the spot (that is what point on is). This is why so many new archers on here get confused, because of statements like yours that have no logic to them. If you want to have credibility, then own up to things that are obvious to the rest of the archery world.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

bradd7 said:


> I'm seeing a cross-over of sorts.
> 
> Back in 'my' beginnings it was, know the arch of the arrow, put the point where we 'think' is best, and either account for wind or anticipate where the animal will be based on this arch.
> 
> ...


There's definitely a cross-over of sorts...because all aiming techniques share similarties...but as I have said...if someone wants to know about a specific aiming technique...they have to ALSO understand the DIFFERENCES.

I've taught myself multiple aiming techniques so I can take advantage of the one that gives me the best chance of hitting that target for that particular circumstance. My GOAL has always been to hit just about any target at anytime...whether it's moving, close distance, long distance or what ever. I'm not good enough to be able to do all of that with just one aiming technique.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

itbeso said:


> Sharp, you have some good insights into instinctive archery but then you lose credibility when you make a statement like" I have no idea what my point on is". You have stated many times in the past that you never see your arrow but you stretch believability when you say that you can't see your arrow when the arrow tip cuts the spot in half while you are looking at the spot (that is what point on is). This is why so many new archers on here get confused, because of statements like yours that have no logic to them. If you want to have credibility, then own up to things that are obvious to the rest of the archery world.


I agree. Not that I believe sharp is lying but the confusion between the subconscious and a lower level of conscious awareness that exists when discussing parts of the aiming process.

An archer does NOT put a sight pin or crosshair on a target totally subconsciously. There is a level of conscious awareness when a person places a finger or aiming reference right on the target they are looking at.

The object/target of primary focus and concentration will be in focus...whereas other objects/aiming reference will be out of focus.

There's a direct correlation with objects in and near a person's direct line of sight.

The closer an archer's aiming reference is to their direct line of sight to the target and the longer that aiming reference stays in view...the harder it is to not be consciously aware of it at some level.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Gapmaster (May 23, 2002)

Boy oh boy. A guy comes on here and makes a really nice post and a few of you guys turn it into it's done this way or it's done that way and that's wrong and this isn't right and if you don't believe me you need a history lesson and this guys says it's this way and you don't have proof, etc, etc. Gawd. Were all archers using fingers and shooting without sights on our bow and that's it really. It's Traditional archery. It's instinctive. It's fingers and no sights man, trying to hit the bulls eye.

It's fishing, be it with dynamite, a pole, a spear, a net, catching by hand, shooting with a bow, whatever-----it's fishing. It's instinctive archery. It's traditional. It's shooting a bow with fingers and no sights and we should all agree that it's done with fingers and no sights. That's all that should matter other than I'm glad you guys choose to shoot with fingers and no sights and I wish there were more of us united with the same frame of mind. But to turn a good post into garbage by once again creating a negative atmosphere over it's not done this way or that way or that's not the definition of something is getting boring. It seems I've been watching posts like these go bad for a few months now, and it seems there is always a few who enjoy the drama they can create by being nice, but negative at the same time.

A few of you guys need to take a break and a breath of air man. Try to be happy that we are all non sight finger shooters and brothers in this game and that's all that matters. If you can "will" the arrow in the dot and I can't then more power to you. Who cares how you do it as long as you don't have a darn sight fastened to your bow and your not shooting a release. Larry made a great post and made a great point and the topic should have stayed addressed that way till the end. Be happy that we are all brethren in this sport and pretty much have the same like minded ways (fingers and no sights) of achieving the final product or outcome.

Personally, I am very happy that we all shoot Traditional instinctive archery with fingers and no sights and wish that there were alot more of us like there used to be in days past. We are for sure dwindling in numbers and need to stay united.

Respect to all finger no sight shooters, Gapmaster


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Gapmaster,

Do you think it's possible for someone to be happy and celebrate in all things archery related even if there's a disagreement.

Why do some of you guys feel that when a person has a disagreement...there's unhappiness, anger or anything else negative ralated to it...other than someone disagreeing with you?

Ray :shade:


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

*POA is not putting the arrow on a spot on the target it is putting the tip of the arrow on a spot on the ground in front of the target depending on distance.*

That is not how understand it. POA can also be on the target. For example, lets say that the target is 25 yards away but you have heavier arrows so your POA might be on the lowest part of the blue, with the POD at 35 yards. Now you have a choice. You can shoot stringwalking or gap or a combination of the two. If you have your bow tuned for a set stringwalk, then it may be advantageous to know the gap too especially when the crawl is going to throw the tune way out of whack. In this case, to practice both at once, just mark dots on the target and aim at them....no need to look at the yellow at all. To practice wind conditions, put the dot to the side of the target and aim at that.

However, I found if you put the tip on the dot, then focus back to the yellow, the brain takes care of the minute details. Once that is done, then the shot becomes instinctive/subconscious and the focus can be on the form/release process.

Instinctive is walking up to the target and knowing/training the gap and/or lead, and just letting the brain do it's thing, without having to point the tip in any specific place consciously.

Or do I have it wrong?

Larry, how do you do it?


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

bradd7 said:


> POA can also be on the target.


:thumbs_up



bradd7 said:


> Instinctive is walking up to the target and knowing/training the gap and/or lead, and just letting the brain do it's thing, without having to point the tip in any specific place consciously.


For some archers that's exactly correct. For other archers...it's done by feel in relationship to the target.

Ray :shade:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

itbeso said:


> Sharp, you have some good insights into instinctive archery but then you lose credibility when you make a statement like" I have no idea what my point on is". You have stated many times in the past that you never see your arrow but you stretch believability when you say that you can't see your arrow when the arrow tip cuts the spot in half while you are looking at the spot (that is what point on is). This is why so many new archers on here get confused, because of statements like yours that have no logic to them. If you want to have credibility, then own up to things that are obvious to the rest of the archery world.


I do not see it , I look through the bow and everything when I shoot. I have stated in the past that at a certian distance - somwhere around 50 yards the bow becomes a distraction and it is difficult for me to shoot, but I have no idea what my point on is and if you don't want to beleive this that is your problem. I never pay any attention to the arrow when I shoot.


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

*For some archers that's exactly correct. For other archers...it's done by feel in relationship to the target.*

That's basically what I meant Ray. It's all training for 'feel' of sorts. Once 'aiming' to a dot or specific place time after time is ingrained it becomes instinctive by feel. IE: I feel that's the right gap or crawl or both. 

It just depends who is most comfortable with what and the only difference seems to be the use of solid reference points or not used to get to the same places. 


Time has to be put forth in both cases and the amount of time is determined by the archers needs.

The great thing about archery is that there is no 'right' way to do it. There is only what the individual deems right for them.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

Gapmaster said:


> Boy oh boy. A guy comes on here and makes a really nice post and a few of you guys turn it into it's done this way or it's done that way and that's wrong and this isn't right and if you don't believe me you need a history lesson and this guys says it's this way and you don't have proof, etc, etc. Gawd. Were all archers using fingers and shooting without sights on our bow and that's it really. It's Traditional archery. It's instinctive. It's fingers and no sights man, trying to hit the bulls eye.
> 
> It's fishing, be it with dynamite, a pole, a spear, a net, catching by hand, shooting with a bow, whatever-----it's fishing. It's instinctive archery. It's traditional. It's shooting a bow with fingers and no sights and we should all agree that it's done with fingers and no sights. That's all that should matter other than I'm glad you guys choose to shoot with fingers and no sights and I wish there were more of us united with the same frame of mind. But to turn a good post into garbage by once again creating a negative atmosphere over it's not done this way or that way or that's not the definition of something is getting boring. It seems I've been watching posts like these go bad for a few months now, and it seems there is always a few who enjoy the drama they can create by being nice, but negative at the same time.
> 
> ...


What, are we just supposed to gobble it up like free candy just because some of you bought his video and think he is an archery god?
Guess what.. I have his video too. I think Larry is awesome and a great shot and teacher of this wonderful sport.
However, I also know that none of us are without fault and can be wrong at times. At the very least, we could require clarification on a point we are trying to make.
Heck, it happens to me all the time. I learn from it.
None of us are unhappy with traditional archery. Some of us learn through discussion and debate. 

I prefer to shoot traditional archery barebow with no sights. However, I hold no ill will against anyone that wishes to shoot otherwise.
Most of my friends shoot a compound with all the gadgets. I wont tell anyone what or how they should shoot. I also wont allow anyone to tell me what or how to shoot. (unless I solicit the help) lol


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

bradd7 said:


> It's all training for 'feel' of sorts.


Yes...that's where proprioception/kinesthesia and motor/muscle memory comes into play. We ALL have to develop it to some extent or another. Some more consciously than others.



bradd7 said:


> Once 'aiming' to a dot or specific place time after time is ingrained it becomes instinctive by feel. IE: I feel that's the right gap or crawl or both.


For some archers....ABSOLUTELY...but most archers who consciously use an aiming reference...aiming is NOT shot entirely by feel. It is only the micro movements of trying to keep the aiming reference on target or where they need to be at the final moments of the shot that are mediated at the subconscious/unconscious level or in most cases...just at a lower level of conscious awareness. This is NOT the same as how an archer aiming Totally/True Instinctive aims.

Ray :shade:


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

*This is NOT the same as how an archer aiming Totally/True Instinctive Aiming aims.*

I have succumbed to the fact that I will never get this as my brain, even when throwing arrows towards a target, has always said in a split second...right and low for the gap and wind, lead by a nose...GO!

:wink:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

bradd7 said:


> *This is NOT the same as how an archer aiming Totally/True Instinctive Aiming aims.*
> 
> I have succumbed to the fact that I will never get this as my brain, even when throwing arrows towards a target, has always said in a split second...right and low for the gap and wind, lead by a nose...GO!
> 
> :wink:


Yes...allot will depend on the archer's PERSONALITY...or more specifically how they are wired. People will have a tendency to be either left or right brain thinkers...which basically means some people will be more analytical and thoughtful about how they do things whereas others are controlled more by their feelings.

One of the keys is finding the techniques that also fit your PERSONALITY :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Yes...allot will depend on the archer's PERSONALITY...or more specifically how they are wired. People will have a tendency to be either left or right brain thinkers...which basically means some people will be more analytical and thoughtful about how they do things whereas others are controlled more by their feelings.
> 
> One of the keys is finding the techniques that also fit your PERSONALITY :wink:
> 
> ...


Ray,, stop it already with all this common sense. People will get the wrong idea and realize we are all different yet enjoy the same sport.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

irishhacker said:


> Ray,, stop it already with all this common sense. People will get the wrong idea and realize we are all different yet enjoy the same sport.


LOL...it's funny how some people make fun of my statements regarding GOALS, ABILITIES and PERSONALITY. It really is common sense...YET...people can't seem to get past the fact that we are all DIFFERENT even though we share similarities.

Some people seem to only want to celebrate the similarities...whereas guys like you and I...can celebrate BOTH the differences and the similarities.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

I had a friend out this year and its his first year hunting trad...and for the record, I have not had the courage yet to leave the wheels at home to hunt with. 

He's a technical shooter, gapping and string walking. It works for him and imo takes less time to develop repeatability. We had a few conversations about it and hopefully he reads this (it would work for him).

But, the point that I failed to make while he was here is that there's two sides of traditional shooting. There's the science of shooting and there is the art of shooting. He chose one way, I'll do the other.


----------



## Big Country (Apr 25, 2003)

BLACK WOLF said:


> LOL...it's funny how some people make fun of my statements regarding GOALS, ABILITIES and PERSONALITY. It really is common sense...YET...people can't seem to get past the fact that we are all DIFFERENT even though we share similarities.
> 
> Some people seem to only want to celebrate the similarities...whereas guys like you and I...can celebrate BOTH the differences and the similarities.
> 
> Ray :shade:


It is sad how confused this subject makes you Ray. 

Nobody is making fun of similarities and differences in archery shooting styles……


Some folks may well be making fun of your easily bruised feelings and rampant paranoia…….


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Bobmuley said:


> I had a friend out this year and its his first year hunting trad...and for the record, I have not had the courage yet to leave the wheels at home to hunt with.
> 
> He's a technical shooter, gapping and string walking. It works for him and imo takes less time to develop repeatability. We had a few conversations about it and hopefully he reads this (it would work for him).
> 
> But, the point that I failed to make while he was here is that *there's two sides of traditional shooting. There's the science of shooting and there is the art of shooting.* He chose one way, I'll do the other.


*AAAAAAAAAAAAMEN!*

scientists and artists....that's an excellent analogy! :thumbs_up


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

sharpbroadhead said:


> I do not see it , I look through the bow and everything when I shoot. I have stated in the past that at a certian distance - somwhere around 50 yards the bow becomes a distraction and it is difficult for me to shoot, but I have no idea what my point on is and if you don't want to beleive this that is your problem. I never pay any attention to the arrow when I shoot.



So I'm guessing that your point on distance is somewhere around 50yds even if you don't know it. In that case,since the bow becomes a distraction and 'makes it difficult for you to shoot',your words, then it's possible you could use the arrow to your advantage at that point. Even I know that much. And, IF I'm right the arrow point would be right there dead on the spot, actually making it easy for you to shoot instead of difficult. Try it, you might like it. 
I have been practicing my snap shooting lately getting ready for the deer that might not be interested in hanging around the perfect shot zone for too long. But, I am still aware that at some distance the arrow is right on target and will use it to my advantage if the conditions are right.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Big Country said:


> It is sad how confused this subject makes you Ray.
> 
> Nobody is making fun of similarities and differences in archery shooting styles……
> 
> ...


Seriously???

You were one of the few here that turn these topics into personal attacks rather than debate respectfully. There's no need to start this crap!

Ray :shade:

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Bobmuley said:


> ...there's two sides of traditional shooting. There's the science of shooting and there is the art of shooting. He chose one way, I'll do the other.


EXACTLY! :thumbs_up

Left and right brain :wink:

Ray :shade:



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BLACK WOLF said:


> EXACTLY! :thumbs_up
> 
> Left and right brain :wink:
> 
> ...


Ray...I'm going to make the following statement just to get your (and anyone else's) opinion of whether I'm actually able to do this or not...cause I believe I am and do it often...which is...I can throw that switch from left to right...scientist too artist....at will...and often times do pending the mood I'm in...sometimes I buckle down and gap...other times I just relax, shoot and watch arrows fly...but here's the thing I'm wrestling with right now as...

From 20yds and less?...it seems there really ain't that much of a difference in the end results and sometimes it seems I shoot tighter groups when I just relax...is that possible? T.I.A. and L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

I am a scientist who would like some artistic ability.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Wow, a lot of muck and baggage to wade through on this thread but I like some of the points that have surfaced. 

Instinctive/intuitive/subconscious aiming can occur in many aiming styles it isn't an exclusive technique used in just one style.

Instinctive has been and still is used to define "non-sight" styles of shooting a bow and arrow. But...

There are definite techniques used in "non-sight" archery, barebow archery, they were defined long ago, Horace Ford, Robert Elmer, Gilman Keasey, Howard Hill and many more. Of course our contemporary personalities and authors have put them to pen and ink as well.

I like that some of you, heck, most of you are able to blur the lines that we know exist, and imagine or even realize that where we thought we were different perhaps we are the same.

Oh yes and some have proven that they are "just" different and will never be the same. I can live with that and I'm sure they can too. TRAD OUT! (That's Dick Robertson's line btw.)


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Arron said:


> I am a scientist who would like some artistic ability.


I'm an artist trying to develop my scientific ability...:wink:


----------



## Big Country (Apr 25, 2003)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Seriously???
> 
> You were one of the few here that turn these topics into personal attacks rather than debate respectfully. There's no need to start this crap!
> 
> ...


My apologies Ray. I forget that you are incapable of seeing how your insecurity turns every non instinctive post into a slam against your personal description of instinctive shooting. Everybody that tires of your childish tantrums is guilty of personal attacks.

There is no debating with you, respectfully or otherwise.


Larry, I truly do apologize for veering off course on your thread.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

JINKSTER said:


> Ray...I'm going to make the following statement just to get your (and anyone else's) opinion of whether I'm actually able to do this or not...cause I believe I am and do it often...which is...I can throw that switch from left to right...scientist too artist....at will...and often times do pending the mood I'm in...sometimes I buckle down and gap...other times I just relax, shoot and watch arrows fly...but here's the thing I'm wrestling with right now as...
> 
> From 20yds and less?...it seems there really ain't that much of a difference in the end results and sometimes it seems I shoot tighter groups when I just relax...is that possible?


Yes. I would say it's totally possible...BUT...NOT exactly how I would suggest an archer to shoot.

I believe the specific aiming technique should be chosen before the archer commits to drawing and shooting....NOT at the last moment while at anchor or just before reaching anchor. For me that would indicate you may lack focus, confidence or you may get distracted easily.

This next question isn't meant to be silly or negative in anyway...but do you have ADD? 

Ray :shade:


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Big Country said:


> Larry, I truly do apologize for veering off course on your thread.


Than take your lame and weak personal attacks to yourself, press the ignore button or just grow up.

There are others here that have posted that can see the positive in my posts even when I disagree with the OP or anyone else.

Maybe you can also take a lesson from Larry. He restrains or just plain chooses not to turn this into a personal attack when he responds to something he disagrees with me on. He's respectful just as I am towards him.

Ray :shade:



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Yes. I would say it's totally possible...BUT...NOT exactly how I would suggest an archer to shoot.
> 
> I believe the specific aiming technique should be chosen before the archer commits to drawing and shooting....NOT at the last moment while at anchor or just before reaching anchor. For me that would indicate you may lack focus, confidence or you may get distracted easily.
> 
> ...


Well Ray?...I don't wait until I'm at full draw to decide....nor do I decide shot-by-shot....it's usually prior to the session itself or sometimes?...I'll start a session out doing strictly the gap thing and then around midway through that session?...one of two things happens?...

1. I'm shoot great with repetitiously tight groups and begin to get bored (which now I'm thinking that's when I should move back some)

or?...

2. I'm not having such a great session with loose groups and the harder I try the looser they get and/or?...it's at this point that my TP starts to kick in?

Then I'll switch up mid session and get back to just relaxing with it.

as far as answering your ADD question?...sounds like you're serious so?...I looked up symptoms...which I guess I could talk myself into having some of those symptoms some of the time but I also found a "Myths & Facts" section which stated...

*"MYTH: Everybody has the symptoms of ADD/ADHD, and anyone with adequate intelligence can overcome these difficulties.

FACT: ADD/ADHD affects persons of all levels of intelligence. And although everyone sometimes has symptoms of ADD/ADHD, only those with chronic impairments from these symptoms warrant an ADD/ADHD diagnosis."*

so I'm guessing maybe..."Borderline"? :laugh:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

JINKSTER said:


> From 20yds and less?...it seems there really ain't that much of a difference in the end results and sometimes it seems I shoot tighter groups when I just relax...is that possible?


Just for clarification...you should be able to shoot tighter groups when you're more relaxed...rather than stressed, uptight or indecisive.

I was addressing how an archer might switch from one aiming technique to another while drawing or at anchor in the other post.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

JINKSTER said:


> Well Ray?...I don't wait until I'm at full draw to decide....nor do I decide shot-by-shot....it's usually prior to the session itself or sometimes?...I'll start a session out doing strictly the gap thing and then around midway through that session?...one of two things happens?...
> 
> 1. I'm shoot great with repetitiously tight groups and begin to get bored (which now I'm thinking that's when I should move back some)
> 
> ...


Gotchya! Internet communication can be difficult at times...which is why I always try to ask questions before making full blown assumptions.

I'm so glad you don't switch aiming techniques like I was talking about during the shot. 

I don't see a problem switching between them like you described...but if you really want to get good at one of them...you'll need to focus on just one.

And yes...everyone has some indications of ADD symptoms from time to time...but it's the people who struggle with it allot that usually get diagnosised as having it.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

19.7% - Ray I think you can do better. 

Matt


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Larry Yien said:


> Instinctive has been and still is used to define "non-sight" styles of shooting a bow and arrow.
> View attachment 1785164


All I can say is that in the 25 years or so that I have been at this game, I have never once heard a gap shooter, a POA shooter, a barrel shooter, or a stringwalker refer to themselves as instinctive, in fact, in all honestly I have heard a great many gap shooters claim that nobody shoots instinctive and everyone is a gap shooter (which is not true). The only group I have ever heard of that lumps all trad shooters as "instinctive" is IFAA, but even in that - the shooters themselves do not identify themselves as instinctive shooters.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> All I can say is that in the 25 years or so that I have been at this game, I have never once heard a gap shooter, a POA shooter, a barrel shooter, or a stringwalker refer to themselves as instinctive, in fact, in all honestly I have heard a great many gap shooters claim that nobody shoots instinctive and everyone is a gap shooter (which is not true). The only group I have ever heard of that lumps all trad shooters as "instinctive" is IFAA, but even in that - the shooters themselves do not identify themselves as instinctive shooters.


My thoughts exactly :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> 19.7% - Ray I think you can do better.


I'm just going with the flow :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

20.5% and climbing 

Matt


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> 20.5% and climbing
> 
> Matt


See...if I was at 100%...than I would have to agree with some of you who claim I like to hear myself talk...because than...I'd only be talking to myself...rather than you and a few others in this thread :wink:

You silly target archers...you're always keeping score LOL :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

sharpbroadhead said:


> All I can say is that in the 25 years or so that I have been at this game, I have never once heard a gap shooter, a POA shooter, a barrel shooter, or a stringwalker refer to themselves as instinctive, in fact, in all honestly I have heard a great many gap shooters claim that nobody shoots instinctive and everyone is a gap shooter (which is not true). The only group I have ever heard of that lumps all trad shooters as "instinctive" is IFAA, but even in that - the shooters themselves do not identify themselves as instinctive shooters.


I traveled across the state and even ventured to other states to shoot tourneys and hunt and I really felt like I had a sense of the heartbeat of archery. But in looking back I had a good sense of what archery was like in the western states. As I ventured out to experience World Tournaments, true international events in Norway, New Zealand, South Africa, Scotland, Australia it gave me a huge scope of what archery means and how it is expressed around the World. 

Now I am not going to even dream of telling you I know how it is, that I know the real scoop on instinctive archery even with my 25 years in competitive archery. But traveling and competing internationally, meeting other archers has given me a broader scope, a humility and an appreciation for the stick and string globally. And even though I might have a sense of the lay of the land, there is always a different perspective between continents and cultures. Furthermore, my ideals and beliefs may have a bias that rings true in my region. So with that osb I might recommend that you make an effort to get out more. Just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

By the way I'm instinctive. And yes, I'm an instinctive archer! I mean it in a modest and sincere way.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Larry Yien said:


> I traveled across the state and even ventured to other states to shoot tourneys and hunt and I really felt like I had a sense of the heartbeat of archery. But in looking back I had a good sense of what archery was like in the western states. As I ventured out to experience World Tournaments, true international events in Norway, New Zealand, South Africa, Scotland, Australia it gave me a huge scope of what archery means and how it is expressed around the World.
> 
> Now I am not going to even dream of telling you I know how it is, that I know the real scoop on instinctive archery even with my 25 years in competitive archery. But traveling and competing internationally, meeting other archers has given me a broader scope, a humility and an appreciation for the stick and string globally. And even though I might have a sense of the lay of the land, there is always a different perspective between continents and cultures. Furthermore, my ideals and beliefs may have a bias that rings true in my region. So with that osb I might recommend that you make an effort to get out more. Just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
> 
> ...


Wow..

I'm not one to say this often. .but..I am duely jealous and impressed. .That sir was a grest post... ..Love the fact you've traveled all over..too...

Thank You. .for sharing your insight. ...

Was these shoots all done with the longbow? 

Thanks again
Mac


----------



## SteveB (Dec 18, 2003)

Larry - you are a true breath of fresh air here.


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

Larry - I got tell you from my little corner of the world up here in MN you sir would be one person I would love to sit down with and share a cup of coffee with.


----------



## Ghost Dancer (Sep 21, 2008)

I would love to have heard Larry uninterrupted. It is a sublime shame and the height of arrogance that a truly accomplished and credentialed archer of worldwide fame is shouted down by a bunch of self-righteous backyard experts, and one of this faction is learning to shoot a bow from a book.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

Arron said:


> Larry - I got tell you from my little corner of the world up here in MN you sir would be one person I would love to sit down with and share a cup of coffee with.


I roomed with Larry at 04 worlds, we didn't drink much Coffee but we got a lot of wine tasting done in the Finger Lakes area:tongue:. Larry is a great guy to hang out with and think the greatest sportsman I personally ever had the pleasure to meet, his conduct in a tourney is something to be admired and followed by everybody.:thumbs_up


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

Ghost Dancer said:


> I would love to have heard Larry uninterrupted. It is a sublime shame and the height of arrogance that a truly accomplished and credentialed archer of worldwide fame is shouted down by a bunch of self-righteous backyard experts, and one of this faction is learning to shoot a bow from a book.


We would love to hear more personal attacks. Please keep them coming.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Steve Morely - so, since according to Larry, you are an instinctive archer, why is it that you tell us that you are a gap shooter and that all FITA shooters are gap shooters, yet they shoot in the instinctive class?



Personally, I find that last post of Larry's a bit arrogant.

I don't have to travel the world over to know that gap shooters, stringwalkers, POA shooters, etc... do not refer to themselves as instinctive shooters. I do not have the money or time to travel the world over to shoot my bow, but I have traveled and shot tournaments in many States here in the USA and several IBO World Championships and to date, I have not met a single gap shooter that has ever claimed to be an instinctive shooter.

Steve Morely, who posted in this thread and has shot all over the world in FITA competitons in the "instinctive" class, has to my knowledge, not once has he claimed to be an instintictive shooter when shooting FITA (he has claimed to shoot instinctive, but only at moving targets). Steve has stated in this forum numerous times that there are NO INSTINCTIVE shooters in FITA. He has said that all FITA shooers are gap shooters, even though they still shoot in the instinctive class. The "instinctive" class has nothing to do with how the archers in that class aim.

This has reached the point of being absurd.

There is no one (except maybe Larry and his fans) who aims via gap shooting, stringwalking, POA, or barrell shooting who claims to be an instinctive shooter. To claim that they do is just absurd and fishing to start some stupid argument about instinctive shooting on a whole new level - but under the guise of peace and love among archers.

Instinctive aiming is a distinct method of aiming and to claim that everyone who shoots a barebow is an instinctive shootert is no different than claiming that everyone who shoots barebow is a stringwalker or a gap shooter. I guarantee that the fans of Larry would go balisitic if Black Wolf or some of these other guys, who are rightly disagreeing with Larry, said that everyone was a stringwalker.

When Larry first posted this, i thought he meant to imply that we all aimned at a subconscious level to one degree or another, which is 100% true, but to say we are all instinctive shooters is simply not true and is no more true than to say that we are all stringwalkers.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

sharpbroadhead...
:nixon::clap2::rock-on:
​Best post of the thread.. well done


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

I'm sure Larry is a good enough guy and, from his posts here, he seems well spoken. I just didn't see where he was "shouted down" or, in any way, insulted in this thread. What did I miss?

And, what is it with this apparent hatred and frequent insults toward "backyard" shooters? Could somebody explain that to me? I shoot in the yard, even behind the barn (for Stone). I don't have to claim to be any better or any worse than anybody else but I do ok and there are people who see it. Maybe not "your people" but they are people.

I think some of you competitive target guys need to get over yourselves and your hero worship. When you say something in public it's open to rebuttal or comment regardless of who you or your friends think you are. If you can't handle that, don't talk or write in public.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Personally, I find that last post of Larry's a bit arrogant.
> 
> When Larry first posted this, i thought he meant to imply that we all aimned at a subconscious level to one degree or another, which is 100% true, but to say we are all instinctive shooters is simply not true and is no more true than to say that we are all stringwalkers.


Larry's last post does say that but it also says that it's a distinctive style.

This reminds me of MSNBC or Fox news. He says both (or nothing) and we have people who have thrills running down their leg just because He spoke.

I really have seen everything now.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

MGF Larry has made it quote clear in his last few posts that he beleives that all non-sighted methods of shooting a bow are "instinctive" and that is simply absurd.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> MGF Larry has made it quote clear in his last few posts that he beleives that all non-sighted methods of shooting a bow are "instinctive" and that is simply absurd.



The only thing that's clear to me in this thread is that whatever Larry said must be right because He is Larry. I don't have anything against Larry but His groupies kind of make me laugh.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Sharp - have I ever said I aimed any other way than subconsciously?? When we shot the 3 Rivers shoot down together I can honestly say I never saw my arrow tip and yes it is RIGHT there - I was in a zone and just running my shot - I was looking at the spot I wanted to hit and concentrating on feeling my back.

Matt


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Steve Morely - so, since according to Larry, you are an instinctive archer, why is it that you tell us that you are a gap shooter and that all FITA shooters are gap shooters, yet they shoot in the instinctive class?


I never said all Fita3D shooters are Gap shooters, I know a few who shoot Longbow and Instinctive rec divs Instinctively Encarna Garrido Lazaro is one well known shooter who has won both IBO and WA3D worlds, so please don't be putting words into my mouth.

I never understood why they called it the Instinctive Div, but I knew it was certainly nothing to do with the aiming method, as per my previous post last week a Swede gave me the history behind why WA3D called it Instinctive, basically because they had two shooting divs and that is what *all* unsighted divs were called, i.e. Sighted and Instinctive and when Stringwalking and Compounds came along everything changed. I've been shooting 27 years and it happened before I started.

I started off as an Instinctive shooter and won several NFAS National titles Instinctively (NFAS is all unmarked Animal/3D rounds) and when I started shooting marked IFAA rounds I learnt Gap and POA methods, I still shoot 3D Instinctively if the shot calls for it.

Sharp you are of course entitled to your opinion but please don't be twisting my opinions to prove your own point. Larry can call me Instinctive if he wishes, it's not so important to me that I'll get my Panties all twisted.

I'm not a Larry Groupie, I've shot against the Man and seen how he conducts himself in International tourneys, he is an inspiration to other Archers on how to behave, it's just RESPECT.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Matt, when someone asks you how you aim, how do you describe your aiming method? Do you not say that you are a stringwalker? Or that your method of aiming is stringwalking? If someone came up to you at the worlds and asked you how you aim, would you say that you aim instinctive?

According to Larry's posts, it would be prefectly fine and accurate for you to say that you are an instinctive shooter.

I agree that you and all shooters, sight shooters, stringwalkers, gap shooters, etc... all aim at a subconscious level to one degree or another, but to say that all are instinctive shooters is a bit different.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Steve, you challenged me to shoot long range FITA with you and you said that everyone who shoots it is a gap shooter and that on one shoots instinctive in it. I am not going to dig through all the posts to find it, but you did say it.

But lets get to the point at hand.

Steve, do you think Larry is accurate in his assertioni that all barebow shooters are instinctive shooters, and if you think this, then why do you make a distinction between Encarna and others? BTW, several folks at the IBO said Encarna was a gap shooter, but that is neither here nor there, i don't really care how she aims.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Steve, you challenged me to shoot long range FITA with you and you said that everyone who shoots it is a gap shooter and that on one shoots instinctive in it. I am not going to dig through all the posts to find it, but you did say it.
> 
> But lets get to the point at hand.
> 
> Steve, do you think Larry is accurate in his assertioni that all barebow shooters are instinctive shooters, and if you think this, then why do you make a distinction between Encarna and others? BTW, several folks at the IBO said Encarna was a gap shooter, but that is neither here nor there, i don't really care how she aims.


If we are talking long range Fita then I was talking about Fita Target, no long range shooting in WA3D it's 33y max and I saw a whole mix of shooting stlyes, IFAA 3D is 60y max, a lot Gap and few shoot Instinctively but very few of them rank in the top.

The only distinction I make between shooters is what they tell me, if they say they aim Instinctively then I have no option but to take their word. You already know my views on Aiming, everybody sees the arrow it just depends on what level conscious attention you want to use in your aiming, it varies from Archer to Archer. I think the topic has become blurred as some people are talking Instnctive Aiming and some talking historically a generic term for shooting bows without sights.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

You seem to want to pick holes in everything everybody writes, if you have a genuine question please ask, if you have a valued contribution then I'm always interested to hear it but trying to twist or find fault in everything people write is very unproductive and adds nothing of value to the topic.

I'm off to bed it's 11:30pm here.

Thanks


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

irishhacker said:


> sharpbroadhead...
> :nixon::clap2::rock-on:
> ​Best post of the thread.. well done


Ken, osb please forgive me for coming off arrogant as it was the furthest thing from my intent. My aim was to demonstrate that I thought I knew how things were when I shot in and around my region. As I traveled more and more I learned and gained more scope of how other archers think, and how archery works in different parts of the world. I guess what I was trying to say was I thought I was "a know it all" but as I learned and gathered more information I realized that I didn't know it all. It was humbling and I was much slower to come to absolute truths in regards to styles and traditions.

I'm no Larry "groupie" and I am definitely not saying what you think I am saying in my last few posts. It's ironic that we are all of sudden at polar opposites since I've felt in line with your posts all through this thread. Of course we all know that there are very definite styles of non-sight aiming. But if we squint a little and allow the lines to blur, we might realize that:



sharpbroadhead said:


> I agree that you and all shooters, sight shooters, stringwalkers, gap shooters, etc... all aim at a subconscious level to one degree or another...


 <---If I can quote your words.

In closing, I am an instinctive archer, simple as that. I don't wear any badges or promote the fact, I've only shared this fact with a few friends. But it is true. Is that a bad thing in your book? I thought you'd at least be a bit more welcoming and neighborly about it?


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> I agree that you and all shooters, sight shooters, stringwalkers, gap shooters, etc... all aim at a subconscious level to one degree or another, but to say that all are instinctive shooters is a bit different.


Pretty much agree....except for the comment that 'all' aim at a subconscious level to one degree. In many cases...it's just a lower level of conscious awareness...which is NOT the same thing as it being totally subconscious/unconscious.



Larry Yien said:


> In closing, I am an instinctive archer, simple as that. I don't wear any badges or promote the fact, I've only shared this fact with a few friends. But it is true. Is that a bad thing in your book?


In my book...I just think it adds to the confusion already surrounding the word as it applies to archery.

So many of you target archers...which does include me...passionately pursue accuracy and precision...but when it comes to terms, labels and definitions...you don't care that much about precision or accuracy and rather blur the lines.

The way I see it, Larry...you're a Barebow archer who likes to use the longbow and/or recurve and uses Gap Aiming...NOT an archer who aims Instinctively as the word applies to a specific aiming technique.

Ultimately...you can call yourself whatever you want. Just as I know I'm the real Batman! :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Irishhacker, Mgf, Sharpbroadhead, blackwolf. Potter is right, you guys blow just to see yourself in print. Each of you are attacking a gentleman who has more character in his little finger than all of you collectively have in all your bodies combined. Not one of you has ever, to my knowledge, excelled in the archery arena, yet, you all like to come off as archery experts, especially on instinctive archery. I am an instinctive archer when I want to be and there isn't one of you turkeys who could touch me at instinctive shooting. Put your money where your bs is and let's get this instinctive thing settled once and for all. I'll pay for the videographer so all of archerytalk can see the results. Mgf and Irishhacker, I certainly don't expect you two to come out of your backyards but Ray and Sharp are always telling us about their many tournament wins, Lets get this thing happening and on video. Let's see what these guys goals, abilities, and personalities enable them to do with a bow in their hand. This should be a no-brainer because I am 25 years past my prime but I have been listening to the same recording for 40 years and it sure gets old.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

What's all this Mamby Pamby stuff about attacking, Larry???

I have NOT once attacked, Larry!!!

I've disagreed with him on some things and if you think that is attacking...than you've obviously NEVER seen me attack anyone...because...that ain't even close.

Ray :shade:


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Good Grief..

1st off. ..I sure as hell ain't any type of groupie..for any person on this forum. .

2nd..I've never met Larry....shot with him. .or even in truth followed him in anything he has ever done. .

3rd...Most of you guys know I'm old fashion as hell..and sure as hell not a competition shooter..

Now..with that said..

Sharp..your sir..are one of the most juvenile individuals on this forum..Your sir are so wrapped up in yourself..you can't understand when someone is trying to get along with you..If someone else is posting and stealing some of your limelight here..you try to twist everything they say into a negative..

Ray..I love ya bro..but..I got to say this to you..You are doing the same thing I used to do..you're so wrapped up in being right all the time. .you're not seeing what you are looking like. .Your arguing semantics..over words..that mean different things to different people. .

No one here is trying to see what Larry is saying. .noone..everyone wants to prove him wrong..and are not understanding what he is saying. .he's saying it's a journey. .we are all on...and we are all in it together and it matters not how we shoot..

The man is not a God..he is just a well respected individual who has only acted like a gentleman here..and some can't stand this fact. ...

Larry..I for one understand what your saying.. and in all honesty am ashamed of how some folks here have this huge sense if self worth and have to turn every discussion into a pissing match..only to stroke their egos. .

Please don't let a few folks with huge egos drive you away..Some people here just jerks..not all of the people here are. .

Mac


----------



## Stone Bridge (May 20, 2013)

itbeso said:


> Sharp, you have some good insights into instinctive archery but then you lose credibility when you make a statement like" I have no idea what my point on is". You have stated many times in the past that you never see your arrow but you stretch believability when you say that you can't see your arrow when the arrow tip cuts the spot in half while you are looking at the spot (that is what point on is). This is why so many new archers on here get confused, because of statements like yours that have no logic to them. If you want to have credibility, then own up to things that are obvious to the rest of the archery world.


Truer words never spoken. No way a man does not know his point-on distance. I've never bought Ken's line of BS about such things.


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Must be a gapper need both eyes open to shoot instinctive. Does that make me a groupie ? 

The Tinman


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

MAC 11700 said:


> Ray..I love ya bro..but..I got to say this to you..You are doing the same thing I used to do..you're so wrapped up in being right all the time. .you're not seeing what you are looking like. .Your arguing semantics..over words..that mean different things to different people. .
> 
> No one here is trying to see what Larry is saying. .noone..everyone wants to prove him wrong..and are not understanding what he is saying. .he's saying it's a journey. .we are all on...and we are all in it together and it matters not how we shoot..


See, Mac...this is the problem soooo many people have communicating over the internet. People make WAAAAY to many poor assumptions.

Please ask before you continue to make the same mistakes.

I see EXACTLY what Larry is saying...and I have AGREED with him in regards to how the term is used in Europe as a competitive class. I've also said he can call himself whatever type of archer he wants. I've also AGREED that at the final moments of many archer's shot...the minute movements of their aiming reference in relationship to it's placement to the target...CAN happen subconsciously/unconsciously and in many cases just at a lower level of conscious awareness.

There is already sooo much confusion over a simple aiming technique...I just don't agree that we should add more to it. Larry has said he's basically trying to blur the lines or get us to see how the lines can be blurred. All I want to do is help people see things more precisely as the terms apply more commonly in archery.

I think some here ONLY want to read what they want to believe about someone...without even knowing them.

It's CRAZY the assumptions some people make about people they have never even met. Often times...passing judgement upon someone is more of a reflection of the person judging than it is the person they're judging.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Seems like a bunch of arguing over nothing to me. Larry seems to be saying what almost everybody else is saying...there's a degree of instinctive shooting in any non-sighted aiming system. The degree may vary depending on the shooter, style, distance, and probably not least the description each gives to their own aiming system. 

I think some of you guys just like to argue. Since there is no way to quantify how much "instinct" each of us uses (who know's what's going on in someone else's head), you can slice the descriptions thinner and thinner letting the argument go on indefinitely. In this case the incessant arguing dilutes what would be another interesting thread, one about an experienced and accomplished archer re-working their form. Speaking only for myself, I'll bet I might pick up a thing or two from Larry's journey that helps my own shooting. I think we are lucky he posts his experiences and thoughts, if that makes me a groupie big f'in deal (just for the record, never met him). I learn from almost everybody on here but especially welcome a shooter of his stature posting.

Here's a question..._How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?_ That seems as just about as precise and definable an issue as the ultra-fine nit-picking going on in most of these instinctive shooting arguments...I mean threads.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Sorry Ray..that's not what I get from his post..and it's no assumption on my part..

We each have a way of looking at things..using what makes sense..You want a black and white answer to a gray question..you won't never get ut..and to shoehorn everyone into 1 category or another because of just 1 wsy of looking at it. .puts you right where I was last year

As to needing specifics of how a person claims to shoot..when that person is evolving their own outlook. .which in Larrys case is changing...without looking deeper into that persons words..it arguing sematics...and makes IMHO you look bad..Thst to me is how I see it. .

The man isnt instructing anyone on how they should shoot.or should .feel...but sharing his insight on how he feels. .and his journey. .Take it for what it is. .not what you think it does..it's not confusing to anyone who just wants to celebrate shooting and being out in nature..

Sometimes folks get so wrapped up in the technical. .they are blinded to the reality of others intent..or readons for posting..

Mac


----------



## Gapmaster (May 23, 2002)

I said this in post 110:



> It seems I've been watching posts like these go bad for a few months now, and it seems there is always a few who enjoy the drama they can create by being nice, but negative at the same time.


Now at post 170 and boy was I right. Same guys as usual too. Four guys have managed to take a nice post and turn it into crap and try to detour any good suggestions with disagreements and negativity, and a little disrespectfulness to the OP. I'm with Itbeso. But I think we ALL should all show up at Darrington at the Nationals and shoot for a few days so it shows some consistency. None if this "one shot wonder" crap. Sounds like a good time to me. 

Respect to OP 
Gapmaster


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Larry...your posts are more than appreciated as it allows those of us who've not the means nor wherewithal to live vicariously through your shared thoughts, travels and experiences...as I might presume that a vast percentage of us either don't have the funds, skills, knowledge or maybe even for some?...the desire to do exactly what it is you've done, accomplished and still love to do.

I might also convey to you that I myself place you on a pedestal higher than that of any Olympian...and the reason for doing so is much the same as to why it blows my mind that some get so readily disgusted when it comes to "aiming" threads...as it seems they are always a hot topic amidst us and imnsho?...rightfully so...why?...here's why...

Outside of the extraneous issues and details of arrow crafting, string crafting and materials, elevated rests or not and various basic tuning issues?...there are but "TWO" (2)..."Primary Issues" that separate and can and do make the difference between "the accomplished" and the "still struggling" archers....and they are?...

1. FORM

and?...(you guessed it)...

2. "AIMING"

and here's where it gets really narrowed down...while the "Form Topics" are fairly well known, clear and common?...

"aiming"?....isn't quite as common a denominator amongst us....but apparently?...you're crossing that divide. :laugh:










L8R, Bill.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

MAC 11700 said:


> Sorry Ray..that's not what I get from his post..and it's no assumption on my part..


Soooo...just to be clear you did not get any of this in Larry's comments?

#1. Instinctive is used in Europe to name a competitive class?
#2. We all can call our chosen path in archery whatever we want?
#3. At the final moments of an archer's shot...the minute movements of the archer's aiming reference in relationship to it's placement to the target...CAN happen subconsciously/unconsciously and in many cases just at a lower level of conscious awareness?
#4. There are similarities between the different aiming techniques?
#5. Larry is blurring the lines between aiming techniques and is trying to get others to also see that?
#6. All archers who aim without sights are shooting Barebow?

If that's NOT what you saw Larry write and/or not what you got out of it...please tell me what it is I'm missing?

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

That was pretty funny, Bill! :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Your slipping Ray down to 20% ;-)

Matt


----------



## ozzypop (Sep 23, 2010)

I am "instinctively" reading KiSik Lee's chapter on how to place the string blur in relation to your sight. On a "subconsciousl" level I am taking it in.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Yes.Ray..I saw what he said..I'm not blind...lol..lol

To answer..

To me..regardless what some organization decides to label 1 style or another. .

Barebow..is just that..a bow sans any fixed sighting system..

Instinctive. .is the same..since I know for a fact there is not 1 instinctive archer that is not blind..that doesn't aim their bow..aiming and using a fixed sight attatched are 2 distinctly different things..One starts the bow towards the target is actually aiming it..one adjust their bow hand on the drsw is aiming..it is a part of the process..

Many here have this false sense of pride that they say they dont aim..they don't see the arrow..that is total bs..everyone sees the arrow..we all align to the target. We all aim....the point is we all use parts of the process of aiming. .some more than others. .

Instinctual. .we all use different meanings..you yourself have chastised me for doing the same damn thing you are doing now..

Look past you constant need to be right all the time bro..your not..nor do You have to have the final word on everything. ..You can disect every word or post as much as you want. .your not perfect..and you're not always right..

We each make the determination of how we shoot..if a gapper wants to say he shoots instinctively in some parts of his rotine..who the heck are you not to believe him..What you consider right..may not be what he considers right..You love pointing out others as wrong by saying..true instinctive..when in reality..the is no true instinctive archer..semmantics...that is all you yourself are arguing over..

Everyone is different. .you yourself have said this. .so stop arguing needlessly. .


----------



## Jim Casto Jr (Aug 20, 2002)

MAC 11700 said:


> .......nor do You have to have the final word on everything. ... .your not perfect..and you're not always right.......


Gee Whiz, MAC, I'm really disappointed in your post. Apparently, you've not been around these forums very long.


----------



## Arron (Nov 18, 2012)

http://archersparadoxdotorg.wordpress.com/2012/09/17/a-discussion-with-larry-yien/

A few months back I ran across this interview with Larry Yien done by Jimmy Blackmon. So tonight I looked it back up and re read it. You know what? I still would love to sit down with Larry Yien over a cup of coffee.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Arron said:


> http://archersparadoxdotorg.wordpress.com/2012/09/17/a-discussion-with-larry-yien/
> 
> A few months back I ran across this interview with Larry Yien done by Jimmy Blackmon. So tonight I looked it back up and re read it. You know what? I still would love to sit down with Larry Yien over a cup of coffee.


Arron

I had the pleasure of drinking a beer or two with Larry last April and you are right he is a great guy to spend some time with. But you know what I'm sure that all the guys posting here would be fun to drink a beer with. 

I don't always agree with Sharp but he's a perfectly pleasant guy to shoot some 3D with. I might like teasing Ray but I'm sure we would have fun chasing elk together. Itbeso (Ben) is just as crusty as he sounds but is ALWAYS willing to help - as well as being a fun guy to shoot with. 

When you get right down to it we all have way more in common than we have differences. 

Matt


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

MAC 11700 said:


> Everyone is different. .you yourself have said this. .so stop arguing needlessly. .


Are some of you guys really that sensitive that whenever someone is discussing a topic and someone disagrees you feel they're arguing needlessly?

I get it. It's OK for guys you agree with to debate their thoughts but not those you disagree with.

Hmmm...I guess I need to be more sensitive to some of you who are easier to upset because it really is obvious it bothers some of you when I debate a topic I may disagree with.

Ray :shade:


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Are some of you guys really that sensitive that whenever someone is discussing a topic and someone disagrees you feel they're arguing needlessly?
> 
> I get it. It's OK for guys you agree with to debate their thoughts but not those you disagree with.
> 
> ...


No Ray..but for a person of high intelligence as yourself. .you should be able to know the difference between a debate and a discussion. .

Your debating this. .not discussing it. .

Mac


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Jim Casto Jr said:


> Gee Whiz, MAC, I'm really disappointed in your post. Apparently, you've not been around these forums very long.


I'm sorry..I'll try to do better next time. ..lol...lol...lol

Mac


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

MAC 11700 said:


> Your debating this. .not discussing it.


Could the difference between debate and discussion be tone of voice?

If so....NON of you have any clue as to my tone of voice when disagreeing with someone and discussing it.

I guarantee there is a difference when I'm discussing these issues with Larry or anyone else when compared to replying to a personal attack :wink:

Ray :shade:

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Could the difference between debate and discussion be tone of voice?
> 
> If so....NON of you have any clue as to my tone of voice when disagreeing with someone and discussing it.
> 
> ...


I understand completely on a personal attack. .but..I also have seen enough of these " discussions " too to know the difference between them and a debate. ..

Mac


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

A discussion is where you are sharing information, a debate is where you are forcing your opinion onto someone in an attempt to change their opinion.

Ray, you are debating, you are always debating. There are people with shooting resumes that can use a "because I said so" delivery, but you aren't one of them.

-Grant


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

grantmac said:


> Ray, you are debating, you are always debating.


If that's your take...than you're living a double standard...because Larry is debating also...just as you have when you disagree with someone.

It's funny watching some of you guys and your double standards. It's OK for the people you agree with to debate something and talk about it...but as soon as someone disagrees and starts explaining why...All of a sudden it's wrong. 

Ray :shade:


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

BLACK WOLF said:


> If that's your take...than you're living a double standard...because Larry is debating also...just as you have when you disagree with someone.
> 
> It's funny watching some of you guys and your double standards. It's OK for the people you agree with to debate something and talk about it...but as soon as someone disagrees and starts explaining why...All of a sudden it's wrong.
> 
> Ray :shade:


It's not about double standards..it's about how the post is worded..Your style suggedt its a debate. .not a discussion. .A discussion does not have a winner.

Why is it. .you feel when others are in disagreement with you. .and see what you're doing as debating a personal attack. .? That's Sharps tactics. ..

Just Saying Ray...


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

For the most part, I have always been a gap at the arrow archer when I shot barebow(compound) except at close yardages, 20 and under, where I would do what I used to call "arm aiming", instinctive is what it would be called here. Back in the early eighties, I shot our state broadhead tournament, which is unmarked, and at that time probably the only unmarked tourney we had in California. For each target, I would judge the yardage, then use my gap for that yardage, to shoot for score.There were times when I had picked out the yardage and the gap and started aiming, but my brain knew something wasn't right and actually influenced me to change the gap and shoot. The overwhelming majority of times, the correction was right on the money. I have talked to other top gap shooters who have experienced the same thing. The only conclusion I could ever draw from these experiences was that, even though I was a dedicated gap shooter, there came a time when instincts kicked in to help the aiming process. This is one of the reasons that I think trying to clearly define what instinctive shooting is, is a big waste of time, because I feel, as Larry does, that whatever style of aiming you claim to use, at some point in your shooting, one or more of the other styles will come into play also, and I'm okay with that.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Larry Yien said:


> Irish, thanks for posting and as much as your opinion might be the popular one of the day or even the decade, I find error in it. First off my intent was not to be merely pleasant and light. More importantly, all barebow styles do fit under "instinctive" whether you like it or not. If we look at barebow archery from the 1950's till now we would realize that it all fits under instinctive and instinctors. If you take a shorter period in time let's say from Fred Asbell's book on you might have a stronger inclination to form opinions stated in your post.
> 
> Perhaps you would prefer to ignore history and create a reality based on archery when "you" first got involved (when did you get involved in "instinctive archery"?). From a physio-psycho-propio level we all have an element or elements of "instinctive" in our shooting style. Is it your point that we determine who is more instinctive by self-admission on what's going through our heads while we shoot our arrows?
> 
> ...




As usual, I started to wonder where this thread took a turn for the worse and it appears to be this post. First couple of pages went ok with some guys attempting to politely disagree and doing pretty well. And then this happened. I took it as a bit condescending and inaccurate. 
BlackWolf tried in the next post to point out that word meanings tend to change with time and may not mean the same as it did in 1950. True, and instinctive is one of those words. Now several different methods of aiming the bare bow have developed and while some of them may involve some degree of subconscious, we are using different words in order to be more specific. 
My first thought in the beginning of this thread was that it was a follow up to a thread that had not gone so well and that the OP was looking to continue it. He did a nice job of applying the make up in the beginning. When other people pointed out the inaccuracy of his position, then she changed.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Yes, the autopsy of the thread, where did it go bad? Overall it wasn't a bad thread, folks were pretty dang civil. Everyone got to make their points. I think this post which was a reply to IHack was pivotal not so much for the words but the picture! This PICTURE is key, how many folks paid attention to the picture? I know Jason appreciated it as well as other seasoned archers. And that bow, I mean what was Damon thinking when he put that many curves into a bow? I wanted to take a minute to thank everyone for contributing to this thread. I'm hopeful that the folks that visited this thread to read-only were able to glean some different perspectives from the thread. It's not so much thinking outside the box as much as it is thinking in a much larger box or is it a sphere?



irishhacker said:


> Im not sure I see the joy in Larry's post either. Yes, it was a great attempt in being pleasant and light, but that does not make it accurate.
> Sure, we can all hold hands while running through fields of flowers while the sun shines down upon us..
> I don't care at all what aiming technique anybody else uses. However, it is inaccurate to group them all under instinctive just because a conventional "sight" is not used.
> If you want to unite everyone, leave aiming out of it. Unite as archers. Or better yet, Bowhunters!





Larry Yien said:


> Irish, thanks for posting and as much as your opinion might be the popular one of the day or even the decade, I find error in it. First off my intent was not to be merely pleasant and light. More importantly, all barebow styles do fit under "instinctive" whether you like it or not. If we look at barebow archery from the 1950's till now we would realize that it all fits under instinctive and instinctors. If you take a shorter period in time let's say from Fred Asbell's book on you might have a stronger inclination to form opinions stated in your post.
> 
> Perhaps you would prefer to ignore history and create a reality based on archery when "you" first got involved (when did you get involved in "instinctive archery"?). From a physio-psycho-propio level we all have an element or elements of "instinctive" in our shooting style. Is it your point that we determine who is more instinctive by self-admission on what's going through our heads while we shoot our arrows?
> 
> ...


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Is the bow in the picture a "Hunter"?


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

itbeso said:


> Irishhacker, Mgf, Sharpbroadhead, blackwolf. Potter is right, you guys blow just to see yourself in print. Each of you are attacking a gentleman who has more character in his little finger than all of you collectively have in all your bodies combined. Not one of you has ever, to my knowledge, excelled in the archery arena, yet, you all like to come off as archery experts, especially on instinctive archery. I am an instinctive archer when I want to be and there isn't one of you turkeys who could touch me at instinctive shooting. Put your money where your bs is and let's get this instinctive thing settled once and for all. I'll pay for the videographer so all of archerytalk can see the results. Mgf and Irishhacker, I certainly don't expect you two to come out of your backyards but Ray and Sharp are always telling us about their many tournament wins, Lets get this thing happening and on video. Let's see what these guys goals, abilities, and personalities enable them to do with a bow in their hand. This should be a no-brainer because I am 25 years past my prime but I have been listening to the same recording for 40 years and it sure gets old.


Sorry, I call.


I challenge you to point to any post where I even came close to attacking Larry. Next, please show even one post where I tried to come off as an expert on instinctive shooting or any other kind of shooting.

By all means put your money where your mouth is. Heck just stand behind your mouth. You accused me of something now back it up. Who do you think you are that you claim to know anything about my character? First we settle the matter of your personal attack and then we can talk about shooting.

I'm leaving this morning for a few days of hunting but I'll look for your response as soon as I get back. We can take it to another thread if that works best but your insulting accusations were made in public public so you should back it up in public...as long as the mods permit it.

Show us your good character.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

Itbeso talking of challenges, I heard a rumor at WA3D worlds in Sardinia last week (from the wife of WA European vice president) that negotiations are in place for the next 2015 WA3D worlds to be held in Canada, if it does happen it seems a perfect opportunity for the best of the Americas to meet the best of Europe. 

Whatever the outcome I think some good friendships will be forged and maybe a new level of respect from both sides of the pond.:thumbs_up


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

itbeso said:


> Irishhacker, Mgf, Sharpbroadhead, blackwolf. Potter is right, you guys blow just to see yourself in print. Each of you are attacking a gentleman who has more character in his little finger than all of you collectively have in all your bodies combined. Not one of you has ever, to my knowledge, excelled in the archery arena, yet, you all like to come off as archery experts, especially on instinctive archery. I am an instinctive archer when I want to be and there isn't one of you turkeys who could touch me at instinctive shooting. Put your money where your bs is and let's get this instinctive thing settled once and for all. I'll pay for the videographer so all of archerytalk can see the results. Mgf and Irishhacker, I certainly don't expect you two to come out of your backyards but Ray and Sharp are always telling us about their many tournament wins, Lets get this thing happening and on video. Let's see what these guys goals, abilities, and personalities enable them to do with a bow in their hand. This should be a no-brainer because I am 25 years past my prime but I have been listening to the same recording for 40 years and it sure gets old.


For starters, I have not seen anyone attack Larry. However, I have seen many personal attacks on people who happen to disagree with Larry. Your post is certainly one of them.
Your post says a lot more about you than any of us.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

You guys at flipping nuts. 

Larry - it have to see the window of that bow to know for sure but I suspect it's a "gappers delight"

Stone - be careful of the back yard shooter you never ever know - Sharp made the same basic statement about me several years ago ;-)

Matt

Matt


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

MAC 11700 said:


> Why is it. .you feel when others are in disagreement with you. .and see what you're doing as debating a personal attack. .?


When a post talks about archery and the information regarding the topic I do NOT feel it's a personal attack if someone disagrees with me. I can easily handle disagreements.

When a person starts whining and the primary thing if not the only thing they have to offer in their post is about what they think of me or someone else...than Yes...they've turned the debate into a personal attack.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Ghost Dancer (Sep 21, 2008)

This is my take/opinion. I am not certain why an op (especially an accomplished and distinguished one) is not allowed to continue or given respect to continue uninterrupted without challenge or controversy. Why can't the discussion/debate wait until the end, and even say I disagree, but I'll refrain from posting until the end to share my thoughts? If one feels compelled to immediately disagree, why not open a new thread, and let the debate begin and rage ad infinitum. 

What we all lose is simply the chance for people of Larry's or a Rod Jenkins status to explain their archery experience, insights, form, memoirs in a civil forum where we can all learn. These attitudes would not occur in a live venue or seminar, but often occur here. I wish there was a live thread where the op can continue and then let the debate begin once he opens it up for comments and feedback, or doses of Ritalin that could be sent electronically. 

Discussions are not debates, and debates always turn into arguments without heavy moderation. Supercilious attitudes and comments are the bane of this forum. 

It can be said that sword sharpens sword, and discussion is good, but a pen knife will never sharpen a katana. This is my lament.


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

Ray...as we all know, I have been accused of this too. It's the nature of the internet wording without being able to see the inflections and body language of the speaker.

When the post 'appears' to be worded as a debate, it's automatically taken (by most) as an attack, even though that is NOT our intention. 

When the post is worded as a discussion of facts based on personal experience or viable information, everyone 'feels' safe.

Disagreements have two opportunities to be worded, on the net. One 'appears' to be intelligent, the other 'appears' to be not (and NO I am not calling you anything!! :angel

I'm sure if we around a campfire, there would be opportunity to ask or tell and know where we are all coming from by the way it was asked or told and we would word it so as not to offend the 'friend'.

I'm still learning to keep the word 'I' out of the conversations, internally and externally.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Brad and Ghost...points well taken.

People need to learn that we all have different ways of communicating and if a person doesn't like the way one person communicates than just skip over their post. That's what I do which rarely happens because I think everyone has something of value to offer unless they're just attacking someone personally.

A campfire is FAR better than the internet :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Brad and Ghost...points well taken.
> 
> People need to learn that we all have different ways of communicating and if a person doesn't like the way one person communicates than just skip over their post. That's what I do which rarely happens because I think everyone has something of value to offer unless they're just attacking someone personally.
> 
> ...


​How about Cloverdale Nationals,, next June?


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

irishhacker said:


> ​How about Cloverdale Nationals,, next June?


I sooo wish I could afford to take off of work and go to a bunch of shoots out of state. Most of my time off is spent fishing or hunting with my dad. There's is a big annual shoot here in Colorado in June I try to attend every year. If you're in the area let me know.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Gapmaster (May 23, 2002)

> you guys blow just to see yourself in print


Maybe when another poster made this comment just maybe there is a little merit to it.

Ray, here is some food for thought.
I joined this forum in 2002, that's 11 years ago. I'm still under 300 total posts. That's 269 to be exact.
You joined this forum in 2005 and you have 9631 posts. Over nine thousand. MGF joined in 2012 and has 3173. On track to have over 30,000 in 10 years. Maybe some of you guys are just a little quick with the tounge. Maybe sometimes if you typed your responses and looked at what you put down before hitting the send button you may perhaps re-think some of the things your saying. It makes it look like all the arrows you guys are shooting is on the internet forums and not outside at real targets. If I spent that much time at the PC making posts I'd never get any shooting done. I don't know how you guys do it. I'm not being negative, I'm trying to give you some food for thought that might help you in keeping out of messes like this. I'm sure your a great guy. But Mac is correct in his assertions. Just saying.

On another note. When I shoot targets I have a gap or reference for every distance. I call it "sighting in my bow". When I walk up to a known distance target I know exactly how I am going to aim my bow before I ever pull the string back. There are however moments when a little voice goes off in my head that says "this don't feel right". In those cases I let that little voice take over and adjust my aim. Sometimes the little voice is correct, but sometimes it's not and I miss the shot. It's usually then I have to tell myself to BELIEVE my gap and ignore that little voice. But, when I'm hunting I always try to keep my shots within 40 yards and it's during that time that I go with instinctive and do what feels good. But it changes again, like during an IBO type shoot where all the targets are unmarked that I go back to the gap. I pick what I feel is the half way point to the target, double it, and that's what I shoot the target for. So for me I use a little of everything. And none of what I said is written in stone. Tomorrow I might not gap a thing, but then again I might. It all depends on nothing inparticular really except what I'm comfortable with that day and what seems to be working. Some days pick a point works, and others it doesn't. But I always have another method to try that day if something I'm using isn't working. 90 percent of the time though, it's the gap I use. But I'm still instinctive. I'm still Traditional. I'm still using my fingers and no sights on my bow. For the life of me I don't get why so many can be so over the top about a definition of a word. If myself and another archer are standing on a shooting line next to each other shooting at a unmarked or marked target, and we both hit the dot with our arrow, does it matter that one guy did it with a gap and the other guy did it with his arm just raising the arrow till it felt right? It doesn't matter. And the definition of "instinctive doesn't matter. What matters is both of us did it using a bow and arrow with fingers and no attached sights. Like I said before, if you can "will" the arrow in the dot more power to you, but I'm gonna be picking your brain to learn how. And we both will still be instinctive archers, and we both will still be traditional archers. 

Just my thoughts,
Gapmaster


----------



## Stone Bridge (May 20, 2013)

Matt_Potter said:


> You guys at flipping nuts.
> 
> Larry - it have to see the window of that bow to know for sure but I suspect it's a "gappers delight"
> 
> ...


Understood, Matt. But that guy kept telling us of never shooting in competition and going out back of his house with a cheap 45# 60" PSE junk bow off the self and shooting three 300 round scores averaging over 260 without taking a break. He's a man in his middle fifties shooting over 180 arrows from a fairly heavy hunting-style bow for target work and getting better as he goes. Like fatigue was unheard of.

It was, at the time, the biggest load of BS I'd ever read on any archery forum ever. To this day he claims it's true. I'll bet you'd have trouble staying over 245 with that same equipment shooting 180 arrows without a rest and you're a big strong guy of some youth. And we all know that you can shoot about as well as human beings are capable of in this thing we do. My only point.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Now they are judging a guy based on how many posts? 

I joined in 2004 and have about 7300 posts - that averages to about 800 posts a year

MGF joined in 2012 and already has over 3100 posts - does that make his opinion any less valid?

MAC joined in 2011 and has nearly 3000 posts - so what does this mean?

Jinx joined in 2011 and has over 5400 posts and I have not heard anyone attack him for how many posts he has made?

I don't know about these other guys, but I have a job the requires me to be in the office for at least half the day and many times with not a single thing to do, so I go to archery talk and "talk" to pass the day - big deal.

Everyone knows that I often disagree with BlackWolf, but come on, to attack him or judge him based on how many posts he has made - that is getting crazy.

Oh well, this thread got pretty stupid a long time ago - time for me to move on.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Everyone knows that I often disagree with BlackWolf, but come on, to attack him or judge him based on how many posts he has made - that is getting crazy.


LOL...people will judge others based on color, religion, gender, nationality, looks, aiming techniques, shooting styles and now...number of posts???

If a person has to judge someone based on meeting a certain criteria...that's fine...but that person needs to realize...they are just making an assumption...that could be absolutely WRONG.

Ray :shade:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Stone Bridge said:


> MGF, your just some socially frightened backyard shooter up in farm country who never competes telling us of shooting 300 scores over 260 with a 45#, 150 dollar piece of crap bow and doing this THREE times in a row in one afternoon. 180 arrows averaging 260 with a junk bow. Remember that little spat we had?
> 
> Well Ben Rogers (itbeso) is older than you are and once upon a time might have been capable of such things - the endurance required and the skill considering the crappy bow you shoot. But you're too dense to understand your own online lies regarding your own 300 scores because you never get around. I'll bet you can't break 200.
> 
> ...



WOW, that is a personal attack. Cheap shots made after the man stated he was going hunting for a few days, so fairly safe that he will never see it. Cowardly at best.
My suggestion is that you go visit 'farm country' and find out for yourself. That backyard el cheapo bow shooter might be happy to have a visit from a pro like yourself. Farm country folks can be right friendly.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Gapmaster said:


> For the life of me I don't get why so many can be so over the top about a definition of a word.


As I've said before...it's ONLY for educational purposes.

#1. I have agreed that the word Instinctive as taught in elemantary school is a word that relates to an inate behavior of animals that doesn't apply directly to an aiming technique when applying that specific definition.
#2. I have also agreed that words can evolve and develop new meanings.
#3. I have also agreed that the term Instinctive was a term used to classify any archer who wasn't using a sight in competition years ago.
#4. I have also agreed the the term Instinctive is used currently as a competitive class of archers in Europe.
#5. I have also agreed that the term currently applies to a specific aiming technique that falls within the barebow category.
#6. I have also agreed that some people view Gap Aiming the same as Instinctive Aiming when both archers ONLY concentrate on the target

As much as a few of you want to claim I'm always argueing...I wanted to show I also do allot of agreeing when discussing this topic :wink:

I just believe for educational purposes...the term Instinctive as it specifically applies to an aiming technique needs to be clarified and not have the lines of what it means blurred. As anyone should see from above...I also approve and agree with it's use under other circumstances.

Ray :shade:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Ghost Dancer said:


> This is my take/opinion. I am not certain why an op (especially an accomplished and distinguished one) is not allowed to continue or given respect to continue uninterrupted without challenge or controversy. Why can't the discussion/debate wait until the end, and even say I disagree, but I'll refrain from posting until the end to share my thoughts? If one feels compelled to immediately disagree, why not open a new thread, and let the debate begin and rage ad infinitum.
> 
> What we all lose is simply the chance for people of Larry's or a Rod Jenkins status to explain their archery experience, insights, form, memoirs in a civil forum where we can all learn. These attitudes would not occur in a live venue or seminar, but often occur here. I wish there was a live thread where the op can continue and then let the debate begin once he opens it up for comments and feedback, or doses of Ritalin that could be sent electronically.
> 
> ...



LOL, that's funny stuff right there. In case you've not noticed, there are some people here who aren't real big on hero worship. This thread is not about the person but rather his position on a subject that always creates strong responses. I think the OP knew that when he started the thread and got exactly what he bargained for.
Based on casual observation I gather you don't like this forum too much. It is different from others and that's what makes it interesting for many people. Doesn't work for everyone.


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

Ghost Dancer said:


> Supercilious attitudes and comments


I admit it - I had to look that word up.


----------



## Gapmaster (May 23, 2002)

> to attack him or judge him based on how many posts he has made - that is getting crazy.


See, that's your problem Sharp. because he wasn't "attacked" nor was he being "judged". He was given good sound advice from an observation of from the outside looking in. Attacked and judged are your words and assumptions and blown out of proportion as usual. And as for the number of posts? The point being is every time someone makes a post about anything doesn't mean you need to have an opinion about it that needs to be posted immediately without taking the time to re-read what your about to say. Maybe if your posts were made without shooting from the hip so quickly you would have about half the posts you do now. Good solid advice was posted for him and you can take it for what it's worth. And if the advice doesn't help him, maybe, just maybe someone else will get what I'm saying and it will help them. But I'm sure there will still be a few who doesn't get it and it will be of no help at all. It's the readers choice how to accept it and there was no ill intent Next time you have an assumption about the meaning of one of my posts PM me and I'll be glad to explain it to you then you won't have to post an incorrect assertion. Gapmaster


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Gapmaster said:


> Maybe when another poster made this comment just maybe there is a little merit to it.
> 
> Ray, here is some food for thought.
> I joined this forum in 2002, that's 11 years ago. I'm still under 300 total posts. That's 269 to be exact.
> ...




Interesting, not your observation of the other peoples posts but the rest of it caught my attention.

"On another note""
Self proclaimed 'Gapmaster', not exactly a title that an instinctive shooter would choose,but whatever. Then, the rest of the post goes on about your alternative aiming methods that bear no resemblance to an instinctive shooter but in the end you say we would both still be instinctive archers. Does not compute.
Actually, it seems that you are in some way supporting the position of the OP that anyone who shoots without a sight is an instinctive shooter. It has been clarified in this thread and many others that the word has evolved over time and no longer means what it did in 1950. I will give you credit. Even if you aren't really an instinctive shooter, you are on topic of the thread.


----------



## Beendare (Jan 31, 2006)

Thanks to Larry and many of the other fine archers for their comments. Tough thread to wade through to get those comments and about the most animosity I've experienced with any Trad related- Anything. I know there is a prevailing, "thats not fair" attitude towards some of the aiming techniques and the division its causing in archery is really sad to see. [ Maybe Larry was trying to illuminate that and effect a sort of peace?]

Frankly, I don't care. Matt probably described it best. There is a moment in your aiming process when your instinct takes over to complete the shot. Instinct is probably the wrong word but my Gawd- its semantics. I'm not going to let semantics get in the way of my learning process. 

*Anyway, from us lurkers; Thanks to Larry, Matt, Steve, Ben, Gary and all of the other top archers for sticking your neck out on these forums in an attempt to help another archer. *


...


...


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Beendare said:


> Thanks to Larry and many of the other fine archers for their comments. Tough thread to wade through to get those comments and about the most animosity I've experienced with any Trad related- Anything. I know there is a prevailing, "thats not fair" attitude towards some of the aiming techniques and the division its causing in archery is really sad to see. [ Maybe Larry was trying to illuminate that and effect a sort of peace?]
> 
> Frankly, I don't care. Matt probably described it best. There is a moment in your aiming process when your instinct takes over to complete the shot. Instinct is probably the wrong word but my Gawd- its semantics. I'm not going to let semantics get in the way of my learning process.
> 
> ...



So I gather that you think there are only five or six people qualified to have opinions. Newsflash Sir, it's a forum, not a class . You have been around AT for quite a while but not really participating in this particular forum too much if I remember correctly. Either way, I believe you know that it would be extremely boring if everyone was into hero worship and only came here to see what crumbs the latest 'top archers' might drop for their adoring fans.
I also check in on some other forums from time to time, mostly for comparison purposes. Trust me, the words repetition and boring fit most of them perfectly. Why? Because if you want to be in the click you have to know whose ass to kiss and how to show your respect to them. You should know by now that is not the way it works here. It's actually a discussion forum where everyone is entitled to his opinion. It might be challenged but at least he has the right to put his two bits into the discussion.


----------



## CAPTJJ (Dec 24, 2007)

Thank you Larry. Been reading this thread and I actually learned some following along between the nonsense. I've been trying to aim instinctively the "right" way, and doing pretty good but my consistency hasn't been there unless I really concentrated; and then I still wasn't happy with my groups. So I tried changing the way I aim the last couple days, instead of trying to completely ignore the arrow, I would concentrate on the spot but see the arrow in my periphery and try visualize its path to the target better(Kidwell's teaching). I think I was caught up in trying to shoot "true instinctive", but the goal is to put the arrow where you want it, the method really doesn't matter as long as it gets there. Just shoot some pretty good groups, with more practice of the trajectory method I really feel more improvement will come, confidence is key. Just needed a new perspective to look at things, you comments are much appreciated.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

CaptJJ - Bryon Ferguson says the same thing about visualizing the flight of the arrow to the target, as do the authors of the Mental Mechanics of Archery, in fact, they say to visualize the entire shot, from raising and drawing the bow to arrow impact. I sort of do this in a very short amount of time, it is amazing how quick you can visualize the entire shot, you can visualise it much faster than you can actually do it. 

I do the whole visualizing before I raise my bow. I look at my intended target, pick a spot and visualize a successful shot and outcome and then try to make it happen. 

I try to never pay any attention to the arrow, because for me, that messes me up - If the arrow is brought to my conscious attention at any point during the shot and I don't either refocus and block it out or let down and draw again - it will be a bad shot without exception. But that is just me, everyone is different and you have to find what works for you.

Don't pay any attention to this "true" instinctive verses, what? "false" instinctive? Just shoot in a manner that gets the arrow to the intended spot.

This "true" instinctive stuff that BlackWolf is forever ranting about is something that I firmly believe is messing up new shooters. This idea that there is a right or a "true" way to aim instinctively based on this guy or that guys opinion is nonsense, you have to find what works for you and keep at it.

It is sort of how peole get all messed up with the Asbell stuff, thinking that they have to snap shoot and have all this weird bending and body form to be "true" instinctive, and this is simply not true and is the reason that a lot of guys never got good shooting instinctive.

The one implies that you have to have a certain form to be "truly" instinctive" and the other implies that you have to have the arrow a certain distance from your eye to be "truly" instinctive and it is all wrong in my opinion.

I have a simple believe about instinctive shooting. If you are not trying to determine distances when you shoot, if you are not consciously lining up anything based on distance to make the shot and you are simply looking at the spot you want to hit and shooting, you are shooting instinctive - TRULY instinctive. The rest does not matter, it does not matter how close the arrow is to your eye, it does not matter if you snap shoot or pause at anchor, it does not matter if you are all bent over and sticking your fanny out when you shoot, or if you stand straight up like an Olympian - that is all peripheral to how you are aiming the bow. 

You hear this stuff about the arrow being to close to your eye and therefore you "have to see" it and use it and this is imply not true. Someone else gave a great example - consider people who wear glasses - the rim of the glasses is right in front of their face, yet they don't "see" it - beause they pay no attention to it - it is blocked out - the same is true of the arrow when shooting instinctive.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Just shoot in a manner that gets the arrow to the intended spot.


:thumbs_up That's how EVERY archer should pursue their GOALS. It shouldn't matter what aiming technique they use...as long as it works for them.

Discussing the specific terms and definitions of the different aiming techniques is just for educational purposes.

Ray :shade:


----------



## CAPTJJ (Dec 24, 2007)

Thanks Ken. I was visualizing the trajectory for a while but seem to have let that part slip. I'm sure with more practice I won't even notice the arrow, even now I can't pay too much attention to it or the shot will be off. Need to focus on the spot, which is something I am still working on; maybe I need to try some ping pong balls like you suggested.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Ping pong balls are fun, you get immediate feedback when you hit them - almost as fun as shooting at balloons!


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Ping pong balls are fun, you get immediate feedback when you hit them - almost as fun as shooting at balloons!


I would like to try that...sharp, You got any videos on that?


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

> Don't pay any attention to this "true" instinctive verses, what? "false" instinctive? Just shoot in a manner that gets the arrow to the intended spot.


Now THAT is something which with I can agree.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

No I dont' have any videos, but what I do is hang a ping pong ball from some fishing line in front of a target and shoot at it from various distances, it is a blast and really helps you focus on a spot.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> No I dont' have any videos, but what I do is hang a ping pong ball from some fishing line in front of a target and shoot at it from various distances, it is a blast and really helps you focus on a spot.


I will give it a go this weekend sometime..


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

CAPTJJ said:


> Thank you Larry. Been reading this thread and I actually learned some following along between the nonsense. I've been trying to aim instinctively the "right" way, and doing pretty good but my consistency hasn't been there unless I really concentrated; and then I still wasn't happy with my groups. So I tried changing the way I aim the last couple days, instead of trying to completely ignore the arrow, I would concentrate on the spot but see the arrow in my periphery and try visualize its path to the target better(Kidwell's teaching). I think I was caught up in trying to shoot "true instinctive", but the goal is to put the arrow where you want it, the method really doesn't matter as long as it gets there. Just shoot some pretty good groups, with more practice of the trajectory method I really feel more improvement will come, confidence is key. Just needed a new perspective to look at things, you comments are much appreciated.



Capt, I'm curious about what exactly it was in this particular thread that turned the light on for you. The subject has been discussed at least weekly for the last five years and I thought that it was clear enough. Many people have said in the many threads just recently that some might need to use the arrow for aiming to some degree on the road to becoming an instinctive shooter. It is developed with practice over time and eventually you just stop noticing it.
I couldn't help but notice that you seem to have been missing it for years and suddenly, the light comes on. Maybe that tells us that all these long drawn out threads are not useless after all.


----------



## ranchoarcher (Sep 26, 2013)

Saw a guy at the range yesterday with a sharp looking bow and equally meticulous arrows. No sight. He had no follow through to speak of and was standing open to the target. He was firing off a dozen arrows in quick succession at the 40 yard target. Knowing what little I know about proper form and without seeing the results I'd have expected them to be all over the target assuming any hit it at all. All were in the yellow, tightly at that. I asked him how are you aiming. He said, "I point and shoot." Maybe that's as far as the explanation needs to go. Something is pointed. It's as personal as the one doing it.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

steve morley said:


> Itbeso talking of challenges, I heard a rumor at WA3D worlds in Sardinia last week (from the wife of WA European vice president) that negotiations are in place for the next 2015 WA3D worlds to be held in Canada, if it does happen it seems a perfect opportunity for the best of the Americas to meet the best of Europe.
> 
> Whatever the outcome I think some good friendships will be forged and maybe a new level of respect from both sides of the pond.:thumbs_up


Steve, That would be a great opportunity for a lot of us here on the forums to get together. Hopefully, I will get to meet you in Florida this year and/or Yankton in 2014. I still have some Canadian $ from a hunting trip to Nova Scotia 2 years ago, so I"m all set.lol. I know you have shot with Gary, so you hopefully know that shooting archery with us is a lot different than the conflict that seems to permeate a lot of these discussions.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

irishhacker said:


> For starters, I have not seen anyone attack Larry. However, I have seen many personal attacks on people who happen to disagree with Larry. Your post is certainly one of them.
> Your post says a lot more about you than any of us.


For starters, you for one attacked Larry's post and ,yes, hopefully my post does say a lot about me. It says I refuse to stand by by and let people who use their subtle putdowns, get by without being called out.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

itbeso said:


> For starters, you for one attacked Larry's post and ,yes, hopefully my post does say a lot about me. It says I refuse to stand by by and let people who use their subtle putdowns, get by without being called out.


Sorry bud, there was no put down or any attacks by me.
Just because I do not agree with your pupil's definition of instinctive archery, does not mean I attacked him.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

ranchoarcher said:


> Saw a guy at the range yesterday with a sharp looking bow and equally meticulous arrows. No sight. He had no follow through to speak of and was standing open to the target. He was firing off a dozen arrows in quick succession at the 40 yard target. Knowing what little I know about proper form and without seeing the results I'd have expected them to be all over the target assuming any hit it at all. All were in the yellow, tightly at that. I asked him how are you aiming. He said, "I point and shoot." Maybe that's as far as the explanation needs to go. Something is pointed. It's as personal as the one doing it.




That guy was obviously well practiced and that works for some people. I think the arguments come about because those who don't understand it just can't believe it's true. I suppose it's too hard to use search engines and see people shooting like that. I have been watching the old Howard Hill and John Schultz videos lately and those guys really broke all the rules but still put the arrows where they needed to be.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

CAPTJJ said:


> Thank you Larry. Been reading this thread and I actually learned some following along between the nonsense. I've been trying to aim instinctively the "right" way, and doing pretty good but my consistency hasn't been there unless I really concentrated; and then I still wasn't happy with my groups. So I tried changing the way I aim the last couple days, instead of trying to completely ignore the arrow, I would concentrate on the spot but see the arrow in my periphery and try visualize its path to the target better(Kidwell's teaching). I think I was caught up in trying to shoot "true instinctive", but the goal is to put the arrow where you want it, the method really doesn't matter as long as it gets there. Just shoot some pretty good groups, with more practice of the trajectory method I really feel more improvement will come, confidence is key. Just needed a new perspective to look at things, you comments are much appreciated.


A new gapper in the making.lol. Welcome aboard, but don't admit to it just yet.


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

*old Howard Hill*

Wasn't he a closet gapper using split-vision with the arrow point and then letting his instincts make the final gap-set? And John Schulktz says in his first TECH video that he learned about accuracy from Howard Hill.

Sort of the same method most aimers use today in one form or another?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

this started as something potentially constructive and insightful, and has spiraled into one of the most ridiculous threads i can remember, which i can only bring myself to skim. thanks to those who've tried to steer it clear of a train wreck. better luck next time


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

itbeso said:


> . Hopefully, I will get to meet you in Florida this year and/or Yankton in 2014.


No plans for Florida, still licking my wounds from last outing, Gary/Sandy were smoking that weekend. 

Truth is I already spent the money and just ordered a $1200 BB riser I'll post pics when it arrives, it's something unique/special. We plan to shoot Yankton so looking forward to meeting you and few other Americans I already know. :thumbs_up


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

irishhacker said:


> Sorry bud, there was no put down or any attacks by me.
> Just because I do not agree with your pupil's definition of instinctive archery, does not mean I attacked him.


Ha,Ha, Larry is by no means a pupil of mine. He was an accomplished archer long before we ever sit down together to pick each others brain. If you say you weren't attacking Larry, then I will take you at you word and apologize for my reaction. My take on this thread, different from several others, is that Larry was just waxing philosophical, not trying to stir up controversy. I will repeat my main mantra, who cares whether someone says they shoot instinctive but uses a gap? Who cares whether someone shoots a gap but says they are instinctive? It is not my place to question what style someone else shoots. I will take exception if I think statements are made that test reality, but hey, I would rather we have these discussions daily than " Samick or Sage", or " what arrow do I need?", or any other topic that should be a matter of personal choice, and not something I nor anyone else should be making for anyone over the internet.JMO


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

ranchoarcher said:


> He said, "I point and shoot." Maybe that's as far as the explanation needs to go. Something is pointed. It's as personal as the one doing it.


Absolutely! :thumbs_up

Some people need to keep it simple whereas others need a more detailed explanation.

Ray :shade:



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

bradd7 said:


> *old Howard Hill*
> 
> Wasn't he a closet gapper using split-vision with the arrow point and then letting his instincts make the final gap-set?


He was like Steve and I...archers who use multiple aiming techniques. 

Hill was not gapping when he performed some of his trick shots.



bradd7 said:


> And John Schulktz says in his first TECH video that he learned about accuracy from Howard Hill.
> 
> Sort of the same method most aimers use today in one form or another?


Sort of the same...but NOT exactly the same. String Walking and Face Walking are sort of the same also...YET...they're still DIFFERENT.

Ray :shade:


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

We are a bunch of middle aged guys perseverating about the proper way to poke things with a sharp stick. The whole thing is really quite silly.

Matt


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Yea, but my stick is longer and sharper than yours! So there!


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> We are a bunch of middle aged guys perseverating about the proper way to poke things with a sharp stick. The whole thing is really quite silly.


Exactly...and for ANYONE to get upset discussing/debating this subject and subjects like it is ridiculous!

Ray :shade:



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I find the hero worship the most ridiculous


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

BarneySlayer said:


> this started as something potentially constructive and insightful, and has spiraled into one of the most ridiculous threads i can remember, which i can only bring myself to skim. thanks to those who've tried to steer it clear of a train wreck. better luck next time



And just who were those fine outstanding individuals who failed so miserably, again?:icon_1_lol:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

sharpbroadhead said:


> I find the hero worship the most ridiculous



It's even funny. Some who seem to be otherwise fairly normal until their hero shows up and they fall all over themselves. :77:


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

*Hill was not gapping when he performed some of his trick shots.*

Uhhhhhmmmm Ray,,,lol,,,,leading an object is gapping! :angel:


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

The only Hero's in my life are the ones that fought for their country or gave up their life protecting others, some of you guys need to get a grip on the real world, and lets stop throwing oil into the fire to kick the whole argument off again.

Sharp, Forest it seems you have nothing better to do than stir up trouble on this thread.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

steve morley said:


> The only Hero's in my life are the ones that fought for their country or gave up their life protecting others, some of you guys need to get a grip on the real world, and lets stop throwing oil into the fire to kick the whole argument off again.
> 
> Sharp, Forest it seems you have nothing better to do than stir up trouble on this thread.




That depends on what you call stirring up trouble. The intent of the first post was probably about stirring up trouble in my opinion. It was so obvious the OP wasn't happy about the viper thread that didn't go well. In fact vipers thread seemed to be aimed in the same direction but got shot down and that made the OP unhappy. He smeared some lipstick on the pig but apparently most still recognized it.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Thought this might be an opportune time to share this but...

One of the big benefits I noticed about working my 12 step program and recently connecting with a Church/Pastor I really like is this...

I found a great sense of relief one I realized that I could take off my robes, lay down my gavel and stop judging others.

It truly was a liberating feeling.


----------



## Beendare (Jan 31, 2006)

FORESTGUMP said:


> So I gather that you think there are only five or six people qualified to have opinions.


You're assumption is based on poor reading comprehension. 

Trad is fun, I like shooting my recurve more than a compound no matter how much the "Trad Police" try to throw cold water on it. And I'm thankful that its a sport where a guy can wander in and end up getting quality advice from some of the top traditional shooters in the world. Try doing that with a world class athlete in another sport- not going to happen. Wander onto a golf course when Tigers playing and ask if you can play in his foursome? Ask him how he sets up his equipment or prepares for a shot? Ha! I have done the equivalent in trad tourneys and on this forum and was welcomed.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Beendare, and when the top traditional shooters disagree? I am a top traditional shooter, finished 4th in the world two years in a row, 5th this year, 1st in the moving target shoot off, 3rd in the all class shoot off, have outscored a very well known archer that is often brought up, has been in videos and has shooting clinics each of the 5 times I have shot with him, etc... and am an instinctive shooter, so I think that my opinion should carry as much weight as the next guys, should it not? But because I don't agree with Larry's view of what instinctive is - that means I am trying to start trouble? Note well that when I directly asked Mr. Morely if he knows of any FITA shooters who aim by gap shooting, stringwalking, POA, etc... who ever refer to themselves as "instinctive" shooters, he did not answer. As I have stated before, I don't care if Larry is the best shot in the world, he is not correct to state that all barebow shooters are instinctive and should be called such. I have never met a gap shooter that calls himself an instinctive shooter - have you? I have never met a stringwalker, who, when asked how he aims says "instinctive", have you? It is utter nonsense to even make such a claim and frankly I am amazed that even one person, let alone the 5 or 6 people would agree with this, no matter how big of fans of Larry they are. 

I think that Forest is probably correct that this thread was started just to stir the "instinctive" pot.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

I think this thread was a musing on the state of barebow archery , and the joy that we all get from it ...

nothing more , nothing less ... 


Many of the responces are however egotistical grabs and self preservation of status and "technique" ...

if children acted like this you'd send them to get therapy 

just plain nuts behaviour .


ps ... back in the day before the interwebs , Asbell and IBO, efoc ... it was pretty common for single string shooters who did not use sights to be referred to as "instinctive" ... it is just a descriptive term ...

if it is really hot outside , it is also common to say that it is "boiling outside" ... the metaphor does bare close examination IMHO ... 

unless you are bored ...

... or really insecure


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Larry Yien said:


> Instinctive/intuitive/subconscious aiming can occur in many aiming styles it isn't an exclusive technique used in just one style.
> 
> Instinctive has been and still is used to define "non-sight" styles of shooting a bow and arrow. But...
> 
> View attachment 1785164


I will dig through and find a few more


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

I don't read that as an attack on instinctive archers or any reason to debate or instigate or defend. I read it as ANY aimer must, at some point, do their thing then let the brain do it's thing instinctively. IE...fill in what is being missed or over.under-calculated. In other words (to me anyway) that at some point the aimer has to let their brain make the final decisions instinctively, which to me means without further thought...just do.

Some people can get there a lot faster than others and show results, while some don't even bother to go there and try to control everything. 

BUT, the one thing in common all the top archers have is that they use this 'instinct' to better themselves.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Beendare,

The reason most top archers are so approachable is their humility. As an example, there are at least three world champion archers on this thread alone, as well as one member of the CA archery hall of fame and at least two NFAA national champions. You will very rarely ever see them wearing their success on their sleeves. With very rare exceptions, all of the top archers I've met realize they didn't get where they are alone and want to help the next group of archers come up.

As an example, one of my friends is a six-time IBO world champion. He probably spends as much time coaching local barebow archers as he does working on his own shooting. He is also directly responsible for getting more quality archers into his IBO class, at times to the detriment of his own ranking. When one of them wins, he is genuinely happy for them. To me, THAT is a true champion.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

bradd7 said:


> I don't read that as an attack on instinctive archers or any reason to debate or instigate or defend. I read it as ANY aimer must, at some point, do their thing then let the brain do it's thing instinctively. IE...fill in what is being missed or over.under-calculated. In other words (to me anyway) that at some point the aimer has to let their brain make the final decisions instinctively, which to me means without further thought...just do.
> 
> Some people can get there a lot faster than others and show results, while some don't even bother to go there and try to control everything.
> 
> BUT, the one thing in common all the top archers have is that they use this 'instinct' to better themselves.



So, would you say that a rifle shooter who carefully aligns the sights with the target is shooting the rifle instinctively?

In shooting the bow without sights, there might be some gray areas but I'm not convinced that string walking would be one of them. I don't know much about it but I believe the objective is to intentionally place the arrow point on the target and keep it there. The OP seems to think that should be under the big tent of instinctive. I don't agree.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

My issue is with this statement:

*"Instinctive has been and still is used to define "non-sight" styles of shooting a bow and arrow."*

This statement is false.

The term "instinctive" has never been used to define all "non-sight" styles of shooting a bow and arrow. It was used as the name of a CLASSIFICATION in tournaments, just like the term "traditional" is used as a CLASSIFICATION for shooters in the IBO, but in neither case is the term used to define "non-sight" styles of shooting a bow and arrow.

Howard Hill back in the day supposedly said that he has seen a lot of instinctive shooters, but never a good one? Why would he say that if Larry is correct and "instinctive" was used to describe all non-sight systems of aiming a bow? Does that even make sense?

Even back in the day, people called gap shooting gap shooting, POA, POA, and string walking, string walking - and that is how they described their style of shooting. Howard Hill, long before Larry Yein was an archer stated that he shot "split vision" he did not refer to his style of shooting as instinctive.

And nobody today that is gap shooter describes his style of shooting as instinctive and nobody today that is a stringwalker describes his style of shooting as instinctive.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

benofthehood said:


> I think this thread was a musing on the state of barebow archery , and the joy that we all get from it ...
> 
> nothing more , nothing less ...
> 
> ...


ben...for some reason I feel compelled to let you know that the two words that stick out most to me in your above post?...are...

1. "preservation"

and?...

2. "technic"

and the reason they do stick out to me?...is the very same reason I hold Kens efforts in such high regard...cause that's where he often times gets himself into trouble...doing just that..."Preserving A Technic"...namely?..."Instinctive Aiming".

He knows it's real...and a handful of others know it's real....and it's power is both addictive and almost magical to those who are able to surrender enough trust to their subconscious and experience it first hand while others who can not, will not or don't?...write it off as snake oil...which is somewhat offensive to those who do.

Furthermore?...you have what I would term "The Partial By-In's"...such as Larry here when he states in the OP that..."he knows he's painting it with a broad brush"....well sir?...you know what broad brushes do?...they put paint in places it's not supposed to be...covers things up...and dilutes other colors...and that's what "a broad brush" does....and with seemingly so few experiencing and championing "true instinctive"?...what are we looking to achieve here?...and end to the great debate?...or ethnic cleansing where the skills and mentality behind "true instinctive" are lost altogether?...which I think is a real bad idea and why I openly support and commend OSB's efforts at keeping it real...true story despite his opinion of me.

But speaking as an archer who at times has been accused of suffering bouts of ADD? :laugh: And enjoying continued efforts of attempting to gain well rounded skills and have the tools of both instinctive annnnnnd gapstinctive...(for those longer shots)...available to me?...

I can see Larry's point as well...where he's just trying to unite us and stop the bickering (if not save vipers) but...

The Million Dollar question in my mind is..."$hould he?"


----------



## ranchoarcher (Sep 26, 2013)

Matt_Potter said:


> We are a bunch of middle aged guys perseverating about the proper way to poke things with a sharp stick. The whole thing is really quite silly.
> 
> Matt


Not really. By the time you're middle aged you've probably spent a lot more time, money, and effort trying to poke other things. It's what we guys do. :wink:


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

I went to the archery range yesterday evening and shot a full 28 NFAA targets 14 field, 14 hunter, yes you guessed it, "INSTINCTIVE". I wasn't very impressed with my score but I'll continue to work on it as I know I can improve. Even though for the most part I didn't see my arrow, I must admit that a couple times I did see my arrow and a thought crept into my mind that I was way off target. But I shot it anyways and it blew my mind, because it invariably hit the spot. And the 80 yard shot was just off the cardboard at 8 o'clock, ALMOST!

Furthermore, the last 3 targets (20yds, 65yds, 50yds) were shot in near dark with just a hint of light from the full moon filtering through the canopy of trees. We were shooting truly instinctive. I could not even see my nock locators, who knows if I even had my arrow nocked correctly. I certainly could not see the arrow and could barely (albeit safely) make out the target. All I can say is WOW, nice group! Amazing. I"M an instinctive archer.

After I spend some time with my son today I'm heading back to the range for some more field shooting. I'm also encouraged with reports on here that "a" top traditional shooter has placed 4th 2 years in a row, placed 5th this year and in the past won the shoot off for moving targets. I definitely need more work on moving targets and look forward to seeing some great results with some hard work and dedication. I find tremendous value in Forums such as these where I can continue to learn and evolve. I realize that some feathers were ruffled and there were concerns for the well being and definitions of traditional archery. But I was still able to get some motivation to experiment and learn. Furthermore I realize that in a literal and factual current realtime vantage point everyone probably isn't an instinctive archer. I meant it more on an existential level.

Just for the record, this was just a "feel good" post to begin with, kind of just sharing what I've been doing the past few months, and even a few thoughts I was contemplating that day. There was no intent to continue or rehash another thread. I only caught the original post and few more of VIper's thread. I thought it queer at first but as I looked at it from different angles I could actually see his point. Funny how that works. I wanted to also thank you all for the warm welcome, I'm looking forward to posting and contributing to this forum, now get out there and shoot some arrows!


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

Bill, 
I think you are completely my point.

I don't give two hoots how Ken aims [ ironically he and I aim and shoot exactly the same way ] 

Much as I couldn't give a rats arse as to how Larry aims 

more importantly , its just archery ...

and the continued vitriolic dissemination of each others postings is ludicrous in the extreme 

and , yes i stand by the comment that worldwide , barebow , single string archery is commonly referred to as "instinctive"


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Larry Yien said:


> Even though for the most part I didn't see my arrow, I must admit that a couple times I did see my arrow and a thought crept into my mind that I was way off target. *But I shot it anyways and it blew my mind, because it invariably hit the spot.*


and *"THERE"* it is Larry....the magic....the pixie dust....the mojo....that some are almost willing to get banned for over defending it and keeping it real...now...do we blame them?...or?...commend them.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Larry, welcome to what I believe to be the true joy of traditional archery - the "magic" if you will. 

Instinctive aiming is awesome and feels almost magical. 

Not matter how many times I hit the ping pong ball, and whether it is 10 yards or 40 yards, I am amazed that it happened and feel like a little kid again and want to jump up and down and scream "YES!" (actually, sometimes I do) - 

I could never get into trying to calculate yardage and look for a gap, or count stitches on a tab, etc... If I was going to do that I would just put a sight on my bow. 

I don't care if other guys want to, but I do think that they are missing one of the true joys of traditional archery by complicating it with all their various complex aiming systems. But to each their own.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

benofthehood said:


> I think this thread was a musing on the state of barebow archery , and the joy that we all get from it ...
> 
> nothing more , nothing less ...
> 
> ...


Great post.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

benofthehood said:


> Bill,
> I think you are completely my point.
> 
> I don't give two hoots how Ken aims [ ironically he and I aim and shoot exactly the same way ]
> ...


I agree with you....and I guess it beats heck out of the word "trad" :laugh:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

If it was common "back in the day" to refer to any barebow shooter as "instinctive" - why would Howard Hill have said that he never saw a good instinctive shooter?


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

*I do think that they are missing one of the true joys of traditional archery by complicating it with all their various complex aiming systems*

And herein lies the difference. There is no right or wrong, just what is most beneficial for the archer.

Personally I enjoy the challenge of finite tuning efforts,trying out new styles and 'knowing' my gear,form and 'system is in place as verified by hitting gold. But that's only for me, about me, for me. 

I'm one of those guys that can only 'wish' to let go as easily others can and say that I shoot 'instinctive' as some may define it. But for now, I still have trouble letting my brain instinctively do the work when I'm supposed to.

I think many, in our heart of hearts, wished they could walk up, pick and spot and without thinking 'know' you are going to hit it. But for some ball throws the lead foot has to be planted just right...


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

brad, that was just a statement of my opinion - just like I think people who don't like mushrooms, onions, and black olives on pizza, don't know what they are missing and have never really ate a pizza until at least all these toppings are on it.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

its the ones who don't like anchovies you have to watch for ...

everyone should like hairy fish


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

FORESTGUMP said:


> So, would you say that a rifle shooter who carefully aligns the sights with the target is shooting the rifle instinctively?


More than you might think. I spent a lot of time looking through both iron sights and a scope on top of my Anschutz free rifle back in my younger days and surprisingly enough, you focus on the tiniest, tiny spot in the middle of the x-ring and let your brain center the ring of the front sight or the cross-hairs of the scope. The mechanics of the sight gets you on target, from there it's all form and letting the shot flow...much like archery and much like the way I hear self-proclaimed gappers describe their shot. Even when testing ammo off the bench in an effort to find the best lot number focusing on the crosshairs only led to more wobble. So yes, even with arguably one of the most precise hand-held aiming systems available there was still an element of "instinct" involved. 

I think that's where threads like this get so easily derailed, everybody is using some degree of "instinct", "intuition", "ingrained habit", whatever you want to call it..of course in varying degrees. Even shooting a compound with a sight, if you focus on the pin you are not going to shoot very well. Everything I read leads me to believe that no matter the game, there comes a point where you give in to your training and practice and let your brain take over, i.e., trust your instincts. In other words, I think we are all shooting instinctive to some degree or other.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Easykeeper said:


> More than you might think. I spent a lot of time looking through both iron sights and a scope on top of my Anschutz free rifle back in my younger days and surprisingly enough, you focus on the tiniest, tiny spot in the middle of the x-ring and let your brain center the ring of the front sight or the cross-hairs of the scope. The mechanics of the sight gets you on target, from there it's all form and letting the shot flow...much like archery and much like the way I hear self-proclaimed gappers describe their shot. Even when testing ammo off the bench in an effort to find the best lot number focusing on the crosshairs only led to more wobble. So yes, even with arguably one of the most precise hand-held aiming systems available there was still an element of "instinct" involved...
> 
> In other words, we are all shooting instinctive to some degree or other.


Great post, interestingly enough, I've been doing some cross training at the 100 yard rifle range shooting offhand rifles both scoped and iron sights and I agree. I am developing that instinctive sense (I know oxymoron) or release, a float if you will. It's very cool sensation and it bears true as I pack my shots tightly and around the spot. Thanks for that both you and forestg.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

bradd7 said:


> *Hill was not gapping when he performed some of his trick shots.*
> 
> Uhhhhhmmmm Ray,,,lol,,,,leading an object is gapping! :angel:


Brad...you have either never shot Instinctively or you just can't comprehend shooting by feel rather than gapping off of a sight picture.

Yes...there are archers who can lead and gap moving targets very well. I'm sure be of them....but when I'm shooting by feel its NOT the same thing.

Have you ever shot your bow from the hip or with your draw arm from behind your back?

Ray :shade:


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

JINKSTER said:


> But speaking as an archer who at times has been accused of suffering bouts of ADD? :laugh:


I see the smiley face but just for clarification...I hope you're not talking about me...because I asked before I accused...unlike a few people on here do :wink:

Ray :shade:



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

It wasn't a cut Ray. I was simply saying that there is a gap between where you have to aim and where the target is at the moment. 

And yes, I have tried shooting by burning a hole where I want the arrow to go...it just never went there and I fell into the other styles for my own satisfaction. Even when I first started (llllooooonnnngggg ago...lol) instinctively I knew how to aim. Does that make sense? Now, there is a moment right before release that has to be retrained to let the brain take over, as it's the instinctive part I'm missing in my shot sequence.

I am of the camp that there is always the subconscious at work in some way, maybe because I don't have the wherewithal to comprehend any other way at this age. But I enjoy reading and trying different methods to just let loose sometimes!


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

JINKSTER said:


> Thought this might be an opportune time to share this but...
> 
> One of the big benefits I noticed about working my 12 step program and recently connecting with a Church/Pastor I really like is this...
> 
> ...


:thumbs_up

Ray :shade:

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

bradd7 said:


> It wasn't a cut Ray. I was simply saying that there is a gap between where you have to aim and where the target is at the moment!


I didn't take it as a cut. I was just adding info or trying to explaining it more clearly.

Yes...there will always be a gap...but whether the archer uses it consciously or not is part of the explanation. The other is in regards to aiming by feel.

Ray :shade:


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

benofthehood said:


> I think this thread was a musing on the state of barebow archery , and the joy that we all get from it ...
> 
> nothing more , nothing less ...
> 
> ...


WELL STATED.:thumbs_up


----------



## p508 (Mar 20, 2012)

Ray- I think following your posts is almost an acquired taste- I don't post much-do like to peruse and see whats being said- when I first started lurking I thought you were out there-but the more I follow your posts the more I think your totallly right most of the time-in fact all the time- but what I don't understand is why you care-people make stupid comments all the time -they misrepresent and twist facts at times to prove a point- problem with these forums as opposed to a verbal discussion is that once something is stated the comment is out there and your stuck with it- but you seem intent on correcting every statement people make that might be a little off-why waste your energy-


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

p508 said:


> - but you seem intent on correcting every statement people make that might be a little off-why waste your energy-


Good question.

The reasons why are:

#1. I'm a perfectionist by nature. I pursue shooting a bow the same way I pursue archery terminology. I like accuracy...whether it's putting the arrow and in my target or discussing archery related topics.

#2. My job allows me the freedom to spend time discussing topics I'm passionate about. Sometimes I've got 15 min. to a 1/2 hr. in between clients. I can't lift weights all the time :wink: If I have an hr. or 2 between clients I'll go fishing or shooting.

#3. I think its important to share accurate info whether it's related to archery or anything else.

#4. I like having a good respectful debate. It just gets annoying when some people make poor assumptions regarding me personally. I NEVER get upset in a disagreement...but I do get a little annoyed at inaccurate accusations at times which I end up laughing off.

Ray :shade:



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## CAPTJJ (Dec 24, 2007)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Capt, I'm curious about what exactly it was in this particular thread that turned the light on for you. The subject has been discussed at least weekly for the last five years and I thought that it was clear enough. Many people have said in the many threads just recently that some might need to use the arrow for aiming to some degree on the road to becoming an instinctive shooter. It is developed with practice over time and eventually you just stop noticing it.
> I couldn't help but notice that you seem to have been missing it for years and suddenly, the light comes on. Maybe that tells us that all these long drawn out threads are not useless after all.


First off, I have only been following this board regularly for about 2 years and only been shooting recurves again for the last 18 months(after a 30 year break), so I am still figuring things out.

I think this thread just had me reevaluating my aiming technique, getting away from worrying about the name for the method or the "proper" technique. For a while I had been doing well getting the aiming down, but a couple weeks ago realized I wasn't working on form enough. So I went back to the blank bale and finally ordered a Formaster, both really helped and back tension was feeling pretty natural. But I think during this time my aiming started suffering, it's a balance like anything; too much focus on either the process or results hampers accuracy. I'm not sure exactly how but reading this thread enabled me to figure out what I needed to change. I guess it's because I saw that someone as experienced as Larry(didn't really know much about him before this thread) still works on things and adapts, I certainly should be able to as a relative beginner.

So now I still don't use the arrow as a sight. I didn't start gapping, don't look at the point of the arrow in relation to the target; from what little I do know about gapping that would be tough, shooting split with an index finger in corner of mouth anchor and short arrows. But I am pointing, or aiming, the arrow where it needs to be(isn't that the point of all aiming methods?) by imagining the trajectory of the arrow as it gets launched from the bow. Still concentrating on where I want to hit, but I see the arrow in my peripheral vision and picture the path it will take to the target when I reach full draw, then release. The results have been rewarding and I feel like I made another step forward, when I had been idling.


----------



## Speck1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Goood grief! Speck


----------



## wseward (Mar 7, 2013)

Larry/OP, thanx for posting. Found some good info in this thread, which I only today started reading and just now caught up on. Had to speed read through some of it, which was a pain in the neck.

Congrats on the worlds...plural. Welcome to AT and hope to see more of your threads.

If I am not shooting with sights...I like to think I am shooting instinctive. Oh yea..I have shot instinctive with sights, too!


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

benofthehood said:


> its the ones who don't like anchovies you have to watch for ...
> 
> Everyone should like hairy fish


lol


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Note well that when I directly asked Mr. Morely if he knows of any FITA shooters who aim by gap shooting, stringwalking, POA, etc... who ever refer to themselves as "instinctive" shooters, he did not answer.


I did answer the question, you just didn't want to hear the answer, I guess you will misquote me on this one for the next few years as well.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

steve morley said:


> If we are talking long range Fita then I was talking about Fita Target, no long range shooting in WA3D it's 33y max and I saw a whole mix of shooting stlyes, IFAA 3D is 60y max, a lot Gap and few shoot Instinctively but very few of them rank in the top.
> 
> The only distinction I make between shooters is what they tell me, if they say they aim Instinctively then I have no option but to take their word. You already know my views on Aiming, everybody sees the arrow it just depends on what level conscious attention you want to use in your aiming, it varies from Archer to Archer. I think the topic has become blurred as some people are talking Instnctive Aiming and some talking historically a generic term for shooting bows without sights.


This was your reply to my question of who you know that is a gap shooter or stringwalker, but would refer to themselves as "instinctive". 

You are missing the point of the question if you think you answered it, maybe I am not wording it right.

Matt Potter, for example is a stringwalker and a darn good one. Do you think that Matt, if asked how he aims, would answer "instinctive"? 

What FITA shooter that has told you he is a gap shooter, would also call himself an "instinctive" shooter when asked how he aims? 

There are no such people and the reason is that the term "instinctive" applies to a SPECIFIC and UNIQUE aiming method and it is wrong to try and say that the term "instinctive" should be applied to any and all methods of aiming a traditional barebow.

That is my only point and that is where Larry is wrong. Instinctive is not a generic term for any method of aiming a barebow and it never has been.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

benofthehood said:


> I think this thread was a musing on the state of barebow archery , and the joy that we all get from it ...
> 
> nothing more , nothing less ...
> 
> ...


SPOT on Ben, thanks for the clarity and accuracy of your post!


----------



## 2413gary (Apr 10, 2008)

Somebody please tell me how I aim !!!!!!


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

2413gary said:


> Somebody please tell me how I aim !!!!!!


Well?...you seem to have some security and identity issues going on as a result of acute female oppression...outside of that?...I'm not sure if you are a nice guy or if it's just a result of the mental maladies previously stated...oh...my...I'm sorry...you said "aim"...I must've missed the eye...honey?...have you seem ny readers? :laugh:


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

2413gary said:


> Somebody please tell me how I aim !!!!!!


High


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

2413gary said:


> Somebody please tell me how I aim !!!!!!


I've seen you aim Gary, and for the record you aim instinctive. This is me getting ready to head off to the range .


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Larry,

Is that recurve on the left a Pierce Choctaw?


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

2413gary said:


> Somebody please tell me how I aim !!!!!!



You are the great pretender. No matter where the target is, you just use your imagination and pretend that it's right at the tip of the arrow.


----------



## Larry Yien (Jul 8, 2004)

Jason, you will always be a dear friend. I just admire the wavelength you are on, I can't get anything by you! Most all my pictures I try to sneak in some treasure I've gathered along the "way". 

Short answer is yes that is a Pierce Choctaw. Man, I love that bow and I value the time I got to spend with Jerry, back in the day...


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> This was your reply to my question of who you know that is a gap shooter or stringwalker, but would refer to themselves as "instinctive".
> 
> You are missing the point of the question if you think you answered it, maybe I am not wording it right.
> 
> ...


Ken..I understand your concern about this subject. .but. .you are beating a dead horse. .seriously. .

I consider myself a instinctive shooter..but..I know for all practical purposes. .I aim..Heck..we all aim..on some level. .the difference is how someone interpets the suttle actions..and wither they remain consciously aware of where the arrow point is at release. .

The only thing that you are doing different. .is using your peripheral vision on the draw to line up with the target..

If a person is focusing intently on the target..and not shifting from the arrow point to and back to the targetbut remain focused on the spot..what dam difference does it make if they say they shoot instinctively or not?

Your just splitting hairs..and trying to act like you are better than them..and they have no right to claim this..

That's childish at best..We all reference the sight picture by different ways....We all start aiming the minute we raise the bow towards the target. .it's just part of the process. .some..just start the instinctual process right before they release the arrow. .

String walking. .face walking. .can be more accurate than other methods...which is why those who don't utilize that method have issues with those that do. .because it. .can be instinctual depending on the individuals way of 
shooting....and puts those who don't at a disadvantage at shooting events....so....I think you are doing everything you can to make sure they can't say that they are instinctual shooters..cause you don't want to be in the same class to compete against them. .

BTW..I think there should be separate classes for each..to give those who choose to use that method equal rights. .but..with 1 caveat. .no one is allowed to hold at full draw....This way. .those who choose to claim they are "instinctual " archers who don't aim off the arrow or tip..have the opportunity to cheat...and do..

How many would be willing to go along with that I wonder. ..probably not very many. ..I wonder why...lol...lol...lol

Mac


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

2413gary said:


> Somebody please tell me how I aim !!!!!!


Well, it's sure not instinctive, as sharp and gump have the exclusive on that!!!!


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

I think I'm going the opposite way of Larry...cause I aim instinctively...and I'm always pretty dang close...but lately I've noticed that if I can hold at anchor long enough and comfortably enough?...it gives me time to take note of where my arrow is in relation to the target...and if I close my left eye and hold the arrow in the same spot with each shot?...my groups somehow magically get much, much tighter...but I don't know why...but I do know this...at 12yds?...I'm getting freaking deadly shooting these 325gr cheetahs off my 32# D-longbow...I like it.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

itbeso said:


> Well, it's sure not instinctive, as sharp and gump have the exclusive on that!!!!



Interesting that you say that. Just a few minutes ago I was thinking how Ca. people seem to have a different thought process than the rest of us. You know, the granola mentality.
But you, you are the exception. You 'get it', but then after all you are a transplant. :smile:


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> That is my only point and that is where Larry is wrong. Instinctive is not a generic term for any method of aiming a barebow and it never has been.


Try some more reading, I posted about a conversation with a Swedish old timer last week in Sardinia who told me the the reason WA3D named the Rec div "Instinctive" was because in the old days that is what they called all unsighted Recurve and Longbow shooters, they were put into two basic shooting divs, sighted and Instinctive and different aiming methods were not discussed till Stringwalking came about.

Just because it hasn't happened in your archery world doesn't mean it never happened in other parts of the world, you just have to open your eyes/mind


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

JINKSTER said:


> I think I'm going the opposite way of Larry...cause I aim instinctively...and I'm always pretty dang close...but lately I've noticed that if I can hold at anchor long enough and comfortably enough?...it gives me time to take note of where my arrow is in relation to the target...and if I close my left eye and hold the arrow in the same spot with each shot?...my groups somehow magically get much, much tighter...but I don't know why...but I do know this...at 12yds?...I'm getting freaking deadly shooting these 325gr cheetahs off my 32# D-longbow...I like it.


That's my point Bill..I've said it for a long time. .

If you hold at full draw. .you will find it easier to aim wither you are focusing on it or not. .This isn't rocket science here...lol..lol..lol

Now. .some folks here love to claim they don't. .and never see the arrow...but..I think they think everyone just fell off the turnip truck today. .lol..lol..lol..

That's why I say..if folks want to claim something that can't be easily verified. .they should not be allowed to hold at full draw in these tournaments....Remove the ease of aiming. .Leave out all the bs of doing this or that on a subconscious level. .out of it. .it's just a way of claiming its not them that's doing the aiming....lol make those who want to claim they don't aim off the arrow not have the ease of doing so..lol..lol..lol..After all. .if some of these folks want to claim those who gap, stringwalk, ,facewalking are cheating....they shouldn't have any issues with it. .

Mac


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

steve morley said:


> Try some more reading, I posted about a conversation with a Swedish old timer last week in Sardinia who told me the the reason WA3D named the Rec div "Instinctive" was because in the old days that is what they called all unsighted Recurve and Longbow shooters, they were put into two basic shooting divs, sighted and Instinctive and different aiming methods were not discussed till Stringwalking came about.
> 
> Just because it hasn't happened in your archery world doesn't mean it never happened in other parts of the world, you just have to open your eyes/mind



"in the old days" and 'in other parts of the world".
Seems that the discussion is more about the here and now. Things change, evolve and words get used in different ways to describe things. They probably had a whole different word two thousand years ago, but they are long forgotten. 
Oh, I'm beating the dead horse again. :frusty:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

MAC 11700 said:


> That's my point Bill..I've said it for a long time. .
> 
> If you hold at full draw. .you will find it easier to aim wither you are focusing on it or not. .This isn't rocket science here...lol..lol..lol
> 
> ...



Was this meant to be a new thread or just a new argument within this thread?


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

Steve:
http://www.archerycanada.ca/images/...EN-Book4_12Feb13_v6.3_WA-Appendix_booklet.pdf

'Instinctive' Division you can use a non-adjustable rest.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

FORESTGUMP said:


> "in the old days" and 'in other parts of the world".
> Seems that the discussion is more about the here and now. Things change, evolve and words get used in different ways to describe things. They probably had a whole different word two thousand years ago, but they are long forgotten.
> Oh, I'm beating the dead horse again. :frusty:


Hmmmm..This is a international web site is it not? 

Mac


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Was this meant to be a new thread or just a new argument within this thread?


Just my opinion. .discuss it..debate it...argue about it if you want. .don't really care. .

Mac


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Interesting that you say that. Just a few minutes ago I was thinking how Ca. people seem to have a different thought process than the rest of us. You know, the granola mentality.
> But you, you are the exception. You 'get it', but then after all you are a transplant. :smile:


Good memory.lol:thumbs_up


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

bradd7 said:


> Steve:
> http://www.archerycanada.ca/images/...EN-Book4_12Feb13_v6.3_WA-Appendix_booklet.pdf
> 
> 'Instinctive' Division you can use a non-adjustable rest.


Yes WA3D rules allow for basic Hoyt type plastic rest or off the shelf.

Forest the fact that WA3D have an "Instinctive" shooting div that is nothing to do with the aiming style brings that history full circle and back into modern day Archery.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

If any of us are to have a respectful debate...we need to stick to the facts and acknowledge those facts that do exist within our opinions.

Ray :shade:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

steve morley said:


> Yes WA3D rules allow for basic Hoyt type plastic rest or off the shelf.
> 
> Forest the fact that WA3D have an "Instinctive" shooting div that is nothing to do with the aiming style brings that history full circle and back into modern day Archery.


Steve....with all due respect?...I think the discussion at hand gets blurred when references are made to such things as the WA3D ( or whoever) referencing a division (or class) as "Instinctive Shooters" and quite the misnomer when one takes into consideration how few of these so referenced Instinctive *"Shooters"* are actually *"Aiming"* instinctively.

Now some may scoff and write it off as mere word games and semantics but for those who truly have discovered and do value the powerful mojo that is their instinctive aiming skills?....not so much...they take this art and acquired skill pretty serious much like OSB does and they get kind tweaked at how others might so flagrantly toss the term around as though it were some general use, describes all term...when in actuality?...it most definitely is anything but and is used to describe a defined aiming system...and not classes or divisions.

To me?...the aiming skills between hard reference point aiming (where the arrow is utilized as a sight pin) and true instinctive aiming?....is as different as night and day...or?...the skills between a Formula1 Driver and a 5 second NHRA 1/4 Mile Trigger Man...and describing them both as simply "Hot Rod Drivers" when both know it's so much more than just that and suddenly the title "hot rod driver" sounds like quite the disparaging title to them both.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

Jinks who am I to argue with Archery history and World Archery body, the question came up and I just presented the facts, I know it doesn't fit in with modern thinking but WA did this not me, it's here whether we like it or not.


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

I was challenged to look up the rule book on another post - for my own info as well. The first thing I thought when I said the 'Instinctive Class' was OH OH.....


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

steve morley said:


> Jinks who am I to argue with Archery history and World Archery body, the question came up and I just presented the facts, I know it doesn't fit in with modern thinking but WA did this not me, it's here whether we like it or not.


well right there's your problem...here's the guys who started it and...










Not one flannel shirt or floppy hat in the crowd! :laugh:


----------



## Gapmaster (May 23, 2002)

*The Force*



> Somebody please tell me how I aim !!!!!!


The force is with you--------------------Traditional instinctive gaping.


----------



## Mo0se (Sep 24, 2002)

What I've extracted from what Larry has said. We all do what we do to improve, on an individual level. It's our nature to want to "control" our accuracy. Admitting defeat, and finding another way around to reach another level or goal is the trademark of a determined individual. It's the control that gets in our way, a self imposed road block to progress. For every action there is a reaction. When we as people, understand that letting go is just as important as the shot itself, good things will happen. We are humans with flaws, we fail. There comes a time when we realize that it wasn't our abilities that held us back, but rather our inability to surrender control, i.e. pride, fear, and successfully replace it with something more constructive, and relaxing. Remove the triggers that are counter productive for advancement.

I'm with you as well Steve Morley...when you've done something for so long, there comes a time when you no longer need to verify what you thought at one time you had to have to succeed. When that becomes the sole focus it can be counter-productive, causing fear to take over. We as humans have always found a way to ruin a perfectly good thing by putting ourselves where we don't belong.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

I draw and release..normally with no hesitation. .I consider this instinctual. .since trying to focus on the arrow in relation to the point of aim is to darn difficult pulling 66 lbs..I can see the arrow..albeit very briefly. .

Now. .if I muscle the bow back..and try to see the arrows gap. .very seldom can I have any consistency in my shots..so I claim instinctual shooting..even though the reality is I know I am still seeing the arrow out of my peripheral vison..and utilizing it for windage to line up on the target..

I took my 45lb recurve out today to see if a lighter poundage bow would make it easier to use the arrow to aim with..Yup..it certainly makes it easier to use. .but it sure as heck doesn't mean I am instantly more accurate. .
Having to relearn a different shooting style is not easy....regardless which one you are trying to relearn....It's only taken me 50 years to feel confident with shooting as I have. .I only hope it doesn't take nearly as long to master another style. .

My hats off to anyone trying something new. .it's not as easy as it looks. .

Mac


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

FORESTGUMP said:


> And just who wer. those fine outstanding individuals who failed so miserably, again?:icon_1_lol:


I certainly didn't make any heroic efforts  I think, on most counts, we've got a pretty good group here. Most everyone is helpful and has something worthwhile to contribute. But, sometimes, it just doesn't come together. As for hero worship, sorry sharp. I'll try to make it less obvious, lest the other guys get jealous


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

itbeso said:


> Irishhacker, Mgf, Sharpbroadhead, blackwolf. Potter is right, you guys blow just to see yourself in print. Each of you are attacking a gentleman who has more character in his little finger than all of you collectively have in all your bodies combined. Not one of you has ever, to my knowledge, excelled in the archery arena, yet, you all like to come off as archery experts, especially on instinctive archery. I am an instinctive archer when I want to be and there isn't one of you turkeys who could touch me at instinctive shooting. Put your money where your bs is and let's get this instinctive thing settled once and for all. I'll pay for the videographer so all of archerytalk can see the results. Mgf and Irishhacker, I certainly don't expect you two to come out of your backyards but Ray and Sharp are always telling us about their many tournament wins, Lets get this thing happening and on video. Let's see what these guys goals, abilities, and personalities enable them to do with a bow in their hand. This should be a no-brainer because I am 25 years past my prime but I have been listening to the same recording for 40 years and it sure gets old.


I'm still waiting to hear where I attacked Larry or claimed any expertise in instinctive archery. I got back in town today and quickly skimmed through the new posts and didn't see a reply.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

MGF said:


> I'm still waiting to hear where I attacked Larry or claimed any expertise in instinctive archery. I got back in town today and quickly skimmed through the new posts and didn't see a reply.


MGF,

Don't even bother. I posted a video of me trick shooting the other day just to show what can be done in the backyard and with technique that doesn't even come close to how most typical target archers shoot...and he claimed I faked it...LOL He believes what he wants to believe...poor assumptions and all.

Ray :shade:


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

Gapmaster said:


> Maybe when another poster made this comment just maybe there is a little merit to it.
> 
> Ray, here is some food for thought.
> I joined this forum in 2002, that's 11 years ago. I'm still under 300 total posts. That's 269 to be exact.
> ...


Just to ease your concerns, I shoot a lot. I shoot almost every day (I miss some days because of work) and I often shoot all day...killing time during breaks doing things like visiting this forum.

What it looks like, doesn't concern me too much.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> MGF,
> 
> Don't even bother. I posted a video of me trick shooting the other day just to show what can be done in the backyard and with technique that doesn't even come close to how most typical target archers shoot...and he claimed I faked it...LOL He believes what he wants to believe...poor assumptions and all.
> 
> Ray :shade:


Well he made an accusation so I think it's only right that he back it up.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

BLACK WOLF said:


> MGF,
> 
> Don't even bother. I posted a video of me trick shooting the other day just to show what can be done in the backyard and with technique that doesn't even come close to how most typical target archers shoot...and he claimed I faked it...LOL He believes what he wants to believe...poor assumptions and all.
> 
> Ray :shade:


Ray, I used to think you had at least a small working idea of what archery entails , but boy was I wrong. You have already got one thread shutdown with your worthless drivel and this one will probably suffer the same fate because of your bigtime insecurities. Continue on with your childish postingand get in all the digs you can while I actually get out and shoot against someone. I, like I'm sure many others, am putting you on ignore. I know that doesn't bother you because you just like to see yourself in print, noone else needs to be involved in the dialogue.LOL


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

MGF said:


> I'm still waiting to hear where I attacked Larry or claimed any expertise in instinctive archery. I got back in town today and quickly skimmed through the new posts and didn't see a reply.


Posts # 153, 154, and 156. Your feeble attempts of putdowns involving Jealousy just because you don't get any " Hero worship ", referring to anyone who respects Larry as a " Groupie ",. These pathetic attempts at putting others down aren't limited to this thread, you have been a constant contrarian throughout your posts on other threads. There is your reply so you certainly don't have to wait any longer. If you can't stand seeing the truth in print, call Ray, I'm sure he will be a support group for you. Ignore button for you also.


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

itbeso said:


> Posts # 153, 154, and 156. Your feeble attempts of putdowns involving Jealousy just because you don't get any " Hero worship ", referring to anyone who respects Larry as a " Groupie ",. These pathetic attempts at putting others down aren't limited to this thread, you have been a constant contrarian throughout your posts on other threads. There is your reply so you certainly don't have to wait any longer. If you can't stand seeing the truth in print, call Ray, I'm sure he will be a support group for you. Ignore button for you also.


Post 153


> *I'm sure Larry is a good enough guy and, from his posts here, he seems well spoken. I just didn't see where he was "shouted down" or, in any way, insulted in this thread. What did I miss?*
> *And, what is it with this apparent hatred and frequent insults toward "backyard" shooters?* Could somebody explain that to me? I shoot in the yard, even behind the barn (for Stone). I don't have to claim to be any better or any worse than anybody else but I do ok and there are people who see it. Maybe not "your people" but they are people.
> 
> I think some of you competitive target guys need to get over yourselves and your hero worship. When you say something in public it's open to rebuttal or comment regardless of who you or your friends think you are. If you can't handle that, don't talk or write in public.


I started the post by complimenting Larry and I don't see where anybody insulted or attacked him. There is your un-truth. The truth is that I never attacked or insulted him at all. 

Earlier in the thread I did poke some light fun at Stones post where he really did attack Ray.


> How about you simply knock off your ceaseless need to hear your own voice and join in the joy that is Larry Y. Guy comes on with some new and pleasant light and once again you start pulling the shades down. What a drag.


 The joy that is Larry Y? LOL there's your hero worship.

I was somewhat "contrary" back when I pointed out that you failed to provide any evidence to support your claim that a second nock locator makes any measureable difference. Is that still bothering you?

I'll ask again. Where did I attack or insult Larry.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

WOW, I may need to ship out some tissues.. Ben, You gonna be alright buddy?


----------



## MGF (Oct 27, 2012)

itbeso said:


> Posts # 153, 154, and 156. Your feeble attempts of putdowns involving Jealousy just because you don't get any " Hero worship ", referring to anyone who respects Larry as a " Groupie ",. These pathetic attempts at putting others down aren't limited to this thread, you have been a constant contrarian throughout your posts on other threads. There is your reply so you certainly don't have to wait any longer. If you can't stand seeing the truth in print, call Ray, I'm sure he will be a support group for you. Ignore button for you also.


Now you went and did it. You said I put others down in other threads too. I'm going to ask you to back that up also. I maintain that I don't put others down but a negative can't be proved so the burden of proof is on you.


----------



## Double S (Mar 30, 2008)

I'm not gonna pick sides so if people continue to argue I will put both parties on a temp vacation. No more Pm's to warn people to stop as I have given too many out. Use the ignore button if that helps.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

irishhacker said:


> WOW, I may need to ship out some tissues.. Ben, You gonna be alright buddy?


Hacker, I've never been better. No tissues needed here.lol.


----------



## irishhacker (Sep 4, 2011)

itbeso said:


> Hacker, I've never been better. No tissues needed here.lol.


OK...good deal...seemed like you were heated up there for a bit lol


----------

