# Free Vegas Shoot Seminar " The Linear Shot Sequence and Alignment"



## huckduck (Nov 24, 2014)

Cool! That's awesome you're putting this on. I'll be sure to attend.


----------



## teebat (Oct 28, 2013)

I'll be there

Sent from my VS835 using Tapatalk


----------



## Roy D (Nov 30, 2019)

Hope someone brings a camera ^^ 


My son was inspired watching yours do so well btw.. Thank you for your videos on yt!


----------



## tassie_devil (Aug 15, 2018)

Well worth it in my opinion. Good luck Chris, I hope it goes smoothly.

James


----------



## Elmosaurus (Sep 15, 2010)

Thank you for doing this, Chris. I'll be at one of them for sure!


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

I'll come, as well.


----------



## stevebster (Feb 5, 2018)

Wish I was going. Very interested in understanding that system.


----------



## bbtradlb (Jul 8, 2016)

Any chance it will be recorded for those who can’t make it to Vegas?


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

I will be recording the seminar during Vegas. I may put the video version up on my Youtube channel. I have not decided yet.

To be totally honest, 

When i started giving the seminar, i charged $50 for it, now almost a year later , it has grown to an hour and a half session and i charge $100.

It is the beginning into my coaching program, either in person or over the internet. 

If i put the video version up on Youtube, while its not an issue to lose the revenue from the seminar, having people watch that instead of interact with me live, i am not sure the information will get absorbed. And how confident i am that the archer really received the foundation for my lessons/ coaching.

Right now, i give each seminar live, and interact with the students, so that afterwards, i know they have a clear understanding of the form and principles. Expecting someone to watch a 1.5 hour seminar on the internet about form and not have them skim over sections is optimistic at best. But live with interaction and conversation, its easy and goes by fast.

So that is my dilemma with putting it on Youtube. As i give internet lessons to archers in a number of countries, any that i would work with, i would want to personally do the seminar. But in the end, i do want to make the information accessible and available. 

I have held a lot of the form principles secret and only for my personal students and let other forms become more widespread that are terrible.

So its time for me to start making the information available to any that are interested.


Chris


----------



## Roy D (Nov 30, 2019)

Understand if you choose not to publish the seminar. 
It is a different world these days media wise. Much like how artists used to be squeezed between management distributors and labels and concerts were mainly not money makers but write offs for the accountant to balance out then they saw liberation with digital distribution and cutting their middle men out and then discovered the digital age has fragmented the market and audience and their incomes are now the millions of crumbs from streaming and the big event prices fans pay at concerts.. I have been absorbing Jake Kaminksi's channel over the past weeks. He has monetized his channel somewhat and this brings in revenue - and he has his site with publications and tours with seminars to book. Could be a route to consider.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

I dont coach for the money, to be honest. There isnt really any money in it. My Youtube channel has generated about $6.81 i think to date. 

A good bit of my coaching is volunteer, many are students and kids who cant afford gear much less lessons. I have a cheap monthly rate for archers who want to compete and have multiple sessions per month. 

Losing the seminar charge is not an issue, i have given as many seminars free as i have charged. As some here on AT can attest. And as the Vegas shoot will be.


However, my seminar has so much value, and many people associate free with not much value. So i also want my seminar to stay away from that impression.

One archer when referring his friend said that my seminar was the best money he had spent in archery. 

That is the understanding i want from my seminar.

Chris


----------



## Roy D (Nov 30, 2019)

Well those things have their own pay off don't they.

Still shame about the YT revenue being as little as it is. If I were on your continent/state I would have come over for sure - wish I had access to a coach of your ilk here. But have hope I'll pick up some good form here as things are and perhaps help my son enjoy his bow as much as yours does


----------



## psnguyen (Jun 15, 2018)

I don't think I can attend the seminar but I know I gained a lot of value out of your YouTube videos regarding setting up and tuning a recurve. Here's hoping you upload onto your channel!


----------



## bruce_m (Jan 23, 2012)

Ill sure try and attend one of the days. Hope to meet some fellow forum members as well. 

Always enjoy bringing the kids to vegas shoot. This will be year 6.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

my seminar will be in the Joshua room. 


Chris


----------



## Maggiemaebe (Jan 10, 2017)

As one of the coaches/archers who have previously paid for your online session, I too would appreciate the opportunity to review it periodically as there is so much to absorb in a short period of time. Being able to review certain bits and pieces as they crop up later would be much appreciated! If you're able to post it to YouTube, that would be fantastic!

To the best of my knowledge, we don't have any paid coaches in Canada save for possibly the National Development Squad folks (2-4 people) so none of us are in it for the money either. I completely understand and respect whichever way you choose to go with this...it is very valuable knowledge and is very similar to what the Canadian team is encouraging in our athletes.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

I am sure that if the video recording is decent, then some version of it will be put on my Youtube channel.

Also Anthony Marino is going to video some of it and make a video on it as a feature offered at the Vegas shoot. 

Chris


----------



## arrowchucker222 (Jun 17, 2013)

Thank you, I’ll be there.
Arrowchucker out


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I've been working to incorporate aspects of a linear draw into my barebow shot based on what has been written and also some theories about traditional oriental archery. I'd be very curious to see if I'm interpreting it correctly. Unfortunately Vegas isn't happening but I can hope for a video.


----------



## Coodster (Feb 3, 2006)

I’ll be there 

Chad


----------



## Giantsnarf (Jul 29, 2015)

Wow wish I could be there I’d love to learn more about this.


----------



## Bill_in_TR (Aug 1, 2014)

Pardon my ignorance but could you provide a link to your You Tube channel.


----------



## Bill_in_TR (Aug 1, 2014)

Oops. And now pardon my stupidity. I see a link right in the beginning. Sound of me slapping face!


----------



## Bill_in_TR (Aug 1, 2014)

Double oops. Not a link after all. Google here I come.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

My Youtube channel


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsedJaZC1whWXfrmiTmq3ZQ


Chris


----------



## arrow8 (Nov 29, 2012)

Thanks Chris. Understand your reservations about putting on You Tube, I'll be appreciative of any information you decide to make public, even if it is just discussion on the history and concept of the different methods. Good Luck with the seminar!


----------



## ItsJim (Jul 29, 2016)

Chris - thank you very much! I plan to be there!


----------



## Bill_in_TR (Aug 1, 2014)

Actually I would love to see or hear discussion on the history and methods and advantages and disadvantages of the different shot processes.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Looking forward to seeing everyone Thursday, Friday and Saturday. 

Look for me at 3 pm in the Joshua room.

Chris


----------



## AlpNov (Aug 2, 2017)

chrstphr said:


> Right now, i give each seminar live, and interact with the students, so that afterwards, i know they have a clear understanding of the form and principles. Expecting someone to watch a 1.5 hour seminar on the internet about form and not have them skim over sections is optimistic at best. But live with interaction and conversation, its easy and goes by fast.


If it makes you feel any better, I really appreciate these in depth coaching instructions on youtube. For example George Ryal's recent ATA seminar. I found myself listening and replaying important sections and lose track of time when it was over.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Attended Chris' seminar Friday (yesterday). Well attended and very well presented. Hi information-count, high energy. A lot of good stuff in his efforts to 'restore what we used to know" as USA archers and classic American/Korean Linear Draw. I wish more younger archers/coaches could have exposure to this thought provoking "remember our roots!" philosophy.


----------



## RAzZin (May 7, 2019)

I really hope there will be some YouTube footage of these seminars, I'm very interested to see it!


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

I had three great seminars. I had about 120 attend total, but some came two days.

I filmed all three days and i also had Anthony Marino film the entire seminar. 

Hopefully the footage will be good and i can get something up on Youtube in the next few weeks. 

I had one archer ignore my warning of using what i taught at Vegas. The next day shot a personal best 275. So that was rewarding for me to hear.


If any of you missed my seminar, i am sorry it was not at a convenient time for you.

It was a lot of work but well worth it. I had quite a few barebow archers give me a chance and i greatly appreciate that.

Thanks to all that attended!


Chris


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

I was able to attend Chris' seminar and it was well presented. He did his homework and had a lot of video slides of Korean top archers using this style (virtually the only style in Korea) of linear shooting. It was very informative and educational for those who want to learn how to shoot the proper form and technique. People need to realize that the NTS (or angular) was born here in the US when Lee came here to the US and used many US archers as the "petri dish" of experiments in order to get things the way he wanted. Brady has used some of the technique and made it work well for him. Some of our top archers have used it including Jack Williams and Jake Kaminski. Jack has a bright future if he hangs in there but in reality I would say that this form and technique is similar to Michele Frangilli of uniqueness. It will work for few but not for all. The linear system is a tried and proven system that overwhelmingly is used by the majority archers and champions worldwide. Congrats Chris on a fine presentation.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

I'm not being facetious in any way in suggesting that a Chris Hill Linear Certification may be the one to have. Looking forward to the video which I suspect is going to get a lot of views. Kudos.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Rick McKinney said:


> I was able to attend Chris' seminar and it was well presented. He did his homework and had a lot of video slides of Korean top archers using this style (virtually the only style in Korea) of linear shooting. It was very informative and educational for those who want to learn how to shoot the proper form and technique. People need to realize that the NTS (or angular) was born here in the US when Lee came here to the US and used many US archers as the "petri dish" of experiments in order to get things the way he wanted. Brady has used some of the technique and made it work well for him. Some of our top archers have used it including Jack Williams and Jake Kaminski. Jack has a bright future if he hangs in there but in reality I would say that this form and technique is similar to Michele Frangilli of uniqueness. It will work for few but not for all. The linear system is a tried and proven system that overwhelmingly is used by the majority archers and champions worldwide. Congrats Chris on a fine presentation.





> I'm not being facetious in any way in suggesting that a Chris Hill Linear Certification may be the one to have. Looking forward to the video which I suspect is going to get a lot of views. Kudos.


Pretty high praise there Chris. Congrat's for having the courage and expertise to deliver the goods. I'm sure nobody will ever realize how much work went into preparing that seminar, and the guts it took to present it at Vegas. Wish I had been there now!


----------



## Roy D (Nov 30, 2019)

Very much looking forward to the seminar as it appears on youtube Chris - by the sound of things the one not to miss on there this year.

And very happy to have been able to acquire your book here in the Netherlands finally mr. McKinney - my 6 year old son quite enjoys watching his father do some homework as well.


----------



## bruce_m (Jan 23, 2012)

Unfortunately it didn't work in my schedule over the weekend either. 

Looking forward to watching the youtube presentation.

Thanks Chris !


----------



## archersready (Apr 26, 2019)

I'm sad I couldn't make it! I will definitely go check out your youtube videos though.


----------



## BuzzMA (Jan 11, 2010)

I gave up on archery 10 years ago because I couldn't adapt to the pretzel twist (the only thing being taught in my area). At the prompting of my wife and a friend I decided to give it another try. I was determined to find another, less painful way to have fun and get better at the sport! Thanks to videos of the Korean archers shooting and the info I am finding here I have discovered that it is possible. I am truly looking forward to seeing some instruction with the linear approach as the basis. Thanks Chris!


----------



## huckduck (Nov 24, 2014)

Chris I want to thank you for that seminar. The "don't touch this stuff until after the tournament" was hard to do, but the little bit that did creep in didn't affect my scores over the weekend, however, I'll be taking a much deeper dive into it over the coming weeks/months.

I hope you do get a video out. My roommate unfortunately didn't get to attend, and I have a friend here who will benefit immensely.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

My favorite line from the seminar was this one by Chris .... "Archery is not an 'aiming sport', it is a 'body control sport' ". 

This is an excellent 'North Star' for learning archers to use to guide their pursuit of better form and better shooting.


----------



## Boomer2094 (Aug 12, 2016)

Chris,

It's a shame that I couldn't make it to your seminar... Have to run the practice range at Vegas for all 3 days doesn't give me much time for anything.

But seeing that you're in Vegas as well... I may have to take a few lesson from you so I can improve my recurve game!

Thanks you for putting this seminar on for us...we greatly appreciated! 

Boomer


----------



## huckduck (Nov 24, 2014)

Hey Chris,

Do you have a way I can identify myself if I'm aiming down my arm or down the arrow? I can't remember exactly what you said in the seminar.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Do you mean looking down the bow arm and looking straight at the target at full draw? 

Without the bow, but in that position, you would be able to raise your shoulder and touch the side of your chin. 

Dont try that with the bow. 

I should have the video seminar up on Youtube over the weekend. 


Chris


----------



## jhinaz (Mar 1, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> I should have the video seminar up on Youtube over the weekend. Chris


Great! I'm looking forward to watching it. - John


----------



## huckduck (Nov 24, 2014)

chrstphr said:


> Do you mean looking down the bow arm and looking straight at the target at full draw?
> 
> Without the bow, but in that position, you would be able to raise your shoulder and touch the side of your chin.
> 
> ...


Yeah. that. Thanks


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

A version of my linear seminar is now on my Youtube channel. 

https://youtu.be/Ha1D4LJ1120


Chris


----------



## huckduck (Nov 24, 2014)

Much Appreciated!


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Thank you, Chris. Great seminar. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Roy D (Nov 30, 2019)

There went half my morning
Thank you Chris!


----------



## RAzZin (May 7, 2019)

chrstphr said:


> A version of my linear seminar is now on my Youtube channel.
> 
> https://youtu.be/Ha1D4LJ1120
> 
> ...


Wow, that's a great amount of extremely useful information!! Thank you!


----------



## MrPhil (Aug 14, 2017)

Chris, thank you so much for making this great information accessible!

I've been wondering about the following.
How much is the biceps involved when getting into the final part of alignment (before anchoring)? Sure, the main work is done by the back, but when closing the angle between forearm and upper arm, my biceps automatically tenses up slightly.


----------



## Gregjlongbow (Jun 15, 2016)

Just watched it, and really enjoyed it. Lots of great points, and solid logic. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

MrPhil said:


> Chris, thank you so much for making this great information accessible!
> 
> I've been wondering about the following.
> How much is the biceps involved when getting into the final part of alignment (before anchoring)? Sure, the main work is done by the back, but when closing the angle between forearm and upper arm, my biceps automatically tenses up slightly.


Ideally, if your alignment is all the way inline (or behind the line) and your back is in command during draw/anchor/expansion of the shot, then the biceps is zero involved because the angles don't require it to be involved. Think of an articulating architect's desk lamp (not a perfect analogy, but...)
If your biceps is getting involved, it's likely that you're not 'quite' all the way in line, or it's just a habit to be polished out..

Good example - here is a picture of Bombayla Devi - her draw arm and biceps looks as smooth and unengaged as a baby's arm ....








This shot of Kim Woo Jin is more apparent corroboration - his draw arm alignment geometry and effortless force-release reaction suggest no biceps involvement whatsoever ... https://youtu.be/1MinzlvqSV0?t=30


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Several archers with more anatomy knowledge that me have messaged me that muscles dont push, they only pull so my explanation during the expansion part is not really what is happening. That is a fair critique, but i will stand with the concept and explanation i gave as i think it gives the nature of the process and the end goal. And its what i feel is happening as i do it. 

I was also told that the bow arm and bow shoulder expansion was exactly what Coach Kim teaches but that the draw shoulder is different and he teaches it should feel like it goes up so the draw elbow does not lower. All of that may also be true. But i believe the shoulders should mirror each other during expansion keeping equalization, and the concept i explained is differing from what Coach Kim teaches probably just in shoulder angle and plane during expansion more so than anything else.

As i did not learn the system from his coaching, i expect there are a number of differences. I am ok with that as well. 


While any motion doing archery will use muscles all over the body, ( archery doesnt just use localized muscle groups) , for me the bicep is relaxed and i dont really feel it is engaged or assisting during the draw. It probably is to some extent as the arm is engaged in pulling load back, but any tension in my bicep is covered up by other muscles in the back and shoulders taking the mass brunt of the load.



Chris


----------



## "TheBlindArcher" (Jan 27, 2015)

Chris- There were five "blind/low vision archers at Vegas this year, down from seven last year... And one has been attending for about 15 years now and is the former indoor and outdoor WR holder and former WC in the VI B1 class. Hope everyone will seek these athletes out next year, most all love to talk blind archery. 

Thanks for posting your seminar, while I'm primarily a compound shooter I'm both working on a OR-style set up and perhaps some of the techniques will translate over...


----------



## Steve_M. (Feb 26, 2018)

Thanks for posting the seminar Chris. As a barebow shooter I really found it informative. I probably need to watch it a couple more times since I'm not quite seeing how string walking and position 1 & 2 are coming together using the draw. I only played with it briefly and I'm sure I am doing it wrong. I was letting the bow arm drop to the target and then my string hand is in front of my face and from there I draw back.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Steve_M. said:


> Thanks for posting the seminar Chris. As a barebow shooter I really found it informative. I probably need to watch it a couple more times since I'm not quite seeing how string walking and position 1 & 2 are coming together using the draw. I only played with it briefly and I'm sure I am doing it wrong. I was letting the bow arm drop to the target and then my string hand is in front of my face and from there I draw back.


Yes, in the seminar, watch Marcus my barebow demonstrator how he draws and anchors. While he is shooting 50 meters and point on, he does exactly the same at 18 meters with string walking. 

Both arms come down together in the same fluid ballet movement. This enables equalizing the load or balancing the draw forces with the bow push. All this happens still in a plane line next to the face where you will anchor.

I am currently teaching this to a trad archer shooting longbow though he has a head tilt with the form for shooting and is not as upright as a WA barebow archer would be.

Still the principles apply. 

Let me know if you have any specific questions. 
Chris


----------



## bbtradlb (Jul 8, 2016)

Chris,

As others have said, thanks for posting this video. The information is just what I’ve been looking for for more than a year as such I really appreciate you being willing to share your knowledge and the work to get the video out so quickly.

Thanks again.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Chris, interesting video but in my opinion Archery (The Art of Archery) is about balance between intention, execution and result of sending the arrow toward something using a stick and string, and the training starts with the balance of body and limbs while executing and is ending with the mental balance when you acknowledge where the arrow landed. If I would ignore this relationship between the parts, I don't see "linear draw" to be more understood than "KSL shot sequence". Good luck in your quest.

PS Target Archery abides by same Balance Rule, and the "use the gravity" is a mark of this balance. Alignment is result of balance between what happens in front and back of the arrow and is necessary to achieve it to be naturally “still” at full draw. A balanced execution works the body efficient. Efficiency is easy to assimilate.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Finally watched it Chris. Good job. A lot of people have no idea how much goes into a seminar like this. I could see hundreds of hours of preparation, on top of years of learning. I also saw a lot of guts to deliver that where you did, when you did. But it needs to be said. It's an important conversation that needs to be had in this country. Thank you for speaking up.

D.O. I think you just helped make Chris' point, actually.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

That was the point, because all the introduction was an attack that showed at least to me ignorance regarding balance from the “sway back” critique to “horse stance”. Both elements used in training to teach something, not to be used “as is”. Are the archers pushed to check if they are stable? If yes, this is the point of subtle sway back. 
The subtle one is that KSL shot follows the same using another approach, but was not understood or clear enough. It’s was a teaching problem if not many got what he taught.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Draven Olary said:


> Chris, interesting video but in my opinion Archery (The Art of Archery) is about balance between intention, execution and result of sending the arrow toward something using a stick and string, and the training starts with the balance of body and limbs while executing and is ending with the mental balance when you acknowledge where the arrow landed. If I would ignore this relationship between the parts, I don't see "linear draw" to be more understood than "KSL shot sequence". Good luck in your quest.
> Efficiency is easy to assimilate.


in rebuttal i would have to say
1. KSL has 28 steps at level 3 and then 108 steps at level 4. Linear has maybe 4 basic principles. Easy to understand? Linear wins hands down. 

2. efficiency is easy to assimilate, agreed...... KSL has nothing to do with efficiency, please see 1. 

3. blind archers are not concerned with what happens in front of the arrow. They are entirely focused on what happens next to the arrow and their connection to it. As any sighted archer should be. The relationship is the form and arrow. Where it lands is results oriented and not part of the shot process. You can make a great shot that is not in the middle. And you can make a terrible shot that is in the X. 

If you are stuck on where the arrow lands, you have unfortunately missed the point of my entire seminar. 

And if KSl is easier to understand than linear, then i am waiting for anyone to teach KSL to a 4 year old and have them shoot it correctly, make a video and post it for all to see. Of course i will be waiting forever. I am still waiting for an adult experienced archer to shoot it exactly as it is meant to be taught. Something that no one has been able to do since 2006. 

Until then i have a video of a 4 year old shooting linear unassisted. That is my challenge to NTS and the KSL shot. 


Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Finally watched it Chris. Good job. A lot of people have no idea how much goes into a seminar like this. I could see hundreds of hours of preparation, on top of years of learning. I also saw a lot of guts to deliver that where you did, when you did. But it needs to be said. It's an important conversation that needs to be had in this country. Thank you for speaking up.
> 
> D.O. I think you just helped make Chris' point, actually.


Thank you John, it was a lot of preparation and each seminar was draining for me. I was physically exhausted after that weekend. But it was very satisfying for me to finally get this out to more than just my students and the reception was as good as i could have wanted.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> Thank you John, it was a lot of preparation and each seminar was draining for me. I was physically exhausted after that weekend. But it was very satisfying for me to finally get this out to more than just my students and the reception was as good as i could have wanted.


Understood. I've only done one seminar, and it was exhausting. Easy for people to sit back and critique. That requires zero effort or knowledge.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> That was the point, because all the introduction was an attack


Funny how differently we saw that.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Draven Olary said:


> That was the point, because all the introduction was an attack that showed at least to me ignorance regarding balance from the “sway back” critique to “horse stance”. Both elements used in training to teach something, not to be used “as is”.


Interesting that my seminar portion regarding the spine and swayback or flatback critique has been shown to medical professionals who agreed 100% with everything i said. I did my homework there before i ventured into anything medical since i personally am not a doctor. Yet you accuse me of ignorance. Please enlighten me and medical doctors on our ignorance. 

its not an attack when you point out the obvious. The truth will always eventually prevail. 

And please show me ANY MMA fight that has the athlete adapt a horse stance and punch or fight from that position. I would love to be enlightened on that as well. 

I am glad you find such truth in KSL and the tilted /tucked stance. Please continue to shoot it. I wish you the best with it. Perhaps you will be the 7th that i know of who can compete internationally using it. 

Chris


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> Interesting that my seminar portion regarding the spine and swayback or flatback critique has been shown to medical professionals who agreed 100% with everything i said.
> Yet you accuse me of ignorance. Please enlighten me and medical doctors on our ignorance.
> 
> And please show me ANY MMA fight that has the athlete adapt a horse stance and punch or fight from that position. I would love to be enlightened on that as well.
> ...


Just let it go Chris. Your work stands on it's own.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

my seminar is guess is not for everyone. Its for people who want the truth and a return to an easy efficient shot form. 

For fans of Lee and KSL, please attend his seminars. He holds them frequently and loves to have the attendance same as i do. 

Knock your self out on KSL. 

Draven must be the one dislike that i got yesterday on Youtube. 

Chris


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

limbwalker said:


> Funny how differently we saw that.


True, and my apologies if it was not. Maybe making fun about things that someone learns their value in a dojo not from movies got me going.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> True, and my apologies if it was not. Maybe making fun about things that someone learns their value in a dojo not from movies got me going.


Hey, I understand. There is a lot of information out there about body position as it relates to sport that could or could not be true. But since the masters teach it a certain way, it is assumed to be true. I mean, this isn't math.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Chris, I have a lot of respect for your ability to quickly communicate how to execute a shot efficiently. We agree on most aspects of form and philosophy with respect to shooting. I think the reason some get a bit anxious about your delivery is the way you are critical of what others teach. Much of it needs critique but sometimes you seem to spend a lot of effort on stoking fires when you could be focusing on the how to. Your ideas have merit without ridicule of others. There is still value in other systems, even if they get much wrong or can't communicate what they intend. No need to be defensive nor dismissive on either side. We all have something to learn and no one is 100 percent right, and no one has a monopoly on truth.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

limbwalker said:


> Hey, I understand. There is a lot of information out there about body position as it relates to sport that could or could not be true. But since the masters teach it a certain way, it is assumed to be true. I mean, this isn't math.


I beg to differ. It is as math or even more. In math, if you don't know numbers and what the symbols between numbers mean, you can't solve a thing. The same thing with the ridiculed stances, they have one single role: to make the beginner to understand feeling / sensation and concepts he is taught. Once he knows the raw feel of something, he will be capable to understand _subtle_ and to find by himself what is_ enough_ to become _efficient_ and _natura_l for him from all he is told. This is universal for any activity, and two times more important when you use weapons converted to tools like a bow. I stop here because I pushed the topic on a direction I didn't want to. My apologies.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

I think Chris is illustrating that the linear draw doesn't require of the new archer energetic time-consuming efforts to understand difficult concepts and arduous physical ministrations in order to find a comfortable/repeatable/athletic feeling body position from which to shoot. 

I'm happy to have Chris' seminar out there. More choices/information/data for USA archery consumers. Nice to have choices. Ultimately access to choices lets the marketplace (I don't mean in a money-sense here) decide which concepts/philosophies/methods have the most merit.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Ditto Larry.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

lcaillo said:


> Chris, I have a lot of respect for your ability to quickly communicate how to execute a shot efficiently. We agree on most aspects of form and philosophy with respect to shooting. I think the reason some get a bit anxious about your delivery is the way you are critical of what others teach. Much of it needs critique but sometimes you seem to spend a lot of effort on stoking fires when you could be focusing on the how to. Your ideas have merit without ridicule of others. There is still value in other systems, even if they get much wrong or can't communicate what they intend. No need to be defensive nor dismissive on either side. We all have something to learn and no one is 100 percent right, and no one has a monopoly on truth.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Have you attended one of Lee's coaching seminars? Seriously, the man spends half his time criticizing others, even other US coaches HE HIMSELF TRAINED for Pete's sake. It's been a routine of his since he landed on our shores. It's how he got the job. I was there at his very first presentation to U.S. coaches, and he spent more than half his time explaining how wrong everyone else was. He was approached a few years ago by the folks he reports to and was specifically told to quiet down the criticism of other coaches because so many people were complaining about it. He did quiet it down, but it's not gone entirely by any stretch. It leaves a very bad taste in the mouths of most of the coaches who attend his L3 and L4 trainings, if they have any experience at all. Those that don't just lap it up as gospel.

Sorry, but watching Chris' presentation, I thought he was very restrained by comparison.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> I beg to differ. It is as math or even more. In math, if you don't know numbers and what the symbols between numbers mean, you can't solve a thing. The same thing with the ridiculed stances, they have one single role: to make the beginner to understand feeling / sensation and concepts he is taught. Once he knows the raw feel of something, he will be capable to understand _subtle_ and to find by himself what is_ enough_ to become _efficient_ and _natura_l for him from all he is told. This is universal for any activity, and two times more important when you use weapons converted to tools like a bow. I stop here because I pushed the topic on a direction I didn't want to. My apologies.


By the "it's not math" I mean that there isn't "one" correct answer. There are an infinite number of ways to shoot a bow, and so long as the arrow goes in the middle, they are all correct.

Look, here in the U.S., it's an advantage if a coach can start with something simple and easy to learn so the student can see some immediate results. There is plenty of time for an advanced student to research new ways to shoot if they are not satisfied with their own shooting. Like literally decades. But they should be started with as simple and easy to learn process as possible, and what Chris is promoting is exactly that. If the Koreans have taught us anything, it's how to teach thousands of young people how to shoot a bow.


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Draven Olary. What you are seeing is a guy who is very passionate at teaching archery. His anger is from losing up and coming archers to the NTS to see it fail miserably and those kids quit after the change. The harm and damage that the program has given has made many coaches angry. I have watched this from the beginning. I watched 1250 FITA archers go to the NTS and could not break 900 points and quite within 6 months. I have watched young archers with lots of promise go to the NTS and end up with injured shoulders and had to quite due to the damage that it caused. I have seen archers go to the center and come back with so much target panic that they gave up and walked away. THIS is why Chris is showing his anger. His efforts at expressing this frustration is an honest reaction. Plus, he has to defend his ideology against not only USA Archery, but the powers behind the scenes who forced Lee on the American system.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Rick McKinney said:


> Draven Olary. What you are seeing is a guy who is very passionate at teaching archery. His anger is from losing up and coming archers to the NTS to see it fail miserably and those kids quit after the change. The harm and damage that the program has given has made many coaches angry. I have watched this from the beginning. I watched 1250 FITA archers go to the NTS and could not break 900 points and quite within 6 months. I have watched young archers with lots of promise go to the NTS and end up with injured shoulders and had to quite due to the damage that it caused. I have seen archers go to the center and come back with so much target panic that they gave up and walked away. THIS is why Chris is showing his anger. His efforts at expressing this frustration is an honest reaction. Plus, he has to defend his ideology against not only USA Archery, *but the powers behind the scenes who forced Lee on the American system.*


And this is my burning question that I can't even begin to develop a theory for (that makes much sense, anyway) - WHY WHY WHY? Why have the powers behind the scene been so resolute in continuing to prop up/protect/promote Coach Lee? It's certainly not because of his fabulously successful results. And if it's 'follow the money", as is usually at the bottom of most mysteries - is it just as simple as 'a closed comprehensive exclusionary system/infrastructure promises captive revenue streams'?


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

limbwalker I was thinking "math" like in numbers and formulas working together to get one expected result. Archery or karate or sword fighting is the same, a lot of things done to make the intention real and get the expected result - hit the target. 
Rick McKinney, I agree with what you said. I don't agree with the attitude, but we can agree to disagree. Just a question if I may? How much time an athlete requires to change a habit and become better with a new habit? Maybe that will point toward the real culprit. Regarding the injuries, I said my opinion on the topic about it, and I think limbwalker gave the answer: some coaches don't know how to coach because they don't know what they coach beyond the 16 or 100 points of a sequence. 
PS Going back to koreans and the movie Chris made, it shows hard work done by kids of small age to become competitive archer. It is opposite to how archery is seen here most of the time. Even the idea of using "linear draw" because is simple is a sample of a specific way of thinking that's not fitting the korean mold / education. NTS should have been discarded long time ago based on all the info gathered here. I really hope what Chris is trying to make will fly and I hope that will land better.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Draven Olary said:


> limbwalker I was thinking "math" like in numbers and formulas working together to get one single result. Archery or karate or sword fighting is the same, a lot of things done to make the intention real - hit the target.
> Rick McKinney, I agree with what you said. I don't agree with the attitude, but we can agree to disagree. Just a question if I may? How much time an athlete requires to change a habit and become better with a new habit? Maybe that will point toward the real culprit. Regarding the injuries, I said my opinion on the topic about it, and I think limbwalker gave the answer: some coaches don't know how to coach because they don't know what they coach beyond the 16 or 100 points of a sequence.
> PS Going back to koreans and the movie Chris made, it shows hard work done by kids of small age to become competitive archer. It is opposite to how archery is seen here most of the time. Even the idea of using "linear draw" because is simple is a sample of a specific way of thinking that's not fitting the korean mold.


"... because they don't know what they coach beyond the 16 or 100 points of a sequence" ... this reminds me of Stash's great quip (paraphrasing here, Stash, don't StarTrek spank me again!) " it reminds me of the golf book titled "The 50 Most Important Things to Remember During Your Backswing"  16 steps? 100 steps? Yeesh...


Draven, you ask Rick how much time an athlete requires to change a habit and become better with a new habit. While waiting for his reply (eagerly), the corollate question that pops into my mind is "is 13years long enough?"


USA Archery has paid Coach Lee (and his wife) MILLIONS OF DOLLARS over 13 years. NTS' complex 'out of the mainstream outside the USA' angular draw shot sequence are his. The Certification Infrastructure is his. The regional camps and mandatory allegiance to NTS are his. The hundreds (thousands?) of graduated coaches from that certification infrastructure received his blessing. They are his. And the (lack of) performance results are his, too. He owns it all. So it seems a little disingenuous to blame 'credentialed Level 3 and Level 4 coaches who don't understand the system' and throw them under the bus. Where stops the buck?


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

lksseven said:


> Draven, you ask Rick how much time an athlete requires to change a habit and become better with a new habit. While waiting for his reply (eagerly), the corollate question that pops into my mind is "is 13years long enough?


If they quit after 6 months, the 13 years don't count at all. You will have a lot of 6 months quitters, not skilled athletes, during a 13 years time span. I was listening Jake Kaminski telling he didn't touched the bow for months and it took even more until he got in front of the target with the bow. You need a special type of character to do this and not quit in a month.
Imagine now how small will be the barebow community if you were told to shoot in a specific way and not home-brewed way to be a barebow archer. And imagine you are told when you go to the Coach with your new Spig riser and your most expensive limbs " now pack your bow under the bed, and lets get out to teach you what you need to feel".


----------



## BuzzMA (Jan 11, 2010)

C'mon man. This is just a teaser. Now I have to wait until the book comes out. Let me know where to send the pre-release payment.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Draven Olary said:


> If they quit after 6 months, the 13 years don't count at all. You will have a lot of 6 months quitters, not skilled athletes, during a 13 years time span. I was listening Jake Kaminski telling he didn't touched the bow for months and it took even more until he got in front of the target with the bow. You need a special type of character to do this and not quit in a month.


"The method is awesome", and the dismal success rate is all the athletes' fault? 

Who gets (in any walk of sports, commerce, or life) 13+ years without any accountability? There's just a Svengalian element at work here that's fascinating. Coach Lee's next gig (assuming his present coaching gig actually does end someday) should be as a headliner hypnotist act in Vegas.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

No, the fault should land in the lap of those who tried to take a niche system and make it universal without having an army of coaches who know the inside out of that said niche system.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Draven Olary said:


> No, the fault should land in the lap of those who tried to take a niche system and make it universal without having an army of coaches who know the inside out of that said niche system.


Who would that (those) lap(s) belong to, if not Coach Lee?


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Who chose him. Who forced him to sigh accreditations to coaches when he didn’t want to.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> No, the fault should land in the lap of those who tried to take a niche system and make it universal without having an army of coaches who know the inside out of that said niche system.


I can't disagree with this. Go back and look at my posts about BEST/NTS over the past 13 years. I've said for over a decade that it's a complex system best suited for full time professional elite athletes, and specifically strong young men. I was literally THE FIRST coach in the U.S. that Lee asked to help him with what became the JDT (my name for it, in fact). It took me two camps to realize Lee's system was far too complicated for the young archers we were thrusting it upon, most of whom would always be recreational/part-time archers regardless of their parent's Olympic dreams for their children. 

So, do we blame the creator, or the distributor(s)? 



> Who chose him. Who forced him to sigh accreditations to coaches when he didn’t want to.


There was a hiring panel that made the selection. My good friend, the late Tom Barker, was on that panel. After seeing what they really "bought", the buyer's remorse kicked in and he regretted his recommendation to hire Lee until he passed. I suspect others on the panel feel the same way. They were sold a product. They believed the product was better than what they had, and would solve the perceived problems with "the system." I can't fault them. At first, I agreed with them. Otherwise why would I have ever agreed to help Lee start the JDT. 

Hey, lots of us buy things and later realize we could have probably made a better choice, or it was a fine tool but not the right tool for the job. Doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad tool. 

Hindsight is an awesome thing. LOL


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

I would blame the distributor, limbwalker. It doesn't make sense to blame the creator. 
I don't believe that the system requires strong kids, but requires the Coach and the practitioner to have the same background. When there is a form of background barrier, the Coach will pick from the masses a limited number of promising archers and will work on breaking that barrier with each one of them. In the end if he finds one or two to understand - usually takes years - his philosophy will be a success. Now his accomplished Student can become a potential Coach and will be capable to pass the philosophy much easier since he has the same background with the people who will come to train with him. Listen Brady and Jake how easy they talk about things that are not contradicting at all KSL philosophy in a very potable and understandable manner - no mambo-jambo LAN2 and tanden breathing that says nothing to someone without the background to understand them.

And listen level IV Coaches saying they can't understand what KSL requires and they teach continuous pulling through clicker while Brady and KSL talk about internal activation of the clicker through subtle muscle activation.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> I would blame the distributor, limbwalker. It doesn't make sense to blame the creator.
> I don't believe that the system requires strong kids, but requires the Coach and the practitioner to have the same background. When there is a form of background barrier, the Coach will pick from the masses a limited number of promising archers and will work on breaking that barrier with each one of them. In the end if he finds one or two to understand - usually takes years - his philosophy will be a success. Now his accomplished Student can become a potential Coach and will be capable to pass the philosophy much easier since he has the same background with the people who will come to train with him. Listen Brady and Jake how easy they talk about things that are not contradicting at all KSL philosophy in a very potable and understandable manner - no mambo-jambo LAN2 and tanden breathing that says nothing to someone without the background to understand them.


Agreed on the student -> coach. I've been saying for years that there is a handful of RA's that are IMO the only ones truly qualified to teach NTS, because they learned it directly from Lee or someone like Guy, and they figured out how to make it work. Part of Lee's frustration is that he needed a lot more time to teach coaches than he had to work with. For that reason, I always thought his criticism of those same coaches was unfair. 

D.O. what's your take on why his method has never really worked for women, either in AUS or the U.S.?


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Anatomic difference between man and woman - no matter how much we like to think we are equal - might have a saying in my opinion. The above barrier too. I can see why "his way" couldn't work in Korea though - because he would have to fight against hundred of years of doing "this way".


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> Anatomic difference between man and woman - no matter how much we like to think we are equal - might have a saying in my opinion.


Do you think that explains the differences we see with Korean women and men? I've always thought that the Korean women were so much more alike than the men ever were.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

I am not a woman to give you an answer to that question, but drawing from above the line of sight has its benefits if you are a small frame figure: using also the gravity to draw the bow (the bow has a controlled fall during the draw) , not just the most efficient way to use the shoulder joints and elbows to activate your big back muscles. The women are more technical than men - less muscle mass - and when the technique helps them it shows.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> I am not a woman to give you an answer to that question, but drawing from above of line of sight has its benefits if you are a small frame figure: using also the gravity to draw the bow (the bow has a controlled fall during the draw) , not just the most efficient way to use the shoulder joints and elbows to activate your big back muscles. The women are more technical than men and when the technique helps them it shows.


I've always felt that female archers are always operating at the extreme margins of their level of strength/control vs. the men who have enough reserve strength to make a lot of different techniques work. So I look at the form that top female archers use as arguably the most efficient form, simply out of necessity.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Agreed. Efficiency is result of necessity. Drawing a bow with a weight close to maximum of your strength or shooting 1000 of arrows in a row will teach you about your form.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Have you attended one of Lee's coaching seminars? Seriously, the man spends half his time criticizing others,
> 
> Sorry, but watching Chris' presentation, I thought he was very restrained by comparison.


At the end of my Saturday seminar that is in the video, two OTC archers in the back had a comment on my seminar. One turned and said " man, Chris really bashes NTS". The other replied, " Yes, but it's nothing compared to how Lee bashes Korean archers in his seminars."

your mileage may vary. 


Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Draven Olary said:


> Who chose him. Who forced him to sigh accreditations to coaches when he didn’t want to.


Easton chose him. And now USA archery is forcing him to accredit all the people who take his certification classes. The last one he did, most of the attendees failed, but Lee was forced to certify them. You see, people wont keep repeatedly paying to attain a level. But they will pay to keep going up in levels.

The certification process in the US for NTS is now a big cash cow. 


Chris


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> Agreed. Efficiency is result of necessity. Drawing a bow with a weight close to maximum of your strength or shooting 1000 of arrows in a row will teach you about your form.


Which I think, is really the point that Chris is trying to make. Why we would deviate from that for our women is beyond me. Maybe it was an experiment worth trying, but isn't that what Australia was? We could have learned from that IMO. Asking a 100 lb. woman to shoot a 40+ lb. bow at 70 meters in the wind is a tall ask already. Whatever form they are taught should make that job as easy as possible for them.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Limbwalker, you know at this point all these are rhetoric questions: what convinced you his system is good for all then?
Do US archery needed a Jesus to save their soul or a Coach for their needs? Because in first case you take whoever you believe will make your wish come true, and in second case you take someone who will improve existing - accent on existing.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> Easton chose him.


They may have influenced some of the decision, but it was my understanding at the time that the hiring panel made the recommendation. Again, with limited information. But that's how we make most hiring decisions, is it not? Some work out better than we hoped. Others not so much.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> Limbwalker, you know at this point all these are rhetoric questions: what convinced you his system is good for all then?


Great question. Do you mean at the time (2006?)


----------



## CoyoteRick (May 18, 2016)

Amongst all of this fighting about systems, I'd like to throw my perspective as an archer that spent 6 years shooting compound very well and switched to recurve when I started college three years ago. Perhaps the more recent experience coming from a young...er shooter can put this into perspective. 

When I first started watching Olympic Recurve archery at the end of High School (Months before Rio 2016), my first thought was I wanted to shoot exactly how the Koreans were shooting. I didn't know anything about NTS, "Classical American," etc. When I came to Vermillion, SD for college I learned that NFAA Easton Yankton was a short distance away and felt pure joy I could learn from coaches who knew what they were talking about. Needless to say, I was taught NTS. Now, I had no idea what the differences were. But I could tell you I hated opening my stance up from a square and refused to do it. That was about the only thing I really neglected and went against. Fast forward a couple of months, and I hurt my shoulder. My draw shoulder specifically. I was off for 4-5 months and had to start all over. 

So I began to watch the Korean women and other athletes like Crispin Duenas, Vic Wunderle, Marco Galiazzo; then I'd watch older athletes such as Rick, Darrel, Park Kyung Mo, etc. This is when I started to be extremely critical and analytical of technique, why people are doing what they're doing, etc. I began to switch from NTS to what I considered to be "Linear" shooting (Basically self teaching at this point). This was also the time when Coach Kim released his archery app, and I slowly gained more and more understanding. I shot tremendously better, but I wasn't in line quite yet. Honestly I didn't know what alignment was (please note that in your mind). We (The USD Archery Club) went to USIAC that year and I ended up with Individual Bronze and we obtained Team Gold. I was critiqued HEAVILY for not shooting NTS by other teams, individuals, coaches, etc. So after I shot the best I'd ever shot, it was looming in my mind from all of the critique that I should be shooting this "NTS" system. So I began working with the same coaches as before and truth be told, never shot better than I did in USIAC shooting my own broken "Linear" technique. I was told that the old "Outdated" "Linear" form would never get me into my back muscles and that it was extraordinarily difficult. But I continued to work with the system being taught and swore was superior.

Here's the thing. Here I am, working with a L4 coach and a L3 and I didn't know what alignment was. I was told about the "Barrel of the gun" concept but wasn't sure how to translate that, being it didn't make sense. And then further comments were made that I'd eventually injure myself if I continued shooting "Linearly" and wouldn't recover as I did the last time from shooting the Lee sequence. 

I struggled hard. Eventually I met Vic Wunderle here in Yankton at the Indoor World Championships in 2018 and a few other athletes and I would ask for advice here and there and do my best to apply their knowledge into the Lee cycle. I went to my first Vegas in 2019 and met Chris, and got superb shooting advice and technique. I used what he taught me and went from shooting 220 to 260 in a day. A single day. When I got back to South Dakota I applied what he taught and I must say I hadn't grouped the way I did since I shot compound competitively in the years prior. But I struggled to put what Chris had taught in fear I would be upsetting my coaches and my fear they'd stop working with me out of spite. So I went to my first USA Archery Collegiate Championship in Dublin, Ohio in May of 2019 still shooting NTS form and shot the worst score I'd ever shot. It was something like a 347, something along those lines. Ever since then I've been extremely disheartened in my ability to shoot a recurve. For a bit, I began selling all of my recurve equipment so I could go back to compound because it's the only thing I was confident in within this sport anymore. I changed my mind after selling my risers and got another one, but haven't really shot much since then. 

Honestly, I pretty much stopped shooting since October 2019. I'm embarrassed to shoot. Not only am I embarrassed from my scores (not just because they're effing terrible) but because the form I want to shoot isn't gradually accepted by coaches here, which is another thing that I'll touch on in a bit. But yeah, I'm embarrassed to shoot in front of everyone now because I just can't make this system work that produces the poorest results I can put up, and when I switch to the system that does work I'm ridiculed so much by my peers that it creates an environment that I don't want to partake or be a part of. 

At times I often want to think "Well, maybe this form will work for me because it worked for others" especially with the new Jake Kaminski videos on YouTube, but I know the truth is I can't make it work. My body doesn't like it and it doesn't feel natural for me. Like I said, I've stopped shooting. I've lost all confidence I once had in this sport and it's so incredibly difficult gaining it back. I'm going to pick shooting up regularly once I'm finished with school, that way I'm not around the toxicity that is what I'm around here at the center. In truth, though I can see a cesspool of arguments and bickering here, there is so much truth to what is said I'm equally satisfied to see the thoughts that come from these threads. 

WHY is it that there are so many coaches that have never touched a bow in their life? WHY is it that all of these coaches discourage other schools of thought? WHY is it that you do something correct that your body agrees with and I'm told it's incorrect? WHY is it that the athletes that make it so far end up quitting? WHY is it that these coaches aren't educated on other schools of thought? WHY is it that these coaches aren't educated in bodily autonomy? These are only some of the questions I always asked myself since I've started recurve. If I were to show you all the pictures of form from our JOAD club over here, you'd all cringe and cry and at what you'd see. It's remarkable at what I see, even with compound shooters form. It's truly baffling what the United States archery program is becoming. 

Maybe it really is that the best information and coaching for this technique comes straight from the big man himself. Perhaps that's why the few successful men that made this system work do it so well. But the differentiated levels handed out like candy to those who can pay is not the way to go. Especially when they have 0 experience and can use their level as a cash grab opportunity. 

I don't want to stop shooting, but man am I discouraged with my lack of progress and steps backward. There have been three people that have helped my understanding of archery actually grow, and one of those men is the topic of this entire Thread. Thank you Chris for your knowledge and challenging the status quo. Thank you for actually taking the time to put this information out here and have the passion to keep teaching as Rick said. I love this sport with all my being and it's the only sport I could identify with throughout my childhood aside from being a sprinter. But the way we are being taught in the U.S. as a standard shouldn't be the standard.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

The end result is people love to shoot the messenger. For people who are drunk on the Kisik Lee koolaid, I will never be able to convince them otherwise. And for those people, NTS is a great home and system for them and they should enjoy it. I realize my coaching is not for everyone. Some people never want the truth. They want what they want to hear. Thats ok too. I deal in truth and hard facts. everything in my seminar, i proved in my seminar. Proved it. 

angular draw vs linear, proved it with an archer larger than myself and a rope. Proved every section with video proof and actual shooting. My form is not the best, i was never a world class archer. I found the sport way to late with no guidance to really be a contender. But thats ok too. I pick up a bow and demonstrate. I shot the State indoor tournament the week of Vegas. I shoot. 


However, i get all the frustrated, irritated, left out archers who have tried NTS to its failure and are looking for something else. 

Here is a message i got yesterday. 

_I've been doing NTS for almost 2 years and I have never felt that it works well for me. If just one small element of it is off it has to be started again. And I ended up with shoulder pain despite it supposedly being better for your shoulder joints. NTS is overly complicated, way too many steps to implement and easy for the system to breakdown in a pressure situation. BB shooters are not full time pros training 8 hours a day. We need a simpler more natural system.... I shoot barebow and NTS is becoming the thing that you should be doing. There are many great BB archers shooting non NTS style but now coaches are really pushing the 13 step (minimum) NTS system into BB. At the same time these NTS coaches are critiquing the top archers who shoot non NTS saying they are shooting wrong or 'they need to do this.....' to be great. They are already great archers. 
_

here is another 
_So many people obsessed by NTS... finally something that makes sense! ��_

another said that _Jake's video explanation of NTS was insane_. 

There are many who do not like NTS, it is not for them, and they do not drink the koolaid. I am here for those archers. When i leave the sport some day, people may not like the attitude i had or the way i said my opinion, but i will have left with a contribution to better the sport and with archers who will for sure better the sport. And that is all i care about. 


Chris


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

limbwalker said:


> Great question. Do you mean at the time (2006?)


Whenever he put on the table his offer and explained his system. The credentials were there anyway.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> Whenever he put on the table his offer and explained his system. The credentials were there anyway.


To most folks in the U.S., the credentials did seem to be there. Having said that, archery in the U.S., particularly in the late 90's and early 2000's, was a male-dominated sport and as I learned right away from the women's squad, not much attention was given to the women in the sport. That has continued through Lee. But I only mention that because I wonder how closely the panel examined his experience with women's teams, whether in Korea, or in Australia. Or, if they just saw the success that Australia had in 2000, read his book, and saw Tim and David's success and declared that "good enough" because there was a little bit of panic in the system at the time and they felt they needed to do something. 

My O.R. experience at that time was extremely limited. I was not satisfied with my own shooting, and was excited to have an opportunity to learn from someone who was considered an elite coach. I had also just begun working with teen JOAD archers and was especially interested in learning a coaching method to teach those students of my own. Overall, I remember feeling a cautious optimism at that first seminar. Some folks were buying it, some were not quite ready to buy it, others were just keeping an open mind. I recall well some of the conversations I had with other coaches who were there, like Jim Coombe and Rick and Tom Barker and others. We were all cautiously optimistic.

Personally I was very flattered to be asked to help start the junior training program. At the time, I had the top Cadet male recurver in the U.S. who Lee wanted in the program. I am not sure what else Lee saw that caused him to invite me. Looking at the original group of JDT coaches (myself, Jim Noble, Jackie Fiala, Chelsea Barker and Gary Holstein), I saw a group chosen based on our ability to work with teens, and not necessarily our ability as archery coaches. I went in with an open mind, knowing I needed to learn a lot more. But as I said, after two camps I could already tell this system was just not going to work for American kids very well. Us coaches were struggling to understand what we were being asked to "teach" and frankly I thought it was an incredibly awkward start. I was out of leave and wasn't willing to donate any more of my vacation time to help other people's kids when mine were at home without me. I figured folks with more time than I had, could help Lee sort it all out and then I'd get back involved later on when I had more time, which I did. But by then, it was clear that this was a system that wasn't going to work any better for American girls and women any more than it did for the Australian women. I became frustrated (and still am) that our American women haven't been given the attention and resources I feel they deserve and I know plenty who agree with me on this. That's why Woo was hired. Unfortunately that didn't work out either. 

I can't believe we're stuck with what we have - continuing to essentially ignore half the team's needs.

Sorry for the rant. LOL


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

limbwalker said:


> Have you attended one of Lee's coaching seminars? Seriously, the man spends half his time criticizing others, even other US coaches HE HIMSELF TRAINED for Pete's sake. It's been a routine of his since he landed on our shores. It's how he got the job. I was there at his very first presentation to U.S. coaches, and he spent more than half his time explaining how wrong everyone else was. He was approached a few years ago by the folks he reports to and was specifically told to quiet down the criticism of other coaches because so many people were complaining about it. He did quiet it down, but it's not gone entirely by any stretch. It leaves a very bad taste in the mouths of most of the coaches who attend his L3 and L4 trainings, if they have any experience at all. Those that don't just lap it up as gospel.
> 
> Sorry, but watching Chris' presentation, I thought he was very restrained by comparison.


No I haven't. Regardless, we don't need that. As you said, Chris's ideas stand on their own.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

CoyoteRick said:


> We (The USD Archery Club) went to USIAC that year and I ended up with Individual Bronze and we obtained Team Gold. I was critiqued HEAVILY for not shooting NTS by other teams, individuals, coaches, etc. So after I shot the best I'd ever shot, it was looming in my mind from all of the critique that I should be shooting this "NTS" system.


That type of bullying from archers and NTS coaches is a safesport violation and should be reported. Having a few archers and coaches suspended will stop that. 

Funny, at USATs, no one ever comes up and bullies any of my linear students when i have been there. Usually people some up to them and discuss how good their form is. 

and thank you CoyoteRick for your perspective. Unfortunately it is an all too common one that i find from archers who NTS failed. I was wondering why you continued NTS. Now i see why. 


Chris


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

lksseven said:


> And this is my burning question that I can't even begin to develop a theory for (that makes much sense, anyway) - WHY WHY WHY? Why have the powers behind the scene been so resolute in continuing to prop up/protect/promote Coach Lee? It's certainly not because of his fabulously successful results. And if it's 'follow the money", as is usually at the bottom of most mysteries - is it just as simple as 'a closed comprehensive exclusionary system/infrastructure promises captive revenue streams'?


The NAA has always been afraid of change and will do just enough to keep the USOC off it's back. There have been many good people elected to the board who get hoodwinked into not doing anything for fear of making mistakes. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I just love the fact that we once again have a young female archer who trained outside the NTS system and is shooting world class scores. It's important because we have to have examples for other up and coming young women (and their parents) to follow. Hopefully she isn't bullied out of the sport the way the last phenom was, but in this case, I think the chances are very good she won't be.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

chrstphr said:


> Easton chose him. And now USA archery is forcing him to accredit all the people who take his certification classes. The last one he did, most of the attendees failed, but Lee was forced to certify them. You see, people wont keep repeatedly paying to attain a level. But they will pay to keep going up in levels.
> 
> The certification process in the US for NTS is now a big cash cow.
> 
> ...


I seem to remember the refrain "we need a Korean" coach coming up a lot in the 1990s. I also remember a desire for a plug and play system to produce medals. The bought what they were looking for without understanding what it would really take and got sold on a cult of personality. There was no appetite for really examining the needs and it was easy to buy the package.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> They may have influenced some of the decision, but it was my understanding at the time that the hiring panel made the recommendation. Again, with limited information. But that's how we make most hiring decisions, is it not? Some work out better than we hoped. Others not so much.


my understanding is people at Easton wanted him, they wooed him from Australia. They then brought it to the BOD which was a done deal and they voted to hire him. 

I have never heard that the BOD or USA archery wooed Lee from Australia. It could be the case, but i have never heard it that way.

Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

lcaillo said:


> I seem to remember the refrain "we need a Korean" coach coming up a lot in the 1990s. I also remember a desire for a plug and play system to produce medals. The bought what they were looking for without understanding what it would really take and got sold on a cult of personality. There was no appetite for really examining the needs and it was easy to buy the package.


you would know more than i on that. You were there, i was not. I have only been told the stories. 


Chris


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Honestly, I stayed on the periphery of it all. I was asked to teach biomechanics at several coaching camps at the training centers and got disillusioned with the unwillingness to learn basic anatomy and science (and I do mean VERY basic) and the desire for a magic pill. I chaired the NAA Sport Science committee and found everyone wanted to skip the hard analysis and science and get to answers based on assumptions. This desire for a quick fix without doing the hard work made for an easy sale if that is what you were peddling. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

lcaillo said:


> I seem to remember the refrain "we need a Korean" coach coming up a lot in the 1990s. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


It was still there when I started as a JOAD parent in the early 2000's. I remember hearing it because my kid's JOAD coach was all googley-eyed over Lee's book and couldn't stop talking about him. LOL


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Thank you for the answer limbwalker.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

chrstphr said:


> my understanding is people at Easton wanted him, they wooed him from Australia. They then brought it to the BOD which was a done deal and they voted to hire him.
> 
> I have never heard that the BOD or USA archery wooed Lee from Australia. It could be the case, but i have never heard it that way.
> 
> Chris


That was my understanding as well.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Kinda wish someone at the time would have stepped up for the women and said, "wait... our women haven't had a lot of success in a long time now. Why did this guy leave Korea, and what's his track record with the women in Australia? The women really are where our biggest need is..." 

Why were we not out looking for a great women's coach in 2005? That's an important and revealing question IMO.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Kinda wish someone at the time would have stepped up for the women and said, "wait... our women haven't had a lot of success in a long time now. Why did this guy leave Korea, and what's his track record with the women in Australia? That's really where our biggest need is..."
> 
> But of course, nobody did.


not to be blunt, but Easton doesnt care about the women side. They showed that when they hired Lee knowing full well why he left South Korea for Australia in the first place. It wouldnt have mattered what the BOD thought. Easton was the money and they wanted Lee. Pretty much what just happened with Lee being renewed thru Paris 2024 when his contracted ended last year. His results dismal, he sabotaged Woo's efforts on the women's side and still Easton wants him in charge of all the teams, male and female. So USA archery gave him back the women's side. 

USA archery and the BOD does what Brady and Easton want. Of the big three ( USA archery, Easton and the USOC), Easton has the most say and power. 

Speaks volumes to the people that are at Easton pulling the strings. And i am one of the few who will say that publicly. 

Chris


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Lots of things could have been done differently. At this point the best most of us can do is learn from the best out r th here and teach as best we can. The best to learn from right now includes Chris. And the many successful archers among us.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

chrstphr said:


> not to be blunt, but Easton doesnt care about the women side. They showed that when they hired Lee knowing full well why he left South Korea for Australia in the first place. It wouldnt have mattered what the BOD thought. Easton was the money and they wanted Lee. Pretty much what just happened with Lee being renewed thru Paris 2024 when his contracted ended last year. His results dismal, he sabotaged Woo's efforts on the women's side and still Easton wants him in charge of all the teams, male and female.
> 
> USA archery and the BOD does what Brady and Easton want.
> 
> ...


When have you ever been blunt?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

lcaillo said:


> When have you ever been blunt?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


touche.... lol


Chris


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

limbwalker said:


> Why were we not out looking for a great women's coach in 2005? That's an important and revealing question IMO.


There are 3 questions that any Coach needs to answer without hesitation when asked about his teachings: How (you do it)? Why (you do it)? and When (you do it)? 
The answer to "why (you do it)?" maybe would have been the answer to your question.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

lcaillo said:


> Lots of things could have been done differently. At this point the best most of us can do is learn from the best out r th here and teach as best we can. The best to learn from right now includes Chris. And the many successful archers among us.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Chris' contributions are incredibly generous and worth serious consideration for a good foundation.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> There are 3 questions that any Coach needs to answer without hesitation when asked about his teachings: How (you do it)? Why (you do it)? and When (you do it)?
> The answer to "why (you do it)?" maybe would have been the answer to your question.


Well, the question was more for the NAA and the hiring panel than it would have been for the coach. I feel they were searching for the wrong thing, based on what our need was.

Of course, they also could have considered the average age of the 2004 team (37) and figured they needed to do something quick. Kinda funny how more than 1/2 the team was the same four years later. LOL


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Yes, but who hires a Coach is supposed to ask the right questions, right?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> Yes, but who hires a Coach is supposed to ask the right questions, right?


Right.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

limbwalker said:


> Chris' contributions are incredibly generous and worth serious consideration for a good foundation.


Yes, I would really like to hear how things evolve when the information matures.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

I asked to give my seminar at the recent Coaches symposium, but they were not interested. Of course, i expected them to say no. 

I asked just to show them i had the guts to ask. 

I heard the seminar on the prevalence of shoulder injuries from NTS was really good. So at least they had one good seminar. 

Chris


----------



## AlpNov (Aug 2, 2017)

Thank you Chris for the seminar.

Half of my lessons are kids 6-13, and I struggle to teach them NTS as true as I understand it. I am excited about showing this new style to some of the kids I have struggled with. I've stopped coaching for the moments due to other commitments, this break would be a good time to experiment with this new style so I can understand it more before I show it around.

It's a shame you weren't allowed to show your work at the Coach's seminar. Anybody know that there are multiple ways to approach a problem, and multiple solutions sometimes. I would've liked to have seen your approach and talked to you first hand.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

AlpNov said:


> Thank you Chris for the seminar.
> 
> Half of my lessons are kids 6-13, and I struggle to teach them NTS as true as I understand it. I am excited about showing this new style to some of the kids I have struggled with. I've stopped coaching for the moments due to other commitments, this break would be a good time to experiment with this new style so I can understand it more before I show it around.
> 
> It's a shame you weren't allowed to show your work at the Coach's seminar. Anybody know that there are multiple ways to approach a problem, and multiple solutions sometimes. I would've liked to have seen your approach and talked to you first hand.


My thought was my seminar would give the level 2 through level 4 coaches a really good understanding of alignment and how to apply it with their students in simple effective terms. I knew USA archery would never let anything non-NTS or non Kisik Lee be shown to national coaches at a sanctioned event. As I am not a respected US national coach, and do not teach the KSL doctrine, they have nothing to learn from me. I knew I would not be welcome before i asked. But i felt i should at least try and give them the benefit to say yes or no. Their answer was not a surprise. I am sure they all had a good laugh at my expense. 

I can now say I tried to work within the system and it was not wanted. My karma is fine with it. 

Chris


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Draven Olary said:


> Rick McKinney, I agree with what you said. I don't agree with the attitude, but we can agree to disagree. Just a question if I may? How much time an athlete requires to change a habit and become better with a new habit? Maybe that will point toward the real culprit. Regarding the injuries, I said my opinion on the topic about it, and I think limbwalker gave the answer: some coaches don't know how to coach because they don't know what they coach beyond the 16 or 100 points of a sequence.


It really depends on the coach. Obviously, the coaches were at a loss of trying to help this archer. Most coaches tend to walk away from an archer if they cannot fix the problem and blame the archer for the "poor attitude" or doesn't listen well. It takes a coach with no motive other than to help the archer to succeed. I am well aware of length of time to fix a problem. However, you did not address the drop in score of 350+ points. The one guy I was talking about was a decent shooter who went down to the training center to learn how to shoot the NTS and he did try his best. Most of us kept trying to convince him to revert back to the form that worked, but he was determined to make the change. Unfortunately, he gave up, and walked away. More so from lack of help from those who helped him make the change rather from him giving up for lack of trying. And please, do not think we tried to discourage him. Most of the group I was associated with in Sacramento were fine people who always had the individuals best interest at heart. None of us bashed the method, we just wanted to help the guy get back to enjoying his archery. 

Obviously, I don't know you and you sure do not know my philosophy of archery. When I say that a person tried but became injured or a person tried their best to make the change but eventually gave up. that is not just a quick observation. I even tried to help encourage them to stay with it or go back. Now, since you appear to support the NTS, I would presume you have knowledge of Lee and his efforts. Can you please tell me who besides Jake and Brady have climbed the ladder of success with this program? I cannot think of any except those two and they worked full time at the training center to learn it directly from Lee. However, none of the other RA's have shown any promise. Even if you can name a few more, it doesn't justify the amount of money and effort it has taken, especially when you see that other programs would bring on more success in a couple of years. When I read your comments it appears more that you want the program to work and find snippets to make it look as though people like myself did not spend much time on considering it. As John mentioned I went to a couple of seminars where Lee presented the program. I am always trying to find better ways to help archers learn a good method, but I was not impressed by what he was explaining. I even have listened and watched Jake's Youtube series and can say with absolute confidence that the idea might work for 1 or 2 archers but the majority of archers will fail miserably with the NTS concept. Jake tries very hard at trying to prove that the system works but what I know and have experienced as an archer, instructor and coach it will not work for the majority of archers. 

What's funny with this is that Brady has blended the "angular" with the "linear". I would say that he has more linear than angular. Jake is far more angular and his form shows it. Also, for a guy who is supposed to be strong, Jake's form is without a doubt unstable. His shaking surprises me since this technique should eliminate it. Brady's style and technique is solid and there is no tremble at all when he shoots. He doesn't use major muscle groups, he is using bone structure as it should be used and he uses as few muscles as possible to keep the accuracy working as it should.


----------



## CoyoteRick (May 18, 2016)

chrstphr said:


> That type of bullying from archers and NTS coaches is a safesport violation and should be reported. Having a few archers and coaches suspended will stop that.
> 
> Funny, at USATs, no one ever comes up and bullies any of my linear students when i have been there. Usually people some up to them and discuss how good their form is.
> 
> ...


It just came down to me not wanting to let down the coaching I had here. But at the end of the day, I couldn't care less now. My scores and lack of motivation of shooting prove why I walked away. As for the constant "You should be shooting NTS because xyz" I was just naive and really thought it was a system proven to be effective, but here I am two years later and my mind is quite made up on the real effectiveness. 

Edit: I should also include that the criticism I received wasn't exactly negative, more-so trying to convince me why NTS is the "Better system" and why I'd be better off shooting it in the long run. Just trying to put my experience in three years of recurve out there.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

chrstphr said:


> My thought was my seminar would give the level 2 through level 4 coaches a really good understanding of alignment and how to apply it with their students in simple effective terms. I knew USA archery would never let anything non-NTS or non Kisik Lee be shown to national coaches at a sanctioned event. As I am not a respected US national coach, and do not teach the KSL doctrine, they have nothing to learn from me. I knew I would not be welcome before i asked. But i felt i should at least try and give them the benefit to say yes or no. Their answer was not a surprise. I am sure they all had a good laugh at my expense.
> 
> I can now say I tried to work within the system and it was not wanted. My karma is fine with it.
> 
> Chris


I would say you are well respected nationally in the US, even if you are not a US national coach. I think your seminar does what you intend.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

CoyoteRick's tale is heart breaking, and disturbing in the pervasive toxicity of NTS and the culture that's sprung from it. And all these naive coaches and young people are so clueless. It's like mass hypnosis. How can so many of them not have the good sense to ask the right questions? Namely, if it's so great, why isn't anyone else on the planet getting onboard in the last 14 years? Hello?! I'm reminded of the great line in the song Gloria by Laura Branigan (sadly died too young from cancer) "If everybody wants you, why isn't anybody calling?" https://youtu.be/nNEb2k_EmMg?t=71


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Rick McKinney

I don’t support NTS per se, I am saying the shot sequence is checking all the boxes IF is looked at it as a whole where whole is a balance between physical effort and mental activity during the shot sequence. I looked at it from another point of view - traditional aka martial, point of view and checks all the boxes. Hips blocked to ensure the rigidity of the core , checked. Position of the head result of the spine moved by the hips, checked. Internal focus expressed as awareness of the execution; checked : the archer can’t rush to aiming because he is literally off target all the way until he reaches full draw. At full draw his mind moves the focus from execution to target; his intention, his body and his bow and arrow work as one; checked. The expansion and the release happens due to the body tension created by the previous steps. There is no other step the archer has to make other than looking at the target at full draw; checked. Breathing is the easiest thing we do without thinking about it. Learning to adapt a shot sequence on a breathing rhythm is taught in any martial art; checked.

Limbwalker was right when he was saying this shot sequence takes years and total dedication to master. In my opinion NTS sequence is a variation of a shot sequence built with a martial mind - like the “linear draw” it is built too. LAN2 is not explained but points toward a martial art - sword fighting; it should have raised a question mark. 

Why NTS is not good for “archery for masses”:

You need Coaches who understand all the above
Since it is a time consuming activity with no quick results the drop-out ratio is very high 
Koreans are saying the westerners are result oriented and they are execution oriented. It doesn’t fit our “internal clock”

PS I hope a diluted “linear draw” will work. 
Why Brady is better than Jake? Level of understanding is one factor if you compare a 3rd Dan to a 5th Dan. They execute same thing but it is something different.
KSL is saying in a interview the most important quality of an archer is thinking. This is what you are asked to do after you are told how to do - personal interpretation of things you were told.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> Rick McKinney
> 
> I don’t support NTS per se, I am saying the shot sequence is checking all the boxes IF is looked at it as a whole where whole is a balance between physical effort and mental activity during the shot sequence. I looked at it from another point of view - traditional aka martial, point of view and checks all the boxes. Hips blocked to ensure the rigidity of the core , checked. Position of the head result of the spine moved by the hips, checked. Internal focus expressed as awareness of the execution; checked : the archer can’t rush to aiming because he is literally off target all the way until he reaches full draw. At full draw his mind moves the focus from execution to target; his intention, his body and his bow and arrow work as one; checked. The expansion and the release happens due to the body tension created by the previous steps. There is no other step the archer has to make other than looking at the target at full draw; checked. Breathing is the easiest thing we do without thinking about it. Learning to adapt a shot sequence on a breathing rhythm is taught in any martial art; checked.


Good explanation. Now tell us why it doesn't work for half the team (women)


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

lksseven said:


> CoyoteRick's tale is heart breaking


As heartbreaking as it is - and I appreciate him sharing that story and being honest - imagine how it feels for an archer and coach who have been working together for years and years, with the goal of getting the archer into the OTC to further their journey, seeing all their work crumble away, and the archer's will to shoot go along with it. And how many archers and coaches now can tell that story? I sent two young men to the OTC in '07-08 and a young woman in '18. Myself and others had invested tens of years into those archers, not to mention the years they had invested themselves. Neither of the young men shoot anymore. They stopped soon after leaving the OTC. Again, I'm sure that's a very common story. And maybe it was before this head coach too, but I'm not sure to this degree. Some days I feel like we've traded an entire generation of coaches and archers for two silver medals, and I wonder if that's worth it. 

I still believe that recreational and elite archery training should be clearly separated. It should be very, very hard to get into elite archery training programs. Not the other way around. We are losing too many people by trying to force a round peg into a square hole.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

I said maybe physical factor, but there might be other factors too - like not all Coaches like to train women, the same way not all eastern coaches like to train westerners. Sometimes is cultural, sometimes is just personal.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> I said maybe physical factor, but there might be other factors too - like not all Coaches like to train women, the same way not all eastern coaches like to train westerners.


But if they do all the steps you described above...then why not?


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

If I knew I would answer. The bad results are due to sequence or the entire environmental factors? What makes you say it is due to sequence?

PS Another question: if it is a martial art technique, requires time to master. What do you think will be the chances of a 1Dan - first level, you know what to do - against a 5th Dan competitor (Koreans)?
The adversary is not sending 5 years old experienced practitioners to represent their country. Have you seen kids standing on their hand to learn a feeling in JOAD camps?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> If I knew I would answer. The bad results are due to sequence or the entire environmental factors? What makes you say it is due to sequence?


Just trying to follow your logic.



> I am saying the shot sequence is checking all the boxes


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

You are trying to follow your logic, not mine. Mine says a sequence known is not enough no matter how good it is. Requires archer’s maturity to become what is supposed to be. You can’t burn time. It was a topic about Brady’s shot sequence. 
For me it makes sense why now and why not earlier. I said maturity, Rick McKinney said Confidence. One includes the other.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> You are trying to follow your logic, not mine. Mine says a sequence known is not enough no matter how good it is. Requires archer’s maturity to become what is supposed to be. You can’t burn time. It was a topic about Brady’s shot sequence.
> For me it makes sense why now and why not earlier. I said maturity, Rick McKinney said Confidence. One includes the other.


So you're saying there has never been a woman mature enough to make it work? Is that what you're saying? If that's true, then surely women need another option. Although I don't believe that's true. I certainly think Khatuna and Crystal and Mac and a few others were as mature as any of the men, and yet none of them have achieved world class levels under Lee. I'm not aware of a single woman (but perhaps one, briefly) who has achieved world class levels under Lee actually, in 20 years of coaching.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

How many years Brady had with KSL and how many years an archer from women team had with KSL?


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

*You learn martial arts!*

Horse stance. Old martial arts:

You don’t want to flex your spine so much you shrink in height. This doesn’t create strength it just makes you feel tight. Try fighting like that. Not katas and deep breathing; fighting, where the other guy doesn’t let you do what you want to do. Good luck with that. 

Returning to “neutral” from a hyperextended lumbar spine and severe anterior tilt of the hips by SLIGHTLY flexing the spine and bringing the chest downs gets you back to normal. If you started at normal/neutral then too much flexion is too much flexion. Your new “tucked hips” is too much posterior tilt. Too much posterior tilt is too much posterior tilt. Horse stance posture isn’t a box to check and then things are correct. There are measurable degrees of motion and interrelated motion and posture in anatomy. Even “neutral” and “middle” have ranges. Coaching cues get misused in the wrong context. “Tuck your pelvis and drop your chest” is an appropriate cue in some instances (hyperextension at T/L junction with accompanying excessive anterior tilt)but will lead to disaster if you misapply on someone who doesn’t need the correction because they’ve already assumed good posture just standing there. 

Western boxing undoes every striking martial art, ever, and quite handily. No horse stances or blocked hips or any of that. Wrestling vs aikido. Wrestling wins. Brazilian jiu jitsu vs aikijiujitsu.. bjj every time in real world context. No make believe just real world applications. Bruce lee said one year one year of western boxing and wrestling is going to beat almost any black belt with 20years of experience in other martial arts. Comparing the too-tucked horse stance (..severely flexed spine and posterior tilt resulting in shortening of the body’s height) is a great comparison to NTS: they’re both wrong in the context of actually fighting and of actually shooting a bow at high level. Nobody fights or shoots bows that way with much success. You’re going to prove whatever you’re seeking out to prove playing that game: where one ill conceived form compliments another then you have “proof”. 

Linear shot system checks all the boxes too. It does it with everything you mentioned but with one more important element: it works in the real world. It works for men and women.its simple and effective and well developed. It’s proven time and time again on the world stage. Aikido and NTS, not so much. That’s the best example imo ; Aikido and NTS. Where practitioners spend20 years believing in a expert but are woefully unprepared for real world activity. You should’ve picked western boxing, wrestling, bjj and muay thai if you wanted to beat humans at fighting and Korean linear if you wanted to beat them at archery.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> How many years Brady had with KSL and how many years an archer from women team had with KSL?


Do you really not know the answer to that? Most women did not last more than 3 years with KSL. Those that did, had nowhere else to go and nothing else to do, and clearly their parents would rather have them at the OTC than home. That is a failure of the coach, not the women, IMO. You cannot use Brady as the example when you're talking about someone who has been tasked with creating a nationwide system of coaching from the ground up. Particularly since Brady was already a world champion archer. Basing a national system on the success of one individual is just silly.

Also, you're avoiding the question. You said maturity, so I asked you about mature women. Then you changed the subject.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

ryan b. said:


> Horse stance. Old martial arts:
> 
> You don’t want to flex your spine so much you shrink in height. This doesn’t create strength it just makes you feel tight. Try fighting like that. Not katas and deep breathing; fighting, where the other guy doesn’t let you do what you want to do. Good luck with that.
> 
> ...


Just damn.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

I just wanted to hear the answer from you. It is a Coach problem, not sequence problem. A Coach at that stage is a guide, not a Captain. If he is not guiding things can go south very easy no matter how good the archer’s intentions are.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> I just wanted to hear the answer from you. It is a Coach problem, not sequence problem. A Coach at that stage is a guide, not a Captain. If he is not guiding things can get south very easy no matter how good the archer’s intentions are.


I don't disagree with this. Still waiting on your "maturity" answer tho


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

You drink wine? You will understand my answer, disregarding personal opinions. Environment is everything. Without it, will become a very expensive vinegar.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> You drink wine?


LOL I'll wait...


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

And I'm not disagreeing with your "coach" assessment, but Lee was hired to do a lot more than just coach a team of already elite archers. He was hired to build a national program that worked at every level.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

It comes a moment when a line is drawn and someone has to explain things. I don’t think the AT is where the line is drawn though.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> It comes a moment when a line is drawn and someone has to explain things. I don’t think the AT is where the line is drawn though.


Okay, suit yourself. You said it. I was just wanting clarification.


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

I am still trying to wrap my head around this "Martial Arts" philosophy and why Martial Arts people think it is critical for archery. I say it is a bunch of bunk! I have argued this issue since the 1980's. Although Lee has tried to make it his own, it has been around. Nobody has added any names to my list of success other than Brady and Jake and as I mentioned, Brady isn't 100% but has made many compromises to fit in order to become as good as he has. Now, to put it in a different perspective, I would argue that Brady would have been so much better if he was taught properly and had the right coach to do so. I have always felt that Brady was far better than he could prove because of Lee holding him back. However, you cannot keep a champion down like Brady forever. He found a way to work with it and has developed into an excellent archer. Please don't use "GOAT" around me. I have rubbed shoulders with some of the greatest archers to ever pick up a bow and Brady hasn't quite gotten there. Give it some more time and maybe he will be an equal to some of the greats. When you shoot against a guy who sets a world record and broke it several times while nobody else came close and owned that record for 14 years, then I will be happy to listen. As for the women, Korean women have done some outstanding things during the past 30 years and I am fairly sure there was no Martial Arts approach. They owned the Olympic Record over the men for years and with 35# pound holding weight on average. They only held for about 2 seconds, so their preparation was "down and dirty". No time for anything but pull back and as they anchored the pin hit the center and the motion continued to finish the shot. Plain and simple. Chris is on the right track. Kudos to you Chris!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Well there ya' go! Pretty hard to argue with that. 

D.O., in all fairness I do get your M.A. analogies and I appreciate them. The cool thing about archery is there are so many approaches to this sport, and none of them are wrong. Some are just better than others for any particular individual.

Rick, I think the "G.O.A.T." references are just because everyone wants the "GOAT" to be someone they personally know, that competed in their time. Right now, that's Brady and everyone wants a piece of his success (for whatever weird reason) so right now, with no real knowledge of the past, people are wanting to give him that label. Long before Brady or even Darrell, there was some great archer that none of us ever knew. And before that archer, there was another. This sport has been around for thousands of years. Claiming someone is "the GOAT" is just kinda silly when you think about it. Archery isn't baseball.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Rick McKinney said:


> I am still trying to wrap my head around this "Martial Arts" philosophy and why Martial Arts people think it is critical for archery. I say it is a bunch of bunk! I have argued this issue since the 1980's. Although Lee has tried to make it his own, it has been around. Nobody has added any names to my list of success other than Brady and Jake and as I mentioned, Brady isn't 100% but has made many compromises to fit in order to become as good as he has. Now, to put it in a different perspective, I would argue that Brady would have been so much better if he was taught properly and had the right coach to do so. I have always felt that Brady was far better than he could prove because of Lee holding him back. However, you cannot keep a champion down like Brady forever. He found a way to work with it and has developed into an excellent archer. Please don't use "GOAT" around me. I have rubbed shoulders with some of the greatest archers to ever pick up a bow and Brady hasn't quite gotten there. Give it some more time and maybe he will be an equal to some of the greats. When you shoot against a guy who sets a world record and broke it several times while nobody else came close and owned that record for 14 years, then I will be happy to listen. As for the women, Korean women have done some outstanding things during the past 30 years and I am fairly sure there was no Martial Arts approach. They owned the Olympic Record over the men for years and with 35# pound holding weight on average. They only held for about 2 seconds, so their preparation was "down and dirty". No time for anything but pull back and as they anchored the pin hit the center and the motion continued to finish the shot. Plain and simple. Chris is on the right track. Kudos to you Chris!


Nobody needs MA to hit a damn target. But since you are not able to understand LAN2, you don't teach breathing as expansion and trigger of the clicker and you ask yourself why it doesn't work, maybe the answer is where you don't want to wrap around your mind. This is what you have in your hands. Chris in his video is talking about pushing shoulders away to get the expansion by watching a korean archer. The same thing happens if he verifies Brady, but he is not watching him. One says "push the shoulders out" other says "pressure in the core will activate teres minor and major and the expansion through contraction of those muscles will give that 50-50 expansion, moving shoulders out". You had an archer using this type of expansion, 50-50, naturally, since 60s, but he was never studied. Martial Arts take what is natural and apply to their purpose, they are for easterners the source of information for subtle body mechanics. Since koreans have hundreds of years of uninterrupted archery knowledge, the "traditional" (read martial) archery is used as inspiration for the sport of archery. I am looking forward how Chris will teach the students "move away the shoulders" when they were told generations to pull-pull-pull to break the clicker. The same thing the NTS level 4 Coaches are teaching today: continue pulling. Jake Kaminski had a seminar a year ago where he stated that continuous pulling is changing the way arrow will leave the fingers, every millimeter counts when the back of the arrow is not living the same place every time. 
You can argue about what would have been until the end of days. Why were you not handed the task to do what KSL was asked to do? Nobody is asking this question from what I see. Why when you had a record of good results you (USArchery) went out for someone with a different background?


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

Not to sidetrack but I'm going through Chris's presentation now and I think it's great and want to thank him for his clearly hard work to put it together and share it.

back to the thread,

lee.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

limbwalker said:


> D.O., in all fairness I do get your M.A. analogies and I appreciate them. The cool thing about archery is there are so many approaches to this sport, and none of them are wrong. Some are just better than others for any particular individual.


You remember your post with senior archers from Europe? It was the best sample of archery not polluted by an outside doctrine - home-brewed archery shot sequence. I loved it.
I hope Chris's revers engineering shot sequence will end into a home-brewed winning sequence.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Draven Olary said:


> Nobody needs MA to hit a damn target. But since you are not able to understand LAN2, you don't teach breathing as expansion and trigger of the clicker and you ask yourself why it doesn't work, maybe the answer is where you don't want to wrap around your mind. This is what you have in your hands. Chris in his video is talking about pushing shoulders away to get the expansion by watching a korean archer. The same thing happens if he verifies Brady, but he is not watching him. One says "push the shoulders out" other says "pressure in the core will activate teres minor and major and the expansion through contraction of those muscles will give that 50-50 expansion, moving shoulders out". You had an archer using this type of expansion, 50-50, naturally, since 60s, but he was never studied. Martial Arts take what is natural and apply to their purpose, they are for easterners the source of information for subtle body mechanics. Since koreans have hundreds of years of uninterrupted archery knowledge, the "traditional" (read martial) archery is used as inspiration for the sport of archery. I am looking forward how Chris will teach the students "move away the shoulders" when they were told generations to pull-pull-pull to break the clicker. The same thing the NTS level 4 Coaches are teaching today: continue pulling. Jake Kaminski had a seminar a year ago where he stated that continuous pulling is changing the way arrow will leave the fingers, every millimeter counts when the back of the arrow is not living the same place every time.
> You can argue about what would have been until the end of days. Why were you not handed the task to do what KSL was asked to do? Nobody is asking this question from what I see. Why when you had a record of good results you (USArchery) went out for someone with a different background?


I have said this quite a few times, and anyone who doubts it should do a little research. The clavicles set the distance between the shoulders. If you are going to "expand" the distance between the shoulders, it does not come from breathing (though it can be related, just not the primary function), and it does not come largely from the teres minor and major. It comes from downward rotation of the scapulae, until you reach the maximum distance between the shoulders. Look up which muscles cause downward rotation of the scapulae. This is what Chris is observing. It can come from either side or both. Most people don't finish this way. They creep up on the bow side and pull through with deltoids on the draw side. When you can set up solid and finish as Chris describes, it is very stable and reliable. Many close the scapulae to the spine too early (great back tension) and get stuck with no where to go. Again, Chris has carefully observed what is happening in some top Korean shooters and reports it quite accurately. All the complications in NTS and the non-standard language just obscure what is going on. It just is not that complicated, but you can complete the shot lots of ways. If you want a stable platform and consistent release, what Chris describes works and is biomechanically sound.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Icaillo, the breathing is used because under mental pressure you don't need to move your attention to something else - other than target in this case. That internal pressure will make it happen, and it will be not "at will" but "a surprise". Brady said he stays there and waits. You don't deny the relation between breathing causing muscle contraction and movement, which at least is a good thing. I think you are mixing 1 mm movement to clear the clicker with the reaction after release but it is not important. I am looking forward to see how this will be taught. Everything can be obtained using different paths since we are 3D. The challenge is to get the best for task path.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

That may work for Brady. But breathing does not necessarily cause expansion. What Chris describes is much more natural. As I have also said, what we need to take away with respect to biomechanics is how to leverage what the system affords. Or "what can we get for free from the system." Like I tried to teach the NAA 25 years ago in my classes, the best coaches and athletes often find that by instinct. If you learn just a little anatomy and biomechanical principles you are more likely to get it right and not overcomplicate it if you also learn from those who have mastered it and put the two together. Relying on the assumptions of one person is lousy management and unscientific. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Arguing on "it is not but it can be related" or "not largely" is worthless. In the end, even if we agree to disagree, it shows that whatever was taught was not understood. Get rid of it and use something you understand and it doesn't require PhD in biomechanics to be taught. You don't lose your life if you miss.


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Draven Olary said:


> Nobody needs MA to hit a damn target. But since you are not able to understand LAN2, you don't teach breathing as expansion and trigger of the clicker and you ask yourself why it doesn't work, maybe the answer is where you don't want to wrap around your mind. This is what you have in your hands. Chris in his video is talking about pushing shoulders away to get the expansion by watching a korean archer. The same thing happens if he verifies Brady, but he is not watching him. One says "push the shoulders out" other says "pressure in the core will activate teres minor and major and the expansion through contraction of those muscles will give that 50-50 expansion, moving shoulders out". You had an archer using this type of expansion, 50-50, naturally, since 60s, but he was never studied. Martial Arts take what is natural and apply to their purpose, they are for easterners the source of information for subtle body mechanics. Since koreans have hundreds of years of uninterrupted archery knowledge, the "traditional" (read martial) archery is used as inspiration for the sport of archery. I am looking forward how Chris will teach the students "move away the shoulders" when they were told generations to pull-pull-pull to break the clicker. The same thing the NTS level 4 Coaches are teaching today: continue pulling. Jake Kaminski had a seminar a year ago where he stated that continuous pulling is changing the way arrow will leave the fingers, every millimeter counts when the back of the arrow is not living the same place every time.
> You can argue about what would have been until the end of days. Why were you not handed the task to do what KSL was asked to do? Nobody is asking this question from what I see. Why when you had a record of good results you (USArchery) went out for someone with a different background?


Sigh....Using snarky comments to get my G.O.A.T. is typical. I will answer your last question first, since it is something most on this board will get if they haven't already. The reason I wasn't asked was because of one word...Easton. You can do your own research on that.

You use the MA ideology as why Korea is so good at archery and their 1000's of years of "tradition". Great causal explanation. If that is the case, why aren't the Mongols good at archery? After all, they took over the world years ago due to their archery. How about the Chinese and their MA? Their existence is well known and why are they not so great at archery? How about Japan? Their MA is historic and their Samurai is well known. I wonder if anyone put together the relationship of when the Koreans started to become dominant and who taught them to be so great? I'll let you research that as well. 

Leonard's explanation is great as for getting through the clicker. Remember, the movement is so tiny most will not see it. Setting up on the clicker is key and motion is minor. However, I leave that to those who want to fiddle around. Chris is on track to sharing some vital information and I for one am tickled that he is sharing it.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Agree completely, Rick, and that is the point. Chris has shared information that can be valuable to many. 

And my point was never that someone should need a PhD to understand. In fact, just the opposite.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Casual explanation? Why are you copying from koreans and not Europeans? Why their way of drawing the Olympic bow is so similar with their way of drawing traditional bow? Why not Japan? Because Japan teens are more interested in soccer than archery, and "they" don't share information easy with outsiders - where outsiders are also non-practitioners of their lineage. The link with the past took a toll with the interdiction of practicing MA too. Arguing with me on this subject it shows nothing but the level of frustration because Easton dictated to you something. I am really sorry for this, but I am not the person who hired KSL and kept him in place when he did not delivered. 

I never disagreed with what Chris shared, knowledge wise.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

lcaillo said:


> Many close the scapulae to the spine too early (great back tension) and get stuck with no where to go.


I'm feeling attacked here. LOL


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> Icaillo, the breathing is used because under mental pressure you don't need to move your attention to something else - other than target in this case. That internal pressure will make it happen, and it will be not "at will" but "a surprise". Brady said he stays there and waits.


So the reason this works for Brady, and a few other archers, is because they have mastered the art of setting up within 1mm of breaking the clicker. This is also exactly the reason this doesn't work for 99.999% of archers out there - ESPECIALLY recreational archers. Recreational archers have literally ZERO chance of consistently setting up within 1mm of breaking the clicker, shot after shot. Zero chance. So *they need a different tool*. I don't understand why it's so difficult for so many coaches to understand and recognize this (not saying you D.O.). Chris' alignment and leverage instruction is a much better tool for most archers, and it's been proven to be an effective world class method.

So, we threw out the method that works best from beginner to elite archer, and replaced it with a method that only works for people who can afford to put the rest of their life on hold in order to pursue only archery, then we tried to teach beginners using that method. It just seems like a dumb approach to me. But, it's "new" and "innovative" and therefore stupid Americans will buy it, because that's what we do. What else would you expect from the #1 consumer / instant gratification culture in the world?


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Draven Olary said:


> Casual explanation? Why are you copying from koreans and not Europeans? Why their way of drawing the Olympic bow is so similar with their way of drawing traditional bow? Why not Japan? Because Japan teens are more interested in soccer than archery, and "they" don't share information easy with outsiders - where outsiders are also non-practitioners of their lineage. The link with the past took a toll with the interdiction of practicing MA too. Arguing with me on this subject it shows nothing but the level of frustration because Easton dictated to you something. I am really sorry for this, but I am not the person who hired KSL and kept him in place when he did not delivered.
> 
> I never disagreed with what Chris shared


I am having trouble understanding your point(s). The thread is about Chris' seminar.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

My point ended long time ago about the subject. Did you followed the topic to understand why we ended here?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> Casual explanation? Why are you copying from koreans and not Europeans?


Unless I'm missing something, we are copying from Koreans, because they copied from Americans, which is a major point Chris (and others, including Rick) is making. The Koreans may have tweaked things to fit their culture and individual situation (training thousands of school children), but I think the idea is 60's and 70's Americans-->80's-2000's Korea--> back to today's Americans, rather than Americans --> Korea --> KSL --> Americans.


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

I haven't gone all the way through Chris's presentation yet, but concerning the concept of expanding through the clicker, here is my thoughts. I'm a pusher. I push through the clicker and I do not pull. I draw back to anchor, rotate my draw shoulder up and back, and when I have settled onto the target I push my bow shoulder forwards. My arm is not bent, nor do I use my hand, I just focus on pushing the bow toward the target, "click" and release. I cannot tell you how I push my bow shoulder forwards, I cannot tell you what muscles I'm using. I can tell you that if I don't set my draw shoulder right, i.e. up and back, that I can't get my clicker to go off. That is what I'm focusing on. 

A few years ago I was in a seminar presided over by the late great Hardy Ward, who was one of the guys who brought American archery to the Orient, but that is another story. Hardy taught what he called a Supinating drawing motion and expansion. Which basically when you come to anchor to get the clicker to go off, you rotate you drawing shoulder in a counter clockwise motion, which was in affect an up and back or back and up motion, and he showed that if you did this rotation correctly that motion would force the bow shoulder to push forward, click and release. The tell tale sign of this drawing motion is that at draw and during the expansion phase one may be able to notice that the archer's little finger on her drawing hand moves ever so slightly toward their neck. Hardy claimed that this was what the Korean women do, and that this was a method that he stated that he rediscovered and then taught. He even had a little contraption that he used as an example of how this worked in the shoulder. Hardy was an engineer by education. 

My point being is that it is very possible to expand one's shoulder girdle to get the clicker to go off, and it is very teachable.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Limbwalker
Good then. Get rid of existing and get back to the old with the new touch. I said this to you months ago.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> Limbwalker
> Good then. Get rid of existing and get back to the old with the new touch. I said this to you months ago.


I think (and hope), especially based on Casey's recent success, this is the direction we're headed.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

erose said:


> I haven't gone all the way through Chris's presentation yet, but concerning the concept of expanding through the clicker, here is my thoughts. I'm a pusher. I push through the clicker and I do not pull. I draw back to anchor, rotate my draw shoulder up and back, and when I have settled onto the target I push my bow shoulder forwards. My arm is not bent, nor do I use my hand, I just focus on pushing the bow toward the target, "click" and release. I cannot tell you how I push my bow shoulder forwards, I cannot tell you what muscles I'm using. I can tell you that if I don't set my draw shoulder right, i.e. up and back, that I can't get my clicker to go off. That is what I'm focusing on.
> 
> A few years ago I was in a seminar presided over by the late great Hardy Ward, who was one of the guys who brought American archery to the Orient, but that is another story. Hardy taught what he called a Supinating drawing motion and expansion. Which basically when you come to anchor to get the clicker to go off, you rotate you drawing shoulder in a counter clockwise motion, which was in affect an up and back or back and up motion, and he showed that if you did this rotation correctly that motion would force the bow shoulder to push forward, click and release. The tell tale sign of this drawing motion is that at draw and during the expansion phase one may be able to notice that the archer's little finger on her drawing hand moves ever so slightly toward their neck. Hardy claimed that this was what the Korean women do, and that this was a method that he stated that he rediscovered and then taught. He even had a little contraption that he used as an example of how this worked in the shoulder. Hardy was an engineer by education.
> 
> My point being is that it is very possible to expand one's shoulder girdle to get the clicker to go off, and it is very teachable.


Teaching front side expansion is IMO a great idea to teach because it also takes care of one of the most common problems we see in archers - a weak, collapsing bowarm. I can't tell you how many students I took in who were taught pull,pull,pull and had never been taught to develop their front side. When I taught some of these archers to just "push" to break the clicker, it's like a light bulb went off. Now, rarely did we stay with JUST the push. But I spent quite a bit of time on this with many of my students so they could understand how to use the OTHER half of their body to their advantage. Even if they went back to a mostly pull technique, knowing about this push usually helped clear up their bowarm issues and shoot much stronger shots.

Once my top students were able to demonstrate to me that they knew how to push to break the clicker, and how to pull to break the clicker (usually on consecutive shots) then I would task them with allowing their OWN BODY to sort out which worked best FOR THEM. It would become an ongoing conversation between me and them, checking their progress, reminding them of the fundamentals, and encouraging them to develop their own shot, and then own that shot 100%. Because under pressure, this is what they will revert to. Once they had convinced themselves that they found "their shot," I would have them explain it to me in detail, and write it down. We would go back to that if they started to struggle. 

I never wanted to take options away from my students. I just don't consider that a productive teaching approach.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

limbwalker said:


> Teaching front side expansion is IMO a great idea to teach because it also takes care of one of the most common problems we see in archers - a weak, collapsing bowarm. I can't tell you how many students I took in who were taught pull,pull,pull and had never been taught to develop their front side. When I taught some of these archers to just "push" to break the clicker, it's like a light bulb went off. Now, rarely did we stay with JUST the push. But I spent quite a bit of time on this with many of my students so they could understand how to use the OTHER half of their body to their advantage. Even if they went back to a mostly pull technique, knowing about this push usually helped clear up their bowarm issues and shoot much stronger shots.
> 
> Once my top students were able to demonstrate to me that they knew how to push to break the clicker, and how to pull to break the clicker (usually on consecutive shots) then I would task them with allowing their OWN BODY to sort out which worked best FOR THEM. It would become an ongoing conversation between me and them, checking their progress, reminding them of the fundamentals, and encouraging them to develop their own shot, and then own that shot 100%. Because under pressure, this is what they will revert to.
> 
> I never wanted to take options away from my students. I just don't consider that a productive teaching approach.


This is what so much coaching discussion about archery misses. You have take the individual where they are and figure out how to progress to improved performance in the context of their shot. 

Now John, what can you do for a sixty year old [email protected] like me?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

lcaillo said:


> This is what so much coaching discussion about archery misses. You have take the individual where they are and figure out how to progress to improved performance in the context of their shot.
> 
> Now John, what can you do for a sixty year old [email protected] like me?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


LOL, I've had some challenging "mature" archers over the years for sure!


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

limbwalker said:


> Teaching front side expansion is IMO a great idea to teach because it also takes care of one of the most common problems we see in archers - a weak, collapsing bowarm. I can't tell you how many students I took in who were taught pull,pull,pull and had never been taught to develop their front side. When I taught some of these archers to just "push" to break the clicker, it's like a light bulb went off. Now, rarely did we stay with JUST the push. But I spent quite a bit of time on this with many of my students so they could understand how to use the OTHER half of their body to their advantage. Even if they went back to a mostly pull technique, knowing about this push usually helped clear up their bowarm issues and shoot much stronger shots.
> 
> Once my top students were able to demonstrate to me that they knew how to push to break the clicker, and how to pull to break the clicker (usually on consecutive shots) then I would task them with allowing their OWN BODY to sort out which worked best FOR THEM. It would become an ongoing conversation between me and them, checking their progress, reminding them of the fundamentals, and encouraging them to develop their own shot, and then own that shot 100%. Because under pressure, this is what they will revert to. Once they had convinced themselves that they found "their shot," I would have them explain it to me in detail, and write it down. We would go back to that if they started to struggle.
> 
> I never wanted to take options away from my students. I just don't consider that a productive teaching approach.


Well that is the reason why I changed up my shooting technique to focus on pushing, I had a tendency to occasionally collapse my bow arm; and as folks like you and Rick and others have taught the bowarm is the most important side of the body, and I felt like if I focused on that part only good things can happen, and I've gotten better. My only problem now is father time.


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

lcaillo said:


> This is what so much coaching discussion about archery misses. You have take the individual where they are and figure out how to progress to improved performance in the context of their shot.
> 
> Now John, what can you do for a sixty year old [email protected] like me?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


I don't know Larry, you did pretty good at indoor Nationals.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> *So the reason this works for Brady, and a few other archers, is because they have mastered the art of setting up within 1mm of breaking the clicker. This is also exactly the reason this doesn't work for 99.999% of archers out there - ESPECIALLY recreational archers. Recreational archers have literally ZERO chance of consistently setting up within 1mm of breaking the clicker, shot after shot.* Zero chance. So *they need a different tool*. I don't understand why it's so difficult for so many coaches to understand and recognize this (not saying you D.O.). Chris' alignment and leverage instruction is a much better tool for most archers, and it's been proven to be an effective world class method.
> 
> So, we threw out the method that works best from beginner to elite archer, and replaced it with a method that only works for people who can afford to put the rest of their life on hold in order to pursue only archery, then we tried to teach beginners using that method. It just seems like a dumb approach to me. But, it's "new" and "innovative" and therefore stupid Americans will buy it, because that's what we do. What else would you expect from the #1 consumer / instant gratification culture in the world?


THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The most incisive point ever made on this forum. End of the thread as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

lcaillo said:


> And my point was never that someone should need a PhD to understand. In fact, just the opposite.


Exactly why i did my seminar. Plain talk for plain folks with plain answers. 

Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Draven Olary said:


> I never disagreed with what Chris shared, knowledge wise.


Actually you said i was ignorant on posture, stance and the horse stance. And my entire introduction was an attack.

I can quote it if needed.


Chris


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

You are ignorant on postures from outside archery, aka horse stance and sway back, and their reason to be - and it is not a big issue until you make fun of it. I maybe over-reacted and I said that. And it is not just me who said your presentation was having too many attacks - you posted a dialogue on this matter too. So, lets stay with the facts. You can try to find where I was bashing you and your attempt to provide something new. I will apologies if necessary.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

erose said:


> I don't know Larry, you did pretty good at indoor Nationals.


E, I think you mean "Leonard"! :wink: It's been a few years since that compliment could be directed to me. :darkbeer:


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Could be much worse than being mixed up with Larry.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Draven Olary said:


> You are ignorant on postures from outside archery, aka horse stance and sway back, and their reason to be - and it is not a big issue until you make fun of it. I maybe over-reacted and I said that. And it is not just me who said your presentation was having too many attacks - you posted a dialogue on this matter too. So, lets stay with the facts. You can try to find where I was bashing you and your attempt to provide something new. I will apologies if necessary.


I think,hope, that we are all about the same thing here, trying to learn, share, and understand how to shoot better. It is fine to disagree, but let's not make it personal. The seminar has plenty of value and the point has been made that ridicule and bashing of others does not add value but is a distraction. I don't think that there is much value in going down that road further.

When you dig down to the mechanics and anatomy, many are on the same track. I believe Hardy's description refers to posterior tilt of the scapula, which also comes with depressing it. What Gary describes as putting it in your back pocket is very similar. If you understand the movements and mechanics of the scapulae, it all becomes pretty clear. If everyone would learn just a little of the accurate terminology we could all talk the same language. We might even find that some of NTS is actually not that different, and better understand where it is different. The problem is we are talking about what others think using terminology that does not lend itself to any standard understanding.

While the description "linear" certainly differentiates from the "angular" method, there are points of convergence in terms of what happens in transferring to the muscles of the back. When we stray from standard anatomical terminology we are asking for confusion and become susceptible to the hocus pocus...


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Agreed Icaillo. On all accounts. 
And it is another point that maybe should be made: whatever technique is presented and broke to pieces, each piece should be analyzed using a simple question: "with what THIS helps the whole - aka the archer posture at full draw ready to send the arrow in the target?". Maybe NTS shot sequence is not just a bunch of steps coming from nowhere and going nowhere as they are taught and understood by a lot of people.
When Chris presented HIS version it was nothing contradicting the end posture until now.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Draven Olary said:


> And it is not just me who said your presentation was having too many attacks - you posted a dialogue on this matter too. So, lets stay with the facts.


They didnt say i had too many attacks. And the difference was they were not put off by it. 

The one saying i really bash NTS was videoing most of the seminar on his phone for future reference. The other has already been shooting this system for sometime and told me he was shocked how i knew as much about the shot as the Korean medalists that coached him, especially since i was not Korean and never came up through their system. 

saying I'm ignorant on what i delivered in the seminar is bashing my overall seminar. Its ok, I knew my seminar would ruffle feathers amongst many. especially doing it at a major USA Archery/ World Archery event. John has alluded to this several times as well as Rick. 

Maybe you should attend a Kisik Lee seminar so you have a comparison. And lets see who is the more civil and who ridicules. I am delivering information they dont want disseminated in the face of USA archery and their national system. And i am not going to pull any punches when delivering it. A lot more than you will be put off by it. There is a lot to lose for USA archery if what i am teaching becomes widespread. Namely all the money from the certification system. Linear is so much simpler, not as much money generator as KSL which has 108 steps. 

If you are focused on the zingers, then i am getting through. Most people ignore the zingers as they are too close to the heart of the issues. 

Chris


----------



## woof156 (Apr 3, 2018)

Bill_in_TR said:


> Pardon my ignorance but could you provide a link to your You Tube channel.


I hope this is OK but it was in public domain:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha1D4LJ1120

I enjoyed the emphasis on alignment and bow hand grip, common problems for many students and oldies as well. I still would recommend my students set an upright head posture before draw and to not bring their face to the string but rather the reverse but with emphasis on alignment of the shoulders up front.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> saying I'm ignorant on what i delivered in the seminar is bashing my overall seminar. Chris


Actually, I believe what D.O. was saying was that you were ignorant of the purpose of those postures as they relate to martial arts. And I understood what he meant by that. I didn't see it as a personal attack. I am also ignorant of those postures as they relate to martial arts, because archery is the only "martial art" I've ever studied! LOL 

There are a lot of things we are ignorant to. Saying someone is ignorant is actually not a personal attack unless the subject chooses it to be. "ignornat" has been given a negative connotation, when it means nothing more than "not aware of." 

Chris, D.O. has complimented you throughout this thread. Sometimes it's better to just ignore what appear to be personal attacks, and move forward.

That's my .02


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Thank you for your .02 Limbwalker.


----------



## ouki (Nov 29, 2016)

After watching Chris's seminar, watching Brady way too much, and one of Jake's videos about drawing/loading, this whole linear vs angular draw argument sounds like it's talking about pretty close to the same thing.

The hand moves linearly to the face in both systems. The elbow/LAN2 moves angularly about the spine in both systems.

Brady @ 12m
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaDV3n44Yt0&t=12m

Jake @ 5m 5s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMTBMdqbXqI&t=5m51s

Choi Mi Sun @ 3m
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIanv6rnNDk&t=3m

No matter how you want to divvy it up, if you want a straight wrist at the end of setup, your hand is ever so slightly to the side/"away" from your face because you cannot pull your forearm through your face. Younger Koreans like Choi Mi Sun, Kang Chae Young and Lee Woo Seok seem to use this method now as opposed to having more pronounced broken wrists during setup like Ki Bo Bae and Chang Hye Jin (which gave a ridiculously linear draw in line with the target) and look very similar to Brady's and Jake's draws.

I feel like there's been misconceptions on both sides of the argument.

On the NTS side, people keep referring to when Koreans have bent wrists coming down from setup, even though the wrist is straightened out as soon as they exited setup and went to draw/load. Seems like some odd fundamental misunderstanding assuming the string is drawn with a bent wrist.

On the Linear side, perhaps KSL did not explain it correctly as his English wasn't very good at the beginning, and so people took him literally to do this weird rounded draw. Even today it seems like we explain it wrong (eg George Ryals @ 4m 25s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8HQteUyLs8&t=4m25s directly going against what Jake says later in his video).


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

All good points, but spending this much time dissecting how the elites shoot with so little concern about translating that into a easily-consumed national training program for beginners and amateurs, is like trying to figure out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. 

There is a time and place for both discussions, but IMO USArchery got it wrong by creating a "top down" approach toward training beginners using a method that so far, only a handful of full-time archers have been able to make work.


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

The big issue as pointed out by Chris is that the NTS versus the Classical American style is complexity versus simplicity. The NTS is over complicated and because of that you can’t find anyone that really understands the NTS. People who have pointed the following out are right, I’ve been to one of the Symposiums that USA Archery puts on for coaches, and Lee always laments about how his level 3 and 4 coaches don’t know how to teach his system; and he is telling a room of level 3 and 4 coaches that we don’t know his system, and somehow it is all our fault.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## ouki (Nov 29, 2016)

Right, my point wasn’t to say that there isn’t an issue with how unnecessarily complicated NTS can be but rather that both sides are saying that they’re different techniques when it’s the same thing, which I think just further creates this divide between both systems. Both systems fundamentally are very, very similar.

Considering the overarching subject of having to create a national system, NTS probably failed in that regard because only people close to KSL/OTC are the only ones that get to understand it. There is certainly a need to have complexity in the system because we want to be aware of what’s happening at all times when we’re trying to become perfectionists. It’s not ok for beginners. There’s some “attempt” at this when you can see the clear separation in detail between the level 3 and 4 licensing and the only thing you’re supposed to teach new students are the names of the main steps of the NTS cycle.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

ouki said:


> Right, my point wasn’t to say that there isn’t an issue with how unnecessarily complicated NTS can be but rather that both sides are saying that they’re different techniques when it’s the same thing, which I think just further creates this divide between both systems. Both systems fundamentally are very, very similar.


I would disagree due to one key component. Did you see the rope demonstration i did for stability with the archer showing different degrees of angular vs linear? 

That one demonstration shows that the angular draw is inferior and is not stable at all for the human body.

The amount of force i used for the linear demo is 10 times what i used for the other angles, yet linear was rock solid. The others were not.

I am not sure how much of my seminar people are seeing. The average watch time so far is 19 minutes, out of almost 2 hours. Thats 10% , which is what i thought would happen if i posted a video of the seminar. Difficult to know if that was the right decision or not. Especially when people think fundamentally both draw forms are the same. 



Chris


----------



## "TheBlindArcher" (Jan 27, 2015)

chrstphr said:


> I would disagree due to one key component. Did you see the rope demonstration i did for stability with the archer showing different degrees of angular vs linear?
> 
> That one demonstration shows that the angular draw is inferior and is not stable at all for the human body.
> 
> ...


Sorry, watched it in parts, but did get through the whole thing.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

erose said:


> People who have pointed the following out are right, I’ve been to one of the Symposiums that USA Archery puts on for coaches, and Lee always laments about how his level 3 and 4 coaches don’t know how to teach his system; and he is telling a room of level 3 and 4 coaches that we don’t know his system, and *somehow it is all our fault.*
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Yup, and with part-time unpaid volunteers, that is the quickest way to drive them away.


----------



## ouki (Nov 29, 2016)

chrstphr said:


> I would disagree due to one key component. Did you see the rope demonstration i did for stability with the archer showing different degrees of angular vs linear?
> 
> That one demonstration shows that the angular draw is inferior and is not stable at all for the human body.
> 
> ...


I watched the whole thing. I primarily shoot NTS, and even I had some pretty big key takeaways from your seminar. Thank you for posting the seminar as I didn’t attend Vegas. 

The “angular draw” is just barely off the target line, and is arguably just about as efficient as linear draw given the use of a larger muscle group when transitioning from setup to anchor. What some NTS coaches have taught is to be very away from line of target, which is very wrong for precisely the reason you demonstrated on the archer as you can see in the George Ryals video.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

ouki said:


> I watched the whole thing, twice might I add. I primarily shoot NTS, and even I had some pretty big key takeaways from your seminar. Thank you for posting the seminar as I didn’t attend Vegas.
> 
> The “angular draw” is just barely off the target line, and is probably just about as efficient as linear draw given the use of a larger muscle group when transitioning from setup to anchor. What some NTS coaches have taught is to be very away from line of target, which is very wrong for precisely the reason you demonstrated on the archer.


I think a lot of us who've been around since before the beginning of this, can all remember the giant "candy cane" draws of young archers on the line. Even Lee himself said this was very wrong. But, it was caused by the way his information was interpreted, and ultimately it's his job to make sure the people he's certifying, understand the information. Otherwise, don't certify them.


----------



## ceratops (May 17, 2017)

I look forward to watching - the whole 2 hours.

And this discussion makes me glad I've never been exposed to a coach who is an adherent of the NTS sect. The lack of flexibility, in trying to force every student into the same over-complicated mold, just sounds so unproductive.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

limbwalker said:


> I think a lot of us who've been around since before the beginning of this, can all remember the giant "candy cane" draws of young archers on the line. Even Lee himself said this was very wrong. But, it was caused by the way his information was interpreted, and ultimately it's his job to make sure the people he's certifying, understand the information. Otherwise, don't certify them.


I have a question Limbwalker. When you teach someone something very new to him (or different) you do the "do like I do" teaching, which starts with "watch how I do it" . KSL ever showed what he wanted to see? Just curious.
No matter the language barrier, an execution opens the eyes - and I've met Japanese sensei who didn't know english but their class was very reach in technical information assimilated very well by all the participants. When sometimes it was a translator, he was never a practitioner but he was just the "subtitle" of what we were looking at.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

ouki said:


> Right, my point wasn’t to say that there isn’t an issue with how unnecessarily complicated NTS can be but rather that both sides are saying that they’re different techniques when it’s the same thing, which I think just further creates this divide between both systems. Both systems fundamentally are very, very similar.





chrstphr said:


> I would disagree due to one key component. Did you see the rope demonstration i did for stability with the archer showing different degrees of angular vs linear?
> 
> That one demonstration shows that the angular draw is inferior and is not stable at all for the human body.
> 
> ...


Agree there are a lot of good take-aways from the seminar. However, the rope demo was a misrepresentation of NTS. In fact it points to what, imho, is the primary difference between linear and angular. The linear draw requires a shoulder rotation that allows the use of gravity to draw the bow along the target line. Alignment has already occurred as you draw to anchor. I think this is what is actually happening when you "draw to alignment". With NTS, you draw the bow as you rotate your shoulders into alignment, using your upper body as well as gravity to draw. There is no leverage disadvantage with NTS which is what the rope demo attempts to show. 

I agree that NTS is the more difficult system due to that difference. It is hard to coordinate upper body rotation and drawing simultaneously. With Linear, you are already in alignment when you draw so the two actions are distinct and easier to teach. 

Imho.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Draven Olary said:


> I have a question Limbwalker. When you teach someone something very new to him (or different) you do the "do like I do" teaching, which starts with "watch how I do it" . KSL ever showed what he wanted to see? Just curious.
> No matter the language barrier, an execution opens the eyes - and I've met Japanese sensei who didn't know english but their class was very reach in technical information assimilated very well by all the participants. When sometimes it was a translator, he was never a practitioner but he was just the "subtitle" of what we were looking at.


I recall very few instances where Lee himself demonstrated his technique. When we were starting JDT, he would describe, then often his wife or one of the RA's would demonstrate. At his seminars, other coaches (sometimes including me) would demonstrate for the students. Your question really has me curious now and I wish my memory was better, because I now find it very odd that he himself demonstrated his technique so rarely. Interesting question.


----------



## ouki (Nov 29, 2016)

Seattlepop said:


> Agree there are a lot of good take-aways from the seminar. However, the rope demo was a misrepresentation of NTS. In fact it points to what, imho, is the primary difference between linear and angular. The linear draw requires a shoulder rotation that allows the use of gravity to draw the bow along the target line. Alignment has already occurred as you draw to anchor. I think this is what is actually happening when you "draw to alignment". With NTS, you draw the bow as you rotate your shoulders into alignment, using your upper body as well as gravity to draw. There is no leverage disadvantage with NTS which is what the rope demo attempts to show.
> 
> I agree that NTS is the more difficult system due to that difference. It is hard to coordinate upper body rotation and drawing simultaneously. With Linear, you are already in alignment when you draw so the two actions are distinct and easier to teach.
> 
> Imho.


In both systems, shoulder alignment/barrel is complete at setup. Bow is drawn when already aligned. Shoulder aligning during drawing is precisely what you DON’T want to be doing. 

Link to technical bulletin regarding NTS setup from the high performance email:
http://files.constantcontact.com/af94ab47001/2cdf679c-7539-4f1a-a460-31888a0959f6.pdf


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

ouki said:


> In both systems, shoulder alignment/barrel is complete at setup. Bow is drawn when already aligned. Shoulder aligning during drawing is precisely what you DON’T want to be doing.
> 
> Link to technical bulletin regarding NTS setup from the high performance email:
> http://files.constantcontact.com/af94ab47001/2cdf679c-7539-4f1a-a460-31888a0959f6.pdf


That's where the problem lays. If I listen Brady and I read KSL directions and in same time trying to understand the whole, the first part of the draw (lets call it pre-draw) is done while the bow hand falls in a controlled manner by using the core and shoulders rotation. That part is done with the back muscles or lets call it leverage. There is no intentional elbow movement other than natural what so ever. If I would try to describe what is happening there, the archer using the NTS is getting "under" the bow/arrow in the first part of his draw, while the archer using linear draw is already "under" the bow/arrow. From the moment the archer using NTS is "under" the bow there is no difference between the two. In my opinion, the open-stance, shoulders rotation, pelvis in front etc are nothing but steps that will work with the breathing pattern the archer will learn later on. I can be wrong, but this is my take since breathing is part of the shot sequence, especially when it is said the open stance is for 'advanced' shooters. And I believe 'advanced' is synonym with 'being told more'. 
Based on my experience with something similar with linear draw and breathing pattern, the downward movement requires exhale all the way until you release and an expansion while exhaling - anomaly for westerners. But maybe it can be done differently too. The small pause some of the korean archers are doing before full draw is part of pre-aiming but can be also an inhale pause.


----------



## woof156 (Apr 3, 2018)

The problem I found with Kirsik's book and linear draw is all this discussion makes more sense for Olympic style under chin anchor. For barebow split or 3 under anchors on the side of the face there is little detailed discussion. It seems there will be a bit more of a J draw for side of face anchors -- trying to minimize the outward movement is the best we can do.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

woof156 said:


> The problem I found with Kirsik's book and linear draw is all this discussion makes more sense for Olympic style under chin anchor. For barebow split or 3 under anchors on the side of the face there is little detailed discussion. It seems there will be a bit more of a J draw for side of face anchors -- trying to minimize the outward movement is the best we can do.


Maybe not as much discussion in this thread, but in my seminar i show how it applies to barebow. And currently i am giving lessons and a seminar to trad and longbow archers. Howard Hill had great alignment with his draw arm when he shot. His only difference from linear was his bow hand grip. 

Form and alignment work for archery in general. 

Chris


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

woof156 said:


> The problem I found with Kirsik's book and linear draw is all this discussion makes more sense for Olympic style under chin anchor. For barebow split or 3 under anchors on the side of the face there is little detailed discussion. It seems there will be a bit more of a J draw for side of face anchors -- trying to minimize the outward movement is the best we can do.


Once there is money to be made from a book detailing the 118 steps to shooting barebow, you will have all your answers.  

Honestly, without the clicker, the effectiveness of any in-depth method of shooting barebow will be very, very hard to quantify.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Once there is money to be made from a book detailing the 118 steps to shooting barebow, you will have all your answers.
> 
> Honestly, without the clicker, the effectiveness of any in-depth method of shooting barebow will be very, very hard to quantify.


totally agree. I think good principles of shooting go further with barebow and trad than any exact step method. 

Chris


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

ouki said:


> In both systems, shoulder alignment/barrel is complete at setup. Bow is drawn when already aligned. Shoulder aligning during drawing is precisely what you DON’T want to be doing.
> 
> Link to technical bulletin regarding NTS setup from the high performance email:
> http://files.constantcontact.com/af94ab47001/2cdf679c-7539-4f1a-a460-31888a0959f6.pdf


Go to 6:16 of Jake's demo. He is rotating his shoulders as he draws. Quote: "I'm rotating my torso..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDSqgF8sSKk&t=381s


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

It is clear that there are many ways to execute a shot. Chris presented a simplified method that has a lot of merit. I suggest taking what makes sense to each of us and apply it to see how well it works. My view is that we are trying to be too prescriptive about the details and are missing the big picture. 

Get to alignment and execute the release without affecting that alignment. Do it with the least effort and stress on the body. That is really what we are after, isn't it? The presentation offered a path to that which is better than most I have seen. Now let's shoot.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## ouki (Nov 29, 2016)

Seattlepop said:


> Go to 6:16 of Jake's demo. He is rotating his shoulders as he draws. Quote: "I'm rotating my torso..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDSqgF8sSKk&t=381s


If you really want to nitpick, then just watch further at 6:36 where he says, "I'm not rotating my shoulders". The torso twist and shoulder alignment are independent actions that you happen to do at the same time, so it looks like you're rotating your draw shoulder. Without a torso/core rotation, the NTS upper body set to setup would like very similar to the linear set to setup in that, if viewing a right handed archer from behind, the bow shoulder is moving right to get the shoulders into alignment with the arm (or the bow hand is moving up and left). The bow shoulder moving right/bow arm moving left is what causes the illusion that the right shoulder is moving back because it's the optical opposite. Your right shoulder is already in alignment with your left shoulder (otherwise you have a very broken shoulder) - it's the left arm that needs to come into alignment with the shoulders. You're just viewing it in a different frame of reference. This is the entire reason why we had a plethora of people mistakenly exaggerate this "candy cane" effect because they couldn't separate the torso rotation with getting into alignment.

Just to be clear of what terminology we're using, setup is not "drawing" the bow - it's the part where you're getting the bow in plane-ish with the target. When he is done at setup, the shoulders don't move anymore.

This is Jake's setup. The shoulders are aligned here even though we can't really see it because of his hoodie.
https://imgur.com/a1nBsXI

I would not like to discuss this further.


----------



## tassie_devil (Aug 15, 2018)

Thanks ouki, it's really interesting, to get the NTS input alongside Chris' stuff. If this is the case, ignoring the open/square stance and torso side of things there is a lot of similarity with linear and NTS, the latter done properly. The big difference of the picture of Jake above (correct me if I'm wrong Chris) is that in linear the string hand would be in front of the face not off to the side. Great value can be seen in seeing where the systems are similar - the overlapping areas are probably the key points to good form

As a weaker type of build I think it would be far easier to draw with my string hand inline than out where Jake's is.

However, if correct NTS form has the shoulders alignment at this point, are the discussed injuries a result of incorrect use of the system than the system itself? That said, I believe a good simple should be simple enough for normal people to follow... Chris' system has helped me a lot.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I have to laugh at a group of people (myself included) that are dissecting a bunch of minute details that none of us can consistently replicate. LOL


----------



## woof156 (Apr 3, 2018)

chrstphr said:


> Maybe not as much discussion in this thread, but in my seminar i show how it applies to barebow. And currently i am giving lessons and a seminar to trad and longbow archers. Howard Hill had great alignment with his draw arm when he shot. His only difference from linear was his bow hand grip.
> 
> Form and alignment work for archery in general.
> 
> Chris


I did see that and no real criticism here you had other fish to fry but it was brief-- I guess I am struggling with trying to get alignment early in my shot cycle-- I totally agree with its importance to hitting any where close to what you want to hit consistently.. Kirsik's book completely ignores barebow but then Olympic style is the money maker and part of the fun is finding out how to-yourself with some basic foundation principles in mind.



limbwalker said:


> Once there is money to be made from a book detailing the 118 steps to shooting barebow, you will have all your answers.
> 
> Honestly, without the clicker, the effectiveness of any in-depth method of shooting barebow will be very, very hard to quantify.


Yup would love to see a whole book on that but as you say _ if wishes were horse beggars would ride_-- yeah I am that old. And as you say Bb is hard to quantify. Really from the information that is out there we can kind of figure out what we are supposed to do, it just might not look as pretty as it should.


----------



## AlpNov (Aug 2, 2017)

chrstphr said:


> I would disagree due to one key component. Did you see the rope demonstration i did for stability with the archer showing different degrees of angular vs linear?
> 
> That one demonstration shows that the angular draw is inferior and is not stable at all for the human body.
> 
> ...


Not a big fan of the rope demonstration. It is misleading. If you have braced your hand on his shoulder for the angular draw as well so that he wouldn't have to brace himself from falling it would have demonstrated much better.

That said, I'm a fan of the simplicity of this principle. Trying to break down NTS in the first lesson is a nightmare for me. I always resort to teaching anchor and elbow position, alignment is a far fetched dream that might be mentioned in the third or fourth lesson if they come back, don't even think about back tension until after lesson five. I don't think I've ever taught anybody expansion/transfer to hold correctly because I've yet to be able to practice it in the four years I've shot and competed.


----------



## gaboy77 (Sep 8, 2017)

Chris,

Many thanks for posting. I was not in Vegas and really appreciate the perspective and information. As a mid 40's guy who never touched a bow until my kids got into the sport, I like seeing new information and approaches. I realized to help my kids and others I needed to pick up a bow and learn to shoot. I have worked solely with NTS under a Level 4 and am a level 2 myself (not that it is worth anything). I see some real potential for myself and my kids (8 and 13) in the material you have provided. I am planning to start testing some of your information on myself today. I really wish I was closer to Vegas, I would love to have a lesson or 2. I know positing the video was risky from your persepective but i really think it has lots of useful information and appreciate you sharing. Thanks again!


----------



## jhinaz (Mar 1, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> I am not sure how much of my seminar people are seeing. The average watch time so far is 19 minutes, out of almost 2 hours. Thats 10% , which is what i thought would happen if i posted a video of the seminar. Difficult to know if that was the right decision or not. Chris


Chris, I watched the entire video and I'm glad that I did. It contains material that I don't remember seeing in the seminar that I attended in Vegas (I think the one I attended was Seminar #2 on Friday). 
Thanks for doing the Live seminars and also for putting it on YouTube. - John


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Chris, I watched the whole video and I'm not sure I'm glad I did. The image of you walking around in a half-squat position will probably be seared in my mind forever. :mg:

Having said that, it was a great way to make your point and was very funny. LOL


----------



## Boltsmyth (Nov 16, 2002)

Thanks Chris for reminding us there is more than one way. And thanks everyone for an intelligent, entertaining, and informative discussion!


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

AlpNov said:


> Not a big fan of the rope demonstration. It is misleading. If you have braced your hand on his shoulder for the angular draw as well so that he wouldn't have to brace himself from falling it would have demonstrated much better.


I wasnt bracing on his shoulder for him to have more stability. I was bracing on his shoulder so I had more stability pulling. The hand on his shoulder was for my benefit, not his. 

The force i applied on the linear was dramatically more than any of the force i applied in the angular directions. 

But i can see your point. 

Chris


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> Chris, I watched the whole video and I'm not sure I'm glad I did. The image of you walking around in a half-squat position will probably be seared in my mind forever. :mg:
> 
> Having said that, it was a great way to make your point and was very funny. LOL


:weightlifter:olarbear:


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

jhinaz said:


> Chris, I watched the entire video and I'm glad that I did. It contains material that I don't remember seeing in the seminar that I attended in Vegas (I think the one I attended was Seminar #2 on Friday).
> Thanks for doing the Live seminars and also for putting it on YouTube. - John


Yes, unfortunately each day i left out things as it is an outline only and not scripted per se. The video i put up was the most complete version of all three days though i still find i left things out from day to day. 

Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Chris, I watched the whole video and I'm not sure I'm glad I did. The image of you walking around in a half-squat position will probably be seared in my mind forever. :mg:
> 
> Having said that, it was a great way to make your point and was very funny. LOL


I tried to have humor whenever i could. People tend to remember the funny parts. 

Chris


----------



## G4RB4G3M4N (Feb 12, 2009)

Rick McKinney said:


> I am always trying to find better ways to help archers learn a good method


Mr. McKinney, does this mean we may - at least one day - get a Version II or Sequel to "The Simple Art of Winning?"


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

G4RB4G3M4N said:


> Mr. McKinney, does this mean we may - at least one day - get a Version II or Sequel to "The Simple Art of Winning?"


If and when I retire i have been thinking of another book with a different approach.


----------



## bruce_m (Jan 23, 2012)

limbwalker said:


> I think a lot of us who've been around since before the beginning of this, can all remember the giant "candy cane" draws of young archers on the line. Even Lee himself said this was very wrong. But, it was caused by the way his information was interpreted, and ultimately it's his job to make sure the people he's certifying, understand the information. Otherwise, don't certify them.


Thats a great way to put it... "how it was interpreted" I've heard attendees say first hand... with my own ears... 

"Just got back from a seminar.... KSL now wants more of a check mark... not a candy cane at set to set up...." 

"now KSL says expansion should be 1-2 seconds... not 1-3 seconds" (head shaking... at this one for sure)

Figured that had to be a misinterpreted message from a Lvl 4 class.


----------



## Mike Lawless (Sep 6, 2017)

Chris, I just watched the video, and although I was at Vegas, I wasn't able to attend the seminars. Wifey wanted to have some fun time too.
While watching, I realized you and your son and I were shooting on the same practice bale Thursday night. Your son is an impressive young man!

I've been trying to implement the draw style you were outlining in the seminar. But I feel like I'm trying to open up a broken lawn chair! With practice, maybe I can get part way there, but I just ain't near as flexible as I once was! I'll keep after it though. It makes sense. To me at least!


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Yes we remember you Mike. It was nice to meet you. Sorry you are having some difficulty with the shot and your flexibility. 

In general, just try to apply the principles as best you can with the range of motion you have. 

Chris


----------



## Mike Lawless (Sep 6, 2017)

chrstphr said:


> Yes we remember you Mike. It was nice to meet you. Sorry you are having some difficulty with the shot and your flexibility.
> 
> In general, just try to apply the principles as best you can with the range of motion you have.
> 
> Chris


Well, gettin' old ain't for sissies! That much is certain. The best we can do, is just that. The best we can do.
At this point, rotating my torso for the first part of the draw seems to be working OK, and netting "better" alignment that what I was doing before. Almost like winding up for a golf swing. 

At any rate, I did get usable information from your presentation. I appreciate you putting it out there


----------



## beleg2 (Dec 31, 2005)

Congratulations Chris!!!
One of the best seminar I've ever see in youtube!

Martin


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Mike Lawless said:


> Well, gettin' old ain't for sissies! That much is certain. The best we can do, is just that. The best we can do.
> At this point, rotating my torso for the first part of the draw seems to be working OK, and netting "better" alignment that what I was doing before. Almost like winding up for a golf swing.
> 
> At any rate, I did get usable information from your presentation. I appreciate you putting it out there


Determining just how far you can push is the hard part about aging. Too far and recovery time is much longer or injury is more likely. And the limits keep changing, dammit!


----------



## Mike Lawless (Sep 6, 2017)

lcaillo said:


> Determining just how far you can push is the hard part about aging. Too far and recovery time is much longer or injury is more likely. And the limits keep changing, dammit!


Amen to that. Don't we know it brother!


----------



## Gregjlongbow (Jun 15, 2016)

*Free Vegas Shoot Seminar &quot; The Linear Shot Sequence and Alignment&quot;*

Chris, 

Does the movement of the stabilizer during the draw cycle indicate a true linear shot versus angular draw? 

I’ve been playing around with some of the points, but I keep seeing a left to right sweep no matter what I do. Maybe angular motion is just too entrained in me. I see some other traditional linear shooters who have stabilizer sweep left to right as well though. So, curious if that is or is not an indicator. 

Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Hard to make a blanket statement without seeing how you do the linear draw, but my stab does not go from left to right as a right handed archer. My stab starts out slight right of center and when i get inside the bow, it drifts left. So the opposite of what you are describing.


Chris


----------



## Gregjlongbow (Jun 15, 2016)

*Free Vegas Shoot Seminar &quot; The Linear Shot Sequence and Alignment&quot;*



chrstphr said:


> Hard to make a blanket statement without seeing how you do the linear draw, but my stab does not go from left to right as a right handed archer. My stab starts out slight right of center and when i get inside the bow, it drifts left. So the opposite of what you are describing.
> 
> 
> Chris


Ok thanks! 

I’m really just trying to feel what you describe. I don’t think I’m going to change what I’m doing just yet. 

Another question I have is the comparison of draw lengths between Korean linear style shooters and NTS shooters. While I’m not suggesting either is better in line than the other, NTS shooters typically can be seen with a draw elbow that is further around than linear shooters in reference to their heads. It appears to me this would increase draw length somewhat, and leave less room to expand through the clicker. I say this part because I also feel like this can affect shot timing, and I think linear shooters typically shoot faster as well just going off of watching YouTube. By comparison I feel like Darrel O. And Rick M. were fully extended at anchor. Could be wrong though. I’m just looking at videos. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Darrel and Rick look like linear drawers to me. They draw back inline to their alignment balance, then anchor, then let'r rip. I believe Rick has said as much here in a previous discussion.


----------



## Gregjlongbow (Jun 15, 2016)

lksseven said:


> Darrel and Rick look like linear drawers to me. They draw back inline to their alignment balance, then anchor, then let'r rip. I believe Rick has said as much here in a previous discussion.


Yeah I’m certain they are. I wasn’t saying they shoot angular. Just that their draw lengths looks more extended than most Koreans. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## woof156 (Apr 3, 2018)

lcaillo said:


> Determining just how far you can push is the hard part about aging. Too far and recovery time is much longer or injury is more likely. And the limits keep changing, dammit!


And as bad as pushing to far is that if you don't push hard on the limits the boundary keeps shrinking to the point that walking across the room for another drink of water is a challenge. Decision decisions-- a Pt of mine told me it is OK to hurt a little but if it continues to hurt or gets worse doing what you are doing then it is time to stop and evaluate...but stop. Damn there is always one more end that must be shot to fix the problem of ..........


----------



## huckduck (Nov 24, 2014)

What I took from Chris' seminar is that it is linear alignment, how you get there is up to you. But keep the forces a simple and towards the target as possible.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Interesting read from 2012, still is relevant and fits with this thread.


https://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1831100


Chris


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Gregjlongbow said:


> Yeah I’m certain they are. I wasn’t saying they shoot angular. Just that their draw lengths looks more extended than most Koreans.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Oh, then Yes! I agree with you on that.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

chrstphr said:


> Interesting read from 2012, still is relevant and fits with this thread.
> 
> 
> https://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1831100
> ...


Wow, I'd forgotten how awesome that thread was. The college equivalent of an archery master's degree. Thanks for the revisit.


----------



## Draven Olary (Jun 12, 2016)

Very interesting read. Thank you for resurrecting it.


----------



## Maggiemaebe (Jan 10, 2017)

How little things change as time goes by...baby steps I guess.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

A quote from Rick's post: "coaches who have varied their styles to either satisfy their own belief or to work in the culture they are representing"

There is a lot of wisdom behind this observation. The fact is that most coaches methods "satisfy their own belief". The problem is when someone attributes to science that which is merely their interpretation of science and cannot drill down to distinguish fact from belief, or data from interpretation. Also, failure to accommodate the culture where athletes develop will inevitably lead to failure to modify it where it needs change and failure to leverage its advantages.


----------



## saltywetman (8 mo ago)

chrstphr said:


> At the Vegas Shoot
> 
> Linear Shot Sequence and alignment seminar by Chris Hill
> 
> ...


Sorry for bumping this thread back from over 2 years ago, but just got through half of the video so far and everything has been invaluable. Been trying to self learn through books and videos as there are no local coaches I can find for oly recurve coming from compound and have been attempting to unsuccessfully learn the nts method well. When I shot compound used a lot of leverage with the draw and can shoot for hours on straight without even feeling any fatigue. When i transitioned to recurve and was using the NTS method. Things went well when I was fresh but i fatigued pretty quickly which ended up compromising my form and therefore alignment.

I also found it much more difficult keeping my head turned and locked down as my upper torso rotated during setup following jake's vids and going by the total archery book. My neck mobility is not as great as others and i'm sure I'm having a lot more tension during the shot sequence compared to when I shot compound. (again, not to knock the system as it is probably myself not utilizing the right amount of intensity. Squeezing butt cheeks to tilt pelvis forward, exhaling and locking down core to keep straight spine, my body had a bunch of tension prior to me even lifting the bow. Then with upper torso rotation to perform the angular draw it would always shift my head off its initial position.

Just tried your higher draw elbow method bringing the shoulders already aligned fully and utilizing leverage for opening the bow up even prior to drawing the bow, I was pleasantly baffled at how much less energy I used and how relaxed my entire body was, and best of all, how because my body was not tensed up, my neck was so much more relaxed and able to remain in position since I was not shifting my torso during the draw anymore, it was simply pulling straight back since my shoulders were already aligned.

With the angular draw, I found as I fatigued it took more and more effort and during the rotation as I got tired, my head would naturally shift more and more that i'm almost fighting my neck trying to force it to twist as far over as possible because I was slowly looking through the very corner of my dominant eye (like you touched on in the video) and actually had a minor nerve pinch after a long practice session last month. I may end up shelving the total archery book for now and revisit it in the future after I develop a consistent shooting form with the linear draw method. The linear draw method is by far easier to grasp by a newbie without a coach present to observe and correct every step of the shot cycle (something that I feel is super important using the NTS method). 

I can't wait to finish this and try this new method this weekend! I have a coworker who recently picked up a recurve to learn oly recurve and I have forwarded your video to him and highly recommended him check it out prior to going shooting this weekend.

Again sorry for bumping this thread but I just wanted to personally give you a shout out and thanks for sharing this method in such a clear and detailed video Chris!


----------



## chang (Sep 16, 2008)

Before NTS and B.E.S.T, early KSL teaching emphasized quite a lot on the shoulder-bowarm line and the use of lower Trapez. Engaging the lower Trapez may be one of the key reason for the angular low draw. 

With the linear draw style, which back muscle group will be more use for going through the clicker?


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

chang said:


> With the linear draw style, which back muscle group will be more use for going through the clicker?


the back and top shoulders


Chris


----------



## chang (Sep 16, 2008)

chrstphr said:


> the back and top shoulders
> 
> Chris











Yes, for doing KSL's pull behind the neck exercise, I found it usually engage the top/middle back naturally.

The linear draw setup may even help getting into the "pull behind neck" alike back alignment earlier during the draw.


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

I watched this vid about a year ago or so during one of my (1000's of) attempts at oly and to me, it was great. It's amazing how much info and experience he puts into his presentation and it's freely available on Youtube. He does a lot of brilliant myth-busting, IMO...

My efforts have failed, but that's all me. I highly recommend it and I'd go to it live, if I were going to be there...

lee.


----------



## chang (Sep 16, 2008)

There could be more than one way of aligning the shoulder-bowarm :


----------



## saltywetman (8 mo ago)

chang said:


> There could be more than one way of aligning the shoulder-bowarm :


According to the diagram in this clip, the final shape of the archer's arms and shoulders is more of a trapezoid than it is a triangle. Is this an ideal alignment? I thought the triangle alignment is what every archer wants to reach regardless of ksl, linear, or rotational draw?


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

Don't get so hung up on perfect geometry. Individual differences exist. The goal is to be in the position which allows for the best alignment to transfer the force to the body and conduct the shot with least effort. Look at the anatomy. The clavicle is curved, the shoulder is complex, and the path for the force to be supported is through the humerus, to the scapula, to the clavicle, to the sternum, if you want the most support with the least muscular effort. The support structure is not straight lines. The archer should be learning to feel the position that supports the shot best, or what I think of as being behind the bow (I think that originally came from Rick). Whether it is something like that or barrel of the gun, the feel is what needs to be learned, not a specific position.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

yes, i always tell my students to "feel" where the shot is strongest and easiest to hold. That is the alignment for them. It is not always exact. Most times it is slightly off a perfect triangle. 


Chris


----------



## MidnightWizard (Feb 6, 2018)

I want to thank Mr.Chris for your seminar.
It is an eye-opener for me, plateauing for such a long time, and getting confused with so much info on alignment and shooting style. I have made great progress and shooting multiple personal best with just my understanding of your alignment.
But I get stuck at the expanding part of your shot, I don't know how to actually do it, when I'm trying to do the reverse shrug at full draw I just feel like im tensing without moving the arrow through the clicker. But if I just shrug my front shoulder down it feels like im reaching with my shoulder, pushing the bow to the target and that made the clicker click, and I have made some good results with that kind of expansion. If I do it with the draw should it just feels stuck, like it cancels out my front shoulder and I'm just staying still tensing.
Can you please explain more about your expansion and help me with what im doing wrong ? Thank you very much.


----------



## chang (Sep 16, 2008)

The "wedge" might be a strong for forming a "Static" posture.

However, the direction of expansion is less inline with the drawing force line and cause more sight movement. Japanese technique shown in some late 70s publications tended to align the shoulder more parallel to the draw force line for more sight picture stability when going through the clicker.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

I am very happy that my seminar is still being discussed 2 and half years after i gave it and posted it online. I am pleased there is still discussion on the information i presented and that archers are still finding useful bits of explanations that help them shoot better.

I am glad there is an alternative to nationally presented archery systems. I expressly wanted to give an insight into how the Koreans shoot using an American form from the 60s and 70s. I think they have refined it to a form that is very consistent and makes podiums. There is more information out now on how the Korean's shoot from the KAA - Youtube, etc than when i started the seminars, but i think my english language version makes it easier for understanding and use among the english speaking world.

I am still busy with mostly international students, and i still have a great success rate with archers using this method. I have had great success with the barebow community as well. That was an added plus i had not anticipated. 

Perhaps some of this success is that i just have great students.


Chris


----------



## saltywetman (8 mo ago)

Since there aren't any out there, you should make your youtube channel the first in depth linear draw go to channel like how jake has built his channel up to be one of the most in depth NTS go to channels!


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

saltywetman said:


> Since there aren't any out there,...


Actually, there are if you look for them. My personal favorites are:






About - Online Archery Academy







www.onlinearcheryacademy.com







https://www.youtube.com/c/OnlineArcheryAcademy





https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=coach+kim+hyung+tak+archery+school


----------



## chang (Sep 16, 2008)

Jeong Hee Jin's archery channel 
His club's Airbnb link


----------



## saltywetman (8 mo ago)

would Ash's method be considered linear? in some of the videos it looks as if he's somewhere in between


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

saltywetman said:


> would Ash's method be considered linear? in some of the videos it looks as if he's somewhere in between


I've been on this board for almost 20 yrs and have yet to see a definitive explanation of "linear" - other than "not lateral". Chris has his way of explaining it and many have done will with it and that's great. If you compare Chris's demonstration with someone else who claims "linear" or "Korean", you may see some differences. Who's wrong, who's right? 

Koreans have variations as well. For example, many if not most top Korean women use a cupped wrist of varying degree and probably fit most folk's idea of a linear draw cycle. Kim Woo Jin uses a flat wrist. Is he not linear? Should I care? RE: Ash: I think Ash demonstrates good technique, his series is very detailed and easy to follow, and I've seen nothing that contradicts my understanding of Korean archery.


----------



## saltywetman (8 mo ago)

Seattlepop said:


> I've been on this board for almost 20 yrs and have yet to see a definitive explanation of "linear" - other than "not lateral". Chris has his way of explaining it and many have done will with it and that's great. If you compare Chris's demonstration with someone else who claims "linear" or "Korean", you may see some differences. Who's wrong, who's right?
> 
> Koreans have variations as well. For example, many if not most top Korean women use a cupped wrist of varying degree and probably fit most folk's idea of a linear draw cycle. Kim Woo Jin uses a flat wrist. Is he not linear? Should I care? RE: Ash: I think Ash demonstrates good technique, his series is very detailed and easy to follow, and I've seen nothing that contradicts my understanding of Korean archery.


Thanks, I was actually looking in subbing to Ashes program but was hesitant that it would confuse me if it started adding in aspects of angular draw. If his method is more in line with the linear/Korean style I will pick up his programs to check it out.

I recently gave up attempting to learn the ksl method through books and videos. After watching Chris' seminar and making just 2 adjustments (square stance + shoulders in alignment off the bat) I have seen a drastic improvement in consistency and grouping and am committed to continue to developing further with to this method. Was just looking for resources to fill the gaps identified as not covered in the seminar.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

saltywetman said:


> Thanks, I was actually looking in subbing to Ashes program but was hesitant that it would confuse me if it started adding in aspects of angular draw. If his method is more in line with the linear/Korean style I will pick up his programs to check it out.
> 
> I recently gave up attempting to learn the ksl method through books and videos. After watching Chris' seminar and making just 2 adjustments (square stance + shoulders in alignment off the bat) I have seen a drastic improvement in consistency and grouping and am committed to continue to developing further with to this method. Was just looking for resources to fill the gaps identified as not covered in the seminar.


For shoulder alignment, watch Chang's FIVIC's video of Joo Hyun Jung. The way she rotates her shoulders into alignment as she goes into setup/pre-draw, imho, is the epitome of Korean style shoulder alignment. Watch videos of all the top Koreans and you will see most do something similar. Often it is done so smoothly (Kim Woo Jin, Kang Chae Young) that you can't tell when set up ends and drawing to anchor begins as to shoulder alignment. One smooth movement - It just happens. Others will have a different perspective, so hear them all out and do what feels right.


----------



## saltywetman (8 mo ago)

Seattlepop said:


> For shoulder alignment, watch Chang's FIVIC's video of Joo Hyun Jung. The way she rotates her shoulders into alignment as she goes into setup/pre-draw, imho, is the epitome of Korean style shoulder alignment. Watch videos of all the top Koreans and you will see most do something similar. Often it is done so smoothly (Kim Woo Jin, Kang Chae Young) that you can't tell when set up ends and drawing to anchor begins as to shoulder alignment. One smooth movement - It just happens. Others will have a different perspective, so hear them all out and do what feels right.


Thanks for the suggestion seattle!


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Sorry, I'm not Julie - the link is a shout-out for her awesome strings.


----------

