# One Final Hinge Question....(maybe)



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

Ok......straight up. I'd just like to know from some of those of you who believe in this "pure" "back tension" "thing" as it regards to *firing* a release, and only firing. 

If rotating the hand in any fashion is "cheating the release" and improper, why is rotating the draw arm around and down not called "cheating the draw arm?" (And considered proper.) You are supposed to be firing the release with "back tension" not by "cheating the bow arm." 

Simple question. If you are a disciple please answer it directly. :cheers:


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

Lazarus said:


> If rotating the hand in any fashion is "cheating the release" and improper, why is rotating the bow arm around and down not called "cheating the bow arm?" (And considered proper.) You are supposed to be firing the release with "back tension" not by "cheating the bow arm."


The answer is (comically) contained in your own question. I'll leave it up to you as an exercise to figure it out. Hint: re-read ron w's description of what PBT is supposed to accomplish and how, as well as the Wise method.

PS: page 89:
http://arrowtrademagazine.com/articles/july_11/July2011-LarryWiseOnProperReleaseUse.pdf

LS


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Not a "disciple", but the way I have been told was that the muscles in the hand/fingers rotating the release are more easily gauged. You can feel them moving, and much like just pulling a trigger with a lot of slop in it. The thought is in time, it will become just like shooting a trigger, and can lead to target panic.
Using the back muscles to rotate the shoulder is much harder to gauge. You have a harder time feeling the motion that is occurring. As such, it gets harder to gauge exactly when the release will go off.
Being that the original technique being questioned involves using the arm for movement, instead of the hand, because it is thought that it is too easy to track the movement in the hand, by using the hand to rotate the release, you are defeating the purpose of using the arm (or back tension) to fire the release.
Your not learning to use back tension, and your cheating yourself thinking you are by using your wrist/hand/fingers instead of your back to fire the release.... Possibly leaving you open to dreaded TP.

Now, much of that makes perfect sense, especially for someone who is more prone to developing TP.

This is one reason I move my thumb when I pull it off the peg. I put it somewhere that it makes it harder for me to feel the movement.

I use back tension as part of my shot execution, but also with hand manipulating the shot as well..."cheating" the PBT technique, but finding another way to get to the same place.


----------



## Sasquech (Dec 15, 2014)

Small muscles of the hand are well controlled and lead to punching or gripping the hinge off or twist an x . Large muscle group of the rhomboid are slightly increased in tension and the release goes off if set properly an improperly set hinge will NOT go off with this method and will require hand manipulation to go off. Most people that can't do it use mine and can immediately understand and it took time to set up properly. Only takes a couple of degrees of movement. If you pull and yield you get similar results. The goal is an un anticipated release with good follow through.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

The shoulder is said the most flexible and complex joints in the body and it isn't one joint, it's two separate joints working together.

A minute movement is all that is needed to fire a hinge, correct? Here's a short blast, John Dudley; "This muscle group is called the rhomboid muscles. Its purpose is to retract the scapula, pulling it to-wards the spine. When you are doing this exercise it will be easy to feel specifically this muscle group getting tighter. You have done it! In a nut shell that is “back tension” or, at least, the movement needed to properly fire a release from pulling."
So why does John have relaxing the damn thumb and index finger?

Not done. ron hit on it earlier. See snip shot from Bernie P. The damn process can not work if the release arm is not is position to establish a proper pivot point. The release arm, ball, and the shoulder, socket, make a ball joint. Release arm down and out all back tension does is force the ball in the socket. Release arm up, elbow in line as we have been instructed, back tension draws the scapula, drawing the release arm and the ball and socket working as it should the release arm pulls that little bit to fire the release.

Words, words, words. Each and every coach, shooter and child yet to born has a different word or way to describe something. I've got so much crap on back tension stuck in my computer that it's probably why my computers are slow or crash. So 10 people finally describe to me the color red and it still isn't the right color red. That's what it amounts to........


----------



## PSE Archer (Oct 26, 2014)

Sasquech said:


> Small muscles of the hand are well controlled and lead to punching or gripping the hinge off or twist an x . Large muscle group of the rhomboid are slightly increased in tension and the release goes off if set properly an improperly set hinge will NOT go off with this method and will require hand manipulation to go off. Most people that can't do it use mine and can immediately understand and it took time to set up properly. Only takes a couple of degrees of movement. If you pull and yield you get similar results. The goal is an un anticipated release with good follow through.


Very good point Sasquech. 
Picked this little tid bit up from a Lev 4 friends of mine-

If I ask you to do a bicep curl with your draw arm you will feel the bicep tighten. 
If I ask you to touch your shoulder the bicep will be more relaxed. 

It seems many focus on just tightening the rhomboid for shot execution. This is not what I would call proper back tension. As the rhomboid tightens there is minimal movement. It is an isolated muscle which if tightened on its own can quite possibly transfer unwanted tension to other engaged parts of the draw arm. The execution should be focused on the area Lan2









This incorporates a larger set of muscles in the back, while at the same time leaving the draw arm relaxed. It produces the same action as tightening the rhomboid, but with more ease and helping to produce good follow through. 

With properly set hinge and relaxed draw hand/arm - this motion will provide adequate enough rotation to fire the hinge. I know after my hand is completely relaxed, I don't know if it the motion of the Lan2 or a combination the relaxed hand giving to the pressure. Once this motion starts my mind is on the target. 

Back tension is no more than finishing the draw from an external to internal movement. The draw never stops and the shot should never become static. 

Practice round last night at the range was a 57x BHFS using the above mentioned method. I call it BT. 

To each their own.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

The principle and idea behind pure back tension comes from beating target panic or punching a release. The reason the cheating a hinge stuff started was because the idea was to not involve any movement with the fingers or hand that could cause punching or flinches. Using back tension only as a method of firing a hinge was designed to use the back muscles to contract and add tension through them. The results and actions from the added tension is the movement of the arm/elbow. Simple body mechanics.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

I appreciate your attempts to explain the *theory* of back tension mahly, PSE Archer, Sasquech, Sonny, and RCR III. Those were some well written posts. The graphics posted with the words from popular "coaches" point to a problem however, bad form. A high elbow (especially if it is used to "cheat the bow arm") is bad form regardless. A bow arm that must move laterally (once again, to "cheat the bow arm") is also bad form. Bad form, bad teaching.

I get where you all are coming from with bringing firing anxiety into the picture, I really do. But firing anxiety is a "mind" issue. That's where it should be treated, not by screwing with proven, sound, mechanics. 

Having said that, the question from the OP remains unanswered, I'll try again, simply;

The method is called "back tension" *firing.* If you are "cheating the bow arm," which involves a lot more negatives than "cheating the release" why is the former accepted and the latter not? Especially when it's a proven fact that movement at the release (very *minor* movement) is more accurate than cheating your form. There, I think I'll start calling "back tension" *firing* "cheating your form," it's a lot more accurate description. 

I'd rather not turn this into a firing anxiety debate but it seems that may be where you all are taking it.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

While all of the explanations are great, our little poll shows only 13% are shooting this method. Whether or not the process can be done or not isn't the issue. Assuming it "can" be done there are some basic problems that stand out. 1. Too difficult to master. 2. Long learning curve. 3. Rigid requirements. 4. Bodily flexibility, movement and control requirements beyond those of mortal men. 5. There are methods much easier to master using hand manipulation that are equally or more effective.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

that has got to be one the most silly twisted questions I ever seen on this forum and really illustrates a lack of knowledge of what traditionally taught back tension is.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Makes sense to me. Any movement from good alignment position would likely affect repeatability. I'm sure it can be practiced to perfection in controlled conditions, so I wouldn't debate that being possible. I could also see it being hard to adapt for conditions that are less than ideal like 3D and field. 

Either way, for me it is an awkward way to execute the shot. Kinda like trying to text with your elbows. You have a tremendous level of dexterity in your fingers and hands. It's the brain you struugle with in executing a smooth, controlled shot.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Lazarus said:


> I appreciate your attempts to explain the *theory* of back tension mahly, PSE Archer, Sasquech, Sonny, and RCR III. Those were some well written posts. The graphics posted with the words from popular "coaches" point to a problem however, bad form. A high elbow (especially if it is used to "cheat the bow arm") is bad form regardless. A bow arm that must move laterally (once again, to "cheat the bow arm") is also bad form. Bad form, bad teaching.


You'll note the man in Bernie's picture doesn't have a bow. Bernie exaggerating the release arm/elbow - he does that a lot. And then you have to read Griv or Larry to read that bow shoulder in place and back tension maintains shoulder or both shoulders alignment and a great shot...Well, we hope...

Lateral movement, yes, but seen at the elbow. The tiniest movement is needed to fire the hinge. A hinge head swivels. Does the hook move? If so, how much?
What about a thumb release? Doesn't take that much to fire, but then the head is solid on most all models. I'd think movement of the hook has to be more than the hook of a hinge. 

field14 hit on it. Biomechanics. Tension builds and something has to move, release arm ever so much. Index release, finger pulls/clinches. Thumb release, thumb clinches or fingers pull.


----------



## Rick! (Aug 10, 2008)

Lazarus said:


> I appreciate your attempts to explain the *theory* of back tension mahly, PSE Archer, Sasquech, Sonny, and RCR III. Those were some well written posts. The graphics posted with the words from popular "coaches" point to a problem however, bad form. A high elbow (especially if it is used to "cheat the bow arm") is bad form regardless. A bow arm that must move laterally (once again, to "cheat the bow arm") is also bad form. Bad form, bad teaching.
> 
> I get where you all are coming from with bringing firing anxiety into the picture, I really do. But firing anxiety is a "mind" issue. That's where it should be treated, not by screwing with proven, sound, mechanics.
> 
> ...


Can you supply supporting data that finger manipulations are more accurate that actuating two muscles in your back? Do you know how many muscles need to be engaged to perform the multi finger manipulation? Do you have video or target data (akin to field14) that shows the accuracy difference between any of the multitude of hinge actuation methods?

Other than anecdotes from a few of your homies, I'm not hearing anything that will change how I-A shooters will go about their shooting.

What's going to happen is that an archer that wants to excel will dedicate the time behind the bow and make achievements happen. Those looking for shortcuts or who are poor at self assessment will still struggle as they haven't structured their program to allow creativity for "exploration" or to tear down and rebuild.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

EPLC said:


> While all of the explanations are great, our little poll shows only 13% are shooting this method. Whether or not the process can be done or not isn't the issue. Assuming it "can" be done there are some basic problems that stand out. 1. Too difficult to master. 2. Long learning curve. 3. Rigid requirements. 4. Bodily flexibility, movement and control requirements beyond those of mortal men. 5. There are methods much easier to master using hand manipulation that are equally or more effective.


Also, forgot #6 which is probably the most compelling objection to straight BT. In 1974 Bob Jacobsen didn't shoot execute with BT, In 2004 GRIV didn't support it, in 2015 Levi Morgan said "NONE" of the really top shooters did it... and there are more, but you get the point. I don't have anything to fill in the blanks between 1974 and 2000 but I do know Bernie's and Larry's books came out early in 2000's. I know there is a lot of second or third (or 100?) hand quotes/interpretations from some of the old pros but there is at least some suspicion that these sources may have simply gotten it wrong or have put their own spin on what was actually said. I do know the buzz words Back Tension have sold a lot of stuff and services along the way. In any case, if any documentation exists pre 2000 such as the Bob Jacobsen article teaching or recommending a straight back tension execution with no hand involvement I'd love to see it. Hey, this method started somewhere and I'd find it interesting to dig down deep into it. 

And let's add #7 which is my personal findings Since I tend to take everything literal, when I just tighten my rhomboids nothing happens that I can tell? Holding the release with a static, not relaxed hand (as per Larry Wise instruction), the release doesn't go off. When I concentrate on moving my elbow they do assist in that movement. The problem with that is I keep pulling myself off center, to the left in my case as I shoot lefty. I have read and understand all of the instructions, have tried different variations and the only thing that seems to actually work for me is hand manipulation.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Sonny, since you seem to have Bernie's book would you dig out the exact quote as to why he recommends the back tension method and who he recommends it for? Thanks. BTW, I'm not referring to target panic, I'm referring to his reference to the pros using hand manipulation and why the average Joe shouldn't.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

Rick! said:


> Can you supply supporting data that finger manipulations are more accurate that actuating two muscles in your back?


No, I'm sorry. No I can't. Mainly because the hinge isn't *fired* by manipulating two muscles in one's back. As for supporting data, common sense needs no supporting data. 

Furthermore, the interesting thing about this discussion is the goal posts constantly get moved with the "back tension" as a *firing* method crowd, some say it's "cheating their form" with a high elbow, some say it's "cheating your form" with lateral movement of the draw arm. And in this example is stating something that is impossible, firing a release with two muscles in the back. 

Sorry I couldn't help you Rick! :cheers: This may help though, it's a quote from another user regarding this discussion, very astute;



nochance said:


> Had geometry in high school and physics in high school and college, already knew the truth


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

cbrunson said:


> Makes sense to me. Any movement from good alignment position would likely affect repeatability. I'm sure it can be practiced to perfection in controlled conditions, so I wouldn't debate that being possible. I could also see it being hard to adapt for conditions that are less than ideal like 3D and field.
> 
> Either way, for me it is an awkward way to execute the shot. Kinda like trying to text with your elbows. You have a tremendous level of dexterity in your fingers and hands. It's the brain you struugle with in executing a smooth, controlled shot.



awkward for you, because you can't do it. that doesn't make it a myth, or an illegitimate way, to fire release...it makes it something you cannot do. no need to condescend with silly little prompts of people rolling around on the floor laughing, to those who can.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

Lazarus said:


> If you are "cheating the bow arm,"


"cheating the bow arm" is your invention; that's why you're not getting the answers you want. This notion is clearly rooted in your misunderstanding of the Wise method/PBT/whatever we want to call it - you're not arguing against a legitimate method here. You're still straw manning in a sense, which will not get you anywhere.



> There, I think I'll start calling "back tension" *firing* "cheating your form," it's a lot more accurate description.


No. It's not an accurate description of anything - you're calling it "cheating your form" because you don't understand the original method in the first place.

Part of learning is being able to ask the right questions. You're not doing that here, which is why you're not getting any answers.

LS


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

Lazarus said:


> No, I'm sorry. No I can't. Mainly because the hinge isn't *fired* by manipulating two muscles in one's back.


Yes, it is (as a side effect of the method). Did you read the Wise article I posted earlier?

LS


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

ron w said:


> that has got to be one the most silly twisted questions I ever seen on this forum and really illustrates a lack of knowledge of what traditionally taught back tension is.


Agree. These are record-breakers in all kinds of ways. Good entertainment, tho, sorta....

LS


----------



## jwilson48 (Apr 1, 2009)

Why is it every time Levi Morgan's quote gets brought up all the "pbt"guys completely ignore it? Act like it wasn't even posted?


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

ron w said:


> awkward for you, because you can't do it. that doesn't make it a myth, or an illegitimate way, to fire release...it makes it something you cannot do. no need to condescend with silly little prompts of people rolling around on the floor laughing, to those who can.


Being able to do it, and discovering that it is a less desirable method are two different things. I never said it was a myth. or that I couldn't do it. There again, you can do it, and do it correctly so.......... what again do you have to show for it?

You seem to think I am antagonizing you, but I am not. When I say put up or shut up, I mean very specifically that I want you to show me what benefit your chosen method has provided YOU, that gives you a leg to stand on when you tell me my method is wrong and that no one can be successful using it. All I have seen from you is "go read my posts". If you can spend 40 years perfecting a method that provides small return on investment, I would certainly then question the validity of your claim that your method is successful.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

jwilson48 said:


> Why is it every time Levi Morgan's quote gets brought up all the "pbt"guys completely ignore it? Act like it wasn't even posted?


Good grief.....because he's just a guy that shoots rubber deer, and occasionally wins the NFAA indoor or something. After all, the two main guys you're calling out were shooting 290's with no x's (because there was no x ring) before that snot nosed kid was born. Who knows, those two guys probably had all their 20 pins and were members of the NFAA 500 club too!! :teeth:

Sorry, just can't turn off the sarcasm sometimes. :cheers:


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

EPLC said:


> Sonny, since you seem to have Bernie's book would you dig out the exact quote as to why he recommends the back tension method and who he recommends it for? Thanks. BTW, I'm not referring to target panic, I'm referring to his reference to the pros using hand manipulation and why the average Joe shouldn't.


The US and International Archer. Coach's Corner, page 338 - 340. "The Importance of Draw Length to Correct Form"
There is no mention of the release hand or even hinge noted in the entire article....Right after the bottom picture I posted and before he goes into a long winded run, word for word; _"The correct draw length will get your elbow in a position high enough to allow your back muscles to be able to move the tip of the elbow when you contract them on the draw side. These muscles are called the rhomboid muscles which located between the shoulder blades and under the trapezius."_

"Draw side" underline. Dudley notes; "back half" So I'm asking, what do they mean draw side and back half? Both are talking back tension, but insert draw side and back half....


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

it has gotten me absolutely nothing, other than 40 years of enjoyable archery. some people don't look for money in everything they do, that's what "enjoyment" is. you see, I make enough income that I can simply do something , because I enjoy doing it, regardless of cost.....evidently you can't.
as for your denials of antagonizing me....what would you call your insertions of immature, silly little animated people rolling around laughing, in your replies to my posts.....grow up and act like the supposed "professional archer", you claim to be.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

jwilson48 said:


> Why is it every time Levi Morgan's quote gets brought up all the "pbt"guys completely ignore it? Act like it wasn't even posted?


Well, before Levi was others noting their "other means" of firing a hinge. Levi's quote came almost 3 years later and he isn't ignored. That "other means" of firing a hinge has come more to the surface "PBT" and "other means" are getting discussed and cussed


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

they get "cussed',...because people try it and can't do it. that doesn't make it non existent,... just, as I 've said before,....something they can't do. the problem is that it mkes people feel inadequate, so the fabricate reasons to, "not want", to do it that way.


----------



## md2bintn (Jul 14, 2014)

I have only been shooting a hinge for about 8 months but, have been shooting for 37 years. All I can say is, I'm so glad I consulted Padgett when I started instead of trying to figure it out by what's being said in the many threads on back tension/hinge firing in the past while. I think the main reason for so much arguing is one of semantics...


----------



## jwilson48 (Apr 1, 2009)

My point is if the best shooters in the world are using hand manipulation maybe they are onto something


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

My wife has been a trial attorney for years and teachers are on top of the list of people that you don't want on a jury because they can't make simple decisions and I have a feeling that we are going to screw around and find ourselves on top of that list if we aren't careful.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

By the way Ronw, I am being a professional and a big brother to my friends here on archery talk and to all of the new shooters that I come in contact every day. I am standing up against guys like you after becoming one of the leading coaches in the entire world that has the ability and the knowledge to get them up and running from a keyboard. I don't need a 350 dollar check from them for a weekend seminar, I just need them to visit my website free of charge and they can get on their way. 

I refuse to let people like you dictate the strongest archery forum in the world where good honest people come to learn, by the way I am still learning and hope that in time I can acutually refine my approach and help even more people than I already do. I absolutely do not believe you are anywhere near this approach, I believe you have already learned all you will ever learn and will continue to try and push it down peoples throats. 

The problem you have is that some of us have been learning and now that the truth is out of the bag when it comes to the top shooters in the world you have nothing left to stand on and will have to learn to adapt.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

SonnyThomas said:


> Well, before Levi was others noting their "other means" of firing a hinge. Levi's quote came almost 3 years later and he isn't ignored. That "other means" of firing a hinge has come more to the surface "PBT" and "other means" are getting discussed and cussed


*"Once set to shoot, I concentrate on relaxing both bow and release hands, keeping back tension and slowly squeezing with the second and third fingers until the release is activated" ~ Bob Jacobsen, 1974*

Since Mr. Jacobsen noted "other means" in 1974, perhaps the true "other means" is what some think is the original and may have actually come at a later date?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

ron w said:


> they get "cussed',...because people try it and can't do it. that doesn't make it non existent,... just, as I 've said before,....something they can't do. the problem is that it mkes people feel inadequate, so the fabricate reasons to, "not want", to do it that way.


The reason some people have been made to feel inadequate is due to the constant pounding and ridicule they encounter when they voice any problem or objection to the rigid method that some continue to subliminally force on others by injecting the notion that if you don't do it this way you will never be able to reach the level of perfection that "only" this method can provide... and a whole boatload of similar propaganda.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Lazarus said:


> I appreciate your attempts to explain the *theory* of back tension mahly, PSE Archer, Sasquech, Sonny, and RCR III. Those were some well written posts. The graphics posted with the words from popular "coaches" point to a problem however, bad form. A high elbow (especially if it is used to "cheat the bow arm") is bad form regardless. A bow arm that must move laterally (once again, to "cheat the bow arm") is also bad form. Bad form, bad teaching.
> 
> I get where you all are coming from with bringing firing anxiety into the picture, I really do. But firing anxiety is a "mind" issue. That's where it should be treated, not by screwing with proven, sound, mechanics.
> 
> ...


You asked why it is not cheating the elbow. 
You were given replies that described why the elbow was the only thing that should move. 
One of the main advantages of a hinge DOES have to do with "firing anxiety". Using a hinge can help remove that anxiety.
The PBT method is designed to eliminate as much of that anxiety as possible, due to using big ("dumb" as Bernie might put it) muscles instead of small muscles used for detailed control.
We are getting into WHY one would shoot a hinge, a HUGE number use the hinge specifically for the anxiety issue. Yes, anxiety is a mental problem, so eliminating as much feedback so the mind doesn't know when the shot will happen, is an effective way to deal with it.
As for the form issue, I don't think a high elbow is "bad" form. I have always thought it should be at LEAST parallel to the arrow, preferably having the forearm pointing at the grip.
No matter where you want YOUR elbow, you can END in that location by setting up your release so that it fires when you are in perfect alignment.

Again, I no longer use PBT, I don't have the same problems PBT corrects (or prevents in the first place). But I used to.
I can see valid arguments FOR PBT, and I have seen it work.
Perhaps I didn't have it down as well as I could have, perhaps I didn't learn it perfectly, but using back tension to hold the bow, and a bit of manipulation DOES have ME shooting better, and with less effort.

PBT is a method with a reason. It works. It's real.
It is not the ONLY method that works, and other methods are just as accurate, if not more so.

As such, I can live and let live. I currently shoot an engine that basically came from Padgett. And he is right, no matter what technique you use, you need to set up the hinge correctly. I believe now, that that is possibly MORE important than the method/s you choose (perhaps a reason Padgett is comfortable and proficient with more than one engine).

Now, I have probably at some point in time in this post dis-agreed with everyone. And that's fine.
I think there is too much put into someone else being "wrong" than allowing them to be right for what works for them.
We have seen that several want to break away from the "PBT is the only correct way" teaching that we have seen in the past.
I think it is equally "wrong" to try to replace that with "PBT is completely wrong and can't "work".

I'm having trouble understanding why we can't live and let live.

I understand the desire to "fight" the my way or the highway" mentality many have come up against. But do be careful NOT to become what you hate.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Mahly said:


> ...I'm having trouble understanding why we can't live and let live.


Well, that would be no fun!  Not to mention we'd run out of topics so quick these boards would go the way of the dinosaur licitly split!  

All kidding aside, these very volatile threads have been very informative and helpful, have brought to light that simple fact that it's Ok to be different and try things without being intimidated by the more rigid posters you see here from time to time.


----------



## PSE Archer (Oct 26, 2014)

I would agree with everyone else, but then we would both be wrong.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

Mahly said:


> I'm having trouble understanding why we can't live and let live.


Again, great post, I'd find it easy to agree with most of what you said if the subject matter were different. 

The main reason some of us can't live and let live is because there has been so much mis-information pumped out to archers it's ridiculous. This is not helping archers, it's hurting them. Firing anxiety is a great example, *archers are so indoctrinated with this idea of firing anxiety that when you see someone post about 1,000 different challenges they are having that the common answer is......"you have target panic bro."* That is ridiculous. It's all because of mis-information purveyed by at least two major players that have been repeatedly mentioned on this forum, all in the name of selling, a, stuff! 

Furthermore, a particular type of release can no more cure firing anxiety than can a different kind of sports drink. Another lie sold to archers. It's very aggravating. I'm going to keep fighting the fight against that kind of BS information (no offense intended) as long as I can.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

ron w said:


> it has gotten me absolutely nothing, other than 40 years of enjoyable archery. some people don't look for money in everything they do, that's what "enjoyment" is. you see, I make enough income that I can simply do something , because I enjoy doing it, regardless of cost.....evidently you can't.
> as for your denials of antagonizing me....what would you call your insertions of immature, silly little animated people rolling around laughing, in your replies to my posts.....grow up and act like the supposed "professional archer", you claim to be.


Enjoyment is all any of us posting here are after. But that becomes hindered when individuals like yourself attempt to inhibit development of other guys with your rigid views. You seem to forget that's where this all started. You think your way is best and anyone trying something different is a fool and can't comprehend your detailed instruction. That's fine as long as you expect to get called out for it by people that actually can shoot with methods other than yours. That's all I'm saying. You can dodge, detail, keep coming back to the "you just can't do it", tactics all day long, and it still doesn't negate the fact that you can't back up your claims with performance. Why would I follow your advice if it only provided you with 40 years of having fun, when I want to win. I'm going to look at what guys that actually can shoot very well have to say.

And no it's not for the money. It would have to pay much much more to compare to my day job. I want to win because I'm competitive.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Lazarus said:


> Again, great post, I'd find it easy to agree with most of what you said if the subject matter were different.
> 
> The main reason some of us can't live and let live is because there has been so much mis-information pumped out to archers it's ridiculous. This is not helping archers, it's hurting them. Firing anxiety is a great example, *archers are so indoctrinated with this idea of firing anxiety that when you see someone post about 1,000 different challenges they are having that the common answer is......"you have target panic bro."* That is ridiculous. It's all because of mis-information purveyed by at least two major players that have been repeatedly mentioned on this forum, all in the name of selling, a, stuff!
> 
> Furthermore, a particular type of release can no more cure firing anxiety than can a different kind of sports drink. Another lie sold to archers. It's very aggravating. I'm going to keep fighting the fight against that kind of BS information (no offense intended) as long as I can.


I'll have to disagree to the point that I think the hinge can be a very effective tool to cure firing anxiety (TP). That is probably their main reason for existing.
A hinge on it's own is NO more accurate than any other release, Getting into minute details, a caliper is probably the more neutral release you can have.
If the release itself is no more accurate, why does it exist? I contend it exists to be used as a tool to fight TP. A thumb trigger, and an index trigger can both be shot with a "surprise" release, so why do we have hinges? They make it EASIER for some of us to have that surprise release (preventing TP).
Hinges don't cure TP, the same way a needle doesn't cure a hole in your shirt....they are both tools that when used properly, they help fix your problems.
The only "misinformation" is that there is only one true way to fire them if you wish to be accurate (which means you don't get TP).
Ron has said that PBT is not the ONLY way to fire a hinge...he may feel the other ways are "wrong" but he acknowledges their existence.
Those opposed to the PBT method should also acknowledge that PBT indeed exists, and for some, works. even if they feel that the PBT method is "wrong".
To me, that is the ONLY thing that IS wrong, denying there is another way.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Just a couple months ago I showed up to my indoor range to shoot and there was a guy in there waiting for me, I didn't know him but my shop owner had told him I would help him out so he had shown up. I only shoot a hinge now and hadn't shot my index finger release for months but I keep one in my 3d stool just in case someone needs to see me shoot one correctly. I had him shoot a few shots so I could see his issues and then I showed him what it looked like to shoot a release without pulling the trigger, the session for the next 30 minutes went well and he left a different shooter. 

Now the cool thing is what I felt while shooting for him, even though I absolutely do not train with a index finger release or shoot one for any reason other than instruction there were things that I instantly noticed. My float really is disconnected from anything that I am doing with a release and it just does its job, as far as pure back tension I probably come closer to only using pure back tension with a index finger release than I do with a hinge. I pre loaded the rhino xt trigger by squishing my skin between the trigger and the bone in my finger and then I simply increased the tension into my wall straight back and the arrow was gone. When I teach shooting a index finger release I talk to them about being compact and not perfectly lined up with the arrow so that when you put your finger on the trigger and pre load it you still have a little bit of slack to take out of the system before it bottoms out being perfectly straight in line with the arrow when it fires.

Shooting like this reminds me of how much lateral force is given to a person as they apply that back tension and that for beginning shooters getting pulled off the target to the left or right is a big problem and frustration for them. They are trying to generate the required amount of rotation to get the release to go off but that effort is pulling the pin off of what they are trying to hit. So they try and limit the amount of rotation and then they end up standing there waiting for it to fire and end up in a state of panic and forcing something to happen.

This is where pulling straight back into the wall with your back tension and then using some form of effort to rotate the release really does prove to be so good for so many people.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Mahly said:


> I'll have to disagree to the point that I think the hinge can be a very effective tool to cure firing anxiety (TP). That is probably their main reason for existing.
> A hinge on it's own is NO more accurate than any other release, Getting into minute details, a caliper is probably the more neutral release you can have.
> If the release itself is no more accurate, why does it exist? I contend it exists to be used as a tool to fight TP. A thumb trigger, and an index trigger can both be shot with a "surprise" release, so why do we have hinges? They make it EASIER for some of us to have that surprise release (preventing TP).
> Hinges don't cure TP, the same way a needle doesn't cure a hole in your shirt....they are both tools that when used properly, they help fix your problems.
> ...


I agree.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Maly, I totally agree that just shooting a hinge doesn't cure target panic and that is one of the biggest issues I see when many of the pro shooters and coaches go straight to telling people that they need to just go up and blank bale for weeks if not months and then move back and shoot. Blank baling has nothing to do with eliminating target panic right along with picking a hinge.

I personally have mentioned many times that I became a 60x shooter many times over while having target panic and control issues with my hinge. Why? Because just like back tension shooting subconsciously has been so poorly discussed and presented that it was almost impossible to really experience what shooting really can be.

The discussions that I have had with n7709k have probably been some of the most valuable in recent times, most of them were done in threads right here and unfortunately I was already well versed so I was contributing more than receiving new information but I still got something personal from the discussions.

These discussions were on executing perfect shots and letting go of accuracy, for almost all of us accuracy is the biggest factor in gauging weather or not a shot was a good one but once you let go of that accuracy that you expect to experience you can truly for the first time just execute better and more perfect shots and then your accuracy will get even better than you ever thought it could be. For me letting go of accuracy was probably the hardest thing I have ever done as a shooter but it did't take long before I started doing things with my bow that I had only seen on youtube videos or in person when a pro shooter was shooting.

None of the lessons that I have learned that have taken me to new levels really depended on weather I was shooting with pure back tension or if I was yielding or Squeezing my fingers a little. All of them have produced that awesome shooting for me and I enjoy all of them but the lessons such as shooting with my natural float, being disconnected, letting go of accuracy, and executing perfect shots are the lessons that you guys need to move on to. They are the ones that make you special.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

Mahly said:


> I'll have to disagree to the point that I think the hinge can be a very effective tool to cure firing anxiety (TP).


Again, I have to agree. But no more so than any other style of T handle release. They are all basically the same. And are all shot basically the same. ENTIRELY too much emphasis has been put on the hinge as a tool to overcome firing anxiety. It's not in the release, it's in the mind. 



Mahly said:


> That is probably their main reason for existing.


For some reason I kind of doubt that. Go back to 1974, the main release being used was a rope/spike. I believe the hinge was simply an upgrade to the rope/spike. It was very affordable to build/sell. And was a little safer than the rope spike. I don't for a minute believe that in the mid-70's the hinge was developed as an aid to overcome firing anxiety. It was just a step forward from the rope/spike.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

SonnyThomas said:


> Well, before Levi was others noting their "other means" of firing a hinge. Levi's quote came almost 3 years later and he isn't ignored. That "other means" of firing a hinge has come more to the surface "PBT" and "other means" are getting discussed and cussed





EPLC said:


> *"Once set to shoot, I concentrate on relaxing both bow and release hands, keeping back tension and slowly squeezing with the second and third fingers until the release is activated" ~ Bob Jacobsen, 1974*
> 
> Since Mr. Jacobsen noted "other means" in 1974, perhaps the true "other means" is what some think is the original and may have actually come at a later date?


I stayed current. 1974, Jacobsen means nothing to me and sure as would mean anything to today's crowd, not 40 years later. Someone would rattle of he was shooting a wheel bow and weird release. 2004, 14 years ago, Griv and Larry really didn't come to surface with the flack in here until copies and links were put forth. Was that me?
Daniel Boone had the most recent discussion of the hinge, 2012 and there was not a quote of Griv and Larry, not that I can remember. Already notable archers commented. January 2015, Levi Morgan's manner of using a hinge was put in the AT General Discussion forum..

So we've had had many Threads surrounding back tension here? 4 ? And a Poll that doesn't want to distinguish Griv and Larry except for what I posted and no comment on it. Virtually all instruct of relaxed hand. Larry has keeping the fingers tight. Big deal. Doesn't mean the hand can't be relaxed.

So now we have Griv, Larry, John and Bernie. Coaches and all giving or putting something different...I guess to say to distinguish them in some manner."


----------



## PSE Archer (Oct 26, 2014)

Well I have to teach my students something - and it will not be hand manipulation while squeezing a rhomboid. It will be just as explained in post #6. I have a pretty good track record teaching that way, so I will stick with it. 

But then again you have to understand it to teach it.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

PSE Archer said:


> But then again you have to understand it to teach it.


To be more accurate, the best shooters in the world understand it well enough not to teach it. :cheers:



PSE Archer said:


> Well I have to teach my students something - and it will not be hand manipulation while squeezing a rhomboid. It will be just as explained in post #6. I have a pretty good track record teaching that way, so I will stick with it.


Not totally unexpected. The joiners are usually not the innovators. Makes perfect sense though, teach the kids everything except what the best shooters in the world are shooting first. If they're serious enough about the game they'll seek out the techniques used by the best. 

:cheers:


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Not only do we understand it but we can do it just like the best shooters in the world who choose not to do what you are teaching. I'm glad that you have some shooters that you can put your name next to but how do justify taking money from people when many of them would benefit more from another method?


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

How about instead of ruling out methods used by others, why don't we discuss benefits or gains, you have personally seen with your preferred methods. (Hopefully something more than you just had fun shooting leagues that way)

(Not you Padgett, I know that is your approach and you continually share that way)


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

cbrunson said:


> How about instead of ruling out methods used by others, why don't we discuss benefits or gains, you have personally seen with your preferred methods. (Hopefully something more than you just had fun shooting leagues that way)
> 
> (Not you Padgett, I know that is your approach and you continually share that way)


Get your own dang topic.........:jksign: Seriously, we could use a little breath of fresh air in here. Post away. :cheers:


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

cbrunson said:


> Enjoyment is all any of us posting here are after. But that becomes hindered when individuals like yourself attempt to inhibit development of other guys with your rigid views. You seem to forget that's where this all started. You think your way is best and anyone trying something different is a fool and can't comprehend your detailed instruction. That's fine as long as you expect to get called out for it by people that actually can shoot with methods other than yours. That's all I'm saying. You can dodge, detail, keep coming back to the "you just can't do it", tactics all day long, and it still doesn't negate the fact that you can't back up your claims with performance. Why would I follow your advice if it only provided you with 40 years of having fun, when I want to win. I'm going to look at what guys that actually can shoot very well have to say.
> 
> And no it's not for the money. It would have to pay much much more to compare to my day job. I want to win because I'm competitive.


 if enjoyment is all you are after, what concern is it of yours, what I get out my archery ?. all that was , was an attempt to rub the fact that you are some kind of supposed "pro" in my face. I couldn't care less if you are or aren't, or whether you win or not. I don't ask you what you get out your archery, do I ?. you know why?.......because it doesn't matter to me.
I can't inhibit anyone from doing anything by making a few posts. the inhibition comes from interpretation, by the person that reads the post, not from the post. 
again, as usual....show me where in any of my posts, I said someone was a fool, if he tried some different approach. just more BS and twisting of facts, to fit some ridiculous agenda of yours. and again, as usual, you seem to compare what someone knows to what someone does. well, if that's the case, and you don't make much shooting as a pro.....in line your own twisted criteria....you must not be much, as a "pro".
it's easy to call yourself a pro, because you have a shirt that has some name on it.....you buy those shirts anywhere.
as far as someone shooting with other than "my methods", I have no problem with that and I couldn't care less what method you use. the question was asked and I replied with what I prefer,...same as you and all the others. if you want to read my posts, read them,...if you don't, don't read them. 
the difference, is that I don't have to get all wound up and have a hissy fit about someone not agreeing with my method and add little immature pictures when I respond. 
as I've said before, most normal people learned to deal with the fact that everything can't always be their way , when they were adolescents.


----------



## PSE Archer (Oct 26, 2014)

Well with 3 National indoor champions, 1 second place nationals, and well over 20 state buckles won with my method, why change?


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Cbrunson, that is the whole issue that we are struggling with here. There are so many of the coaches who are not only like me doing this for free but actually get paid or make a living and the are only teaching one method and they refuse to do anything else. I simply don't understand how they can watch people set records and win at the local and pro levels doing things differently than they teach and not offer it to their students.

There are many standard fundamentals that we can choose to teach any archer from beginning to advanced and then as a coach it is our job if we are a good one to individualize our instruction to fit a individual needs. That doesn't mean putting the shooter into a cocoon being sheltered, it means we should teach them what we believe to be the best for them and also give them other methods to try on their own. Then as they train and work on the stuff that we gave them they can focus and learn what gives them the best progress.


----------



## Atascaderobow (Nov 4, 2014)

Not trying to be an $#%@ hole but since the mid west states are fairly close why don't the two camps get together for a shoot off? Somebody's method will win. Being on the same line shooting may open some eyes. You guys might be pretty close in how you send an arrow down range. Just a thought from the left coast. Heck I'll throw in $5 for gas money.

I use to think you never talked about religion, politics and Ford, Chevy or Dodge..... guess I better add back tension to the taboo list :zip: All the drama makes for a good read, but it sure does mess with this newbie's head. Maybe I better go back to punching a trigger. At least I know I'm doing that wrong.


----------



## PSE Archer (Oct 26, 2014)

Actually it's not my method. It belongs to A combination of Kisik Lee and Griv. 

I'm out you _jolly fellows_ keep arguing.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

PSE Archer said:


> Well with 3 National indoor champions, 1 second place nationals, and well over 20 state buckles won with my method, why change?


Because maybe you'd like to be teaching the same techniques the best shooters in the world use? Maybe not. To each his own. :cheers:


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Your reason to continue on is the same reason many people never can commit to hinge shooting in the first place because they buy the hinge and they suck with it, they are comparing their current ability to shoot with something they just bought. The moment that you do so is the moment that you stop improving your personal shooting and your instruction to others.

I went back and read your post where you talked about this lan2 thing and it is just yielding, there are a couple different schools of thought when it comes to yielding and one of them is to use back tension to pull your arm on a arc and produce the tension required to do the yielding or stretching of the hand without creeping forward but you can also choose to pull straight back into the wall and do the same thing. I guarantee you that you will have way more success teaching new shooters to pull into the wall in a straight line than you do rotating their arm in a lan2 method. Why, because it is just easier to explain to anyone weather you are talking to someone on the street who has never shot a bow or a experienced shooter. At some point in time when you are working with a shooter you can then give them the opportunity to do both methods and then they can choose for themselves. I guarantee you that not everyone is going to pick lan2, some of them are going to pick it and some are going to pick pulling straight into the wall.

Now here is the real kicker, both methods are doing the same freaking thing and it only comes down to what you are telling your brain because I guarantee you that as I pull straight back into the wall I am using the same muscles that you are when doing the lan2 method and my arm is moving on the same arc.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I knew it was basically the griv method which is totally a hand manipulation thing by stretching it out.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

PSE Archer said:


> Well with 3 National indoor champions, 1 second place nationals, and well over 20 state buckles won with my method, why change?


No, I think I would stick with that as well  just don't force it on someone else. Not that you would do that, just saying...


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

PSE Archer said:


> Actually it's not my method. It belongs to A combination of Kisik Lee and Griv.
> 
> I'm out you jolly fellows keep arguing.


I'm sorry, are you saying you support and teach hand manipulation? GRIV certainly does. I'm just totally blown away by this statement!


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

ron w said:


> if enjoyment is all you are after, what concern is it of yours, what I get out my archery ?. all that was , was an attempt to rub the fact that you are some kind of supposed "pro" in my face. I couldn't care less if you are or aren't, or whether you win or not. I don't ask you what you get out your archery, do I ?. you know why?.......because it doesn't matter to me.
> I can't inhibit anyone from doing anything by making a few posts. the inhibition comes from interpretation, by the person that reads the post, not from the post.
> again, as usual....show me where in any of my posts, I said someone was a fool, if he tried some different approach. just more BS and twisting of facts, to fit some ridiculous agenda of yours. and again, as usual, you seem to compare what someone knows to what someone does. well, if that's the case, and you don't make much shooting as a pro.....in line your own twisted criteria....you must not be much, as a "pro".
> it's easy to call yourself a pro, because you have a shirt that has some name on it.....you buy those shirts anywhere.
> ...


I'm not even sure I know what your tantrum is even about this time.

I don't remember ever saying I am a pro. Not sure where you got that from. I'm still learning, albeit at a much faster pace than some.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

EPLC said:


> I'm sorry, are you saying you support and teach hand manipulation? GRIV certainly does. I'm just totally blown away by this statement!


I was too. That's been happening quite a bit the last few days though. Just supports the idea that the "back tension" *firing* crowd only thinks they are firing with "back tension." 

SMH.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

cbrunson said:


> I'm not even sure I know what your tantrum is even about this time, but since you seem to like the ROFLMAO guy so much here he is again
> 
> I don't remember ever saying I am a pro. Not sure where you got that from. I'm still learning, albeit at a much faster pace than some.


 not bothering to look up the specific post, I recall you saying something about "if I (you) shoot good, I (you) get paid".


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

ron w said:


> not bothering to look up the specific post, I recall you saying something about "if I (you) shoot good, I (you) get paid".


Ah I see. Not sure how in works in your back yard, but nearly every shoot I go to has an amateur money class. I donate more than I win, but I do win some and I am getting closer to the top shooters in my state. I look at this sport/hobby as a competitive one. I want to win. When I started winning the fun shoots, it was time to up the ante. When/if I start winning all the amateur class money shoots, (that would be a big challenge), I would then look to competing with the pros.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

Gentlemen, and after reading these posts, I do use that term VERY loosely. You are all misinterpreting the facts and putting words into the mouths of GRIV, Larry W, Jesse B and others. There is no hand manipulation of a hinge when it is "properly" fired. There is no conscious movement of the fingers, there is no active manipulation of the elbow. 

When the tension is allowed to "bleed out of the system", it is done through the forearm and wrist. The hand is just along for the ride, the fingers' sole purpose is to hold onto the release so you don't fire it into the target, and the elbow, if performed properly, is not consciously moved around and back, but does so on its own due to the sudden release of the energy that was created by the release of the dynamic tension that had been built up during the draw, hold and transfer.

Yes, there are many ways to fire a hinge--some, *in the long run*, will be much more effective than others due to the lesser potential of some methods providing a direct pathway for the shooter developing anxiety through the process. 

Pick your poison and use it, but for the sake of civility, stop behaving like a bunch of school yard bullies when someone does not mold themselves to your personal ideas of how it should or should not be done.


----------



## bseltzer (Nov 20, 2014)

First off, I am just another guy who, although he has 40+ years of on and off archery experience, considers himself a rank beginner simply because I'm just coming back from a 15+ year absence from the sport and because I've just started trying to learn to use a hinge release. For that reason, I thought it would be worth my while to plow through these 3 pages of posts since the OP's question seemed germane to my particular learning experience. Well, there are a few pearls here, yes, but they're difficult to find between all the posturing and rhetoric. So, could y'all tone it down a bit for the sake of a newbie trying to learn? Thanks.

Now, from my hinge release adventures so far, it is pretty clear to me that in order to fire, the hinge HAS to rotate somehow. Is that just me or is it true? If so, then it's also clear that the bloody thing will not fire if you just pull on it no matter what muscles you are using to do so. I've also found that setting the release off by any method that includes increasing tension in my drawing forearm/fingers does not produce repeatable or desirable results.

What does seem to work for me, let me emphasize *for me* is to use my back muscles to stay firmly against the wall while relaxing my drawing forearm. This "action" is easy to reproduce and it reliably generates enough rotation to fire the release without willfully "manipulating" my hand.

OK, that's my story, and I'm sticking with it. It is NOT a method. It is not something I'd recommend to anyone else. All I want to know is if I keep this up, will I grow hair on my palms and slowly go blind. Or is this, or something like it, and acceptable approach?

Please note; I have no agenda here whatsoever except to get some help with my development as an archer. Thanks.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

bseltzer said:


> First off, I am just another guy who, although he has 40+ years of on and off archery experience, considers himself a rank beginner simply because I'm just coming back from a 15+ year absence from the sport and because I've just started trying to learn to use a hinge release. For that reason, I thought it would be worth my while to plow through these 3 pages of posts since the OP's question seemed germane to my particular learning experience. Well, there are a few pearls here, yes, but they're difficult to find between all the posturing and rhetoric. So, could y'all tone it down a bit for the sake of a newbie trying to learn? Thanks.
> 
> Now, from my hinge release adventures so far, it is pretty clear to me that in order to fire, the hinge HAS to rotate somehow. Is that just me or is it true? If so, then it's also clear that the bloody thing will not fire if you just pull on it no matter what muscles you are using to do so. I've also found that setting the release off by any method that includes increasing tension in my drawing forearm/fingers does not produce repeatable or desirable results.
> 
> ...


Any approach that yields more successful results is acceptable. You can always try something different when you stall out. Just don't change to often. Shoot that way for a few months to really see if it is beneficial or not. Too many people want immediate fixes, but this sport doesn't really work that way. Gotta put the time in..


----------



## ride394 (Oct 16, 2006)

It's my opinion that if you can't get a hinge to fire with just your back then you either have the release set wayyy to cold, or you're death gripping the release with your index finger, OR YOU'RE USING THE WRONG MUSCLES!!! If you squeeze your rhomboids and lats your elbow will rotate around your back which WILL fire the release.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

bseltzer, bear with us just a little longer. We have everything you need right here available and there are plenty of us to help keep you going in a good direction, many of us have been waiting for a long time for something or anything to give us that bump that we needed. Levi Morgan finally gave us that huge beyond freaking awesome nuclear explosion that we have all been waiting for. We all know what he said and we all knew the moment that he said it that things were never going to be the same, every _darn_ coach and every person that has been trying to make us believe that nothing was going on in their hand is now back tracking and all of a sudden every body is yielding to the back tension that they have been talking about for years. I have sit here at my computer and listened to them for years claiming that absolutely nothing should be going on with your hand and now it turns out that apparently they have been doing it all along. I guess they just forgot to mention it by accident.

I am personally excited because I have been teaching many people with yielding and I personally shoot with it every day and it is such a good way to shoot a hinge, I generate a very good and usable amount of rotation with yielding and love to use it when I have poor footing shots on the 3d courses or when I freeze up during a scoring round shooting indoor. I do shoot better with my squeeze and pull engine but not by much and who knows in the long run I may end up better with yielding. Only time will tell.

I will say that nothing that I use is without back tension, I use it to add tension to the system so that I am not just sitting in the valley or just touching the wall. I pull into the wall with my back tension and I prefer to pull straight back into the wall instead of rotating my elbow and arm. Back tension is what makes a shot a strong one that isn't just wandering around, back tension and the stretch that it adds to your system is what tightens up the float and makes it hold its self inside the x.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

bseltzer said:


> First off, I am just another guy who, although he has 40+ years of on and off archery experience, considers himself a rank beginner simply because I'm just coming back from a 15+ year absence from the sport and because I've just started trying to learn to use a hinge release. For that reason, I thought it would be worth my while to plow through these 3 pages of posts since the OP's question seemed germane to my particular learning experience. Well, there are a few pearls here, yes, but they're difficult to find between all the posturing and rhetoric. So, could y'all tone it down a bit for the sake of a newbie trying to learn? Thanks.
> 
> Now, from my hinge release adventures so far, it is pretty clear to me that in order to fire, the hinge HAS to rotate somehow. Is that just me or is it true? If so, then it's also clear that the bloody thing will not fire if you just pull on it no matter what muscles you are using to do so. I've also found that setting the release off by any method that includes increasing tension in my drawing forearm/fingers does not produce repeatable or desirable results.
> 
> ...





cbrunson said:


> Any approach that yields more successful results is acceptable. You can always try something different when you stall out. Just don't change to often. Shoot that way for a few months to really see if it is beneficial or not. Too many people want immediate fixes, but this sport doesn't really work that way. Gotta put the time in..


 cbrunson, nicely done, nicely said.


----------



## bseltzer (Nov 20, 2014)

Padgett,

Thanks. FWIW, your contributions to these discussions, as well as the wealth of other materials you make available, have been very helpful. That said, the majority of this and several other similar threads are far too bogged down in ego to be very helpful at my level. I think the best course of action for me at this point is to simply keep my own counsel. Getting tangled up in the polemics here is not constructive.

Wish that weren't the case, but oh well... Trial and error does work. It just takes longer. No matter, if there's one resource I have in spades, it's patience.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

For a guy like you the key is that you already have your hands on a variety of materials from me and other people and the confidence that the top pro shooters in the world are using some of the same stuff. This is totally different than when I came here as a lurker in 2008 and 2009 before I joined, I joined in 2010 and none of the information that you have received was readily available. So yeah it sucks that you have found yourself beginning as we get things up and running again but the cool thing is you were here when it happened.


----------



## bseltzer (Nov 20, 2014)

I do realize I am fortunate to have access to the library of information compiled by the hinge release "pioneers". So I'll stop whining :embara:

I think the real "key" is for me to be confident enough to trust my own observations as subjective as they might be. An engineering background helps with that. As does a strategically video cam


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

ride394 said:


> It's my opinion that if you can't get a hinge to fire with just your back then you either have the release set wayyy to cold, or you're death gripping the release with your index finger, OR YOU'RE USING THE WRONG MUSCLES!!! If you squeeze your rhomboids and lats your elbow will rotate around your back which WILL fire the release.


Exactly my point so thank you for the validation. It can never be the pbt method if it isn't working for someone, the blame is always the shooters fault. You mustn't be doing it right, etc., etc. I wish I had a dollar for every time we've heard that one! Here's a process with requirements so demanding for release settings, draw length, position, angles, no hand involvement, body control, extensive learning curve, etc., and it's always the failure of the shooter. Well I guess I'm just a failure because it hasn't worked for me.

Guilty, guilty, guilty. I'm such a failure!


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

i'll that,..... just as you said to me,...... as a concession.


----------



## bseltzer (Nov 20, 2014)

Helpful, real helpful...


----------



## ride394 (Oct 16, 2006)

EPLC said:


> Exactly my point so thank you for the validation. It can never be the pbt method if it isn't working for someone, the blame is always the shooters fault. You mustn't be doing it right, etc., etc. I wish I had a dollar for every time we've heard that one! Here's a process with requirements so demanding for release settings, draw length, position, angles, no hand involvement, body control, extensive learning curve, etc., and it's always the failure of the shooter. Well I guess I'm just a failure because it hasn't worked for me.
> 
> Guilty, guilty, guilty. I'm such a failure!


Never said you we a failure, just trying to say it isn't a myth. It is entirely possible and can definitely be more accurate than almost anyone in here is capable of being. I'm not one to say that hand manipulation is cheating as I used the relax method all last 3d season, but going into indoor this year I just found PBT to work better for ME.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

ride394 said:


> Never said you we a failure, just trying to say it isn't a myth. It is entirely possible and can definitely be more accurate than almost anyone in here is capable of being.


Why would you say that? I can name at least four people that I know for a fact that frequent this joint (some of them quietly) that can shoot a variation of a firing process that is FAR from the mythical "back tension" firing method. And they most likely shoot it better than anyone in the world "cheats their form." 

Not trying to be argumentative at all. I just don't know how you can make that kind of claim when you have no idea who is participating/watching.


----------



## ride394 (Oct 16, 2006)

I'm not sure what you mean? I specifically said there's no such thing as cheating a hinge.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

Sorry, that was a little unclear. This is the part I was referencing;



ride394 said:


> It is entirely possible and can definitely be more accurate than almost anyone in here is capable of being.


There's some shooters here....and there's some even better one's lurking. (That don't buy into "cheating your form.") The best don't, and I don't believe they ever have.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

ride394 said:


> It's my opinion that if you can't get a hinge to fire with just your back then you either have the release set wayyy to cold, or you're death gripping the release with your index finger, OR YOU'RE USING THE WRONG MUSCLES!!! If you squeeze your rhomboids and lats your elbow will rotate around your back which WILL fire the release.





EPLC said:


> Exactly my point so thank you for the validation. It can never be the pbt method if it isn't working for someone, the blame is always the shooters fault. You mustn't be doing it right, etc., etc. I wish I had a dollar for every time we've heard that one! Here's a process with requirements so demanding for release settings, draw length, position, angles, no hand involvement, body control, extensive learning curve, etc., and it's always the failure of the shooter. Well I guess I'm just a failure because it hasn't worked for me.
> 
> Guilty, guilty, guilty. I'm such a failure!





ride394 said:


> Never said you we a failure, just trying to say it isn't a myth. It is entirely possible and can definitely be more accurate than almost anyone in here is capable of being. I'm not one to say that hand manipulation is cheating as I used the relax method all last 3d season, but going into indoor this year I just found PBT to work better for ME.


Let me explain why I responded the way that I did. In your original post you positioned this as "You are the problem" which in my opinion is the real MYTH, not whether it can be done, but the myth that it "should" be done or you are somehow at fault. Because of this positioning I had it engrained in my thinking that I was somehow failing PBT and was somehow missing out on something wonderful. Not moving my hand was so engrained that it really slowed my progress. So, if you believe it is working for you I'm happy for you, but to position this as you did isn't helping anyone. Just my opinion.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Lazarus said:


> Sorry, that was a little unclear. This is the part I was referencing;
> 
> 
> 
> There's some shooters here....and there's some even better one's lurking. (That don't buy into "cheating your form.") The best don't, and I don't believe they ever have.


You've been getting those PMs too?


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

You know EPLC, I watched for the last year as your posting progressed in many of these threads and many times it felt like the threads were basically your personal coaching clinic. I listened to your knowledge of shooting in general and you always seemed very honest with your scoring on your indoor targets but something just didn't add up, your knowledge of shooting was and is above the scores and groups that I was seeing when you posted pictures of your targets.

I am 45 years old and I have shot a bow for my entire life but only in the last 2 years have things happened that have allowed me to become a real shooter, to me you are older in years but you are going through the same thing that I did. You have trusted what was being presented and suffered creating doubt deep down inside that maybe you aren't good enough to experience the shooting that some guys seem to enjoy every freaking day. Right now I think that you have allowed yourself to start seeing the truth and it isn't going to be a overnight success story because you are going to have to do the training and learn the little subtle things that go with it but in the end I think you are on the right track. Good luck and hopefully with your overall knowledge the transition will be a smooth one.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

cbrunson said:


> You've been getting those PMs too?


Yup. The cheering section. :cheers:


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Yes, I guess I just suffered longer  and old ingrained habits are very difficult to overcome.


----------



## northern rednek (Oct 24, 2008)

Just curious what they are doing in Europe and everywhere else in the world. I keep hearing about the way the so called best shooters in the world are doing it and not to take way from the U.S. Shooters but there's a lot more to archery than just american shooters.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

northern rednek said:


> Just curious what they are doing in Europe and everywhere else in the world. I keep hearing about the way the so called best shooters in the world are doing it and not to take way from the U.S. Shooters but there's a lot more to archery than just american shooters.


Can't speak for all. But I got a PM from one of 'em from across the pond just this morning. Just to reassure you, they think just like the best in the U.S. do. :cheers:


----------



## ride394 (Oct 16, 2006)

EPLC said:


> Let me explain why I responded the way that I did. In your original post you positioned this as "You are the problem" which in my opinion is the real MYTH, not whether it can be done, but the myth that it "should" be done or you are somehow at fault. Because of this positioning I had it engrained in my thinking that I was somehow failing PBT and was somehow missing out on something wonderful. Not moving my hand was so engrained that it really slowed my progress. So, if you believe it is working for you I'm happy for you, but to position this as you did isn't helping anyone. Just my opinion.


I was more referring to the people that say it's not possible. I totally understand that it may not be preferred for you or for many other people, just trying to get rid of the notion that PBT can't be done.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Yeah, I shoot with pure back tension all the time as a training thing and for me being a guy that uses other methods competitively it is so weird to completely shut off my hand and let the back tension do 100% of the job. It is ok that a few guys have said that it is impossible, the key is that we are moving on to a more constructive archery talk from here on out where people can hear what is actually working on a grand scale.


----------



## ride394 (Oct 16, 2006)

Padgett said:


> Yeah, I shoot with pure back tension all the time as a training thing and for me being a guy that uses other methods competitively it is so weird to completely shut off my hand and let the back tension do 100% of the job. It is ok that a few guys have said that it is impossible, the key is that we are moving on to a more constructive archery talk from here on out where people can hear what is actually working on a grand scale.


I totally agree padgett, but to have people say "you have to use hand manipulation" is just as bad as back in the day when PBT was the only way or you were cheating. There is a middle ground to be found here, and as with everything else in archery it is almost all up to the individual to find what works. 

I'm glad I was on here back in the day and learned how to shoot PBT, and I'm glad you sent me your articles and I learned all those methods as well. It ultimately just came down to what works for me, but I now have the tools to experiment with all the methods as I move along and learn more about MY shooting.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Given time, the voices of reason stand out.

I encourage those "lurkers" to get involved in the discussion rather than just send an occasional PM.
Sure some won't agree with you, some may be adamant about it, but in time, the best information comes forward.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Mahly said:


> Given time, the voices of reason stand out.
> 
> I encourage those "lurkers" to get involved in the discussion rather than just send an occasional PM.
> Sure some won't agree with you, some may be adamant about it, but in time, the best information comes forward.


Some have too much on the line, to get caught up in arguing PEOPLE, and tarnishing their reputations on this very, very public forum. Let's just say the message is getting through.


----------



## rebeldawg (Jan 10, 2014)

My 2 cents. I've been shooting tournaments for the past 14 years. Last year after having a complete breakdown at a fairly large event I was ready to quit. Lazarus saw some of my posts and reached out to me. Some of his ideas and suggestions were foreign to me as my previous coach recommended pure "dynamic" back tension as a release method. Can it work. Ya he does it and is a fairly high ranked pro. Is it cheating the release? Yep sure is because it can be manipulated and fired! Hinge releases aren't supposed to be fired!! And I'm sorry Padgett obviously your system works for you but I went through all of your programs and FOR ME they are all potatoes and no meat. Another words if you don't already have a solid method they won't work for instruction purposes. No offense. So I had to let go of what I knew and just do what Lazarus said. I did and I will tell you this. I shoot better now than I ever have before and I almost quit completely. Oh and btw it is possible to utilize more than one method At a time if you learn proper execution. I do it all the time based on my float that day. But I can say from experience that a true static hinge release without dynamic moving is more accurate and more repeatable than any other method. But know this. You better put your big boy pants on because it is not easy to learn. Oh and would you guys quit posting pastes of the "top" archery coaches and how they point to the LAN and true back tension! That is a reference to Olympic recurve form. How do I know. My dad shot thAt class for years with some of the best in the world. I was brought up shooting it as well. And I can tell you with 100% certainty from experience that it does NOT translate to compound hinge shooting!!


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

rebeldawg said:


> My 2 cents. I've been shooting tournaments for the past 14 years. Last year after having a complete breakdown at a fairly large event I was ready to quit. Lazarus saw some of my posts and reached out to me. Some of his ideas and suggestions were foreign to me as my previous coach recommended pure "dynamic" back tension as a release method. Can it work. Ya he does it and is a fairly high ranked pro. Is it cheating the release? Yep sure is because it can be manipulated and fired! Hinge releases aren't supposed to be fired!! And I'm sorry Padgett obviously your system works for you but I went through all of your programs and FOR ME they are all potatoes and no meat. Another words if you don't already have a solid method they won't work for instruction purposes. No offense. So I had to let go of what I knew and just do what Lazarus said. I did and I will tell you this. I shoot better now than I ever have before and I almost quit completely. Oh and btw it is possible to utilize more than one method At a time if you learn proper execution. I do it all the time based on my float that day. But I can say from experience that a true static hinge release without dynamic moving is more accurate and more repeatable than any other method. But know this. You better put your big boy pants on because it is not easy to learn. Oh and would you guys quit posting pastes of the "top" archery coaches and how they point to the LAN and true back tension! That is a reference to Olympic recurve form. How do I know. My dad shot thAt class for years with some of the best in the world. I was brought up shooting it as well. And I can tell you with 100% certainty from experience that it does NOT translate to compound hinge shooting!!


No offence, but your post just confused the crap out of me? And Laz and Padgett are pretty much on the same page... aren't they?


----------



## jwilson48 (Apr 1, 2009)

rebeldawg said:


> My 2 cents. I've been shooting tournaments for the past 14 years. Last year after having a complete breakdown at a fairly large event I was ready to quit. Lazarus saw some of my posts and reached out to me. Some of his ideas and suggestions were foreign to me as my previous coach recommended pure "dynamic" back tension as a release method. Can it work. Ya he does it and is a fairly high ranked pro. Is it cheating the release? Yep sure is because it can be manipulated and fired! Hinge releases aren't supposed to be fired!! And I'm sorry Padgett obviously your system works for you but I went through all of your programs and FOR ME they are all potatoes and no meat. Another words if you don't already have a solid method they won't work for instruction purposes. No offense. So I had to let go of what I knew and just do what Lazarus said. I did and I will tell you this. I shoot better now than I ever have before and I almost quit completely. Oh and btw it is possible to utilize more than one method At a time if you learn proper execution. I do it all the time based on my float that day. But I can say from experience that a true static hinge release without dynamic moving is more accurate and more repeatable than any other method. But know this. You better put your big boy pants on because it is not easy to learn. Oh and would you guys quit posting pastes of the "top" archery coaches and how they point to the LAN and true back tension! That is a reference to Olympic recurve form. How do I know. My dad shot thAt class for years with some of the best in the world. I was brought up shooting it as well. And I can tell you with 100% certainty from experience that it does NOT translate to compound hinge shooting!!


Huh? Confused by this post...which side of the fence are you on?


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

Good deal rebeldawg. :cheers:

Now if I could only remember what I shared with you. :teeth: Getting older, deteriorating skills. 

Most of what I know about archery has came from First, but not in order of importance; Recurve shooters. They are the source of pure information. The recurve innovators did it for the love of the game. Not because they had this fancy little gadget that could cure all of your shooting ills for the low price of $49.95 to sell. Second, my info has came from those who have "Done" not talked about it. Not one to drop names, but my contacts list on my phone would blow some peoples minds. I don't say that to make myself look good, I say it because I don't get my info from people who won a tournament or two then decided to start writing books. It comes from the horses mouths. The Winners! And there's lots of them. 

In other words, it's not MY information. It's theirs. I just pass it on.

Here's a little something I got to hold on to one night last summer for a bit. (Lynn is actually holding it in this pic.) That's the owner in the background. Doesn't make me know anything more about archery than the next person. But if I have a question, I can damn sure get the question answered from a quality source pretty quick.........and yes, that's what you think it is. Enjoy......


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

jwilson48 said:


> Huh? Confused by this post...which side of the fence are you on?


Fences have nothing to do with it. I truly don't understand what he meant.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

EPLC said:


> Fences have nothing to do with it. I truly don't understand what he meant.


I think the whole thing got a little muddy. It was a question of whether or not it had to be done one way exclusively, or whether or not you could be successful modifying the firing technique to better suit your preferences. It has morphed into a purists vs non-purists thing. I guess the war got lost in the battle.

I agree with you, I have no idea what his post means.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

EPLC said:


> No offence, but your post just confused the crap out of me? And Laz and Padgett are pretty much on the same page... aren't they?


I know where he's coming from. I used to take some issue with some of what Padgett had to say too. I'll give you an example, maybe you remember it; the Sam Wolthuis firing method. Sam's a great shooter, 100% respect for him..........but that firing process as Padgett described it was an aBORtion. If that's exactly how Sam does it, that's awesome for him! But it wouldn't work for me at all. Nor would it work for too many people I suspect. 

I personally have grown to see that Padgett and my's philosophy is pretty near the same. I'm probably a lot more philosophical in my approach than he, but that's ok. It takes all kinds! Bottom line some people respond better to black and whites. Some people respond better to concepts. That's the difference that what rebeldawg points out highlights. My .02


----------



## rebeldawg (Jan 10, 2014)

Is it john Williams gold??


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

^ Yep. Man knows archery. Credits Al Henderson with his success.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

One of the things that I am proud of is that I am looking forward to getting better as a shooter and also as a member here on archery talk, I saw a need when I was suffering myself for someone to step up and give out good info. It took me a long time to even get to the point where I could contribute anything and sure some of my beginning thoughts were crude and in need of refinement. Many times my stuff was crude because I simply hadn't learned enough of the lessons to be a solid source but I have gotten better and hope to continue to do so.

The Sam method is just yielding, the difference is how he comes to click compared to other people and he is a more aggressive hinge shooter than most. I am a performance based person and when you watch somebody shoot 60x rounds everytime you watch them shoot don't you have to give them a little respect and see what they are doing. I shoot with his method from time to time and I enjoy it but it isn't for me either, but I shoot it really good. That is the big problem that many of you guys have is that you have so many lessons that you haven't learned about target panic and control issues that you go down in flames the moment that you try anything other than what you are used to. Make sure you take a step back and learn those lessons so that you can shoot with the sam engine and normal yielding and squeezing into the wall and back tension. 

Firing methods are just a simple job to get rid of the arrow and send it on its way, they do not define you as a shooter. Your ability to learn to shoot with your natural float that isn't messed with by your efforts to fire the bow and good form are what are what makes your shooting special.


----------



## ride394 (Oct 16, 2006)

Padgett said:


> One of the things that I am proud of is that I am looking forward to getting better as a shooter and also as a member here on archery talk, I saw a need when I was suffering myself for someone to step up and give out good info. It took me a long time to even get to the point where I could contribute anything and sure some of my beginning thoughts were crude and in need of refinement. Many times my stuff was crude because I simply hadn't learned enough of the lessons to be a solid source but I have gotten better and hope to continue to do so.
> 
> The Sam method is just yielding, the difference is how he comes to click compared to other people and he is a more aggressive hinge shooter than most. I am a performance based person and when you watch somebody shoot 60x rounds everytime you watch them shoot don't you have to give them a little respect and see what they are doing. I shoot with his method from time to time and I enjoy it but it isn't for me either, but I shoot it really good. That is the big problem that many of you guys have is that you have so many lessons that you haven't learned about target panic and control issues that you go down in flames the moment that you try anything other than what you are used to. Make sure you take a step back and learn those lessons so that you can shoot with the sam engine and normal yielding and squeezing into the wall and back tension.
> 
> Firing methods are just a simple job to get rid of the arrow and send it on its way, they do not define you as a shooter. Your ability to learn to shoot with your natural float that isn't messed with by your efforts to fire the bow and good form are what are what makes your shooting special.


Please don't take this the wrong way, but I'd like to call you out. We've all seen your posts about shooting hundreds of X's in a row, or heard how many points up you've shot on a 3d course, but really who are you? You're a far better shot than I am, for sure, but you've gathered a cult like following on here (akin to n&b...). You offer up really good info, but can you point so some of your results? Because apparently, around here, you're opinion really only matters if you're an established pro.


----------



## Rick! (Aug 10, 2008)

ride394 said:


> Please don't take this the wrong way, but I'd like to call you out. We've all seen your posts about shooting hundreds of X's in a row, or heard how many points up you've shot on a 3d course, but really who are you? You're a far better shot than I am, for sure, but you've gathered a cult like following on here (akin to n&b...). You offer up really good info, but can you point so some of your results? Because apparently, around here, you're opinion really only matters if you're an established pro.


Just look up padgett in results on the asa site. His # is 36875.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

Wow. Getting a little weird in here. :eek3:


----------



## ride394 (Oct 16, 2006)

Lazarus said:


> Wow. Getting a little weird in here. :eek3:


Lol not meant to be weird. I was honestly just curious.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

ride394 said:


> Please don't take this the wrong way, but I'd like to call you out. We've all seen your posts about shooting hundreds of X's in a row, or heard how many points up you've shot on a 3d course, but really who are you? You're a far better shot than I am, for sure, but you've gathered a cult like following on here (akin to n&b...). You offer up really good info, but can you point so some of your results? Because apparently, around here, you're opinion really only matters if you're an established pro.


Credibility is only an issue when you are told your method is wrong. If someone asks a question or brings up a topic that is something you've dealt with and successfully managed, you would expect to be able to share that information. Like real experience, rather than theory. When another person refutes your statements, for whatever reason, you would likely expect to see some actual results that substantiate that person's claim. It's really hard to accept contradiction from someone who has never experienced success with the methods they insist are more beneficial than what you have found to work specifically for you. You don't have to be a pro, but if you are a 290 5-spot shooter, you probably shouldn't be telling a 300-55+ shooter he's doing it wrong.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

cbrunson said:


> Credibility is only an issue when you are told your method is wrong....When another person refutes your statements, for whatever reason, you would likely expect to see some actual results that substantiate that person's claim.


Actually no. It's the other way around - credibility is a function of the substance behind the original claim of credentials/achievement etc. When someone questions your claim of creds/achievement, etc, the burden of proof/substantiation is on you, not the one asking for substantiation. They're not the one making the claims, you are. So it's your responsibility to provide the basis for your claim.

In other words, it is perfectly acceptable for ride to ask Shawn as he did for the proof in the pudding so to speak. But clearly Shawn has no trouble at all supplying it, as we can see from his scores .

LS


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

ride394 said:


> Lol not meant to be weird. I was honestly just curious.


I hear ya. That part I understood. It's the part where someone posts someone's member number that's weird. Public information? Yes. But carrying someones member number around, then sharing it on the forum. Borderline questionable. .02


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

unclejane said:


> Actually no. It's the other way around - credibility is a function of the substance behind the original claim of credentials/achievement etc. When someone questions your claim of creds/achievement, etc, the burden of proof/substantiation is on you, not the one asking for substantiation. They're not the one making the claims, you are. So it's your responsibility to provide the basis for your claim.
> 
> In other words, it is perfectly acceptable for ride to ask Shawn as he did for the proof in the pudding so to speak. But clearly Shawn has no trouble at all supplying it, as we can see from his scores .
> 
> LS


Yeah you kinda went a different direction with that, it seems only for the purpose of correcting someone. My point was only for the sake of someone who can't shoot telling someone who can, that he or she is doing it wrong. Kinda like the metaphor used often here regarding driving a car. You may give what you believe is perfect instruction for driving a car, but when you jump behind the wheel yourself and can't keep it on the road, it diminishes your credibility. 

I agree you don't have to be a pro, or even a decent shooter to offer advice that may help someone, especially if the advice is supported by others that have been successful. But you really shouldn't shoot down the advice from another person who is miles beyond your skill level. What lends to his credibility is success, not knowledge.

What Padgett and some others of us have going on behind the scenes here would very likely astonish you. Believe it or not, people want advice from people that actually can shoot.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

cbrunson said:


> Yeah you kinda went a different direction with that, it seems only for the purpose of correcting someone. My point was only for the sake of someone who can't shoot telling someone who can, that he or she is doing it wrong. Kinda like the metaphor used often here regarding driving a car. You may give what you believe is perfect instruction for driving a car, but when you jump behind the wheel yourself and can't keep it on the road, it diminishes your credibility.


The problem here, tho, is that you're not exempt either - where "you" are you guys who claim to be shooting experts (including you of course). If you *say* you're an expert and someone asks you to *demonstrate* it, *you* still bear the burden the proof of that claim, not the one asking for the demonstration/proof. *Your* credibility is on the line in that case, *not* the one asking for the demonstration.

You seem to think that some qualifications that meet with your approval are required to assess your claims of expertise. Nope. Doesn't work that way.

Your point about less experienced persons trying advice more experienced ones is well taken, but that isn't really what's going on here.


> What Padgett and some others of us have going on behind the scenes here would very likely astonish you. Believe it or not, people want advice from people that actually can shoot.


I want advice from people who can *demonstrate *that they can actually shoot, personally. I'm not astonished or impressed in any way by someone who merely claims they can shoot "behind the scenes".

LS


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Asking for proof is fine, the person asking chooses to put a lot of weight on scores... Makes perfect sense.
It's hard to tell someone shooting 60x they are doing it "wrong".
I personally would prefer if people would let those in question decide if their information is posted.
However, being a great shooter doesn't make one a great coach.
Being able to explain exactly why what works for you, and seeing how it could help someone else goes a long way, but they aren't the only attributes of a good coach.
If you choose to look only at someone's scorecard to decide if their advice is right for you, that is perfectly fine. If you wish to look only at the results of their students (if they have any), that's perfectly fine as well. If you wish to put more weight on experience, that's fine as well.
I prefer to balance it among all those things. But that is just me.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

Mahly said:


> ting 60x they are doing it "wrong".


I just wanted to clarify that that's not what ride did - "show me some proof that you shoot as well as you say you do" is not in any form or fashion equivalent to "you're doing it wrong". It's not even implied as brunson seems to think it is.

Asking for support for a claim is completely orthogonal to making a claim; the former doesn't require credentials to the satisfaction of the "defendant", but the latter does (if the claim is called out onto the mat).

LS


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

I was speaking in more general terms. Not referring to anyone.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

unclejane said:


> The problem here, tho, is that you're not exempt either - where "you" are you guys who claim to be shooting experts (including you of course). If you *say* you're an expert and someone asks you to *demonstrate* it, *you* still bear the burden the proof of that claim, not the one asking for the demonstration/proof. *Your* credibility is on the line in that case, *not* the one asking for the demonstration.
> 
> You seem to think that some qualifications that meet with your approval are required to assess your claims of expertise. Nope. Doesn't work that way.
> 
> ...


The part you're not getting is that it has nothing to do with claims of expertise. Only claims of what has worked. Speaking for myself here. I'm not an expert. I just know what I have done to get where I'm at. Padgett knows what he has done. If you want validation it's there. If you just want to be the smart guy that can't shoot, so be it. No skin off my back.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

cbrunson said:


> The part you're not getting is that it has nothing to do with claims of expertise. Only claims of what has worked.


It has everything to do with claims of expertise. If you claim "this works", you're making a claim to a certain level of expertise. I've done it, you've done it, Shawn has done it and we've all done it. It is perfectly valid and should be expected, therefore, for anyone to ask for substantiation for any of those claims. At that point, the one being asked has to present their case in order to be credible.



> Speaking for myself here. I'm not an expert. I just know what I have done to get where I'm at. Padgett knows what he has done. If you want validation it's there. If you just want to be the smart guy that can't shoot, so be it. No skin off my back.


You don't gain credibility as an expert by simply claiming it. Simply saying how "astonishing" your shooting is "behind the scenes" doesn't astonish or impress me at all. If you want to be believed as an expert, you have to demonstrate it. End of story. Sorry.

LS


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

unclejane said:


> It has everything to do with claims of expertise. If you claim "this works", you're making a claim to a certain level of expertise. I've done it, you've done it, Shawn has done it and we've all done it. It is perfectly valid and should be expected, therefore, for anyone to ask for substantiation for any of those claims. At that point, the one being asked has to present their case in order to be credible.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ok I see. You took that comment out of context. It should be read as, "You would be astonished by the amount of people talking to some of us through PMs and other social media sources and asking questions that don't get asked here in the open forum."

There's a reason why they aren't asking here.


----------



## unclejane (Jul 22, 2012)

cbrunson said:


> Ok I see. You took that comment out of context. It should be read as, "You would be astonished by the amount of people talking to some of us through PMs and other social media sources and asking questions that don't get asked here in the open forum."


Give me the figures there and I'll make up my own mind - again, I won't be "astonished" by you simply telling me how "astonishing" your statistics are. Present them first, then we can go from there as to establishing "astonishment". See how it works?



> There's a reason why they aren't asking here.


And what would that reason be?

LS


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Let's get back on topic, take it to PMs if you wish to continue this.


----------



## tmorelli (Jul 31, 2005)

Tagged for later.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

unclejane said:


> ...I want advice from people who can *demonstrate *that they can actually shoot, personally. I'm not astonished or impressed in any way by someone who merely claims they can shoot "behind the scenes".
> 
> LS


I'm sorry, but just about the time you think you've heard it all! WOW!


----------

