Instinctive shooting - an instinctive shooter's perspective

[kombikid]

Wow, this post's been a doozy. Just wondering if anyone has had the experience of having to react quickly to a situation they'd been trained for, but never had to do for real? I've had to do it once or twice in situations that were potentially life threatening. Each time my conscious brain just disappeared into the background, the training took over and I did what had to be done without conscious thought (at least 'til I had the guy breathing again).
I think we're talking about the same sort of thing with this whole debate.
I agree with those that feel the term "Instinctive Shooting" is a valid archery term, it is a distinct, subject specific name for a method of shooting which requires no conscious thought.
A sailboat pulls it's sails up with a halyard, even though on modern boats there is no need to literally have a "haul-yard" with which to raise the yard a square sail was suspended from. It's a valid term with archaic origins, just as "instinct" is. They are names given to a specific thing (or aiming method in this case), by which those things are known, and which everyone understands.
I feel that those who have the ability to shoot instinctively have trouble describing how they do what they do much the same as I have trouble describing how I can sing in tune and play the guitar. I have an ability which I was born with, I've always played music and sang, but I can't explain how or why I can do it and others can't.
Thousands of hours playing the guitar over the last 35 years sorta helps.
I feel that instinctive shooters must have an inborn ability, a "talent" that with practise and repetition they develop and improve on, just as people in the arts and music do.
As for me, I'm essentially a gap shooter, although I'll also put 3 arrows in a lovely tight group one after the other 3 inches left of where I wanna hit on occasion, so maybe the subconscious is having a little dig there as well LOL.
Also agree with keeping things traditional as much as poss. I'm very much a returning newcomer to archery after being involved in ABA in Bowen and the NT years ago. Started with a compound, went to recurve, got out of it when I moved to Maryborough and started working LOTSA shift work.
Been making stickbows (busted a LOT), now making longbows, although I'm working on a guava stave at the moment. Point being, that for me anyway, it's a ton of fun doing things the hard way. Also immensely satisfying when things work out.
Hope I've not wombled on too much,
Cheers,
Ian

[Stickbow Hunter]

Do you still live in Maryborough (Qld) Ian? It's not a bad place IMO.

Jeff

[kombikid]

Hiya Jeff, yeah mate, we're at 18 Ferry Lane, just behind the Lamington Hotel, in fact our driveway basically opens onto their carpark.
I like Maryborough, we moved here in '92 from the Territory and really enjoy living here. I've only been messing with bow building for the last year or so, and the missus keeps asking me what I want to build ANOTHER bow for. I tell her I still haven't made the best bow that I can yet so have to keep trying.
Do you ever go out to the ABA range? I went once last year with some of my earlier efforts and met a nice bloke called Mike ( I think), who showed me a she-oak bow he was building, but the majority seemed to be into shooting knitting needles out of machines so haven't been back so far. I might take one of my masaranduba/bamboo bows out when they open up again and have a shoot, my latest bows are much better than the first ones were.
Cheers,
Ian

[Stickbow Hunter]

Ian, We're just up in Walker St so we'll have to meet up some time and talk bows. .

Jeff

[kombikid]

Sounds good mate, I'm working 6 days a week atm so time's a bit short. The bloody lawn isn't though. Stay in touch, a meet'd be good,
Cheers,
Ian

[Kendaric]

The old debate about instinctive shooting always makes me smile, and not was intended for this post.

Instinctive, is like someone suggested, a poor use of the word, but it applicable to someone who uses it in so much, that for me instinctive means, at least, the I do not use a specific aiming reference like a sight shooter, gap shooter (using the bows window gap as a reference) or point of aim shooter (using the arrow point as a reference). As an instinctive shooter, it is an overall sight picture that fits with what I 'feel' is right. Humans learn by experience (well most of us) and it can't be helped. Instinctive is just a word we use to try and describe about shooting without a 'specific' aiming reference point.

Having said that, I have meet a lot of shooters who claim to be 'instinctive', yet their shooting style indicates a point of aim shooter, 3 fingers under, arrow nock close to the eye and bow held vertical.

I've never found it enjoyable sighting at a point on the ground.

I have shot all styles, and just simply enjoy 'instinctive' (or non specific aiming reference point) more, as it feels nice, and I can enjoy the 'grace of the shot'. My technique might be similar in some respects to classical form, not unlike the approach that Bryon Fergusons takes with respect to how he 'sees' the arrow fly in his minds sight - though I cant say that I am that disciplined.

[Dennis La Varenne]

Kendaric,

It was probably me who wrote about the misuse of the term.

Most who criticise the use of the term use it in its very strict and very limited biological meaning, without considering where the word originated and it use and meaning during the ages. Most criticism comes from the fact that we practise the style which is completely contrary to the biological use of a behaviour which is innate, unchangeable and inherited.

The archery use is and always has been a descriptor, not a definition as such.

We shoot 'as if by instinct' meaning we shoot as though there is no conscious thought given to the process. Of course there is thought given to it at least at the early stages. The more we practice, the less we need to think about it. We don't shoot 'by instinct'; we shoot 'as if' by instinct which is why we use the term 'instinctive shooting' and not shooting by instinct.

The term 'instinctive shooting' is used in all my old archery books back into the early 20th Century and they were well aware of what it meant.

Archers coined the term to describe a method of shooting which was not like the other known deliberative types of aimed shooting.

It was well known that instinctive shooting was the more practical for hunting, particularly in scrub and for moving targets or animals, but it needed lots of practice, just as lions, leopards, wolves and other carnivorous predoators have a basic instinct to hunt, but need to practice and be taught to be successful.

Those who criticise the use of the term seem to consider that archers have no right to devise a term to describe a form of shooting practised by them and that its use should only be restricted to the same use of the term as in the biological sciences. That is where their argument derives from, and is a deliberate and complete misunderstanding of how archery uses it, and is where and why this line of argument always falls down if you understand what is being said.

Unhappily, many archers who shoot instinctively also fall for that same line of argument and don't know how to respond.

Regards,

[Goatchaser]

Instinctive shooting can be taken literally as well, as the meaning of instinct/ instinctive behaviour is a fixed action pattern, (sequence of actions without variation) so taken literally for me it means that if your "form" comes instinctively or without variation then the need to sight up at all should be minimal allowing for a quicker shot and takedown. Just how I have been led to understand it.

[Dennis La Varenne]

Goatchaser,

From which perspective are you debating - the biological sciences view or the traditional archery term? You can't have it both ways.

Shooting instinctively in archery is not necessarily a fixed pattern in any scientific sense because we have the ability to change it at will (and some practice).

Therefore, it cannot be a fixed pattern of behaviour. It can be modified by the organism (us) which performs it. It can only at best be a learned pattern of behaviour which has the APPEARANCE of being instinctive in the strict sense of the word. That is where and why it earned the term very many years ago when the work 'instinct' and 'instinctive' had rather more general meanings than at present.

Instinctive shooting is a highly repetitive form of behaviour, but not fixed in any sense of that word.

It is NOT a fixed, unmodifiable, inherited form of shooting behaviour. It is so-termed in archery because it has the appearance of being instinctive, and thus the name. If it were fixed, inherited and unmodifiable in the strict sense of the word, none of us would ever need to practice it. It would be innate from birth and we would do it from birth without any form of teaching or training.

[Goatchaser]

As I said in my post I am just going by the meaning of the word and what I was led to believe, I am not trying to correct anyone or get into and argument as I didn't actually realise that the word had a different meaning when it came to traditional archery.

[Allan]

Hi all,I do not know what you call how I use a Bow,I do not look at any part of the Bow or arrow trad,in the past I used a compound Bow with an overdraw system I set the Bow up to hit the point of aim at a given distance with me just looking at that point, then I learn the trajectory out further and just look at a point in line but above where I want to hit and let the Arrow drop to were I want to hit.With in range not having to allow for trajectory I can use a Bow in the dark.When I use a Shot gun I do not look at the Gun at all, just look at what I want to hit with both eyes onen and shoot.

[Bent Stick]

Well seems to me theres those that do and those don't get it, a whole lot of semantics "and way too much time on your hands IMO".
I seem to shoot ok, I am unable to use point of reference, I am very left eye dominant and the right isnlt much chop, i shoot right handed i can't see the arrow oint when i look at a target and if i tried to use it is a reference donlt be standing on my left anywhere.

I bore that hole and let go, pretty simple.
Machine repeatability is important so my brain can calculate a ballistic trajectory and direct my muscles "be it first time or muscle memory" to position my hands "front and rear sights if you like" in the right place.
The machine repeatbility is referred to as form, lets debate that sucker its a loose term i could shoot the #$%^ out of.

I think there is way too much debate and not enough hunting going lol, if you don't shoot instinctive cover or obstruct your dominant eye and try reference shooting, you'll need to be good as any change in difference will change your reference laterally also.

Now...........more photo's Jeff

[Dennis La Varenne]

Bent Stick,

So, what is your contribution to the debate. All I read is a bit of standard 'cop out' criticism when a debate gets a bit too complicated. What about doing a bit of original thinking and a bit of research. If you have nothing better to offer than that others here have 'too much time on their hands" then stay out of it and go about your other business.

The rest of us are trying to sort something out which is very often a trenchant and long-standing criticism from other archers, particularly non-trad archers, about how we shoot and how we define the way in which we shoot. That criticism should be answered and others on this site can benefit with a defence against if they can find a reasonable, understandable and easily conveyed explanation of that particular shooting technique.

The only way in which to do this is to argue among ourselves and interpret the various concepts involved with the use of the term to see who provides the best cogent explanation of the term. You use the word 'semantics' as if it is a pejorative and not the way in which our language is used and the rules of grammar underlying it. That is intellectually a very lazy cop-out.

Simply rattling off how you shoot explains absolutely nothing and shows that you have not given any serious thought to the issue. But, perhaps have too little time on your hands to to think too deeply about the things which ought to concern you.

Your line in your post above

The machine repeatbility is referred to as form, lets debate that sucker its a loose term i could shoot the #$%^ out of.

Well, what about you 'shooting the #$%^ out of' it and let's hear your understanding and explanation of the use of the word 'instinctive' as applied to the archery usage which answers the criticism of our use of the term in a cogent manner.

[Bent Stick]

I think the debate is more etymology, false etymology and semantics; the use of a term, argument or equation to define an abstract or conglomerate of ideas, methodologies or someother such group of actions, process etc will always be debatable and as infinte as the imagination. There is no finite definition as there is no finite element, it's subject to the understanding of user and is subject to social and formal learning which is subjective to an individual and changes of time, demographics and other social influences.

The value is in my opinion is extremely low and like "the chicken and egg" useful debates are best debated on Bundy around the camp fire.

The function of the terms i think is adequate you either use two points of aim and manually adjust trajectory or you use a single point of reference "bored hole" and allow the greatest computer on earth to do the work, "sometimes mine is broke".

You either trust the computer between your ears or you manually aim, I don't care if you call it "gumbooting" as long as i can recognise what it is your describing thats fine, i don't even care how you spell it.

I think i've already wasted more time than the so called debate is worth; however for the passionate don't stop the debate as you should only be limited by something finite like the number of pages in a thread.

I'd rather be looking at hunting pics myself.

[Dennis La Varenne]

Bent Stick,

Stop wasting others' time if you still have nothing constructive to add. If you thought that when you first read the posts, then why did you even bother to involve yourself. Everything on this planet has a name. There have, and always will be, debates on what to name anything and those debates help to find the most apt term to describe it. That is what is going on here.

Your opening line is nothing but nonsense. Why would there be names for anything at all under your viewpoint? You should think through what you are saying instead of trying to sound erudite by running a string of nonsense words together. It reflects only on yourself and not on the sense of the debate.

[Bent Stick]

Enjoy your Tanty Dennis your a zealot

[slinkymalinky]

Since when is having a more pragmatic point of view, not a valid contribution to a debate? I love my trad bows but I rarely post because it appears that the only welcome contributions are intellectual.

I think the most meaningful contribution to this whole discussion is your signature, Stick Bow!!

[Farmhand]

Well seems to me theres those that do and those don't get it, a whole lot of semantics "and way too much time on your hands IMO".
I seem to shoot ok, I am unable to use point of reference, I am very left eye dominant and the right isnlt much chop, i shoot right handed i can't see the arrow oint when i look at a target and if i tried to use it is a reference donlt be standing on my left anywhere.

I bore that hole and let go, pretty simple.
Machine repeatability is important so my brain can calculate a ballistic trajectory and direct my muscles "be it first time or muscle memory" to position my hands "front and rear sights if you like" in the right place.
The machine repeatbility is referred to as form, lets debate that sucker its a loose term i could shoot the #$%^ out of.

I think there is way too much debate and not enough hunting going lol, if you don't shoot instinctive cover or obstruct your dominant eye and try reference shooting, you'll need to be good as any change in difference will change your reference laterally also.

Now...........more photo's Jeff

I like the way you think Bent Stick, and the way you post it.

Even though I'm still learning I have been watching myself closely and thinking about things a lot (after the fact) I video taped myself and watched it back to see what is working and why. I think "Instinctive Shooting" is a bit of a misnomer, but I have no problem with the term and I know the effect it refers to happens. I prefer to think of it as "Natural" shooting.

Instinct definition
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/instinct

As the definition for instinctive is defined in the dictionary, it is tied to "Natural" anyway. The name for it aside.. When i first got my bow I tried using the sights and arrow rest, but that was not going to work for me, so then I tried sighting with the arrow like I always used to in previous Archery trials in school and so forth, I found three fingers under lends itself to sighting by arrow. But I wasn't happy doing that, I want to shoot one over two under, and so I thought of it like throwing a rock, it's not an instinctive action but it is "Natural", I thought to myself when I throw a rock I look at the target (sometimes for a few long moments) and my subconscious mind does the calculations from previous data, while the conscious mind gauges wind speed angles ect. and maybe also decides on how to position the body and weather or not to try to shoot between the wind gusts or if the arrow will encounter wind on it's travel (ie. shooting from wind protection into an area with prevailing cross winds ect.)

I visualize the shot before I make it.

When I draw and shoot I try to do it all in one motion, (swing draw) while staring at the hit point on the target. It's important to get he bow up and on target just before hitting the anchor point (with 2 or three inches of draw left) so any last second windage or taget movement adjustments can be made in the last 2 or three inches of draw while on target, then I draw back and when I hit the anchor point I loose, or even just before I hit anchor point if I think it is the right time, if my mind says fire, I don't ignore that even if I'm not yet quite at anchor. I think an Instinctive shooter does not hesitate at full draw for longer than 1 second or so. There would be no point to that unless aiming.

Shooting "naturally" that way for me is much more accurate than any other way with a recurve bow. I also notice that shooting at something other than a concentric circle paper target is a lot easier to be accurate and group better. As soon as I got my arrows to clear the bow pretty good I was startled by how close I could get to a well stared at point on a target. It doesn't seem logical but it is happening and it feels great. When I get feathers I should get more consistency.

So call it instinctive shooting or whatever I have no doubt it is the way to shoot for me, I think of it as "Natural" but I don't mind to call it instinctive, and there is merit for calling it that. Closest analogy I can think of for a way to visualize or rationalize instinctive shooting is it's like throwing a rock there is no "aiming", we know by how heavy the rock is how it will fly. Very simple and very effective. When you throw a rock you just look at what you want to hit and throw.

The more practice you get the better you will become. A given of course.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

To my way of thinking "instinctive" or natural shooting comes down to three things.

1) The ability to shoot and hit (or near hit) a target area without taking eye focus off the target area. (accuracy)

2) The ability to hit targets without aiming with arrow or gap shooting ie. No conscious aiming corrections at full draw ( speed of shooting).

3) The ability to shoot without holding the bow at full draw for any significant length of time. (Ergonomics/fatigue).

I intend to employ a training method I thought up to improve my Natural shooting at an accelerated rate, it requires the use of a laser red dot sight for training, set up in a particular way, which may be controversial but I get to decide how I train to improve my natural shooting effectiveness. I have not quite got it set up yet, waiting for batteries. To put it mildly I have a plan and if it works it will improve my natural shooting accuracy and form very quickly.

I've always been the kind of person to teach myself stuff and just ask when I want help on specific issues, this way I learn my own way and coach myself. Being a free country/society I have the right to do things any way I choose, so long as it does not adversely affect others. My personal opinion is we are all capable of learning and becoming very good archers by teaching ourselves our own way if we so choose. I think it is all about self confidence - self awareness - logic - concentration and practice,
If I find myself trying to sight with the arrow or " gap shoot" I narrow my focus to a smaller point, always both eyes are open.

In my opinion if an archer closes an eye conscious aiming is happening. If the bow is held at full draw for any extended length of time conscious aiming is happening. Just my opinion.

If I wanted to "aim consciously" in any way I would use an effective dedicated sighting system, not bare bow, to me bare bow instinctive shooting means no conscious aiming "gap shooting or arrow aiming" both of which I can also do and get results. It can be complicated (but it's not rocket surgery) Common sense and logic go a long way in my opinion.

There is no human walking or otherwise who is qualified or has authority to dictate how another shoots naturally/instinctively, we can only have our opinions and shoot rules.

Cheers

P.S. Even animals over time improve on their instinctive abilities by experience. It's instinct for a baby to cry when it is hungry, it is a learned behavior for an older child to whinge for a particular food (which is "Natural"), but it is instinctive to want to eat in general.

ie. It is not "instinctive" to throw a rock, but is a is a natural thing to do, we don't use "aiming systems" or "aiming methods" to throw rocks, only experience and unconscious logical computations based in physics from an "internal" data base built up from experience, visualization and results. It's really very simple and easy to understand, "Instinctive" or "Natural" means no conscious aiming system of any kind, no gap shooting, no arrow aiming and no other aiming system, just a natural response to a target acquisition, like throwing a rock.

..

I also have a compound bow with peep sights and I can group arrows real tight at 15 yards after setting up the bow and sighting it in, it's just like shooting a sighted rifle but at much less range, piece of cake, some skill and thought required, but aiming and form makes the shot. However Instinctive or natural shooting is more like throwing a spear or a rock, there is no sighting in or aiming, only practice, results and visualization of how to hit the mark. (in my case or in my opinion).

If anyone is offended by a newcomer having such opinions then I apologize for your distress. If I have an opinion I give it, no frills, no ill will intended, no apologies for my opinions, just for the distress it may cause some folks..

..

EDIT: To take it a bit further and risk going a bit off topic. I see the terms of things like this.

1) Any object when used in an offensive or defensive way against humans, or human on human use, is a weapon.

2) Any object used to defend oneself from a non human animal or to hunt, control vermin or sport, is a tool or a piece of equipment. Something is only a weapon when used against other people, period. A bit off topic I know and I apologize, but it's just logical definitions, to my way of thinking.

..

[Jim]

There is no human walking or otherwise who is qualified or has authority to dictate how another shoots naturally/instinctively, we can only have our opinions and shoot rules.

That's true enough Farmhand, but you'll find plenty of fellas around here that will stack up their arrows at 20m+ with a barebow and in my small opinion results are worth more than all the opinions and talk in the world (I'm aware of the small irony in that thought ). I also take a perverse pleasure in toughing it out teaching myself stuff, but remember there is no need to reinvent the wheel.

All the best with your endeavours mate.

Jim

[AndyF]

I'm with Grahame A on this one.

'Instinctive' shooting in my opinion refers mainly to the process of aiming (rather than shooting style) - the kind of aiming used in hunting and at shoots like Wisemans and The Gathering where you have no idea what the exact distance to the target is. Personally, I think it might better be described as 'Educated Guess Aiming'.

What I mean by that is, for instance, I've shot lots of target and FITA Field stuff and have generally used point of aim at target and a mix of POA and my version of GAP around FITA Field courses. In a sense, every one of those shots has gone into a mental aiming bank. So I know roughly where to aim (i.e. what the sight picture/relationship of arrow point to bullseye looks like) at say 10, 20, 30 metres - even if that's a secondary focus to looking at what I want to hit. On top of that, there's a kind of natural 'it feels right about there' aspect (like throwing a stone) which gets laid on top of that. That's why I would describe 'Instinctive' aiming as 'Educated Guess' aiming. It's a combination of several factors plus the experience gained from all your previous shots.

I recall the first time I ever shot an unmarked 3D course about 4 years ago (Wiseman's). All I'd shot before that was target at set distances. Consequently the entire thing was total guesswork, and apart from a few lucky guesses, I was woeful. These days the guessing is a bit more educated and I'm not quite as woeful.

A

[AndyF]

Sorry, can't help adding a little bit more, specifically relating to what Dennis says about not being able to work out what you're doing wrong etc when you're not shooting well (way back on page 1) i.e. shooting form rather than aiming.

In my opinion, I don't think whether you're self-taught, as such, or have come through from more formal target shooting matters too much as long as you can be consistent. That only means you have to understand a little about what you're doing so you can then work out what's going wrong.

I've read tons of stuff from the likes of Kisik Lee through to Byron Ferguson and Jay Kidwell's books. They all have good points to make but it's easy to get overloaded with advice - even though they're all pretty much talking about the same thing. It get's golf-like if you're not careful.

With that in mind, I always wanted some advice to follow that was fairly simple, made sense 'to me' and that would let me practice on my 12x5ft Bondi apartment balcony. The nearest I've found to that is the Rod Jenkins section in Masters of The Barebow 3. He's a hunter that's won IBO titles and worked with Olympic recurve coaches. So he's seen a fair bit. What he seems to have done is simplify everything he's learned into some great basics worth concentrating on - and he doesn't preach that things should be exactly such and such a way. Just what I wanted. (The Larry Yien section on that video isn't bad either, but I find Rod a more engaging kind of bloke).

And video yourself. It's the easiest way to see what you're doing, or not. And then you'll at least have a point of reference to work from.

[longbowinfected]

I would add to that the words like a mantra that I learnt from Arthur Fisk
Push, Pull, Power, Pose releasing under full power and fully posing/pointing at your target until you hear it hits gets even more important the further away.

I am going to stay well clear of headline topic though because I will only make people very cranky. Suffice to say I am a gap shooter. I find guessing distances very easy if you practice enough.

Kevin

[GrahameA]

Morning All.

.... I find guessing distances very easy if you practice enough. ....

10000 hours yet?

Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell

[scuzz]

I shoot with an 'instinctive' aiming style but i find form to be more important.

I concentrate on a 'spot' because i believe concentrating on a smaller target minimises your error margin. From there I keep a very straight bow arm and i draw about an inch past the corner of my lip before releasing.
From slowly returning to archery this past year i have found that the correct anchoring and strong bow arm affects my accuracy more than the concentration.
Form practice is very important, shooting from 5m or so and ensuring you 'feel' everything rather than concentrating on accuracy has always helped me build skill.

I think the term 'instinctive' is adequate.

Scuzz

[Chase N. Nocks]

I would add to that the words like a mantra that I learnt from Arthur Fisk
Push, Pull, Power, Pose releasing under full power and fully posing/pointing at your target until you hear it hits gets even more important the further away.

I am going to stay well clear of headline topic though because I will only make people very cranky. Suffice to say I am a gap shooter. I find guessing distances very easy if you practice enough.

Kevin

Hey Kevin, I simply believe everyone gaps, some are conscious of it others not.

Guarantee you would not make me cranky Kev, and I enjoy hearing what you have to say about shooting. Start your own thread.

Grahame - I always come back to one of your favourite quotes - "the more I practice the luckier I get"

Farmhand - yes I think it is a misnomer that flies in the face of its descriptive value. By the same token I don't really care anymore other than to say that I mostly understand what people are trying to describe when they use the term. I say mostly because I have encountered archers determined to use "instinctive" in a stricter sense than as an anecdotal archery term.

BTW I have shot "Instinctive" for the bulk of my shooting in the last 30 years so I am not coming from a position where I can't do it. Natural style as you suggest is a little more amiable - previously I have suggested Fluid style as a possible alternative.

Cheers
Troy

Cheers
Troy

[longbowinfected]

Grahame, without ramped up hours practising for nationals over 8 years [over 1.000 hours] my normal practise in that time has been nearly 6,500 hours of practising to be lucky.

James Larven and Mick Turner ran a workshop for unmarked field. James pulled out his you beaut range finder and challenged everyone to guess the range of an object. I told him probably half a metre under 100 metres. He said I was wrong and that it was 110 metres. I politely asked him to check his settings because it was probably set for yards.......it was

I gauge the distance of every shot even at target as part of my set up. I practice this every shot even at target. I started prior to going to a major overseas 3D comp. I used to have a big problem collapsing. Reminding myself of the distance stopped this and helped me to remember my gap as chemo had affected my memory. So sorry Grahame only 75% of the journey covered but then there is the tournament time.

Kevin

[GrahameA]

Morning Kev.

Grahame, without ramped up hours ......

So yet to do the 10,000 - and that is only for ranging in this case. Enjoy the journey.

Hi Troy

Grahame - I always come back to one of your favourite quotes - "the more I practice the luckier I get"

Yep, amazing that. And even with all the issues around practice it still doesn't hurt to put a few hours in. Bit like."Want a HD? Put in some serious hours."

[Chase N. Nocks]

Grahame, without ramped up hours practising for nationals over 8 years [over 1.000 hours] my normal practise in that time has been nearly 6,500 hours of practising to be lucky.

James Larven and Mick Turner ran a workshop for unmarked field. James pulled out his you beaut range finder and challenged everyone to guess the range of an object. I told him probably half a metre under 100 metres. He said I was wrong and that it was 110 metres. I politely asked him to check his settings because it was probably set for yards.......it was

I gauge the distance of every shot even at target as part of my set up. I practice this every shot even at target. I started prior to going to a major overseas 3D comp. I used to have a big problem collapsing. Reminding myself of the distance stopped this and helped me to remember my gap as chemo had affected my memory. So sorry Grahame only 75% of the journey covered but then there is the tournament time.

Kevin

See those two sentences are really interesting and illuminating. Certainly inspirational to give such very impressive returns

I told him probably half a metre under 100 metres.

Cheers

[longbowinfected]

Grahame, it was you constantly telling me that I was collapsing that prompted the change and the improvement. Arthur used to tell me that if you shoot with the heaviest bow you can manage for the day that your releases under power would be crisper. Putting it all together was due to having someone watching critically.
Before my stoush with cancer I used to practise a lot with Steve and we relied a lot on critical evaluation by the other guy and the momentum gained trying to do better than your training partner. We also regularly videotaped each other using the other guy's phone. That was very helpful I have not had the regular privilege of being able to practice with Steve for a while but have practised a lot competing against compounders down at Penrith mid week and that has helped a lot blended in with a lot of mixed marked distances using a blank butt trying to shoot groups which really helps you to learn how to make better adjustments.

I can and do occasionally snap shoot whilst warming up at a butt at closer distances like 30m and down and really get into the zone in a manner that would appear to be instinctive. I have even been surprised by a young fox and nailed it without going through the conscious part of my procedure in a much accelerated manner. I also can consciously and very slowly gap shoot a moving target within 20-25 metres but can let down if I feel I could do the wrong thing and disrespect the animal. The brain is truly an amazing thing.

It [instinctive shooting] is not something that I would expect you could rely upon at longer distances for a whole day in my opinion. Due to the constant longer distance gap shooting that I do and practise for it certainly helps me to be consistent and confident so it is much easier to find my gap according to the site conditions on the day and repeat it at that distance for 36 arrows. I can now be confident of getting there with two arrows and not losing it as cloud cover increases or the wind strength or direction changes dramatically. The two sighters get better points and now my ends get better during that distance.

Lots of practice required to develop good form means that whatever style or method you use would work better. One advantage out of being made redundant is that now I can practice every day even if half of it is at home at 5-10 metres. I am noting the difference this makes in my archery and my general feeling of well being.

Kevin