The myth of "Instinctive Shooting " explained ???????????

[aroadik]

Took your time getting here Mate ! now all I have to do is find Scotty ! cheers (no icon) Pete

[kombikid]

Cheers Chase n' Nocks, I certainly have no argument with your point of view, if we were all of one mind about everything what a bloody boring world it would be. The biggest thing I have gained from this discussion is a re-evaluation of my shooting technique that has actually improved my accuracy.
I tend not to get too hung up on whys and wherefores, I mostly take a "suck it and see" attitude to most things in life, some things work out, some things don't. However a little discipline and application to whichever way you aim a bow does seem to bring results. I put 6 out of 11 shafts into a 1.25 litre soft drink bottle at 20 yards this morning, and none of the misses were more than 2 inches away, my best effort yet.
For me concentration and discipline seem to pay off.
The Black Wattle bow folded, a flaw in the heartwood in the top limb threw in the towel, it hinged and popped up a 4 inch splinter off the back, dammit. I was attempting to make a "post apocolypse" bow with just a tomahawk and heavy scraper and all was good until then, I'm surprised at how finely you can work with a good sharp hand axe actually.
Anyway, thanks to you all for this discussion, it's been very interesting and productive,
Cheers,
Ian

[Dennis La Varenne]

Apropos of Troy's earlier statement that he didn't believe those who said that they did/could not see the arrow when shooting, it is pretty difficult to transfer one's perceptions over to another person's mind so that they can 'see' what you can unfortunately. You just have to take what they say on trust in the end.

For myself, I don't see the arrow at all during the shooing sequence, but there is no way that I can prove that to somebody else.

However, if I try to 'look' at the arrow at some stage, the consequences are very poor for the accuracy of my shooting. What seems to happen is that when I take my full concentration from the mark, the effect seems to be like just discharging an arrow randomly into the blurry distance. I cannot really describe it better than that.

At the physiological level, the neuorological chappies know that our eyes actually 'see' everything within the periphery of our vision, but our brains select only that which it needs in order to process a relevant task. The rest is just jettisoned from awareness and not retained in memory as irrelevant - at least that is what they taught us in our neuro lectures during my nursing training.

It would be nice to be able to gap shoot for the undoubted benefit it seems to have in the various forms of target shooting, but my brain seems to balk whenever I try it. There is one instance where I can do it, and that is when I try to find the maximum point blank distance of any particular bow-arrow combination. I take the classic rifleman's 6 o'clock hold on the mark using my arrow tip and move backwards continually until the arrow strikes the mark.

But, so far as holding any deliberate gap at varying ranges, something seems to happen to my brain and it doesn't seem to be able to focus on the amount of nothing between the mark and my arrow tip in order to maintain a gap. It seems to 'need' to look at something specific which is the mark.

I am sure also, in the same way Troy is trying to re-educate his brain to gap shooting, that I could probably do the same if I was prepared to put in the work, but my accuracy from instinctive shooting is not so bad that I am sure that it is worth that effort.

If I was a high achieving target shooter, I would move heaven and hell to change over because gap shooting allows one to analyse one's misses in a way that is difficult with instinctive shooting, and make a deliberate correction in the same way that a rifleman does. But the modest ranges at which I shoot my bows, gapping is more of a hindrance than a benefit.

So far as the term is concerned, as Romeo said "What's in a name?" It is only a traditional name in a traditional form of archery. There are no authorities in traditions, only those who try to preserve them.

[kombikid]

Dennis, you mention not being comfortable focussing on the "nothing" when gap shooting, and also the fact you never see your arrow. I've found that I focus on the target, seeing the arrow with peripheral vision as just another input of information required to make the shot. Kind of the reverse of what you experience when you attempt to gap shoot. Also I don't focus on the gap, the gap merely exists as part of the overall picture.
It seems to me that there are elements of instinctive and aimed shooting in most styles of shooting a bow, even the fastest and most accurate instinctive shooter got there in the vast majority of cases after a great deal of practice, as did the more deliberate shooter who consciously aims using whatever method they feel comfortable with.
I really don't care one way or the other how an individual shoots. As long as you hit what you're aiming at the method seems supremely unimportant to me.
Having said that, having respect for others point of view IS important, and if a person says that such and such does, or does not, work for them, then that statement must be respected as being true for the person making it.
If someone else's truth is not the same as mine, that's fine, sometimes truth is not absolute. Healthy discussion is fine, I'll listen to your viewpoint if you'll listen to mine. Just don't try to start an argument, or push your point of view as being superior to mine. I'm afraid I won't play that game. We are all different, our brains are wired differently, we all have unique skills and abilities.
Vive la difference!!
Cheers,
Ian

[Dennis La Varenne]

Ian,

I really don't care one way or the other how an individual shoots. As long as you hit what you're aiming at the method seems supremely unimportant to me.
Having said that, having respect for others point of view IS important, and if a person says that such and such does, or does not, work for them, then that statement must be respected as being true for the person making it.
If someone else's truth is not the same as mine, that's fine, sometimes truth is not absolute. Healthy discussion is fine, I'll listen to your viewpoint if you'll listen to mine. Just don't try to start an argument, or push your point of view as being superior to mine. I'm afraid I won't play that game. We are all different, our brains are wired differently, we all have unique skills and abilities.
Vive la difference!!

What on earth are you on about???

I think you have completely missed the point of what I wrote above and read something entirely different into it.

[kombikid]

Hmm, yes, sorry about that, I do tend to wax a little inappropriately philosophical at times. I guess what I'm getting at is the depth of thought and passion that go into this subject, and many others, has people making accusations that the opposing viewpoint has the inability to understand where they're coming from, that their style offers certain advantages over the other etc etc.
There seems to be almost an adversarial attitude between the proponents of the two styles, whereas really there is no right or wrong way to do something. If what you're doing works, that's sufficient.
I'm no doubt reading far too much into this whole thing, and Dennis I apologise if I annoyed you, the "you" in that last post was a generic "you" who I argue with in my head to try and arrange my thoughts, certainly not someone I've never met and have no wish to offend.
I think it best I leave this right here,
Cheers to all,
Ian

[Dennis La Varenne]

Ian,

No need to apologise. No offence taken. I just didn't understand where you were coming from.

I don't mind if people argue with me. That is how it should be if they don't agree with me, so long as they don't mind me arguing back.

I don't do it out of any kind of superiority complex or anger. I try to keep it as level headed and as logical as I can and backed up with as much factual information as I am able. When any of us tries to explain a personal point of view, we are trying to make it possible for another person to see things as we see them by way of explanation, and if we think they are in error in some aspect of their thinking, we try to show them how they are in error so they can be or do what they are doing even better, not that they are dimwits or fools.

Over the years, I feel that many people with whom I have disagreed on many issues have taken my counter arguments as personal attacks on their intelligence or character rather than debating the issue on the merits of the arguments put forward.

It has gotten me into a bit of strife from time to time, and I have found some people to be annoying at worst when I think they are not really reading my arguments properly for some reason. But there are no people on Ozbow whom I have any kind of personal dislike for really.

[kombikid]

Hey, you'll get no argument from me mate, listening to other people's point of view is the best way I know to open your mind to new concepts and ideas. Plus learning better ways of doing things of course.
I guess what does annoy me at times are the diehards who've taken a position that they'll defend to the death and will not listen to people who know another, or God forbid, better way.
Thankfully the vast majority just like to get along, and I would enjoy a discussion and demonstration of your shooting style some time,
Cheers,
Ian