Instinctive shooting method-your way of taking the shot

[Chase N. Nocks]

3) if you are left-eye dominant and shoot right handed (and vica-versa) - you don't shoot instinctive!

I have a mate who can pick up a r/h or l/h bow and has an uncanny ability to hit the dot at 10m with both eyes open. He is right eye dominate, so when he shoots the R/H bow he is instinctive but according to your statement when he shots the L/H bow 1 min later he is not instinctive? I confused.

The definition of instinctive is different for everyone, I am not sure why so many people get hung up splitting hairs over their definition being the only true and correct definition.

We are all archers and bowhunter's who probably all shoot at some level instinctively, the brain as someone pointed out is an amazing bit of gear and any of us who pretend to fully understand the human brain that well should probably be putting their knowledge to better use.

Anyway I got to get to work, talk more later.

Michael

Thanks Hue, for jumping in.

Michael gives a good example that I can personally vouch for in my own shooting...the major limiting factors if I swap hands/eyes is my release being untrained, my anchor point not being very familiar and draw weight of the bow needing to be a little lighter to be comfortable but other than that I do not gap, I shoot very much the Fluid Instinctive style..I have not shot left hand beyond maybe 25m so will concede that I would very probably GAP at the greater ranges..partly to check-in on the steadiness of my aim as well.

But I'll take Michael's and Robert's questions even further. Can you explain why you feel that all or any of those peramiters exclude someone from instinctive?

I think that a concrete definition for instinctive is terribly hard but we can try for some generalities. But I will try to find some of the definitions as supplied by some of the more authoritive archers as well as try to located the first use of the term particularly in modern archery. Anyone who has an idea please jump in and help...Graeme A??

[Chase N. Nocks]

3) if you are left-eye dominant and shoot right handed (and vica-versa) - you don't shoot instinctive!

The definition of instinctive is different for everyone, I am not sure why so many people get hung up splitting hairs over their definition being the only true and correct definition.

We are all archers and bowhunter's who probably all shoot at some level instinctively,


Michael

Michael, I agree completely..that's what I was trying to say about the communication blur between archers (anyone really) due to people's different observational abilities and the way they use language. eg My wife and I are often at loggerheads because she uses absolutes in her language all the time, while I never do.

For instance, I have many many archers claim that they DO NOT SEE THE ARROW in their peripheral vision at all... I have quite frankly found this statement astonishing. When pressed into a serious dialogue where no egos are sought to be trampled on, most will agree that what they meant in reality is that they TAKE NO CONSCIOUS NOTICE OF THE ARROW. To some people the statements are the same, to me there is a world of difference. Of the small number that do not change the quality of their statement, some I accept as "stuck on the rails thinkers" and the others that are truely exquisitely skilled archers I'll try to give the benefit of the doubt.

30 years of shooting and I'm sorry but my bow arm and bow and arrow have yet to disappear from my view. The surprise if that did happen would be enormous. Even when I have been completely in the zone..and the day I shot my highest score ever it just happened so ridiculously easy and I don't remember much about the round or even my target to target shooting....it just happened. It was a state of mind...but if the leading edge of my body had dissappeared I'm pretty sure I would have remembered that.

The two areas I mentioned, NON-DELIBERATE AIMING AND FLUID MOTION. Are just two of the (to me) most apparrant overlapping qualities that archers mention when talking about Instinctive style. There are others that I would like to hash out with other shooters here and at other forums...not as a basis of rule setting, in fact the opposite. I think that any style that is unaided in range finding IS actually an instinctive style but not what we generally accept as instinctive...so to separate properly I'll call it Fluid Instinctive.

If you are guessing without the aid of a device the range to a target you are using your instincts no less in my opinion. Thus the instinctive quality can be applied to GAP, Stringwalkers and Facewalkers. The initial guess regardless of the time or sequence to taking the shot is irrelivent ultimately. There IS a guess and there IS a commitment whether it is before or during the drawing of the bow.

Also Simon I would be very interested in hearing further your experiences and comments on String walking...does it fit into a larger category of Instinctive shooting like I am trying to say??

ABA and 3DAAA should change their rules and it is long overdue. These are all valid barebow techniques as far as I can objectively tell and should compete side by side at the peg.

I winder at the history of String and Face walking. Certainly GAP, IMHO predates Instinctive by at least 30 seconds.

Cheers Troy

[Chase N. Nocks]

Case in point. If I had a new archer to bring along I would teach them to GAP and practice practice practice at different ranges and tell them that Fluid Instinctive will largely take care of itself....if they want it to and they think there is a benefit.

[Nomad]

i found the BEST way to learn how to focus on that point is to shoot in the dark. set up a oversized target board that will stop arrows and in the middle put a small glow stick. they can be bought from fishing shops for like 50c or something. i used to crack them then cut the end and draw a 1" circle with the glow juice. other times i have just blutacked the thing on. then go back to 10m and you dont have a choice on focus then. especialy since you cant see your gear it means you take the shot 100% instinct. after 5 or so shots, take a gander at where they are landing. vary position and range so that your shooting instinct is more adept at calculations and you will be sweet. works a treat after a short while fellahs!

Jake

[Brumbies Country]

[quote="Chase N. Nocks

If you are guessing without the aid of a device the range to a target you are using your instincts no less in my opinion. Thus the instinctive quality can be applied to GAP, Stringwalkers and Facewalkers. The initial guess regardless of the time or sequence to taking the shot is irrelivent ultimately. There IS a guess and there IS a commitment whether it is before or during the drawing of the bow.

Also Simon I would be very interested in hearing further your experiences and comments on String walking...does it fit into a larger category of Instinctive shooting like I am trying to say??

ABA and 3DAAA should change their rules and it is long overdue. These are all valid barebow techniques as far as I can objectively tell and should compete side by side at the peg.

I winder at the history of String and Face walking. Certainly GAP, IMHO predates Instinctive by at least 30 seconds.

Cheers Troy[/quote]

Troy, re your last comment, what you said here is absolutely in line with what a US representative longbower said on one of their trad sites last week. He had gap shooting, instinctive and split vision in the same time frame you have here . Re the literal history of string and face walking, Larry Yien, in a Stickbow.com article he wrote on string walking talked about it being "another primitive sighting technique" although I cannot find anything definitive re the history of either technique. You'd have to think that face walking would have been something that archers could well have historically engaged in. Tight fitting bone/horn nocks the Turks had could have lent to stringwalking.

Re your question about string walking fitting into a larger category of instinctive techniques, I'd say probably not. It's a deliberate aiming method and when you see some of the scores shot by our own Mick Turner and some of the Swedish barebowers, a very effective one. The Swedish guys shoot scores that are not far removed from sighted recurvers and compounders in FITA field competitions. Having said that. I believe you need an element of instinctive calculation of distance on unmarked courses. It's rightly a legitimate technique within IFAA and FITA rules.

In contrast I'd reckon face walking could come closer to meeting your broader interpretation. There is an element of gap shooting within different face anchor points but I reckon with training they could be processed into the subconcious.

Simon

[Chase N. Nocks]

Simon I would be very interested if you could remember where the comments were posted by the longbowman you mention. I would like to take a look at what he has to say.

Maybe I could suggest a different tac with regards to the instinctive issue or really the terminology....the style should not be called Instinctive at all.

I have been using the term "Fluid Instinctive" here as a way to try and keep the label we all love alive but if it gets in the way it should go...let's call it "Fluid Memory" style. A highly practiced technique is being employed that depending on the skill set, dedication to form and frequency becomes efficient and 2nd Nature and that is the point I think we lapse into using the term instinctive..

So the only difference between the unaided styles is the way they FLOW. The Fluid Memory archer may have advantages in reaction times but lose out in the accuracy stakes...hence the concept that the other (hard worked at) styles are sly or cheating or unfair.

Steve who started this topic is pursuing a regime of 1000 arrows a week. Good on him. THAT IS the most consistant formulea, coupled with QUALITY PRACTICE, that all the great shots employ.

Perry, mate sorry I will respond to what you said but we were both of a similar mind over coffee on the weekend.

[Brumbies Country]

Troy, I'm not sure what copyright laws apply between websites and whether or not I might be hung drawn and quartered for unintentionally promoting somebody elses website, but in the interest of extension of knowledge, here goes: The site is Trad gang.com. The archer who made the statement that I broadly quoted goes under the pseudnym of Zetabow. I went back to try to find that quote; there's alot of material there and I failed to find that particular quote. But I did find this also posted by Zetabow:

"I can shoot Instinctive, Gap and point of Aim method and do well at marked Field and unmarked 3D but obviously my instinct isn't quite at your level.

I won the Fita 3D world champs is Sept against some very good instinctive shooters (Fita 3D is close to IBO with 33y max distamce) but I tend to use Split-vision more on static targets and instinct on moving."

In line with your theme these comments will be of interest. Alot of what this guy posts sounds knowledgable. I'd assumed he was US based. On other posts he mentions having a Korean coach. With some difficulty I found the 2009 World FITA 3D results and the winner of the mens LB was Steve Morley of Estonia.

Simon

[Fantastication]

The biggest issue with 'instinctive' archery is that it is quite literally the wrong word to use. Instinctive is an adverb, used to describe an action performed by instinct, which in itself is defined as 'an inherent or natural aptitude or capacity' or 'behaviour that is mediated by reactions below the conscious level'.

Humans have many instincts, but none that relate to archery. A clear example of instinct is our response to suprise, which is generally a sharply indrawn breath and immediately raised pulse and levels of adrenaline. None of these are trained reactions. We cannot consciously control our pulse, nor can we control the release of adrenaline apart from putting ourselves in positions where these reactions are likely to be triggered, which is controlling our instinct by controlling the environment that triggers it, not by direct control.

Archers who describe themselves as instinctive would also describe themselves as instinctive at many other activities, including mathematics. Sounds odd? Let me explain.

If I were to say to you, dear reader, what the result of '3 + 6' is, the chances are you would respond '9', without conciously thinking about the actual maths involved. If I was to ask you why 3 + 6 = 9, you would actually have to think about it, some of you may not even be able to answer at all beyond a simple 'because it is'. If I was to ask '3+6=?' of a child who is just learning, their response would be to work it out; '3 + 6 = 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9', ticking each consecutive number off on their fingers as they went, until they had ticked off six, giving both the final answer and why 3+6=9 at the same time. As adults who've had to add 3 + 6 thousands of times or more, our brains work differently due to the neurological version of muscle memory. Given the environmental conditions of 3+6, the brain no longer needs to go through the intermediary steps of calculating the answer, as we have a memory of the final answer that we use instead, which also leads to us trivialising, and often forgetting, the reason why it works. While it is possible to learn that 3+6=9 by trial and error instead of being taught the method of working it out, by handing in your exam with 3+6=8 and discovering that it is wrong, finally handing in your exam with 3+6=9 teaches you the answer.

Following along to archery, an 'instinctive' archer is the adult in the above analogy that no longer needs to calculate the intermediary steps or think about why the result is correct and has consequently forgotten the steps involved. Alternatively, they may have never known the intermediary steps and learnt through trial and error (in this case, arrows not landing where you aim is the same as answering 3+6 with anything other than 9).

Gap shooting, face- and string-walking, along with every other aiming method, are the intermediate steps to landing an arrow correctly. After enough shots, you won't actually need them anymore, while the same can be said of trial and error, using a method is a much faster way to get to the final result of not needing an aiming method. That said, remembering how to answer the question of why what they do works allows for many more options when they come to getting used to a new piece of equipment.

Any 'instinctive' archer who belittles aiming methods is just forgetful or naive, they've forgotten that they had a system to learn or never had a system to learn, neither of which make them any better than any other archer.


As a final aside: if you want an example of an instinctive action that involves movement instead of biological responses, it's walking. After the initial conscious decision to start walking, the messages to the legs to continue walking don't originate in the brain, but the lower spinal cord.

[hue]

Hi again guys

certainly is an interesting talking point, isn't it?
what constitutes instinctive as opposed to the other forms of aiming
but i'll answer Rocksteady first -

i've been intructing and coaching archery for nearly 18 years and only the last 3 years have i been teaching barebows as i shot compound for most of that time. when i say "eye-dominant" i mean that in it's most literal sense - not one eye being slightly clearer or slightly stronger or depth or whatever - i mean real dominance and that happens to a lot of people.
put a bow in their hands and teach them to shoot both eyes and, if they are right handed, the arrow consistantly goes to the left and badly until you shut that dominant eye or teach that side of the body. if you have strong dominance of an eye and cannot comfortably shoot against your body's natural side, you can't shoot both eyes open and ipso facto - can't shoot "instinctive" - does that make sense. Just something i've learnt!
Will also agree with the point that instinctive works far better with a moving object (as in the hunt) as opposed to static objects (such as target). Will use my friend Mick Smith as an example (hope you don't mind Mick) put Mick into a paddock and the rabbits are dinner - he is awesome with moving targets - put Mick in front of a 40 cm target, 1.2 mtrs off the ground at a distance of 18 metres, well, he'd be the first to say it ...........
it's the speed and proper use of "form" (the consistant way you shoot) and the ability to "know where the arrow is going to go" that produces a good instinctive archer IMHO, you don't use speed at any form of static target.

Hue

[perry]

I am left handed at the majority of things yet right eye dominant. I kick a football with my right foot. I naturally picked up a cricket bat right handed due to eye dominance yet bowl left handed. I always saw bowling a cricket ball in the same vein as shooting a bow, you could fairly call it an instictive thing in the context of this thread.

Could not agree more that the dominant eye should be the determining factor whether you shoot right of left handed highlighting my earlier point about about the human brain- there are no absolutes for everyone it will put out the same quality information as what's put into it.

The dominant eye in archery is more about depth perception and what feels natural to beginners. By closing either eye all you are doing is eliminating depth perception and introducing a dependance on a referance point. Its perfectly possible to shoot opposite ones eye dominance both eyes open. Just begin on a conscience level to relearn your shot sequence and file away to the subconscious just as you did as a beginner. By suggesting Instinctive shooting is left or right handed you are acknologing that it's a learned behavior.

Take another sport that requires a high level of hand eye coordination and depth perception interaction and an "instictive feel" to play well such as Tennis. Margaret Court , arguably the finest womens Tennis player of the 20th century was a natural left hander , left eye dominant who was basically bullied out of playing left handed by coaches of that era and retrained herself to be an outstanding champion playing with her unnatural hand

regards Jacko

[Brumbies Country]

Troy, I found the quote you asked me about by Steve Morley. He's got impressive runs on the board re international 3D and IFAA longbow and also lists himself as a trad bowhunter.

The third line here is what I was chasing: "Gap and or Split-vision is the same thing just different name, it (mostly) starts off as a visual learning sequence where you do look at the arrow but once mastered the Archer is not dependent on visual imput of seeing the arrow point and it becomes more about Saptial awareness.

"Spatial awareness is the ability to be aware of oneself in space. Awareness of spatial relationships is the ability to see two or more objects in relation to each other and to oneself."

Instinct, Gap, split-vision as far as I'm concerned are all closely related and it's just how you start off the learning process and how the conscious and subconscious mind process the information.

No one method it better than the other as it really depends on the person and how it suits them, I know a few people who insist on shooting Instinct because they think it's Trad but watching them it's obvious they're stuggling.

My advice to people I teach is to explore every aiming method and either use them all or find which best suits you. "

Simon

________________________________________

[GrahameA]

Good Morning Simon

Something to consider. When you are shooting "instinctive" the object that is in focus is the target. Everything closer is blurred to some extent. When you are shooting aimed the sighting mechanism is in focus and the target is blurred.

[Brumbies Country]

Good Morning Simon

Something to consider. When you are shooting "instinctive" the object that is in focus is the target. Everything closer is blurred to some extent. When you are shooting aimed the sighting mechanism is in focus and the target is blurred.

Good Morning Grahame

Good point. In the face of that and perhaps dependent on long term training it seems that some of the guys who are shooting well in terms of international competion results seem to be able to switch from one to the other, a bit dependent on discipline, and particularly relative to distance. Larry Yien in Masters of the Barebow 2, and he's a particular well credentilled longbower in IFAA terms (where they shoot out to 80 yards), talked in terms of concious gap shooting but then it becoming relatively instinctive with a lot of training over time. Even at that level there may be some variation about how instinctive shooting is defined. I remember a particular remark that stuck out when I was searching to see what well credentialled barebow archers were doing re gap, slpit vision and instinctive aiming methods and it was along these lines:

Aiming methods are important, but they are not as important in the overall scheme of things as building up really good form.

Simon

[GrahameA]

Good Morning Simon

Good point. In the face of that and perhaps dependent on long term training it seems that some of the guys who are shooting well in terms of international competion results seem to be able to switch from one to the other, a bit dependent on discipline, and particularly relative to distance. Larry Yien in Masters of the Barebow 2, and he's a particular well credentilled longbower in IFAA terms (where they shoot out to 80 yards), talked in terms of concious gap shooting but then it becoming relatively instinctive with a lot of training over time. Even at that level there may be some variation about how instinctive shooting is defined. I remember a particular remark that stuck out when I was searching to see what well credentialled barebow archers were doing re gap, slpit vision and instinctive aiming methods and it was along these lines:

Aiming methods are important, but they are not as important in the overall scheme of things as building up really good form.

Simon

Form is everything - well it is in my opinion. If you do not have "good form" then no two arrows are shot the same and you spray them all over the place.

For me. At 70 metres is a very deliberate aimed shot and I am shooting "point-of-aim". At 40 metres I generally shoot "point-of-aim". At 20 metres I just "blat it". So somewhere between 40 and 20 metres I transition from an aimed shot to something that is much more "instinctive" - look at the target and zap. The brain does all the calculation of trajectory and offset and when the sight picture is correct the arrow is released.

As a comparison - shooting Skeet is a very "instinctive" type of shooting - there is not enough time to consciously aim the gun as the clay is moving fast. Shooting small bore is very much an aimed shot.

[Brumbies Country]

That's a really good analogy. I did a bit of skeet shooting and you don't have time to be other than instinctive, even more so wth ISU skeet where you start with the gun on the hip. It's in line with Hue's comments re Mick Smiths ability to hit moving rabbits earlier in this thread.

Simon

[Benny Nganabbarru]

The more familiar I become with my point-on, the better an instinctive shooter I become.

[perry]

Excellant fella's When I am shooting 3D archery or in the lead up to a Trad shoot ideally I like to shoot a few clay's as it helps with the fluid shooting that Troy has talked about - and you be very quite thanks very much Chasin Nocks I had Tennis elbow and had not shot my bow or my shotgun for a while the other week out at Ripley . I really can shoot better than that see proves my point about proper practice prevents poor performance

regards Jacko

[hue]

oh Grahame

i could kiss you (only kidding ) form is everything!!!!!!!!!!
i had an almost heated exchange with a good friend of mine at the LB 100 over that subject because he used the term "spined arrows" are what makes a great archer and that's all i seem to hear from trad shooters, as if that is the panacea to all their problems.
people don't seem to realise that an excellent archer will shoot a mediocre bow and ill-matched arrows reasonably well, a bad archer will shoot the best bow in the world and most accurately spined arrows badly - simple as that!
Form, form, practice, practice form and finally form will make you the best (it also helps to have well spined arrows and some natural talent ) but refer back to the beginning of this sentance!

Hue

[GrahameA]

Hi Hue.

i had an almost heated exchange with a good friend of mine at the LB 100 over that subject because he used the term "spined arrows" are what makes a great archer and that's all i seem to hear from trad shooters, as if that is the panacea to all their problems.

He should read what Horace Ford had to say on the subject.

The Panacea to all problems is "Perfect Practice" and lots of it - along with a bit of appropriate coaching. The normal saying is "Practice makes Perfect". That is total rubbish - Practice make Permanent. If you practice the wrong thing or poor "form" that is what you learn and it will vecome ingrained into your actions.

Only "Perfect Practice makes Perfect".

[Stephen Georgiou]

Hello all,
Very interesting to see different opinions on this subject.
Love this subject and the varied comments and passion that comes from it!

Fascination raises some very good points on the way the brain and nervous system works.
But, "sorry there is always a but " The definition of instinctive may be off a bit....
Instinct is on a similar level as walking as the response to practice cause competence in both. I made reference earlier in this in the way we throw a ball or use a bat. Archery is no different.
The skill can be imprinted into your mind and body and become part of your basic skills.
I have had little opportunity to shoot this year due to health issues and recently, picked up the bow to have a few shots. Fr those of you who know me know that I am a passionate archer and practiced daily for quite a while. This practice has burned the skill into my being. Over a 2 year period I must have shot well in excess of 100,000 arrows well. This level of activity for me was exactly what I needed on many levels. Having the discipline to do this meant that now I am finding it easier in many other areas of my life to focus on tasks and get things done.
I am digressing..
Lets look a some of the auto response systems in the human body.
The heart, or all of our muscles rely on an initial impulse to activate this activation is fed to a muscle fiber that is like the leader or foreman of a number of adjacent fibers that are known as sympathetic fibers. These fibers respond to the leader and operate. In the case of cramps, heart fibulation and ticks, the signal between the sympathetic fibers and the leader fibers is interrupted. These auto functions on a more complex level, aid in the ability to hit a target or prey. These auto functions have a part in the way our body and muscles respond to a feeling or reaction and employing these are part of the mechanism we know as muscle memory.

The "Instinct" is the hunt and the pursuit of prey the familiarity of the weapon is all that matters. The thought of distance, size of the prey, angle of shot, weight of projectile or any other parameter of the tools employed had no bearing on the shot decision or the result.

I recently read a book called "The valley of the horses" It is a wonderful book that was set in pre-historic times and talks about the life of a Scandinavian woman who was raised by neanderthols. She told of the experience of living with them and the differences between the two races. The neanderthols memories where passed on from generation to generation the same way eye color or other traits where. "This book was fictional but made many sensible proposals" The level of maintenance of these instinct's came from repetition and imprinting by watching others in the clan. After some time the instinctive memories filled in the gaps and the clan members became able to use the skills of their forebears. I found this very interesting and plausible.

Think about how this relates to archery.
Although the tools employed may vary, the instinct to hunt and resourcefully use tools to do so, are an inherent part of our makeup as humans. Depending on our lineage maybe some are more adept in certain skill areas as there may be a slight thread back to either hunter, gatherer, tool maker or king.

So after a long break I think that I have said enough, again!

Great work to all of you who have kept the home fire burning.

Cheers.

P.S. I am having my gallbadder removed on monday and head for the US on the 25th. So anyone interested in bits and pieces from the US can PM me and I will see what I can do.

I will put the gallbladder on the trade blanket! if anyone needs a spare.

[roscoe]

Instinctive shooting of the bow is a very good and very rewarding method of shooting a bow. I say this because under real hunting conditions we havent always got time to calculate the shot. Its rewarding to use our senses to shoot the bow accurately. I remember the first time i started to learn to shoot instinctively. I and i will say that most of us, until we learn to shot the bow instinctively didnt really know we had it in us and it felt and still does feel sort of supernatural at how accurate we can shoot this way.
How can we do it? Well IMO i think that our mind takes a memory photo of were all of our bow, bow arm, arrow etc. are at when we do a correct shot. Its like handing someone a photo of the same thing over and over and then give them a slightly different photo and imediately you will pick the difference. This is what i believe is happening when we instinctively shoot.
We also definately develope muscle memory and as some one said in a pevious thread, that we can shoot lights in the dark. I have done this and yes you can hit the light or come very close most times at normal distances. IMO you must pick a small spot to focus your eyes and mind onto. How many of us have a good pig or a target infront of us and the pig is totaly black, its hard to pick a spot until you have to come very close in to pick a defined spot, like a curl of hair etc. with out this spot focus point makes the shot much harder and definately less accurate. I have taught a lot of people and i know that anyone that has been involved with archery and shots the bow at a reasonable level and i dont just mean target shooting, but hunting as well would have taught there fair share of people. If there is some new people that are just getting into trad shooting and would like for me to show how i go about teaching instinctive shooting then i would gladely explain the process that i use to get the ball rolling..... Roscoe

[Trad Bound]

Steve
All the best with your operation. Hope to see you soon you've had a bit of a rough run with your health.
take care, bring back some good stories from the US.
Cheers Tony

[Chase N. Nocks]

Good Morning Simon

Something to consider. When you are shooting "instinctive" the object that is in focus is the target. Everything closer is blurred to some extent. When you are shooting aimed the sighting mechanism is in focus and the target is blurred.

Good Morning Grahame

Good point. In the face of that and perhaps dependent on long term training it seems that some of the guys who are shooting well in terms of international competion results seem to be able to switch from one to the other, a bit dependent on discipline, and particularly relative to distance. Larry Yien in Masters of the Barebow 2, and he's a particular well credentilled longbower in IFAA terms (where they shoot out to 80 yards), talked in terms of concious gap shooting but then it becoming relatively instinctive with a lot of training over time. Even at that level there may be some variation about how instinctive shooting is defined. I remember a particular remark that stuck out when I was searching to see what well credentialled barebow archers were doing re gap, slpit vision and instinctive aiming methods and it was along these lines:

Aiming methods are important, but they are not as important in the overall scheme of things as building up really good form.

Simon

Thanks for finding the quotes Simon..I will read some more.

Both your and Graeme's quite I think are essentially true..Instinctive is something that some shooters progress to, whether it be deliberate or coincidential. As young blokes we were interested that our archery be for hunting practice so deliberately tried to foster "Instinctive" (I'm starting to dislike using that word) but I think it really only has clear advantages with moving targets as per the Hue's story about Mick. Can't discount attitude providing that extra bit of focus...when Mick's hitting the running bunnies.

[Chase N. Nocks]

Yes Steve, hope you are on the mend soon!

[Chase N. Nocks]

Is there anyone here now who thinks that the use of the term "Instinctive" when it comes to a shooting style/method is not a complete misnomer?

Hence apart from a emotional attachment to the term and the associated coolness and mystery, should be done away with.

I've been using the term myself now for 30 odd years as much out of laziness as convention, but seriously not always comfortably or honestly. It is a learned method, a learned barebow style. Nothing more.

Watching quite a few shooting videos lately and many very good and articulate archers has bought that home.

[Chase N. Nocks]

See "Hypothectical at the Peg"

[Aztec Hunter]

Most people here in San Diego, California shoot compounds, with the exception of myself. Thanks for the great information, I've learned a lot in ten minutes.

[Chase N. Nocks]

Good on you Aztec, hope to see more of you in the future.

[Stephen Georgiou]

Hello Aztec! I was at the San Diego range at Balboa Park last weekend! Do you shoot there?

[Chase N. Nocks]

I did not wish to sabotage Dennis' thread and will oblige by staying out of it.

I just wanted to bump this back into the spotlight along with the Hypothetical:At the Peg thread. I think these are interesting and can run in tandem.

At the least I think there is value in revisiting these threads as even the contradictions to your own style and own point of view may illuminate what you do and help you explain it better.

My own experience mirrors Dennis' very closely and yet I only refer to myself as an instinctive shooter as a matter of convention and expediency when talking to other barebow archers. I don't refer to myself as an instinctive archer as a matter of accuracy even though my shooting style fits those criteria as accepted by Dennis.