Trad Gang
Main Boards => The Shooters FORM Board => Topic started by: X2 on March 07, 2007, 04:30:00 PM
-
Just watched Instructional shooting video volume 2 by Ricky Welch. He states that he does not consciously look at or use the tip of the arrow for aiming. I hear some people say that in order to shoot well you have to have a conscious aiming method. I have shot against Ricky Welch, and I can say that he is a very good shot and has won many world titles. Through many years of trial and error I have come up with a very similar method of shooting, and it works extremely well for me. My point is that there are many ways to do things. I see a lot of argument of my way is better than yours, or you have to do it this way. What it all comes down to is, use what works best for you. Anyone else seen this video, and what do you think? How do you explain his success given that he doesn't have a conscious aiming method?
-
I agree with the whatever works for you statement.I personally don't care how a person shoots as long as they hit their mark ( not wounding animals).Some people shoot great simply because they have a gift. Leland
-
"How do you explain his success given that he doesn't have a conscious aiming method?"
The same way a pro quarterback can stand back and throw a football through the hole in a swinging tire. Doesn't mean we all can do it. Sometimes when I put three shots one right after the other in the bulls eye, instinctively, I begin to think maybe I know how to do it. Then the next one goes wild and I can't tell you why.
-
He doesn't use the tip of the arrow to aim the bow but he uses something. It may be hand-eye coordination but if you are shooting at something, bullseye or game, then you are "aiming" in some way or another. I can't understand the idea of "not aiming" at something that I am trying to shoot. I do not look at the tip of my arrow to "aim" my bow at the target, I look at where I want to hit and "aim the bow". But to hit a target you must "aim".
-
There is a difference between conscious aiming and sub conscious aiming. I think that is the big difference that we are talking about. Everyone aim's it is just the difference of how we do it. That is what was being discussed.
-
I aim pretty much the same way Rick does. I use my instince's to shoot. Yes, way back when I started shooting I was a gap shooter. Through many long hours of practice I lost conscious sight of the arrow. I now no longer look at the arrow while shooting it. **********************
That does not mean that I do not hold the arrow back at full draw for a few seconds. **********
I see so many shooters that snap shoot and say they are shooting instinctive. How can one ever be accurate and never stop moving ? Archery is fairly simple, You just have to do the same thing every time. ( Oh so hard to do !) How can you do the same thing evrey time if you never stop moving ?
I am not qualified to tell anybody anything, this is just my opinion.
Bill
-
Rick Welch runs a shooting clinc now and gives check points to use on part of ur face , where the arrow feather touches...etc. ...
-
-
I think I saw the first video, I can't remember which one it was exactly. I seem to remember it advocating gap shooting as a good way to get started. Or maybe I'm mixing up videos? :confused:
I think a person can be equally successful either way, after the basic skills of archery have been mastered. (By that I mean that the archer has developed enough skill that matters of poor or inconsistent form are no longer a significant variable.) However, I think mostly it is just a matter of how we imprecisely describe experience with words. We're all obviously conscious of our shooting / aiming to some degree.
I'm sure I'll get lots of criticism for this, but I personally don't believe there is any such thing as "instinctive" shooting. Even if he never mentally calculated gaps or leads, the pro quarterback has practiced long hours, probably every day for years, to throw that ball through the swinging tire. Similarly, I think unconscious aiming is a product of conscious aiming performed somewhere along the learning curve while the archer was developing the basics of form. It didn't "just happen."
When you think about it, aiming is the easy part. Keeping back tension, follow through, smooth release, etc., all of these are hard to do consistently. I submit that a person's method of aiming is developed far earlier in the learning curve than the other aspects of shooting. By the time those aspects of form are consistent, aiming has probably already become consistent and second nature, "unconscious" or "instinctive," as you will.
I think when an archer has developed to that point, he or she, whether realizing it or not, has done a lot of unconscious aiming while focusing on aspects of form. Now the body has things sorted out enough that the mind is free to concentrate on other things. You can choose what those things are - aiming or something else. What you choose probably has more to do with you personally, physically or psychologically, rather than any supposed "best" method. For example, someone shooting a light bow with a short draw length may choose to focus instead on back tension, because of the dramatic decrease in power if they creep forward (but I wouldn't know anything about that... ;) ) If it leads to consistently higher success, that is the best method for that person. Again, it goes back to what works for the individual, and that choice may have absolutely nothing to do with anyone else's experience. A large part of the debate I think comes from the (mis?)conception that people are sufficiently similar that the same method will work for almost everyone. Also, everyone is in a different stage of learning. Some are beginning, some are very advanced. A person's needs change as they progress along the learning curve.
The really good archers who do not consciously aim I think are successful because they have practiced so much that aiming is completely second nature, and in most circumstances, there's no need to use mental energy on it. Thus they are free to focus on other things - form aspects maybe, or mentally drilling a hole in the spot (is that "conscious aiming?"). They are just as free to focus on aiming, even though they may not have to from a technical point of view.
-
Interesting. In all sincereity I love the responses on this board. One thing I can say, the guys/gals here difinetly make ya think. Nothing less than brilliant minds here. :readit:
Instinct as to be my understanding is something learnered either by evolution and or by practice. Done without hesitation and not to be confused by a reflex.
You can consciouly aim all you want if your bow hand does not raise and if your draw arm does not draw you cannot shoot.
The word "Instinctive" at least to me puts all the necessary things required to accomplish a shot.
Noting that the mind does control all we do, have monkies consciously learned how to swing from trees to escape an attaching lion or consciously put a stick on a termite hold to collect food? It all skills they learned to build instincts. Until we can move objects by use of telekenetics where only our minds are in use, I shall term the way atleast I shoot to be instinctively and anything else not done by reflex.
Noting that all individuals are created equal yet physically and menatlly different, how long might you think it would take lets say an 8 year old shooting a 15# recurve and a 40 year old shooting a 65# longbow to develope the skills to shoot instinctively at say 8 yards? Let me rephase that to shoot via consciously aiming? Il'll even call it snap shooting for a better term. But wait snap shooting, isnt that to fast to be called consciouly aiming, has arcehry become a reflex? :bigsmyl:
One thing I can say, the guys/gals here difinetly make ya think. Nothing less than brilliant minds here. Wish we all could sit around a fire, a very big fire and exchange thoughts and ideas. I don't know where it would lead, but would be lots of fun watching deer go by and saying how one would attack the situation.
-
I think it would help if we agree on a definition of instinctive shooting. I don't think any instinctive shooters believe they are using the "force" from Star Wars, or some innate sense they were born with like being able to touch, see, smell, etc. I think everyone would agree that instinctive shooting is learned; otherwise, the use of a bow would go all the way back to the beginning of human beings and not just 10,000 years or so.
For me, instinctive shooting means shooting a bow and arrow without using any part of the bow or arrow as a point of reference in determining where to aim. So my definition would include Howard Hill's method of shooting, which was to focus on the target but also be aware of the arrow in his peripheral vision, since his awareness of the arrow did not include using it as an aiming device.
My definition would not include gap shooting, since the arrow is used as an aiming device.
People may say that Howard Hill probably used his arrow as an aiming device, or that all the rest of us use some aiming device, whether we are aware of it or not. I have tested this, to a degree, by cutting out little pieces of cardboard that I have taped to the bottom of my eyeglasses such that the only thing I can see when I shoot is the target. Others have tested it by shooting in a dark room with only a spot on the target illuminated. I can assure you that it is possible to shoot without using the arrow or the bow as an aiming device, whether they are present in our peripheral vision or not.
-
McDave, the shooting with the "blinders" is interesting. How were your results? Were you able to group arrows? How well did you shoot, compared to your "normal" shooting?
It seems to me that a completely dark room would be necessary to really block out the awareness of the arrow, the bow, the knuckle, etc.
Usually I do consciously aim, so I figure I would just compensate by using some other point of reference if I couldn't see the arrow point. I will have to try this. I'll post pics if I put any holes in the wall. :D
-
:thumbsup:
-
"McDave, the shooting with the "blinders" is interesting. How were your results? Were you able to group arrows? How well did you shoot, compared to your "normal" shooting?"
Actually, if I just let myself focus on the target, and try not to be aware of the cardboard, I found that I could shoot and group okay. Maybe not as well as usual, but then I usually don't shoot that way. Probably if I really wanted to make a point, I could get better if I always shot with the bow and arrow blocked out, but I really didn't feel like making a habit out of it.
-
To be dead honest I don't know what style I shoot. I guess if I had to label it, it would be "Instincti-Gap" or something like that. I don't consciously gap shoot or aim, but I don't release as soon as I hit full draw like an instinctive shooter does.
I'm not consciously aware of my arrow point in relation to the target, I'm just looking at where I want to hit. Before I draw I bring my bow hand roughly to the level my brain says is needed to hit the target. As I achieve full draw, my bow hand adjusts as my eyes and brain tell it without actually thinking about it. I hold for about 2-4 seconds as I focus on my spot and release when it feels right.
When I first started out I consciously gap shot, but over time the deliberate thought process involved has faded away, leaving me neither fish nor fowl as far as a specific style goes...
-
"A BowLazer for Low Light Conditions" if there isnt one Made already, it wont take them Long.
:archer: :goldtooth:
-
Interisting discussion,confusing but interesting!
I shoot at night often and seem to shoot better when I can't see the bow/arrow or other stuff to take my mind off the target.I also do not release as soon as I hit anchor.I can shoot that way but am more inconsistent than if I "hold" at anchor.I hesitate to say hold because I use that time to refine my target focus and push/pull. If I hold (like to have someone check my form@ full draw) Istart to shake and lose focus. When I push the bow to the target I can remain @ full draw quite a long time without shaking. I shoot a 60#@30 recurve drawn to 30" and a 54# longbow and this seems the same with either.Unlike a lot of shooters I did't shoot compounds much and find that I still use a form wery simular to high school (30 years ago).
Sorry to ramble but who else shoots better in the dark and "holds" @ full draw? I know I don't gap cause I tried .Got tired of hunting for arrers:)
It took my focus off the target and bad things happen then.I really don't know how I aim but I know I do cause I miss when I don't:)
Try it ,try something shiney to reflect a fashlight beam @15 to 20 yards and see what happens,be confident!
-
I have no problem shooting at night. I dont think I shoot any better, about the same. You may be shooting better at night because you are able to focus on the target better.
I also hold at draw for about 2-3 seconds. Concentrate on the spot I want to hit use good form and execute the shot.
-
I agree ,I'm easily distracted!! can't see the pretty birds,butterflys,ect.
-
Originally posted by Bill Leslie II:
How can one ever be accurate and never stop moving ? Archery is fairly simple, You just have to do the same thing every time. ( Oh so hard to do !) How can you do the same thing evrey time if you never stop moving ?
Bill
Bill,
Ask the guy in the clips.......
Snap Shooter.... (http://tradgang.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=33;t=000004)
-
Bill,
Not qualified my butt!
-
-
It's the whole hand / eye coordination thing. Or, maybe it's The Force. I seem to have to work at it more then others.
-
Nice, thanks for the videos guys. Howard was a jedi of archery, that's for sure.
Kingstaken, your boy looks like he has good form. Such a serious look on his face! Love to see kids like that. The pic at the top of this forum is my all-time fav. Since I don't have any kids, I may have to go borrow some for 4H archery or something.
I haven't figured a lightsource for my target yet, hence no holes in the wall yet. I think I'm just going to rig up an LED with a battery and a couple resisters.
-
Yeah....OK Kingstaken........then here's just a normal regular o'l guy doing it the same way every time that doesn't stop moving either....
Joe Smo (http://tradgang.com/videos/tg/m27.wmv)
-
Oh.....and who says you 'have' to do it the same way everytime???
Versatility of the Trad Bow (http://www.tradgang.com/videos/tg/terry-2.wmv)
-
Terry thanks for clips.
Who was that Joe Smo????
LQQked more like Terry Super Shooter to me...Nice shooting!!??? :thumbsup:
-
The brothers Wensel have argued about this before. I believe Barry claims to shoot instinctive and Gene tells Barry that there is no way you can shoot and not see the arrow in your side vision, therefore making it impossible to be completely instinctive. As far as I know they are still arguing.
-
My hood is in plane site every time I drive my truck....but I don't 'see' the hood, or look at the hood. If all I did was look at the hood, I'd soon crash. :D
-
I'm just amazed to where it blows my mind that no matter what site you visit, Tradgang being the BEST by far, many make the arguement that noone can shoot instinctively.
I feel it's really time for archers to grow up and move on with their shooting thier way.
And should anyone ask the question "How to instinctively" or "How to gap shoot, that only responsives answers be permitted.
-
So many non-instinctive shooters get all caught up on the instinctive 'label'. What was told from guys 'back in the day' that the subconsious method of aiming was called instinctive because it SEEMED 'instinctive like', and was never meant to mean the direct literal meaning of the word.
Of course no one is born shooting bull eyes at 30 yards straight from birth....but is a learned performance through practice of hand and eye coordination to the point where it is instictive like by letting the subconscious run the shot.
I don't give a rip how anyone aims, I've hunted with a lot of people, and 'how do you aim' is a question I dont ever remember asking them. Of course there is discussion around the campfire at times of people inquiring, but the guys I hunt with could care less how each of us aim, or what its 'labeled'. Its all really not worth the time and effort to argue over it obsessively like some people do. I'd just rather shoot with guys and have fun, and more so.......just HUNT. Lease that's my take on it.
I shoot instinctive, and that's the term our fore father's of the sport used, so I'm gonna keep using it.
-
Originally posted by Terry Green:
I don't give a rip how anyone aims, I've hunted with a lot of people, and 'how do you aim' is a question I dont ever remember asking them. Of course there is discussion around the campfire at times of people inquiring, but the guys I hunt with could care less how each of us aim, or what its 'labeled'. Its all really not worth the time and effort to argue over it obsessively like some people do. I'd just rather shoot with guys and have fun, and more so.......just HUNT. Lease that's my take on it.
Man, I couldn't agree more. About the only time I remember ever asking someone how they aimed was when I was impressed with their shooting and was fishing for advice I could use myself. Past that, I'm not sure why anyone would care one way or the other.
-
Yeah Jason....I know you are a gap shooter, and have shot game instinctively.....I'm an instinctive shooter that tried to 'gap' over a limb once . HA!!!!!!...and it worked. Be happy to share a camp with you again.
Funny, I was emailed last night that on some other site there's a six page rant bashing over the term 'instinctive' and instinctive shooters. Guess they don't have anything better to do.
-
Six pages? Good grief. Where I'm from, we call that "ate up". :rolleyes:
-
Terry Green
So many non-instinctive shooters get all caught up on the instinctive 'label'. What was told from guys 'back in the day' that the subconsious method of aiming was called instinctive because it SEEMED 'instinctive like', and was never meant to mean the direct literal meaning of the word.
Your words are as well delivered as your arrows, O'Wise One. :thumbsup:
-
i can't gap shoot or use point of aim .just the way i was put together Left eye dominate and shoot right handed . in order to do either would have to close my left eye and loose depth preception .if i try and look at my arrow when i am drawing or shooting the point it aiming so far left that on a live deer facing right at 30 yds i would be shooting behind the animal. so i look at the spot i want to hit and draw and release if i hit an anchor point ( been hard to do lately) i hit or hit close to what i am looking at .---- not instinctive but not using any part of arrow or anything else to hit what i am looking at --- herb
-
Great shooting Terry! How in the heck do you aim to be able to shoot like that? Just kidding. Interesting topic, but some will just never understand, even after watching it with their own eyes! I use the typing example....where a fast typist doesn't look at the keys he or she is typing but can type accurately.(By the way, I type slow and I'm not accurate either.)
-
Howard Hill was a gap shooter...split vision method of aiming he called it
-
Originally posted by -Achilles-:
Howard Hill was a gap shooter...split vision method of aiming he called it
Yessireee.....and he stated that he made a lot of instinctive shots on game as well.
-
well said terry never understood what the big deal is any way.i just like to shoot!!!!
-
Truth be known,I never knew I was a split-vision shooter until I was told I was.Now,that I know I conciously do it(sorta) I suppose my shooting has improved. Not sure where that puts me.
-
The only time when 'how an archer aims' should be important to someone...is when they are teaching or learning.
No one has an unfair advantage in competition if they are following the rules...but that isn't saying that some aiming techiniques won't have any advantages over another aiming techinques.
Bottom line...the archer is the one pulling the string and it's up to them to find out what works best for them...but if the archer does a little research...the info they will find should help them choose what aiming system is more likely to increase their accuracy for their particular goals.
I personally would never recommend that an archer try to aim instinctively if they want to compete in an event similar to an American Round while trying to group arrows at long distances. Just as I wouldn't recommend Point of Aim to an archer wanting to hit moving targets.
It always amuses me how some people get so bent out of shape about a word that describes a particular aiming techinique....especially on some of the other websites ;)
Ray ;)
-
Just to further confuse things. . .
An instinct is a "fixed action pattern" that an organism is born with. It is inate or inherent in the organism at birth and all species of a kind have the same instincts. In animals, these can be very complex and even animals raised in isolation will exhibit these instincts when the correct stimulus is presented. Psychologist are in some disagreement as to whether humans possess any instincts.
Instincts should not be confused with reflexes. Humans and animals both possess reflexes which are very different from instincts. Cut off a chickens head and the body will run. No brain functioning is associated with a reflex response. When the doctor taps your knee the impulse travels to your spinal cord and makes a u-turn back down your leg and causes it to rise. A second impulse is sent up to the brain telling it what is going on and the brain sends a response impulse down to stop the knee from rising. The amount of leg movement tells the doctor how long it took the second impulse to get to the brain and a response impulse to get back again and tells the doctor how well the central nervous system if functioning. Most people think that if your leg doesn't rise it is a bad sign. If that happens the doc will just hit you again till it does. What we don't want to see is too much leg movement because that tells us that the second impulse was stopped somewhere in the central nervous system and probably indicates a spinal injury or disease.
So, even if humans do possess some instincts, instinctive archery is not really instinctive because we are not born with the "fixed action patter" of draw-release without thinking that is stimulated by a bow in one hand and a string in the other.
Instinctive shooting is about proprioceptive discrimination (knowing where parts of your body are in space) or what many would call hand/eye coordination but it's much more than just your hand and eyes. Instinctive shooting is about transferring a behavior from a conscious level to a subconscious level. Some gifted people start out with less to transfer. Many people could throw a baseball to a catcher from the pitchers mound. Other, like Cincinnati Mayor Mallory can't! He would have much more work to do to transfer info from the conscious level to the subconscious level.
So there really is no such thing as instinctive shooting. I had a difficult time putting that in the title of my book because it perpetuates incorrect information but that was a battle not worth waging. The type of archery we do, be it gap shooting or "burn a hole in the spot" shooting falls somewhere on a continuum between conscious and subconscious. I've discovered that to the degree I can get my attention down range, on the target, to that degree I will be successful. When my attention is back where I am at all I faulter. Others are different.
No archer is a "true instinctive" shooter (since you are not born with the ability) so the argument there is a moot point. Some are pure "subconscious" shooters like me and some mix "conscious and subconscious" like a gap shooter.
We are all part of a brotherhood of archers with the individual freedom to release the arrow in a manner that fulfills.
Just some thoughts to further the conversation.
-
Very few people believe that 'instinctive aiming' refers to an ability that we are born with, although some aspects of 'instinctive aiming' such as pointing and basic hand and eye coordination are often discussed as possibly being true instincts.
It always amazes me how some people get so bent out of shape over a name...and I'm not saying you are at all Jay. I pretty much completely agree with what you said above....except when you say there is no such thing as instinctive shooting.
Instinctive aiming exists. You may disagree with the name it was given...but it still exists as a seperate yet similar way to aim a bow without sights.
Instinctive aiming is just the name a specific aiming style was given that is different from gap, point of aim or some of the other barebow aiming techiniques.
Further study into semantics will reveal that the word 'instinct' can apply to an aiming style due to a portion of it's definition based on one of the longest running dictionaries of the English language.
Just because part of the definition applies does not mean every part applies.
Merriam Webster - INSTINCT - 1 : a natural or inherent aptitude, impulse, or capacity - had an instinct for the right word.
Language is a learned behavior. If a person can have an instinct for the right word...an archer can have an instinct for the right sight picture, which is also a learned behavior or ability.
2 a : a largely inheritable and unalterable tendency of an organism to make a complex and specific response to environmental stimuli without involving reason b : behavior that is mediated by reactions below the conscious level.
Part of the aiming process while aiming instinctively is executed below the conscious level. The subconscious plays a huge role while aiming instinctively. The only thing that an instinctive archer is consciously doing during the aiming process is picking the spot they want to hit and putting their complete concentration into that spot.
Furthermore 'instinctive' can also mean arising spontaneously or relating to instinct, which can mean 'instinct like'.
We can argue all day about the semantics of the word...but one thing that should be understood is that aiming instinctively is NOT exactly the same as the other barebow aiming techiniques. It's different just as gap is different from point of aim, so it requires a seperate name to help define it, which indicates it exists as a different and unique way to aim a bow and arrow.
I think the words 'reflexive' or 'intuitive' actually may define it a little more accurately but I surely don't feel any need to change it's name.
Instinctive aiming is totally fine by me ;)
Ray ;)
-
I surely don't want to change the name. I like the ring of "instinctive" shooting or archery. We just need to make sure that we know that it is "instinct like." That is a good, and accurate way to say it. Both of your definitions for instinctive include the idea of an "inherent" ability which is not learned. What we do (hand/eye coordination etc.) is learned, even though we may have learned much of it somewhere else. Some are even predisposed neurologically to have better faculties for shooting than others. All I care about is that we realize that instinctive shooting is not instinct. It is a learned behavior. I like the "instinct like" because it does become second nature. If it were first nature it would not have to "become" and therefore would be instinct. (Okay, I'm not going back there again)
I think that conceptualizing a continuum
CONSCIOUS ---------------------- SUBCONSCIOUS
and then realizing that everyone falls somewhere on that continuum is a good way to think of it. People fall somewhere on that continuum. A compound shooter with sights and a very mechanical style falls strongly to the left. An instinct like shooter falls strongly to the right. That is where I always want to be, however, I do find myself slipping to the left sometimes and my shooting suffers.
-
Jay,
Great post.
I'm curious...Name some specific things that you believe are an ineherent instinct.
Do you believe a fawn flees from danger based on instinct or is it a learned behavior...or is it a combination of both?
Do you believe we pull away from fire as our hands get near it based on instinct?
Can inherent instincts be improved upon?
Can pointing be an instinct or based on instinct?
What do you make of Merrian Webster using 'instinct' in the sentence "had an instinct for the right word"?
If communication or language is an inherent instinct why couldn't pointing be an inherent ability?
Do you believe meanings of words can evolve?
Ray ;)
-
I don't think humans possess instincts. We do possess reflexes that do not require brain activity. If we do have instincts they are no where near as complex as animals. We typically refer to them as "fixed action patterns" in animals becuase of this complexity. Your fawn example is a good example. When a fawn is separated from it's mother is bawls for a period of time to call the mother back. If that doesn't work it will go to a high point where it can overlook the area and lay down motionless for as much as a couple days. If the mother comes back to the area the fawn is waiting. If a predator heard the bawls from the fawn the fawn is now in a position to see the predator first.
A more complex example would be a gray legged goose that lays its eggs on top of a mound. If an egg rolls off the mound when the goose is feeding, the goose will hook the egg under its bill and walk backward up the mound, roll it back into its place and settle down on the eggs. If the egg rolls from under the bill, halfway up the mound the goose will not stop and go get it. The goose will watch it roll down as it continues its backward movement all the way into the sitting position on the eggs. If we tape a piece of fishing line to the egg and continue to pull it away from the goose on every trip up the mound the goose will not learn to stop and go get the egg. It will continue to go through the fixed action pattern over and over till exhaustion.
Moving our hands from fire is learned at an early age. Kids are forever touching hot things. They learn through operant learning (punishment) not to do it again. Or they learn from the parents warning (negative reinforcement).
We know that pointing is learned through observation and trial and error at an early age.
Communication and language is not inherent other than we are wired to learn it. I did not like my psycholinguistics course, however, we know that we are wired to be predisposed to learn language quickly. A child raised in isolation would never learn language. An animal raised in isolation with no opportunity to learn will still exhibit its natural instincts. It will also be able to communicate with like kind if put in that situation.
Can inherent instincts be improved on? I'd say no because we probably don't have instincts. We do have predispositions or gifts that we can develop. This is the result of our unique neural wiring. That's why it is important to help kids identify their gifts or strengths. So they can develop them. Many of us had a gift for archery but did not discover it till later in life.
To say someone had an "instinct for the right word" is figurative.
The meanings of words can evolve and the dictionary often changes definitions to accomodate changes in language. In science, however, we need concrete terminology to work with and keep close tabs on our definitions.
I think calling it instinctive shooting is fine as long as we realize it is somewhat figurative.
I feel like I'm in Intro to Psych class, only your questions are better!
By the way, psychologists are not always right but we do test these hypothesis as best as we can scientifically to find something near the truth.
-
I shoot like NDTerminator except I never shot gap consciously. My daughter who is eleven has so much natural talent she amazes me. I do believe she shoots so well because she doesn't know she shouldn't be able to. She was born with the ability.
-
I believe we do have instincts. I really don't understand why we wouldn't based on the fact that we too are animals...except we have a higher capacity to learn than other animals and have the abilty to improve upon those instincts.
I believe behaviors, gifts, talents and/or abilities can be passed on genetically which therefore are inherent.
Gestures, body language and tone of voice are all forms of communication that we or other animals can exhibit. Those are some of the ways of how we communicate with other people that speak a different language.
I guess we will just have to agree to disagree ;)
But the one thing we do seem to agree on is that 'instinctive aiming is a uniquely different way to aim a barebow that requires a seperate name to describe it other than just barebow aiming, gap aiming or point of aim.
Ray ;)
-
I'd say less than 10% of psychologists, neurologists and physiologists believe humans have instincts like animals. And I am sure that percentage is very generous. I did some research on this one time and found only a few supporters of the idea that we had any fixed action patterns. The primary example they cited was "separation anxiety" that infants demonstrate. When taken to day care they often cry violently then become lethargic for the rest of the day. That is similar to what a fawn does. That's about the only example they cite.
Ray hit on a valuable point regarding instinctive shooting. He stated that his daughter "shoots so well because she doesn't know she shouldn't be able to." I really believe we are often our own worst enemy when it comes to instinctive shooting. The more we think, analyze and machanize the worse we get. If we can have the faith of a little child, so to speak, and just feel the shot we do much better. The conscious mind has to get it into the subconscious but once it's there the conscious needs to stay out of the way. That's hard to do sometimes.
-
I believe the reason why we don't have any FIXED action patterns is because we have a greater ability to adapt, learn and change those patterns where as other animals don't or don't to the degree we can.
Your goose example is a perfect example to me as how we as humans have a greater capacity to learn and make changes where as lower animals aren't able to as well.
I COMPLETELY agree with your explanation on sports performance and the subconscious. In most cases the elite athletes are the one's who don't have to consciously think about the mechanics of their chosen activity.
If a mixed martial artist has to consciously think about how to execute a move or a strike...the chances of the movement failing are greatly increased.
Ray ;)
-
Hoooooo... Boy! the Saducees and Pharisees will come out to rightly devide the words and their meaning. For the purposes of transmitting archery proficiency and knowledge to "yee seekers" of such proficiency and knowledge, some of us (whether we are vetrans or new discoverers of this wonder) offer the words "instictive shooting", tell you stories, show you videos,pictures of 1-inch groups at 20 yards, and 4 inch groups shot at 10,20, 30 and 40 yards sucessively while walking backwards, and try to explain how it's done. How we do it. Yet, some will argue with a sunrise, or a sunset, or Joe Montana and say it ain't so, you don't do it like that - it just can't be.
Those folks may come around someday. But they won't learn instinctive shooting. not 'cause they can't or because it can't or doesn't work. Because they won't.
Meanwhile, you who want to do what Howard Hill, John Schultz, or Byron Fergussing, or Dick Plamer, or lots of others dead, alive or even on Tradgang do and did, just try it.
Not as hard as it looks. The first few times you hit a bottle-cap sized target on purpose at 20 yards, you will begin to see that, and how instinctive shooting works. Watch Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (Redford and Newman) when Redford asks "Can I move?"
Then get Byron Furgusson's videos shooting aerial targets from a moving pick-up. Or just try it.
Instictive, swing-draw, release on achor. Check out all the folks shooting aspirins out of the air. It's not digital. It's not thinking through a process, it's not aiming. It's not measuring the gap. It's just developing the analog, eye-hand, body-coordination/skill to "do one" and do it again.
Or don't do it. But please don't tell the folks who are doing it that they aren't doing it. We know what we doin'
-
Originally posted by GroundHunter:
Hoooooo... Boy! the Saducees and Pharisees will come out to rightly devide the words and their meaning.
1. I think you misquoted Scipture. The Pharisees and Sacucees did not "rightly divide." What they did was reinterpreted Scipture to their liking.
The one you were looking for is 2Ti 2:15.
"Study to present yourself to God approved, a workman who has no cause to be ashamed, accurately dividing the Word of Truth."
Originally posted by GroundHunter:
Then get Byron Furgusson's videos shooting aerial targets from a moving pick-up. Or just try it.
Instictive, swing-draw, release on achor. Check out all the folks shooting aspirins out of the air. It's not digital. It's not thinking through a process, it's not aiming. It's not measuring the gap. It's just developing the analog, eye-hand, body-coordination/skill to "do one" and do it again.
2. Byron Ferguson uses a somewhat complicated method of gap shooting (measuring gap and bow cant) that he explained in some detail in an issue of "Traditional Archery Magazine" sometime back. He uses traditional equipment but just cause you can't see it don't mean he's really "doing it."
3. Okay, maybe some humans do have instincts. (Jude 1:10)
All in fun . . .
By the way, nice choice of bows. I really like my Tomahawk SS, 62" 58#@28. Sweetest bow I've shot (instinctively).
-
Again,
It's just a term used to describe a type of aiming method where the subconscious runs the shot....to the point were it becomes 'instinctive like'.
See how easy that is?
-
Instinctive like.
Your the man!
-
But hey...sometimes it's fun and educational debating the meaning of stuff ;)
Ray ;)
-
Hey Jay...thanks for sharing that Bible verse - "Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and what things they do understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals—these are the very things that destroy them."
It appears that Biblically...instinct doesn't involve reason or in other words the power of comprehending, inferring, or thinking especially in orderly rational ways which is exactly how instinctive aiming is executed.
As simple as it sounds...it's just point and shoot by feel...even though we know to be any good at it...it's much more complicated than just that. When someone get's really good at it...that is what they are basically doing. There is no thinking in an orderly fashion in regards to aiming. It is just point and shoot by feel ;)
Ray ;)
-
I have no problem using "instintive" to refer to a shooting style. However, it is good to know the difference between instinctive and learned etc. It all makes us more aware of what is really going on when we shoot and do it more effectively. More importantly, it gives us a language to communicate and teach others and that is the bottom line. If you shoot all your life what have you accomplished? If you pass that passion on to others they will pass it on in turn. Your gift will out live you.
Continue the heritage.
-
Black Wolf, you are completely correct. The Greek word (I took Classical Greek in college) actually means, as you stated, something that does not involve reason and was a common term used by the Greek philosophers. Reason is self evaluation, observation, reflection, comprehending, inferring, thinking etc.
Kierkegaard said the self was a relation that related itself to itself and in relating itself to itself related itself to others. What that means is that humans can ponder things (reason). That is what gives us a concept of past, present and future. Humans think about the past, the present and project that into dreams for the future. Animals don't sit around reasoning like that and animals have little if any self awareness.
Reasoning takes place in the conscious mind. So if istinct is something other than reasoning it must take place at a subconscious level.
Very cool discussion.
-
Jay,
You said - "Reasoning takes place in the conscious mind. So if istinct is something other than reasoning it must take place at a subconscious level."
We definitely agree there ;) and a definition of instinct describes it as happening below the conscious level.
I believe humans are born with certain instincts just as other animals are...but as humans we have a higher capacity to reason and learn therefore as we reason through something that may have started out as an instinct, it no longer is instinctive because we are reasoning through it.
For example - I believe it's when it (the ability or feeling) has become so ingrained throughout the mind and body where the archer no longer has to reason through it, is when I believe a learned ability such as aiming can become an instinct in the sense their is no longer any reasoning going on, which allows the subconscious mind and proprioception to take over.
I just want to tell you...this has been one of the best discussions in regards to this topic I've had on any archery board. Some of the other people I have discussed this with have been so childish and prejudice towards this subject, it becomes almost comical...so I want to thank you for being so mature discussing this, even though we partially disagree....Thanks!
Ray ;)
-
Ray,
I think we agree on everything but terminology and I realize I'm a psychologist and biased toward rigid definitions in the name of science. I typically stay away from these discussions because, as you said, many people are not able to handle the deviation from their reality. I think it's usually exciting to pursue the turth.
I'm sure I would enjoy discussing your insights around a campfire. I think we'd make most people turn in early!
-
Jay,
I'm sure we are boring some people to death with this but it has definitely been interesting to me ;)
You mentioned reflexes earlier and stated that no brain functioning is associated with a reflex response as when a chicken gets it's head cut off.
How than can shooting a bow be a reflex response when we need the brain to be stimulated in order to accurately aim a bow?
It appears that you are saying that in order for a reaction to be an instinct requires the brain to respond to certain stimuli and a refexive action doesn't require that.
I believe the 'fixed action response' is not stimulated by holding a bow and arrow in the hand but is stimulated on what the archer sees...just as a fawn needs to have one or more of it's senses to be stimulated in order to know when and/or where to flee.
When an archer sees his target within a distance he is very familiar with and conciously decides to shoot, the action taken is fixed based on what the brain has learned through repetition. There is no reasoning taking place such as what is the exact gap I need or where should my arrow point be in relationship to the target.
Some instinctive archers never learn to be conciously aware of the arrow or any other reference point...whereas other archers may start out with a conscious aiming techinique and master it to the point they no longer are conciously making adjustments within their aiming process.
In the previous definitions I used it does say that an instinct is inherent...but it also used the word 'largely' to help describe the amount that it is inherent, which to me doesn't mean 'only'...which could be why there is a grey area concerning the application of this word.
It's getting late and my head is starting to hurt...Time for me to go to bed ;)
Ray ;)
-
Shooting can become "instinct like" and it can become "like a fixed action pattern." However, a reflex is a stimulus-response that occurs with no brain functioning and animals are born with instincts and no learning/experience is ever required. I think an accurate statement would be that shooting can become an automatic response of the subconscious (requires brain functioning and is learned through experience).
-
Jay and Ray,
"It does not require many words to speak the truth." -Chief Joseph :)
...but this is a pretty interesting campfire conversation! :campfire:
-
Jay,
I just want to clarify…I’m not trying to say that aiming a bow and arrow is or has to be an instinct as an inherent behavior that we are born with.
I’m mainly concerned with trying to show how and why the different applications of the word ‘instinctive and instinct’ can apply to an aiming techinique based on semantics and how instinctive aiming does exist.
Some food for thought.
I believe ALL animals, including humans, share some of the same BASIC instincts, which are to survive and reproduce.
I believe how each species survives and reproduces is based on genetics, which are transfered from one generation to the next and can evolve through learning, adaptation, survival of the fittest and selective breeding.
Take a wolf for example ;) - One of the strongest and most basic of the instincts of a wolf is the hunting instinct – this was essential for survival and through selective breeding herd dogs were created. The herding instinct of a Blue Heeler has replaced what was basically the hunting instinct of the wolf. It has been modified over centuries of selective breeding, which indicates that instincts can evolve and/or be altered.
Some other thoughts.
Is it an instinct for a bird to fly?
Does a bird learn how to fly effectively?
Is it an instinct for a wolf to hunt?
Does a wolf learn how to hunt effectively?
If instincts are governed by both brain function and genetics it would appear that a human instinct is one of trying to make life or situations easier through learning and inventing. We are genetically designed for higher learning, adaptation and understanding.
You said - "I think an accurate statement would be that shooting can become an automatic response of the subconscious (requires brain functioning and is learned through experience)."
I TOTALLY agree with that!
I just have a hard time believing we have no instincts or there’s no way we can do something instinctively or do something based on instinct.
As a side note...I want to tell you that I believe you have one of the BEST books out there in regards to archery I have ever read!
Ray ;)
-
Molson,
I'm glad someone else finds this interesting besides Jay and I ;)
Ray ;)
-
Questions for Terry:
On that video where you shoot the 3 arrows at the block target across the yard...
1) what is the distance you are shooting?
2) Do you use a solid anchor point when you shoot or does you finger or hand just come to a postion that mentally triggers your release?
-
I think that what all this leads to is:
1. How can we most efficiently transfer what is needed from the conscious to the subconsious so that shooting becomes like a reflex or instinct.
2. Once in the subconscios, how can we make sure we consciously stay out of the shot process so the subconscious can do its job.
When we think too much about the shot process we mess everything up. The subconscious is much more capable to do most complex tasks than the conscious for the following reason.
Most people don't really know this but humans process information serially in that they can only attend to one thing at a time. Everyone has read a book while attending to something else and they realize that they have not comprehended a single thing they read. If we did not process information serially there would be no such thing as attention deficit disorder. With this in mind, think about all the things one must think about when learning to shoot. We have to quickly switch our attention to one thing after another through the process. Once the process has reached the subconscious we can either keep our minds clear or have a single thought.
-
OK, I looked into a post on instinctive shooting, which is not about what this thread is about, really. No problem with folks having fun on the mental and philosophical gymnastics. It's all fun.
Anybody who wants to learn to shoot well instinctivly will do so by doing - getting the feel, and building that into their form/rythm.
Very few words are involved. I'm a tax attorney, so I have no aversion to words or numbers, but more of them is no help on something like instinctive shooting.
My little brother, Joe, who regularly astonished me at age 11 by consitently hitting a 1.5 inch swinging rubber ball at 20 yards with his 31# Wing, fiberglass arrows, and instinctive snap-shooting says it like this:
1. Fix your entire attention on the spot on the target you intend to hit.
2. Raise your bow and draw with your entire attention so fixed that you are an extension of the arrow.
3. Release upon full draw with your attention so fixed, and keep it so until the arrow hits the target.
I'd boil it down to "Look, Draw, Hit".
That's really all there is to it for folks who really want to make it happen. So, i consult Joe on my shooting form, and instictive shooting.
Best way to make a good instinctive shooter is to turn a physically talented 11 year old loose with a good bow and arrows, and once he starts hitting the bulls-eye at 10 yards, move him back to 20. Once the "robbin hoods" start busting too many arrows (about three arrows to a kid in in 1962), give him a smaller swinging target.
Finally, I think the shooting in dim light illustrated it best for me. My best instinctive groups have been in dim light where I could not see the arrow, or the bulls-eye, or the arrow even hit. But I could focus on the center of the target. And, i could hear each arrow slap in next to the others. Funny - I shot a 1-inch group on the very X-ring of my rubber deer at about 18 yards. Made me a believer in instictive snap-shooting.
Then, I tried Dick Palmer's shoot as you keep walking back, 'till you miss. I found it's not that unusual to shoot a 4 inch group of successive arrows at 10, 20, 30 and 40 yards, on the kill zone of my rubber deer. Same for live ones.
Just swinging up, releasing on reaching full draw, all the wile focussing my attention on the spot.
Good luck !
-
You are correct GroundHunter. Words are fun, however, you can learn much more from an 11 year old who can do it. Your brother would not have understood or cared about the conversation in this post thus far. What he did care about was getting the arrow where it needed to be.
Your comments reminded me of my oldest daughter who is now married. When she was 5 she got a BB gun and a bow at Christmas. It was cold but we took the bow out back and I put a large styrofoam coffe cup upside down for a target. She had three arrows with rubber blunts and within 5 minutes she was hitting that cup at 10 yards everytime.
It's all about the "faith of a little child" when we get right down to it. So the bottom line of our discussion is as you say . . . That was interesting, now, forget all that and just do it.
-
I have never used sights for any amount of time, never used the gap method. Bare fingers, one above one below, I see my target spot and draw, and release. Some have called it a snap-release, when my finger hits the corner of my mouth ,the arrow is on it's way, it seems to me to be forever at draw. I compare it to throwing a base-ball, you look where you want the arrow to go, and let it fly. Instinctive or un-conscious shooting. I also dont spend alot of time worrying about form, I'm locked into the TARGET and my only thought is to get the arrow in the target. Great thread...