Trad Gang
Main Boards => The Shooters FORM Board => Topic started by: CTaggart on November 01, 2008, 11:59:00 PM
-
As the title says, I'd like to make a decision as to what shooting style to train myself on. I'm very new to trad archery and would like to pick your brains as to what style you shoot and why.
I'm also in the market for instructional reading on the topic. What style would be more beneficial for somebody who would be hunting with their recurve?
-
I would suggest picking a spot and let her rip. I also shoot a recurve and shoot split finger(one over the knock and two below. I anchor with my middle finger in the corner of my mouth. This subject will certainly stir the kettle so I'll leave it at that.
As far as videos, Masters of The barebow is what you want. Several styles to choose from and excellent instruction. I liked #1 the best. You can get it on Trad Gangs store page.
Mike
-
That is another topic I hadn't thought of...I was instructed to shoot 3 fingers below the knock... This was per my local bowshop employee. (who is a pretty well informed fellow as well as a trad shooter)
As far as stirring the kettle, I certainly do not mean for a heated discussion.
-
I shoot like leatherneck described, the main reason is I shoot good that way and when I try and gap shoot and cant group worth a flip. Whatever is the most comfortable and most ethical for you. If you shoot better and more consistant groups one way or the other I would stick with that, you owe it to the animal for a quick clean kill.
My .02
thanks
--c--
-
3 under is a good way to shoot especially for newcomers. For hunting, instinctive is faster,look at where you want to hit and shoot, but some people do gap. Pick what works for you and go for it.
Danny
-
CTaggart - I would suggest reading the article "Instictive Shooting...Is It Really?" by Andy Duffy in the Oct/Nov 08 issue of Traditional Bowhunter Magazine. I think it's a great article on the subject. Essentially, I use the G. Fred Asbell school of thought, and I also recommend his video and books. However, I think that there is a lot to be said about sight picture and this is where I sort of part company with Fred (no blasphemy intended Fred). I believe that we all do a little bit of gap shooting whether we admit it or not...a lot of that has to do with our conscious vs. subconscious mind. Donnie.
-
I also grip the string one over and two under i also anchor with my middle finger. That is what works best for me. As far as shooting i shoot what i think of as instinctive inside 20yds. After 20yds i have found that i gap. I can put the tip of my broadhead on where i want to hit 25 a little low 30 dead on 35 a little over. I just found what worked best for me and went with it.
-
I find that if you are shooting 3 under that that lends its self to gap shooting a little better than split finger (the gap is smaller), so your finger style my influence your sighting style more at this point IMO. But then again I find myself instinctively gap shooting!
go figure :knothead:
-
There are some basic advantages in techiniques that can make learning to aim a bow and arrow easier than others but as an archer you need to ultimately choose what works best with your goals, abilities and personality.
If you're gonna learn an aiming techinique for bowhunting besides aiming Instinctively the closer you can get your point on to 20 or 30 yrds. the easier it is to reference your arrow tip in most hunting situations if you're gonna use your arrow tip as a visual reference.
With some people...like myself...getting a Point On that close would also require shooting a low weight bow with a heavy slow arrow...which is something I wouldn't recommend for hunting...so you might have to accept that your Point On maybe 40 or 50yrds...which is still better for hunting circumstances than 70 or 90yrds.
You can do that a number of ways. One is to shoot 3 Under as oppossed to Split Finger. Another is to raise your anchor point and in most cases an archer will have to do both to get that Point On to closer distance.
Learning to aim with Gap Aiming is easier to master than learning to aim Instinctively. It should only take a couple of shots to know what your gap is for a specific distance whereas aiming Instinctively can take 100's to 1000's of shots to engrain the correct sight picture and bow arm position into your muscle memory and subconscious for a specific distance.
Instinctive Aiming has it's advantages in most hunting citcumstances where the archer doesn't have time to think about distance and their gap such as shooting at moving targets or when an animal appears out of no where and the shot needs to be taken in a matter of seconds. So if you are also wanting an aiming techinique where you're not consciously analizing the situation and you just want to keep it simple by just picking a spot to focus on to point and shoot at...Instinctive Aiming will most likely be the better choice.
Gap shooting can also be very effective in many hunting circumstances. I can vouche for that ;)
Based on my own personal experience with Gap Aiming, Gap Aiming has nearly become totally Instinctive to me to the point where I feel my gaps rather than analize exactly what they are. My mind knows it when it sees it but I couldn't tell anyone exactly what they are for a specific distance but I'm still consciously aware of them.
If you are gonna primarily or only be a bowhunter I would suggest learning Instinctive Aiming if you have the time and skills to dedicate yourself to mastering it.
If you want to bowhunt and compete in archery tournaments, I would suggest learning Gap Aiming.
Whatever aiming techinique you choose, you're still gonna need to take time, dedication and perseverence to master it. It's just that some aiming techiniques are easier to learn to become more accurate and consistant with than some of the other aiming techiniques....especially at longer distances.
Ray ;)
-
I shoot instinctive out to 35 yards and gap from there. 3D shoots I attend often have shots beyond 40, so it helps to have a system for longer targets. I limit my hunting shots to 20ish. Some claim to shoot longer shots instinctively, but to be consistent, you'll need to at least learn by aiming. Other guys in my club shoot gap exclusively and are very good, especially in that elusive 35-45 range. This is very much a personal choice based on how it feels to you, so give everything a try with plenty of shots.
Also, I have both Masters of the Barebow dvds and they're very good, absolutely worth buying.
-
Gap and shoot until it becomes automatic or "instinctive". Much shorter learning curve to proficiency for most.
Steve
-
Learn them all.
Most of the top tourney shooters I know do, you become a very adaptable shooter that can deal with most shooting scenarios.
-
In the words of Howard Hill:
"Aiming instinctively is fairly simple and easy to master and is used by more archers in hunting than any other methods. Instinctive style is the easiest on the individual, in this style there is no set rule of posture or anchor. You do what is most natural for you to do.
My own method might be called the "Indirect Imaginary Point" method. The better shot you are instinctively, the easier this system will be for you to grasp, however, after learning the fundamentals of archery which I have given a few points on rather briefly, anyone, can with diligent practice and the reading of this and other articles gain by doing so." -Howard Hill
The above came from:
HILL, HOWARD My Method of Shooting a Bow and Arrow Los Angeles, Ca. Instinctors, Inc.. Soft Cover. Booklet No. 1 published by Instinctors, Inc. No date; circa 1951 (President of Instinctors mention of having just seen the rushes of "Tembo", Howard Hill's legendary movie). Stapled softcover; size: octavo. 3-ring binder holes. Great photographic cover of Hill about to shoot from a kneeling position. 16 pages; photo-illustrated. Facsimile signed letters from the President of Instinctors, Inc. to Howard Hill, and Hill's answering letter. The article by Hill takes up 6 pages, with 3 photos of his shooting style. The remainder of the book consists of archery-related ads.
This booklet is rare and I've currently found only one copy at a cost of $150. A fellow stickbow archer has a copy and shared it for free here:
http://***********.bowsite.com/tf/lw/thread2.cfm?forum=23&threadid=182751&messages=29&CATEGORY=5
I now have the file of the entire booklet saved on my computer for easy reading if you would like a free copy.
later,
Daddy Bear
-
"Aiming instinctively is fairly simple and easy to master and is used by more archers in hunting than any other methods. Instinctive style is the easiest on the individual, in this style there is no set rule of posture or anchor. You do what is most natural for you to do."
Fundamentally...I totally agree.
Instinctive Aiming is the easiest to learn because you just do what comes naturally....but that's where I would draw the line based on what I have seen in archery competitions and teaching new archers when it comes to making claims of easiest or hardiest.
When it comes to developing and maintaining consistant accuracy...Instinctive Aiming isn't as easy to master as the other aiming techiniques...especially as the distances get further. It may be for some people...but when you take into consideration the average Joe...it isn't.
Instinctive Aiming requires 100's if not 1000's of arrows to engrain the subconscious with the proper body position and/or sight picture to hit a target consistantly...but with the other aiming techiniques...it should be just a matter of a couple of arrows to know what your gap should be or your point of aim.
In many cases this learning curve is stretched out when an archer tries to learn both form and aiming at the same time...and that applies to any aiming techinique.
The more inconsistant an archer's form is...the harder it is to learn an aiming techinique.
Ray ;)
-
Learn to GAP until it become 'instinctive.' In truth, they are one and the same. One is conscious effort, the other one is not. One takes effort to learn, the other one does not but instinctive takes more time to do properly AND consistently.
"The more inconsistant an archer's form is...the harder it is to learn an aiming techinique." PERFECT!
-
Concious is NOT the same as subconcious.
So, in truth, they are not the same. No where near the same. Wont ever be the same.
-
I totally agree with Terry.
A better word may be 'similar' but not the 'same'.
They are 'similar' in the sense that they are BOTH barebow aiming techiniques.
They are 'similar' in the sense that some, if not all, Instinctive archers rely on a sight picture to fine tune their aiming but it happens within their subconscious and most Instinctive archers are not even aware of doing it...which is why some will say they don't aim at all or don't use any kind of reference.
That's the best way they know how to explain it...but scientifically...the only time an archer isn't using a sight picture one way or another is if they are blind or shooting in total darkness.
A Gap shooter is ALWAYS CONSCIOUSLY aware of their sight picture and their aiming references to some degree or another.
Whereas an Instinctive shooter is ONLY CONSCIOUSLY aware of the target and not any other reference within their sight picture.
So Gap and Instinctive aiming can share some similarities...they are still NOT EXACTLY the same.
The same can be said of using sights and using the arrow. They can share some similaraties...yet they are NOT EXACTLY the same.
Ray ;)
-
Some good scientific related reading on the subject of aiming and/or how an archer can aim instinctively can be found at these links if anyone is interested in studing it more.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V8T-47733K6-2&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=f2d3935d3e2baf29 4a7655d70db2da4c (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V8T-47733K6-2&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=f2d3935d3e2baf294a7655d70db2da4c)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/05/050526225858.htm
Ray ;)
-
Originally posted by BLACK WOLF:
They are 'similar' in the sense that some, if not all, Instinctive archers rely on a sight picture to fine tune their aiming but it happens within their subconscious and most Instinctive archers are not even aware of doing it...which is why some will say they don't aim at all or don't use any kind of reference.
I do not use any visual reference on any weapon i am using when shoot instinctively. It is not that i am not aware that i am doing it, it is that i am completely aware that i am not doing it.
I do not need to, nor do i, use the view of the weapon at all in my sight picture because the weapon is in my hands and i am perfectly capable of knowing instinctively through my muscles position where the weapon is pointed.
Stand me in the complete dark, light only the target and i will still hit the target and i've only been shooting bow four weeks.
I started shooting bow instinctively because it seemed the only sensible thing to do with a weapon without sights. My teacher had to show me what gap shooting was last week, i tried it and couldn't hit the target.
-
Originally posted by freefeet:
I do not use any visual reference on any weapon i am using when shoot instinctively. It is not that i am not aware that i am doing it, it is that i am completely aware that i am not doing it.
I do not need to, nor do i, use the view of the weapon at all in my sight picture because the weapon is in my hands and i am perfectly capable of knowing instinctively through my muscles position where the weapon is pointed.
Stand me in the complete dark, light only the target and i will still hit the target and i've only been shooting bow four weeks.
freefeet,
An easy test to shed some truth on this topic is to shoot in total darkness at lazer pointers on the x ring of a NFAA 300 round target at different distances and positions and shoot 2 or 3 arrows per target....say 1 target at 5yrds., 1 at 10yrds., 1 at 15yrds. and 1 at 20yrds. and score them...if you shoot as good or better in the dark than when the lights are on...I'll believe that you don't use any visual references...BUT...if you do...you have to admit that you are using visual references if you want to believe it or not.
It's a pretty easy test to do...especially if you have access to an indoor range or have a basement long enough
Ray ;)
-
Originally posted by BLACK WOLF:
An easy test to shed some truth on this topic is to shoot in total darkness at lazer pointers on the x ring of a NFAA 300 round target at different distances and positions and shoot 2 or 3 arrows per target....say 1 target at 5yrds., 1 at 10yrds., 1 at 15yrds. and 1 at 20yrds. and score them...if you shoot as good or better in the dark than when the lights are on...I'll believe that you don't use any visual references...BUT...if you do...you have to admit that you are using visual references if you want to believe it or not.
I think your test is incorrect.
Since when did instinctive shooting become not using any visual references of anything? I thought it was only about not using any visual references as regards the weapon's pointing?
I also think it is pretty impossible to judge the distance to a lazer dot in complete darkness.
And why the continuous need to try to rubbish other people's aiming abilities?
-
freefeet,
I'm not trying to rubbish anyone's aiming abilities...so please don't take it that way.
I'm just trying to clarify terms, explanations and definitions founded on scientific principals to shed some light on some common misconceptions about the different aiming techiniques. That's all...nothing more...nothing less.
I'm not knocking anyone for their choice of aiming techinique. They are all good and each one has it's advantages and disadvantages under specific situations.
The great thing about the human mind and body...is that it can adapt to just about any situation and an archer can learn to make just about anything work. It's just that some are easier than others depending on the advantages concerning the specific circumstances.
Did you read any of those links I attached to a previous post?
If you did...it might help shed more light on what I'm trying to explain.
Ray ;)
-
Originally posted by BLACK WOLF:
I'm just trying to clarify terms, explanations and definitions founded on scientific principals to shed some light on some common misconceptions about the different aiming techiniques. That's all...nothing more...nothing less.
Fair enough.
But why does someone concern themselves and demand scientific evidence for other's claims on how they believe they hit the target?
Why do people have to come up with experiments to prove other people wrong, experiments that take the whole subject out of context and therefore prove nothing of the claims they're trying to make?
You cannot experiment on something without affecting that which you experiment on.
Personally, i think that there are many ways of getting a projectile to a target. Some animals rely on sound, some on vibration, some on touch, some on smell, some on taste, some on electrical currents, and some on various mixes of the above. And we as humans have the ability to pick and chose which aspects of our senses we chose to use to direct our projectiles at our targets and hone those to our own personal liking. No two people are the same.
If someone claims to me that God, The Force, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, makes their arrows hit the target, who am i to start demanding evidence and subjecting them to experiments to enter doubt into their minds? If they hit the target, that's good enough for me to believe that they believe that.
Shooting any weapon is, afterall, more a belief thing than anything else. How each person chooses to work with their beliefs within their own minds when shooting is entirely their own thing and should not be tampered with if they are hitting the target.
I've have shot guns since i was a child, everything from pistols to GPMG's, and one thing i've learned is that how someone aims is a very personal and subjective experience and for others to start throwing doubts into people's minds about how they aim a weapon, demanding objective evidence and subjecting them to all manner of experiments, is to my mind not a good thing at all.
I will leave you with this thought... If you take an arrow and go into a completely dark room, then hold the arrow head between the fore finger and thumb of one hand and the nock between the forefinger and thumb of the other, you will know - if you have accurate spacial awareness of your own body - exactly where that arrow is pointing. You do not need to visual the arrow at all (consciously or sub/un-consciously) to know this if your spacial awareness of your body is correct.
-
Taggart....you gotta pic the aiming method that fits YOU.
Here's a start....
Were you an athlete in school or a calculus wiz?
-
freefeet,
If you rather continue believing the way you do...don't let me stop you or convince you otherwise. You have the freedom to believe whatever you want...no one can force that upon you.
If it makes you shoot better...go for it.
I'm definitely not condemning you or passing judgement on you because of what you believe.
I'm just the type of person that rather share the facts than tell people that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists...unless he/she truly does exist ;)
But this really isn't like trying to prove God exists...because it can be easily tested.
Like I said...take the test I told you about and you will see how references within our periphial vision that make up part of our sight picture come into play in our subconscious when aiming...which can include the arrow, bow riser, your arm, your hand, a finger, etc. etc.
The way they come into play helps fine tune the aiming process of an Instinctive shooter which is also controled by the archer's muscle memory and proprioceptive ability.
Ray ;)
-
Originally posted by Terry Green:
Taggart....you gotta pic the aiming method that fits YOU.
Here's a start....
Were you an athlete in school or a calculus wiz?
Just as Terry implied...sometimes the aiming techinique will pick you based on your personality and genetics.
Someone who is more gifted as an athelete will probobaly pick up Instinctive Aiming quicker than others that are not...and someone who is more analytical or likes to problem solve...might be better off with Gap for example.
Whatever aiming method you choose...just also remember that if you set your mind to something and you pursue it with perseverence and passion...a person can often overcome the challenges that for some gifted people are easier to overcome and master.
We all have gifts. Just because some of us are not gifted athletically doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Our minds and bodies were created with nearly infinite potential.
Ray ;)
-
Originally posted by BLACK WOLF:
I'm just the type of person that rather share the facts than tell people that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists...unless he/she truly does exist ;)
But this really isn't like trying to prove God exists...because it can be easily tested.
Like I said...take the test I told you about and you will see how references within our periphial vision that make up part of our sight picture come into play in our subconscious when aiming...which can include the arrow, bow riser, your arm, your hand, a finger, etc. etc.
To you the Flying Spaghetti Monster may not exist, but to someone in the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (google it), that may be the only thing in their mind that does get the arrow accurately on target. To them that is the fact.
Many sportsmen thank their relevant gods for their success because a lot of them do believe that it is a fact in their ability, and they shouldn't have to be questioned, tested or experimented on to prove their beliefs true and neither should someone believing they shoot instinctively.
And i really do not see how your test proves anything about instinctive aiming. Instinctive aiming is not about shooting at a point of which you cannot judge the distance in surroundings you cannot see, it is simply not using your visual awareness to sight the weapon on the target. Or is my understanding of instinctive aiming incorrect?
-
freefeet,
A person who is secure in their beliefs will care less about if someone disagrees with them or if someone wants to test them.
I'm willing to discuss any topic with anyone...even if we disagree. It's healthy...as long as mutual respect is maintained and both people have learned not to take it personally.
You may not want to take the test...and you don't have to. I just think it would be an eye opening experience for you and anyone else who believes they aren't using a sight picture with visual references to some degree or another to position the weapon when they are aiming Instinctively.
You said - "...it is simply not using your visual awareness to sight the weapon on the target. Or is my understanding of instinctive aiming incorrect?"
From my perspective that is incorrect.
If you can see a target...you have visual awareness.
If can see something within your periphial vision such as your bow arm or arrow...you have visual awareness...even though you might not be consciously aware of it's presence or consciously using it. Just because you are not consciously using it...doesn't mean you are not subconsciously using it.
Again...the test is designed to indicate how an archer uses their eyes to fine tune their natural pointing abilty. The better an archer's hand and eye coordination is...the quicker and more accurate they are able to execute it.
An archer has to adjust their body in relationship to the target if they want to hit it and the way an archer adjusts can be based on muscle memory, proprioception, hearing and/or seeing.
Our vision is used more than just for depth perception and yardage estimation.
You can also test that by telling an archer exactly how far the lazer target is and have them shoot it in the dark....by eliminating the need for yardage estimation.
Ray ;)
-
"Many sportsmen thank their relevant gods for their success because a lot of them do believe that it is a fact in their ability, and they shouldn't have to be questioned, tested or experimented on to prove their beliefs true and neither should someone believing they shoot instinctively."
I think you may be unclear as to why people read and post in this forum. There are no doubt a large number of people who just want to shoot their bows however they shoot them, and don't want to be bothered by conflicting theories or opinions. More power to them! But I doubt if any of them would be interested in participating in this forum, where theories and opinions about ways to shoot are what we enjoy doing.
On the other hand, your point about shooting at a laser point where you have no way of judging the distance is a good one, I think. Inherent in instinctive shooting is that we have some means of judging distance. Our binocular vision would be able to make some determination as to the distance of a laser point, out to maybe 10 yards, after which the convergence of our eyes doesn't change much. Beyond 10 yards, I think you would need some other visual references in order to shoot accurately instinctively or any other way, if you didn't already know the distance to the laser point.
For me, instinctive shooting means that we don't consciously use an aiming device, whether it be the tip of the arrow or anything else. Whatever our mind puts together from the environment and our visual picture of the target in order to guide the elevation of our bow arm is all a part of instinctive shooting, as far as I'm concerned.
-
An archer can get very consistantly accurate while shooting at a target at a fixed distance and position through repeatitive motion that gets stored within our muscle memory/motor memory...which is why some archer's can get very accurate while shooting in the dark at one specific target at a specific distance and position.
Ray ;)
-
Originally posted by McDave:
For me, instinctive shooting means that we don't consciously use an aiming device, whether it be the tip of the arrow or anything else. Whatever our mind puts together from the environment and our visual picture of the target in order to guide the elevation of our bow arm is all a part of instinctive shooting, as far as I'm concerned.
Totally agree ;)
Ray ;)
-
Originally posted by McDave:
I think you may be unclear as to why people read and post in this forum. There are no doubt a large number of people who just want to shoot their bows however they shoot them, and don't want to be bothered by conflicting theories or opinions. More power to them! But I doubt if any of them would be interested in participating in this forum, where theories and opinions about ways to shoot are what we enjoy doing.
Sorry, it wasn't my intention to imply that people shouldn't be putting opinions and theories forward and discussing them. I was trying to say something else, but i can see why it probably got taken the wrong way having read it. Writing isn't my strong point sometimes.
Originally posted by McDave:
For me, instinctive shooting means that we don't consciously use an aiming device, whether it be the tip of the arrow or anything else. Whatever our mind puts together from the environment and our visual picture of the target in order to guide the elevation of our bow arm is all a part of instinctive shooting, as far as I'm concerned.
I fully accept your definition as well.
To Black Wolf...
So ok, we can practice at 10 yard targets for a month and then turn the lights off. But we still have a memory issue as a variable which isn't there when shooting normally. Some people can remember things very well, others can't. How do you conclude anything when you can't measure the memory variable within your test?
Then we have the issue of darkness itself as a variable. When we go into darkness it is automatic that our other senses become more acute. Our hearing will start to hear things that we don't hear when it's light, we will notice smells we didn't notice before, tastes, touches and our spacial awareness will be different. All these things can disturb us, and once again, the effect any of these has on any one individual is unmeasurable as a variable within your test.
Even if the room is in complete silence when we do this test, complete silence in the dark can be an issue for a lot of people, it's when we normally go to sleep and people's brains will start to do things that they normally wouldn't if it had remained light. Once again, you cannot measure this variable within each individual within your test.
Some people become anxious in the dark to varying degrees, and anxiety will certainly throw your aim off. How would you measure the anxiety variable?
What i'm trying to say is that there are simply too many variables out of our control acting upon our conscious and subconscious minds by switching the lights off. And as we are supposed to be testing our subconscious minds this is an experiment that cannot deliver any conclusion.
My point i'm trying to make is that if someone is hitting their targets then it would be foolish to take this test and then drawer the conclusion that you are implying if they don't hit the target, because they simply cannot draw that conclusion from the result. And if they did draw that conclusion and it was wrong then what then happens to their shooting after that as they go away believing something about their aiming that isn't true?
As i said earlier, shooting any projectile is a matter of belief. We believe it will hit the target when we release the projectile from the weapon because we believe in whatever we believe about our aiming method to get it there. If we start drawing the wrong conclusions about that belief because we don't consider that there are numerous variables that can skew the results of said test then we are entering problems in my opinion.
-
freefeet,
You said - "I do not use any visual reference on any weapon i am using when shoot instinctively. It is not that i am not aware that i am doing it, it is that i am completely aware that i am not doing it."
First off...your hand is on the weapon and your arm is attached to it...so if you're not using the arrow or anything else on the bow...you have to be using the hand, finger, arm or something else within your periphial vision...like I previously said as part of your visual reference.
Like I said...an archer gets good at shooting at a target in the dark set at one distance and one position through motor memory...but when you set up multiple targets up at different distances and different positions like in the real world when hunting or 3D competitions...that motor memory is challenged and the eyes need to come into play to use the references subconsciously to fine tune the aiming process.
I have yet to see an archer shoot better in this test than with the lights on...myself included others who have claimed they don't visual reference anything while aiming...consciously or subconsciously.
Why do you think the term 'hand and EYE coordination' plays into this?
What is it about our eyes that aids our ability to hit objects with arrows?
Again...if you want to believe your not using any visual references to aid yourself while aiming your bow...feel free to keep on believing that...but I will always explain the facts on why that isn't true. The only time it doesn't apply is if you are blind, blindfolded or shooting in total darkness.
Ray ;)
-
Originally posted by CTaggart:
As far as stirring the kettle, I certainly do not mean for a heated discussion.
At this point there's arguing just to be arguing, and not addressing the topic starter's questions at all.