Uh oh! I used "The Force."

[YosemiteSam]

I've been gap shooting since I started this traditional archery adventure a little more than a year ago.  I've mentioned on this forum many times how it is the best system for me because of its similarity to firearm shooting & such.  But every now and then, I try out instinctive or split vision just to mix things up a bit.  Life's a journey, right?

So much to my surprise, I've been shooting my best groups in a long time while using a split vision or instinctive gap.  I don't know why it's working so well lately.  Maybe something finally clicked in my brain.  Maybe my draw is more even (no long pause while I aim and then start my release movements).  I don't know how it would work in the 25+ yard situations where my arrow would cover the target.  But here I am and I'm about to get a taste of crow for what I said.  It's not the first time and it probably won't be the last.

Has anybody else changed from gap to instinctive or split vision?  I've heard of a number of archers that went the other way (from instinctive to gap).  I'm about ready to start believing in this jedi stuff for once.

[McDave]

What you are describing is a natural progression for many people.  Byron Ferguson, in his book, describes a classic gap system, but then concludes by more or less saying that after a while your mind/body connection will learn how to set the gaps without your having to calculate them, which is instinctive gap, or split vision.  We don't know if Howard Hill started off with classic gap, but we do know that he ended up with split vision.  In discussions with Rick Welch, I think he went the other way: he started with pure instinctive, but soon discovered he could shoot more consistently if he paid attention to his sight picture (but without estimating distances), which seems to me to be indistinguishable from split vision.

The advantage of split vision over gap is that no cognitive thinking is involved, which opens up the mind to a greater state of physical awareness, meaning that we can be aware of and quickly react to small physical changes that might escape us if we were calculating things in our heads.

The advantage of gap over split vision is that at known distances, we can achieve a far greater level of precision because we have practiced and practiced at those distances until we know exactly what the gap should be.

Given the uncertainties involved in estimating distances, I see no advantage in gap over split vision when shooting at unknown distances.

[Orion]

I agree with McDave.  Been shooting split vision for more than 50 years.  Was doing it that way long before I knew what it was called. I do sometimes go to a form of gap, i.e., point on at longer yardages, around 40-45 yards depending on the bow/arrow combination I'm shooting.

[slowbowjoe]

McDve and orion, X3.

[crazynate]

Ii have never tried any type of aiming system. It's shoot 100% instinctively. But I wouldnt mind being more consistent at 60+ yards for fun. I enjoy shooting long distances to help with form but sometimes I'm inconsistent. Maybe sometime I'll try this gap method I here about.

[crazynate]

Also I like what these gentlemen above my post have to say about describing different styles of shooting. Very interesting

[Friend]

Have used split vision the past 8 years from within my point-on range of 25 yards and then stack beyond that.

If an estimated range is 15 yards on in, then a personally perceived 1/2" of light window from the focused-on minimally sized target area and shade of the arrow is utilized. Use a 1/4" personally perceived window for 20 yards. No clutter obscures the sight picture as the arrow could be pointed in the dirt, yet I only perceive the lighted area in my peripheral vision.

We all have to find our own niche. The style of aiming as also utilized by Larry Yien has permitted me to focus much more intently on the minimized target zone and focus on my shot execution. This ascribed-to method has proven most personally favorable and natural in the field as well as 3D.

The more developed this method becomes as ascertained by virtually being able to continually increase the total focus on the pinpointed target zone, the more instinctive it becomes.

Do acknowledge that there are two other aiming methods that are more accurate, yet are not natural for me as I transition to the field where I live. Having stated that, not achieving close to a 9.0 average on a moderate difficulty 3D range has not been attributed to my adopted aiming style.

Merely, my own observation.

[YosemiteSam]

Good thoughts, all.  Sounds like the journey takes us all in different places and in different times.

[fnshtr]

Uh oh, sounds like you're having fun!