Shooting Style Question

[Sam McMichael]

The best aiming system is that system that works best for an individual archer. While each of us thinks our particular system is best, we need to realize that not all agree with us, probably because another system suits them better. To me, its pretty much that simple. Nobody should think ill of another archer based on how he aims his bow.

[newhouse114]

Back in thd mid 70's, sights and peeps were common in "trad" bows. Nobody seemed to mind back then, or criticize the user. I killed my first elk with a recurve with a sight! Don't use one anymore and haven't for years but if that was the only way I could be accurate enough to ethically hunt, you better bet your bottom dollar I'd be using one!

[buckeyebowhunter]

Forest, In response to your comment about everyone making their own equipment for 6,000+ years is simply incorrect.

I'm not a history teacher but rather Art History and from the history classes I had the privilege of taking it is a fact that even ancient civilizations had member's of their community that contributed in certain ways. I would venture to say that certain members were skilled in bow and arrow making as there are today. Not everyone made their own equipment.

[Mark R]

coach, I guess it depends on what your definition of truly instinctive is,if anyone has attitude the way you shoot a bow of your choice because they don't, sounds pointless unless specific rules are in play. I would not worry about the archery police. Shoot the way it makes you happy.

[forestdweller]

Originally posted by buckeyebowhunter:
Forest, In response to your comment about everyone making their own equipment for 6,000+ years is simply incorrect.

I'm not a history teacher but rather Art History and from the history classes I had the privilege of taking it is a fact that even ancient civilizations had member's of their community that contributed in certain ways. I would venture to say that certain members were skilled in bow and arrow making as there are today. Not everyone made their own equipment.

I agree with you that optimally a tribe would have one set bow and arrow maker but one thing we do know for sure is that they used traditional materials like wooden bows and wooden arrows and not carbon/fiberglass/foam and so on.

I'm sure that there were plenty of archers that made their own bows and arrows though. You have to be a pretty proficient archer just to be able to make a bow.

I never intended to stir the pot so to speak I just find shooting the mass manufactured glass bows and carbon arrows to be significantly less rewarding than making my own bows and arrows out of natural materials.

There has just always been something special about seeing someone shooting a wooden self bow off the finger using wooden arrows just like it has been done for thousands and thousands of years.

Seems more like an art to me.

As for the what the definition if instinctive is. It's quite simple. It's putting all of your attention on the target itself and not paying any mind to where the point of your arrow is in relation to your target.

The easy way to see if you are shooting instinctive or GAP is to determine where your focus is while shooting. If most of the focus is on the arrow point than you are shooting GAP or a method similar to it.

If most of your focus is on the target and you don't measure things out while shooting than it's instinctive.

The beauty about instinctive is that it's a feel based shooting system that is very flexible and does not require any thinking.

[Wild Bill MCP 808]

I shoot pure instinctive and have many friends shooting gap and others that is fine with me. Shoot the way you like.

Tundra

[McDave]

Stating a preference for one kind of shooting or another is fine, Forest, as long as it as not at the expense of another person's preference.  As I stated above, we are all a part of the same tradition.

As far as your definition of instinctive is concerned, I'm sure you'll agree that you are stating your own opinion, which is also fine (as an opinion).  More than once on this and other forums, blood has started to flow and threads have been shut down when people get too emotionally involved in their own perceptions of what instinctive may or may not really mean.

[KeganM]

Forestdweller, string walking doesn't hurt a selfbow. I've built (and broken) many, many selfbows and composites. The only way it could hurt a bow is if it's done incorrectly. Just think about the asymmetry of a yumi!

It also doesn't take much of an archer to build a bow. I built a dozen before I could hit a two-square-foot target at more than ten feet!  

As for someone saying string walking or gapping are more accurate, why get upset? Of course they're more accurate. If they weren't, target folks wouldn't use them. Target guys only care about hitting as accurately and consistently as possible, so if instinctive was more accurate they'd have mastered it instead. They test all this stuff out and we can just learn from them without having to do it ourselves. Accuracy and tradition are two separate things, but an important tradition in archery is learning from other's mistakes.

Heck, a rifle is more accurate than a bow, doesn't mean I want to use one. I tried string walking. It worked, kinda, but with my glasses I couldn't get it how I liked. Went back to gap-stinctive. I know there are more accurate methods, and that's great! I just don't need them for my hunting/archery. Doesn't mean I need to say my system is more accurate. It's not, but I don't want or need a sight/crawl/whatever for what I do. What I do works for ME and I like it AT THIS MOMENT. I'll shoot however I like, whenever I like, for whatever reason I like, out of whatever bow I like. Whatever gives me the most enjoyment at the time!

Kinda like trucks. My brother's '98 v8 Ram 2500 will tow his tractor no problem, but he drives his '89 i4 Dakota all the other times because it's easier to park and better on gas. Is the Dakota a "better" truck? No, it's only rwd and small. Doesn't mean it doesn't have a place!

Unless you compete the only thing that matters is if you're enjoying yourself (and not breaking any laws, I guess lol).

[Broken Arrows]

We are human. If I had to guess all of the above methods were used 6000 years ago, there is really no way to know if you didn't live back then. They did what ever they needed to shoot and kill game.

[forestdweller]

Originally posted by KeganM:
Forestdweller, string walking doesn't hurt a selfbow. I've built (and broken) many, many selfbows and composites. The only way it could hurt a bow is if it's done incorrectly. Just think about the asymmetry of a yumi!

It also doesn't take much of an archer to build a bow. I built a dozen before I could hit a two-square-foot target at more than ten feet!      

As for someone saying string walking or gapping are more accurate, why get upset? Of course they're more accurate. If they weren't, target folks wouldn't use them. Target guys only care about hitting as accurately and consistently as possible, so if instinctive was more accurate they'd have mastered it instead. They test all this stuff out and we can just learn from them without having to do it ourselves. Accuracy and tradition are two separate things, but an important tradition in archery is learning from other's mistakes.

Heck, a rifle is more accurate than a bow, doesn't mean I want to use one. I tried string walking. It worked, kinda, but with my glasses I couldn't get it how I liked. Went back to gap-stinctive. I know there are more accurate methods, and that's great! I just don't need them for my hunting/archery. Doesn't mean I need to say my system is more accurate. It's not, but I don't want or need a sight/crawl/whatever for what I do. What I do works for ME and I like it AT THIS MOMENT. I'll shoot however I like, whenever I like, for whatever reason I like, out of whatever bow I like. Whatever gives me the most enjoyment at the time!

Kinda like trucks. My brother's '98 v8 Ram 2500 will tow his tractor no problem, but he drives his '89 i4 Dakota all the other times because it's easier to park and better on gas. Is the Dakota a "better" truck? No, it's only rwd and small. Doesn't mean it doesn't have a place!

Unless you compete the only thing that matters is if you're enjoying yourself (and not breaking any laws, I guess lol).

Not trying to argue with you Kegan but those Yumi bow's are tillered to be held and drawn at a specific point on the bow.

If you tried to draw a selfbow higher or lower than where it was tillered for you will overstress the bow and can induce set or possibly break the bow.

I have heard of one person that has supposedly gone through one super recurve a year due to string walking.

As for one method being more accurate than another that's a subjective thing or else everyone would shoot the same method.

[KeganM]

Forest, we're not arguing, this is just healthy debate.

You're absolutely right, that string walking CAN cause failure if done improperly. I've seen it happen. However, just as an asymmetrical yumi can be designed "out of norm" any selfbow can be designed to string walk. String walking doesn't inherently cause bow failure. It'd be the same if someone over drew the bow. That's just user error.

I'm going to call heresay on someone burning through super recurves by string walking, though. Alan Eagleton competed internationally in FITA barebow with an ILF recurve sporting Hex limbs (there was a video of him shooting in competition on Youtube). If that's true then someone doesn't know what they're doing.

As for accuracy being subjective, you are right- for the individual accuracy CAN be subjective. However, in any outdoor target archery class where string walking is actually allowed (there are many classes where it is not) SW dominates, because it is more accurate. Like I said, target guys would shoot a bow upside down if it was more consistent and accurate. So yes, where accuracy is the only thing that matters (and it's allowed) string walking is all people use. Target guys don't care how perfectly the arrow flies, how loud the bow is, or how obtrusive the set up can be in the woods; all they care about is accuracy.

Doesn't mean a darn thing to most of us. We have other considerations, too. That's why folks still bow hunt, rather than just use rifles. Or why folks use traditional bows, rather than just compounds. Or why folks shoot wooden bows instead of modern composites. The list goes on and on.

Hunters don't have someone telling us we have to shoot the target from 35 yards standing at a stake in the ground. We can just wait until it's 5 yards. Accuracy is incredibly important for hunting, but as hunters we have control of the situation; we CHOOSE when,where, and IF we even shoot, where as target shooters have to step to the line or stake and put it in the gold if they want to be "successful". That's why instinctive archery is still so popular. It's simple, easy to learn, and works great at the closer ranges we shoot.

Just because a sports car is faster doesn't mean it's better for my purposes than a pickup. Same with aiming styles. A Viper is faster than my Ram. String walking is more accurate than my gap-stinctive. I'll be sticking with the latter in both cases because they work for me, and I'd bet most folks make their own calls like that about their own situations, too.

[forestdweller]

I agree a self bow can be designed to handle string walking it would have to be overbuilt by quite a bit though which would sacrifice arrow speed.

Go talk to Stephen Morley he told me along with others that he was burning through a super recurve a year which is why he stopped shooting them.

I'd refer you to the thread in which he told the bow manufacturer and everyone about his once a year bow failure but it's on another forum and I don't think that's allowed on here.

String walking dominates right now but one of the best barebow archers, Rick, was an instinctive archer and he dominated when he was competing. I really don't believe that string walking is superior to instinctive when it comes to target accuracy or hunting accuracy.

Barebow has become a joke now though since they allow stabilizers, rests, and plungers at most events now so ,it isn't even true barebow and should not be called such. They need to rename it to FITA limited.

[KeganM]

Barebow has become a joke now though since they allow stabilizers, rests, and plungers at most events now so ,it isn't even true barebow and should not be called such. They need to rename it to FITA limited. [/QB]

Refer to post #1 of this thread.

I'm aware of that thread. You're taking it out of context. That company has had issues with light arrows regardless of how the string is held.

Place your fingers dead even (+/-0" nock height). Nock your arrow at 1" above. Presto, string walking without stress on the bow. Building a bow that close to the limits of durability is neither necessary or desired.

Mr. Welch is a man of immense natural talent and hard-earned skill. He is an exception. If instinctive itself was more accurate than string walking other target shooters would be using it. They use what's the most accurate, both on targets and in the woods. I have no interest in debating opinions or preferences as that is entirely subjective. To each their own.

You've shared your opinions on how others enjoy this sport before. I had hoped we could stay positive. Best of luck on your journey.

[forestdweller]

Originally posted by KeganM:
   

Barebow has become a joke now though since they allow stabilizers, rests, and plungers at most events now so ,it isn't even true barebow and should not be called such. They need to rename it to FITA limited. [/b]

Refer to post #1 of this thread.

I'm aware of that thread. You're taking it out of context. That company has had issues with light arrows regardless of how the string is held.

Place your fingers dead even (+/-0" nock height). Nock your arrow at 1" above. Presto, string walking without stress on the bow. Building a bow that close to the limits of durability is neither necessary or desired.

Mr. Welch is a man of immense natural talent and hard-earned skill. He is an exception. If instinctive itself was more accurate than string walking other target shooters would be using it. They use what's the most accurate, both on targets and in the woods. I have no interest in debating opinions or preferences as that is entirely subjective. To each their own.

You've shared your opinions on how others enjoy this sport before. I had hoped we could stay positive. Best of luck on your journey. [/QB]

But you just said that the HEX limbs can handle string walking yet Stephen said that his limbs failed once a year from using them while string walking them....

Sure 1" is not that far below the nock but most string walkers will pull back on the string up to 3" below where the arrow is nocked, placing a significant amount of undue stress on the lower limb.

It would be the equivalent of handing someone a bow that has been designed to be drawn 27" and drawing it back 30+" at that point.

Not to mention the safety aspect of string walking. I have had nocks fail on me that have led to dry fires in which if my eye was placed as close to the nock as most string walkers than I could possibly be blind right now.

There are clubs that have string walking banned for safety reasons and for good reason.

String walking simply is not a proper nor safe method to shoot the bow. If someone say's they are not capable as shooting as accurate using instinctive than they are just coming up with excuses as to why they are not shooting as well as they could be shooting.

All of the great hunters and shooters of the past shot GAP or instinctive and they did just fine, with Byron quite possibly being the most accurate archer on the planet right now.