Traditional: Misunderstanding What Was.

[Grant Young]

George, its always great to read your posts and I especially agree with this one. I've been involved and interested in archery and bowhunting for forty plus years and equipment controversies and "labeling" have always made me uncomfortable. Like you, I personally don't use sights but have no problem with them whatsoever-heck, I only shot a compound for about a month and gave it up, but I don't have a problem with those who use them. I'm always a little concerned that the pointless formation of factions within will ultimately weaken our position on larger and more exigent isuues like preserving our bowhunting privs.       Grant

[rascal]

Very well said George.  

I figure thats the explanation for the holes drilled in the riser of my Browning Safari II recurve from the late 60s.  Im even considering putting a sight back on it now that my bow season is over, so I can work on my form.  Hopefully it will aid in building a bit of muscle memory and improving my accuracy and range.  My biggest struggle this year was to stay the course and not fall back into using my compound and the only reasons I would consider going back was accuracy and range.

[Rob DiStefano]

Be aware that there can easily be great differences between instinctive form and freestyle (sight) form.    

A bowsight is intended to be the sole point-of-aim device, and there are mandatory form changes that go along with its use.  This WILL involve setting up a bow with regards to the sight, arrow plate/pressure point, arrows, shooting style - but there are other factors, too.  One would be best served to seek out a competent coach when learning to properly use a bowsight.  Not really knowing what yer doing can be a severe detriment to your shooting accuracy.  

Form and tackle aside, the bugaboo with using bowsights is trying to estimate unmarked distances.  This can be somewhat overcome by using extremely fast arrows at typical short hunting distances, or by premarking distances around yer treestand or blind.  

Back in the day, some of us used fixed multi-pin bowsights on recurves with moderate to good success.  The common denominator was/is always the archer.  

If you are a bowhunter/rover that's struggling with shooting consistency/accuracy, seek out a competent coach and don't look for what may be a crutch that will never serve you well.  Mixing different styles of shooting is not a good prescription for becoming an accurate archer/bowhunter.

"Traditional" will always be in the mind of the be in the mind, heart and soul of the beholder.  I think that's a good thing.    :cool:

[Molson]

George, I agree with you (somewhat) and understand your point.  I just think it's important to remember what we did to ourselves.

It's too easy to say, "before the compound" and take no responsibility for what happened leading up to and after the compound.  We chose to develope the term, "Traditional Archery".  We chose to label ourselves and we chose to promote ourselves in a different way. That is a part of our history too.

Sights or no sights...What's that question really about?  

Go back and count the number of labels in these posts to describe those who disagree with use of sights.  "Pointless", "arrogant", "elite" and on it goes.  Who on either side is any better?  We all want what we want, don't we?

Regardless of what you choose to accept, you should remember the choice exists because others have different views.  You don't have to agree, in fact, I'd rather you didn't.  I might like to try carbons someday and you might like to try wood.  Without each other, we might not have either.

Rob- Right on.  Is it a crutch or is it a style choice?  Makes a difference doesn't it?

[Labs4me]

Aside from the notion of what should qualify as being "traditional", it is an often hyped fallacy that it is within EVERYONE's ability to learn to shoot a bow accurately without relying on sights. Learning to shoot a bow without sights is a skill that requires dedication, time and yes, some modicum of ability.

Just like everyone can learn to hit a baseball, but not everyone can learn to hit WELL, the same is true of shooting a bow (any bow) without using sights. Anyone can learn to shoot without sights, but not everyone can learn to shoot ACCURATELY without using sights.

[KodiakBob]

Took my meds so my memory is working now. The compound was great because it let you more easily hold at full draw to align your sight, point of aim etc. Many used sights on their recurves, not many shot longbows in those days, many had kisser buttons and/or peeps, no sights viewed the point of the arrow thru the peep, a hot hunting setup was a mascara brush for an arrow rest and a finishing nail for a sight with a peep on the string. We used to spray paint the natural color alum arrows with red paint so we could find them, the good old days.

[Sharpster]

I firmly believe that "Traditional bowhunting" is much better defined by the individuals mindset and attitude about the hunt than by the particular equipment he or she may choose to hunt with.

I know a few oldtimers who shoot older wheel bows with no sights, no mechanical releases and who won't shoot over twenty yards ever. In my mind even these fellows are true trad hunters.

Well said George. Our first and formost responsability is a humane kill. Whatever equipment we choose to hunt with is a distant second.

-Sharps

[John3]

My "old school" tribute to Earl Hoyt Jr. Yes I am hunting with this bow this season,, with a sight.

JDS III
 
 

[Rob DiStefano]

Originally posted by JDS3:
My "old school" tribute to Earl Hoyt Jr. Yes I am hunting with this bow this season,, with a sight.

JDS III

Just Beautiful.  A work of art.

One of my most nostalgic recurves - I've had at least 4 Hoyt Pro Medalists and 1 Pro Hunter, and competed for a decade with the Medalists (both freestyle fingers and release aid).  

Just gorgeous, the classic Hoyts, Wing Presentations and Slimlines, Bear Tamerlanes and Alaskans, Damon Howatts, and many many more were the high points in the 60's and 70's Art of the Modern Recurve, IMO.

[Jon Stewart]

George I read your post and could not agree more. I am fortunate enough to come from an archery rich family.  My dad was and still is at 84 an instictive archer and won National tournaments in 1957 in Chicago, came in 10th that year in Watkins Glenn,New York, 1st place in 1958 in Chicago and took 1st again in Chicago in 1959.  My uncle, Clif McGrane was a site shooter as we called them and he was as good as they got with a site.  He took 2nd in Grayling in 1958 where there were 1400 archers shooting in this National Event.  Probably the best female archer in her day was a freestyle shooter by the name of Ann Marsten from Michigan who at 16 years old won a 1955 National Tournament.

Those types of tournaments are a thing of the past.  Field archery, target archery and hunter rounds are no longer shot.  As a 58 year old who has shot a bow for 50 years ,I have many fond memories of tournament shooting.  There were just as many site shooters as instinctive shooters.
Jon Stewart

[Dan Worden]

Originally posted by Labs4me:
Aside from the notion of what should qualify as being "traditional", it is an often hyped fallacy that it is within EVERYONE's ability to learn to shoot a bow accurately without relying on sights. Learning to shoot a bow without sights is a skill that requires dedication, time and yes, some modicum of ability.

Just like everyone can learn to hit a baseball, but not everyone can learn to hit WELL, the same is true of shooting a bow (any bow) without using sights. Anyone can learn to shoot without sights, but not everyone can learn to shoot ACCURATELY without using sights.

WHAM!!!!  Drove that nail with one great  BIG  hammer.

[Bill Kissner]

Great post George. You sure come up with some thoughtful posts!

In the late fifties through about 1968 I belonged to an archery club that was in a league with 7 other clubs. These clubs were distributed over southern Illinois with one being in Missouri. Every Sunday there was a shoot at one of the clubs. It was attended by shooters from all the other clubs. Then the next Sunday another club would hold the shoot. The schedule was drawn up before the season started just like a baseball or football season.

All the shoots were NFAA sanctioned and attendance was great. There was always more than 200 shooters in attendance. Believe me EVERYONE took every advantage they could to win. And a few even mounted "Heartshot" sights on their hunting bows. We did not know what traditional archery was. In all eight clubs, absolutely no one shot a longbow. The recurve was king. The longbow was considered by most at that time to be inferior to the recurve. Earl Hoyt's bows were dominent in our area. Shooters in the barebow classes ALL walked the string to to be able to shoot their best scores.

 I say all this to show that at THAT particular time we were not a whole lot different than the compound shooter of today. We all wanted to win and that meant shooting the most accurate equipment. When Allen invented the compound most people were  slow to take it up because the first ones were pretty ugly. But after a few years everybody was getting beat by the compound so most joined in and bought one.

A few stickbow shooters simply quit shooting tournaments rather than switch. The ones that stayed with recurves  were forgotten or looked down on. Only after the resurgence of the stickbow was the term "traditional" used. Now I fear we have a few that shoot "traditional" only to be hip, which is not all bad because a few of them will stay with it and be an asset to our ranks.

Sorry to be so long winded but sometimes I get carried away.

[pseman]

I agree with what you have said George except for one thing that you and others have said or insinuated(sp). That is that new/young "trad" guys are not concerned with hitting what they are shooting at. I am a "new guy" and started shooting stickbows(note the avoidance of the word "trad") back in February after many years with a compound. Now I will admit that I switched at least partly because I think this stuff is cool and I wanted to shoot instinctively, but never have I discounted the need to be accurate. I am not as accurate as I would like to be but I simply live with my current limitations. I work hard on my shooting but do not plan on using a sight. On the other hand, it does not bother me in the least if a guy wants to put one on his bow.

Shawn said that he thought a lot of guys should put a sight on their bow because they are not good shots. Maybe so, maybe not. Maybe they should practice more. Maybe some of you "expert shots" should offer to help them with their shooting instead of dismissing them as "trad wannabes".

Alot of this discussion comes down to old vs new. Newer guys should look to older ones for advice and help and not think that all "trad" started the day they decided to pick up a stick bow. Older, more experiences shooters should offer advice and help to those just starting out so they get a firm foundation of fundamentals but don't chastise them if they choose to do things differently.

Mark

[Rob DiStefano]

IMHO, you either aim with a bowsight or you don't.  

I have been in this sport since '55 and I've learned some things about shooting a bow the easy way ... and some the hard way - usually when things hit me upsides my head after lotsa frustration.  

It's quite rare to find an archer/bowhunter that can devise an accurate consistent aiming system that uses both a physical sight and an inner virtual aiming methodology.  Choose one or the other.

If you use a sight to "tune up" yer accuracy, that aiming process will not help your instinctive aiming.  Choose one or the other.

In any event, particularly if yer a newbie to stickbows, as a first time archer or metriculating over from wheel bows, you would do best to get a competent coach.  Archery is a form game and an aiming sport, not at all radically different from bowling or darts or golf.

So, in getting back to George's original post - IMO I agree that there's nothing "non-traditional" about stickbows and bowsights; bowsights have been around for many many centuries.  Bowsights are not a panacea for improved accuracy and they all have limitations and compromises.  

What matters most to a bowhunter is what will that bowsight do for me?  How should I use it to my advantage?  Can it improve my accuracy in taking game?  Nothing else should matter.

[pseman]

Where are these archery coaches I hear you guys speak of? I would guess it would be easier to find Jimmie Hoffa than an archery coach where I live. Especially if you want one who coaches barebow instinctive shooting.

For most of us, learning to shoot a barebow is a self-taught skill. I use this site and the advice of others that I know who shoot, but for the most part what I know about shooting and traditional archery is a product of my own research and trial and error.

Mark

[George D. Stout]

Mark,  it is difficult to find coaches....it wasn't thirty years ago; however, in your state of Alabama, I'm sure there are many older archers who competed and are capable of teaching archery form, and that's basically what is needed.  Most guys who shoot badly, lack proper form, and it only takes about five minutes or so to correct the basics.

Guys coming from shooting compounds actually are better equipped to handle the change, since they are probably understanding of archery form.  The basics don't change much, but the devil is in the details.

Also, much can be garnered from books, such as Jay Kidwell's treatise, and some older ones that can be found via places like abebooks.com.

[longbowman]

Being an old timer I really appreciate the post George.  I agree with you in most of what you brought up.  I don't believe for a minute that the compound was responsible for the term "traditional" archery.  When the compound first came out in my neck of the woods a bunch of people went to them and we still called it archery or bowhunting...no traditional in front of any of it.  I also agree that "many" of the recurve/longbow shooters should consider using sights because it's noramlly accepted at the 3d shoots I attend to have horrible scores if you shoot this type of equipment.  This has nothing to do with being a new or old recurve/longbow shooter either.  Some people can master it some cannot.

[Molson]

Bill Kissner- Simply wonderful!!!!  Finally, an accurate description of what the attitudes toward archery equipment were at the time leading up to the compound.

[Rob DiStefano]

Bill Kissner - Yup, exactly the same for us in the Nor'East from around '58 to about '67, then on through the late 70's when the compound took a firm hold.  No one used that 'traditional' word, you did what you hadda do to score on the field or target course (which quickly prompted new and 'inventive' competition classes, geez there were a TON of classes and a gazillion trophies!)- but most of us went back to instinctive aiming when hunting.  I was deeply involved in target archery from the early to the late 60's and formed a club of 250+ ... chartered a parcel of city land for a 56 target field course, a 24 target NAA range and a full 180 yard clout shoot field.  Most of us hunted together as well, a great group of fellers.  Ah, those were the dayze!

[Rico]

If you can't hit the target with your barebow get closer.