I have recently watched a youtube video called The Push. I brought up a lot of great points about archery and hunting. Why is it that a person that shoots truly instinctive sort of looks down their nose at a person that uses another type of aiming method? I just dont see where it is really a big deal. Its like the debate between the 270 and 30-06, does it really matter if the person is enjoying the time in the woods. I may be reading more into it than I should, we will see. From My personal experience, I rarely have time to shoot in the Fall because I am a Football coach and dont usually get home until after dark and there isnt a range close. So, I am probably going to convert to the Fixed crawl method of shooting because I dont have much practice time and this method will still allow me to possibly do some hunting during our bow season in Alabama. I am just curious to what your thoughts are about the subject?
I'm an advocate of whatever works best for you. I don't see why it should matter to someone else how you shoot as long as what you do gives you enough accuracy to make clean kills.
I shoot instinctive, but I know other methods work. I tried the fixed crawl, but it made my bow louder, so I didn't mess with it long. The video was good though.
You do whatever you like .
This hobby is supposed to be enjoyable , so relax and do what you want .
Likewise, shoot what works for you. I have shot instinctive so long that other methods are just to hard to pick up. I do start to use the gap method at 30yds and beyond on targets.
Just have fun with it and do what's best for you. I don't have perfect form it I've out shot guys that think they do. It's all about fun.
To be honest, I don't recall reading about an instinctive shooter looking down on a person who uses another aiming method. What I have read is when someone objects to someone else saying he shoots instinctively when the writer doesn't agree with the second person's definition of instinctive. For some people, the definition of words is important and I suppose it is good to agree on what words mean. However, when a person tries to make a moral issue out of it, I think they've gone a little too far.
I'm a self taught instinctive shooter with hunting as my main archery interest. So is everyone I hang with, and it's a large group. I don't even know anyone who uses some other aiming method.
I honestly only look at what I want to hit. Not looking down my nose at all but gapping, crawling, walking, gun barreling or whatever is a mystery to me.
McDave
I can understand that. I haven't ever read anything about an instinctive archer looking down their nose. I have seen it though. I was not want to question any morals of anyone, I have just seen things that I didn't understand and was wondering.
QuoteOriginally posted by coachA:
McDave
I can understand that. I haven't ever read anything about an instinctive archer looking down their nose. I have seen it though. I was not want to question any morals of anyone, I have just seen things that I didn't understand and was wondering.
Sorry Coach, I wasn't referring to you at all. I kind of agree with you in fact. To me, some of the arguments I have read about what is and what isn't instinctive seem kind of silly, that's all.
Not sure if he looks down on other methods but in his instinctive shooting book G. Fred describes instinctive shooting as the best aiming system for hunting because of the hunter's ability to quickly release an arrow at fast approaching game.
While I somewhat agree with Mr. Asbell, I also believe that most hunter's who consider themselves purely instinctive shots are not quite in fact shooting purely instinctive. Rod Jenkins calls out Daryl Quidort on this in the Master's series vol. 3 I believe.
I believe that just about any aiming system can be practiced in order to get off quicker shots at game, even gapping. And in my opinion most close shots (15 yds an under) are done practically instinctively anyway. Just find the best system for you and stick with it. If you feel as though ppl are going to look down on you just tell em you're shooting instinctive since you don't have sights anyway how would they know lol :thumbsup:
The divide or rather arguments come into play whenever those that use a string walking or GAP method say that their method is more accurate and better than instinctive.
It's only natural for the person that uses their own method to defend the method that they use.
If you watch "The Push" the maker of the video claims that string walking is superior to instinctive in a non direct manner.
Some people also look down on string walking because it was not a traditional method of shooting the bow unless you consider tradition to be within the 20th century to the present (less than 100 years).
With selfbow's and wooden composite bows and self nock's string walking would be nearly impossible and even if you did manage to prevent the arrow from popping off it would overly stress your bow resulting in breakage or vastly decreased durability.
That being said I believe that instinctive is vastly superior to string walking for many reasons.
Im a string walker during 3-d season and hunt with a fixed crawl. While shooting a 3-d with several trad friends, an acquaintance (instinctive archer) said, "if I had to shoot a trad bow the way you do, I would give up shooting trad." I had another archer (also an instinctive archer) during another 3-d outing say, " you're one of those anal archers." I let the comments go. I prefer to just remain silent and out shoot them.
QuoteOriginally posted by forestdweller:
The divide or rather arguments come into play whenever those that use a string walking or GAP method say that their method is more accurate and better than instinctive.
It's only natural for the person that uses their own method to defend the method that they use.
If you watch "The Push" the maker of the video claims that string walking is superior to instinctive in a non direct manner.
Some people also look down on string walking because it was not a traditional method of shooting the bow unless you consider tradition to be within the 20th century to the present (less than 100 years).
With selfbow's and wooden composite bows and self nock's string walking would be nearly impossible and even if you did manage to prevent the arrow from popping off it would overly stress your bow resulting in breakage or vastly decreased durability.
That being said I believe that instinctive is vastly superior to string walking for many reasons.
I'm not here to start an argument, but with all due respect consider this. I'm not an archery historian, but I would venture a guess that prior to the 20th century there were no glass limb lams, carbon lams or limb veneers. Basically, self bows. You made the following statement: "Some people also look down on string walking because it was not a traditional method of shooting the bow unless you consider tradition to be within the 20th century to the present (less than 100 years)." If you follow the same logic, unless you're shooting a bow that you made, with arrows that you made, with obsidian broad heads you knapped, you're not traditional.
I hate this conversation, but lets be accepting of all trad archers. We are all on the same team. We, traditional archers, are a very accepting and non judgmental group, but sometimes we eat our own. Why? I don't know.
Deleted original comment because I don't want to create a fluster.
QuoteOriginally posted by longbow fanatic 1:
QuoteOriginally posted by forestdweller:
The divide or rather arguments come into play whenever those that use a string walking or GAP method say that their method is more accurate and better than instinctive.
It's only natural for the person that uses their own method to defend the method that they use.
If you watch "The Push" the maker of the video claims that string walking is superior to instinctive in a non direct manner.
Some people also look down on string walking because it was not a traditional method of shooting the bow unless you consider tradition to be within the 20th century to the present (less than 100 years).
With selfbow's and wooden composite bows and self nock's string walking would be nearly impossible and even if you did manage to prevent the arrow from popping off it would overly stress your bow resulting in breakage or vastly decreased durability.
That being said I believe that instinctive is vastly superior to string walking for many reasons.
I'm not here to start an argument, but with all due respect consider this. I'm not an archery historian, but I would venture a guess that prior to the 20th century there were no glass limb lams, carbon lams or limb veneers. Basically, self bows. You made the following statement: "Some people also look down on string walking because it was not a traditional method of shooting the bow unless you consider tradition to be within the 20th century to the present (less than 100 years)." If you follow the same logic, unless you're shooting a bow that you made, with arrows that you made, with obsidian broad heads you knapped, you're not traditional.
I hate this conversation, but lets be accepting of all trad archers. We are all on the same team. We, traditional archers, are a very accepting and non judgmental group, but sometimes we eat our own. Why? I don't know. [/b]
The bow's might not be traditional but many people prefer to shoot them the traditional way which put's the least amount of stress on the bow, is the safest way to shoot the bow, and is the most traditional way to shoot the bow.
Forest,
I really enjoyed your response. Consider this: Anyone, and I mean anyone, who joins our passion should be embraced. I shoot everything from an olympic style recurve with carbon arrows, to ILF hunting bows with carbon and aluminum arrows to wood longbows shot with self made wood arrows.
We are too small of a group to divide those among us who choose different equipment. :thumbsup:
Traditionally, I would guess that since back before recorded history, the one thing that all archers have had in common is that they all wanted to shoot the bow better than they did. I would assume this included anything they could do to improve the accuracy of their equipment and anything they could do to improve their own skills. Can you imagine a caveman hunter or an English archer before the battle of Agincourt saying, "Better not use the point of the arrow to aim with; it's not traditional, you know!"
In that sense, the compound bow and the crossbow are part of our same tradition of continually striving to find ways to improve our equipment. There is absolutely nothing wrong with deciding that we want to limit ourselves to a particular style of shooting or a particular type of equipment, whatever our reasons may be. But to do it because it is more traditional is somewhat of a misnomer, I think.
QuoteOriginally posted by McDave:
Traditionally, I would guess that since back before recorded history, the one thing that all archers have had in common is that they all wanted to shoot the bow better than they did. I would assume this included anything they could do to improve the accuracy of their equipment and anything they could do to improve their own skills. Can you imagine a caveman hunter or an English archer before the battle of Agincourt saying, "Better not use the point of the arrow to aim with; it's not traditional, you know!"
In that sense, the compound bow and the crossbow are part of our same tradition of continually striving to find ways to improve our equipment. There is absolutely nothing wrong with deciding that we want to limit ourselves to a particular style of shooting or a particular type of equipment, whatever our reasons may be. But to do it because it is more traditional is somewhat of a misnomer, I think.
With that kind of thinking why don't we all just shoot teched out compounds using the latest gadgets than?
The reason why it's called traditional is because that's the way it has been done for thousands and thousands of years. String walking is not even 100 years old.
Saying that "But to do it because it is more traditional is somewhat of a misnomer, I think." is silly in my opinion.
People shoot traditional or do "traditional things" because it's much more rewarding, requires more skill, and is more personal among many other reasons.
Forest,
I don't shoot traditional archery to earn anyone's respect. What you or anyone else thinks of the way I shoot means nothing to me. Before the compound bow ( circa 1970s?) archer was simply called archery. There was no traditional archery. Please dont judge other traditional archers because they dont shoot a single string the way you do.
QuoteOriginally posted by longbow fanatic 1:
Forest,
I don't shoot traditional archery to earn anyone's respect. What you or anyone else thinks of the way I shoot means nothing to me. Before the compound bow ( circa 1970s?) archer was simply called archery. There was no traditional archery. Please dont judge other traditional archers because they dont shoot a single string the way you do.
I don't judge anyone a certain way because they shoot a certain bow but in my opinion the highest achievement in archery is shooting lights out and taking game using both bows and arrows made out of natural materials that you made on your own just as how it was done for 6000+ years (traditional).
Forest,
On page one, you posted a response. I liked your response and responded as such. Then, you deleted your response. Then, you copied my comment and changed your response again. I'm no longer continuing my conversation on this topic. I feel that it's a pointless discussion.
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.
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!
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.
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.
QuoteOriginally 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.
I shoot pure instinctive and have many friends shooting gap and others that is fine with me. Shoot the way you like.
Tundra
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.
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).
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.
QuoteOriginally 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.
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.
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.
QuoteBarebow 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.
QuoteOriginally posted by KeganM:
QuoteBarebow 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.