Archery

[kalniel]

You mentioned partial eye dominance but how do you test the degree of eye dominance?

I've no idea. For me it's distance based - I'm right-eye dominant at short distances and left-eye over longer distances*. That may have something to do with the fact I'm long-sighted in my left eye and short-sighted in my right! Also I'm ambidextrous, so my brain's just confused anyway.

*At some distances I can actually switch dominance by concentrating, but it's far easier to close an eye.

[TooNice]

Interesting, though it does not look like I am pretty much all left eyed after all. I tried an eyepatch but it looks like it may take a bit of time getting used to it. I noticed that it is a touch harder to sit the arrow on the bow while wearing an eyepatch which I guess is due to the loss. Nothing too bad, though perhaps it is easier to just close an eye. What I have noticed though, is that shooting with one eye, whether using a patch, or closing an eye makes it much harder to see the the arrow fly towards the target. And, perhaps an eyesight check is overdue, but at 30m, I struggle to see where the arrow lands especially if I don't see the arrow fly. As I am still getting used to the technique and little tested second hand bow, this is a bit of an issue because I can't make necessary adjustments after a shot and I have found myself with not so badly grouped shots... above the target. Would it help / be weird to get a monocular? I note that nobody shooting at this distance seem to need it, though those shooting at 70m use a proper one on a tripod.

[TooNice]

Since the last post, I hit another wall caused by a problem with my sight, figured out the problem and fixed it myself, and made a lot of progress. I am now one of the better new members, and the only one amongst not using a clicker. Is it worth investing in one?

Also, one thing I have noticed is that when other people draw their bows, the arrowhead is very near the riser (like in this post: http://www.archery-forum.com/showthr...r-for-Bow-help!). Mine isn't, I think that my arrow head is out by at least two inches. My arms are simply not long enough to pull further back. Does this have any impact on my aiming? And if so, can I just get shorter arrows, or does it not work that way?

Thanks.

[kalniel]

I am now one of the better new members, and the only one amongst not using a clicker. Is it worth investing in one?

No!

Also, one thing I have noticed is that when other people draw their bows, the arrowhead is very near the riser (like in this post: http://www.archery-forum.com/showthr...r-for-Bow-help!). Mine isn't, I think that my arrow head is out by at least two inches. My arms are simply not long enough to pull further back. Does this have any impact on my aiming? And if so, can I just get shorter arrows, or does it not work that way?

No it doesn't impact aiming, but yes it absolutely works that way: Your arms are not too short, your arrows are too long. Place the nock of an arrow in the middle of your sternum and hold your arms out straight in front of you so head end of the arrow is between your palms, the tip of the arrow should only just protude from your middle fingers.

But this is of barely any consequence - you're carrying a little more weight in the arrow than you need to, but this isn't going to be a problem for the first few years. Only once you have absolutely settled your anchor point should you consider arrow length. If you decide to switch anchors then you might need longer arrows again. And having too long an arrow is infinitely better than too short!

Likewise if you have a short draw then you can get away with shorter limb lengths before encountering stacking (and shorter limbs = faster).

[TooNice]

I just tried the test you suggested, and the arrow protrude by about 20cm! Now that I think about it, "about two inches" might have been a gross underestimate, though I am sure it is not quite as much as 7-8 inches. 5 inches might be possible though (not sure, it is only something I noticed recently). Would such excess pretty much preclude the use of a clicker even if I wanted to in the future? The clickers I have seen are all installed pretty near the arrow rest, and I can't visualise how it would work if the arrows protrude from the riser by more than a cm.

But if not for this issue, could you qualify the reasons for not using a clicker? It is not like I am trying to justify getting one, I am sure I can still grow without one but I wonder if there is any value getting used o it early. All the better, new students (who started at the same time as me) are starting to use clickers lately. The top girl amongst new students in our club seems to have gotten used to it almost instantly, and didn't suffer much initially, and kept improving with one. The second best girl in amongst new students really struggled with clickers at the beginning (arrows would stray horribly left), got far worse initially, but recovered within two weeks (not sure about the guys - it just to happen that I was there during the girls first practice using clickers).

[kalniel]

Would such excess pretty much preclude the use of a clicker even if I wanted to in the future? The clickers I have seen are all installed pretty near the arrow rest, and I can't visualise how it would work if the arrows protrude from the riser by more than a cm.

Yes, exactly. You can get extension plates that go out a little, but not too much.

But if not for this issue, could you qualify the reasons for not using a clicker? It is not like I am trying to justify getting one, I am sure I can still grow without one but I wonder if there is any value getting used o it early. All the better, new students (who started at the same time as me) are starting to use clickers lately. The top girl amongst new students in our club seems to have gotten used to it almost instantly, and didn't suffer much initially, and kept improving with one. The second best girl in amongst new students really struggled with clickers at the beginning (arrows would stray horribly left), got far worse initially, but recovered within two weeks (not sure about the guys - it just to happen that I was there during the girls first practice using clickers).

Because you should focus on other bits of technique first rather than a sticking plaster over the top. A clicker theoretically ensures consistent draw length. What does draw length rely on? Anchor point and stance. You really want to nail them without a clicker so that by the time you eventually (if ever) use a clicker, it's working with you, rather than you working to the clicker. If you use a clicker too early you will artificially adjust your draw and anchor to satisfy the conditions of the clicker, and you'll likely do this in an inconstant way if you haven't nailed the aspects beforehand. That in turn will mess up your release, stance and all sorts of other things.

It's a bit like using stabilisers - they might help group your shots a little closer, but they mask underlying imbalances/bad release and you'll never get it better. If you sort out the imbalance/release, even if in the meantime your grouping is worse, then when you eventually use stablisation the grouping will be improving from a better position that you'd have never reached if you took the easy option earlier.

As with many things, it's tempting to look for short term gains, but archery really is about overcoming walls, and the more short cuts you take the more likely you are to hit a wall and have to undo the work and start right back again.

[TooNice]

I have to say, I still haven't got my consistency down. As soon as I miss one practice session (out of the two per week), I "lose" my anchor. Frustrating as I thought I had finally overcome one wall after coming second amongst new students in a field archery match with another uni (effectively first in my affiliated uni), and did pretty well in the following practice (but had to miss the one after). It does seem like I am a lot less consistent amongst those who show up to practice fairly frequently, doing really well sometime, and quite mediocre in others.

It is quite interesting that you brought the issue on stabilisers though. The aforementioned top new female archer in the club has recently being given/lent a "tripod" shaped stabiliser to replace the "rod" shaped stabiliser everyone starts with. I do have the impression that people are fairly gear minded, though in her case, it might be that she is good/consistent enough to justify it.

That said, how do you benchmark such things? At the moment, I go for personal best, and I feel like I have a lot of room to grow yet. But is there a certain wall, score wise (at 30m, as that is the furthest we can shoot at our regular archery range) after which it might be justifiable to optimising equipment?