After decades of hunting successfully using the instinctive method where I just look at the point I want to hit, I now have seen other methods like gap shooting, fixed gap, string walking, and even using sites on trad bows.
I would like to hear what methods you all employ to hunt or shoot at targets.
Jimmy Blackmon had a unique way where you shoot at a spot at 15-17 yards by putting the arrow tip on a mark say 15 inches below the bullseye and seeing where the arrow impacts. Then you draw again and mark on your riser where the arrow impacted by holding on the same mark. This creates the gap you are shooting with. So then for ranges 10-20+ yards you get your arrow point lined up under the bullseye but put the mark on your riser at the bullseye level.
Been a point and shoot guy since I started. Been quite deadly that way but keep my hunting shots short and past 20 yards accuracy was not that consistent.
Took a Joel Turner clinic in May (after a shoot I shot mediocre in) I switched to gap. I'm a lot more consistent and feel very confident to shoot a pig out to 25 yards. Still figuring out my longer gaps for 3D but honestly the positive impact it has had there was pretty significant as well.
Only have killed five animals so far this year (our pigs moved down by the river I guess because of the drought) and only one using this method but I've placed decently in my last three shoots while still figuring out the gaps and tuning as it changed my draw length an inch or so.
Said I never would but after shooting over four pigs in a row early this year I had to change something.
I still struggle to pin a name on my aiming style to this day ......not sure what to say or what you'd call it. Mostly instinctive? Yeah that's for sure ....... but there are also other little things that take place. There are things I do before I even draw the bow ......like imagining or visualizing my form while my bow arm is coming up to prepare for a shot. I align my form / arrow closest to dead on with left and right, before I even put tension on the string. Fast forward, once at anchor, I reference or confirm my left / right of shaft alignment sort of with my peripheral vision. Then, the elevation ....... that's the weird part. That's where I feel I just know where the arrows gonna hit, out to a certain distance that is plenty for hunting. Though I'd never be partial to shooting animals out to 40 yards, I'm plenty good on targets out to that with tight groups. The close shots like 20, all I have to do is make sure to follow through with all my little mental nuances, and not cut any corners thinking the close shot is a "gimme". Burning the shooting mantra into your soul ...... consistency happens then.
Quote from: GCook on July 07, 2022, 07:35:45 AM
Been a point and shoot guy since I started. Been quite deadly that way but keep my hunting shots short and past 20 yards accuracy was not that consistent.
Took a Joel Turner clinic in May (after a shoot I shot mediocre in) I switched to gap. I'm a lot more consistent and feel very confident to shoot a pig out to 25 yards. Still figuring out my longer gaps for 3D but honestly the positive impact it has had there was pretty significant as well.
Only have killed five animals so far this year (our pigs moved down by the river I guess because of the drought) and only one using this method but I've placed decently in my last three shoots while still figuring out the gaps and tuning as it changed my draw length an inch or so.
Said I never would but after shooting over four pigs in a row early this year I had to change something.
GCook, curious ....... did you loose draw length or gain it in changing your method?
Quote from: LookMomNoSights on July 07, 2022, 09:30:10 AM
Quote from: GCook on July 07, 2022, 07:35:45 AM
Been a point and shoot guy since I started. Been quite deadly that way but keep my hunting shots short and past 20 yards accuracy was not that consistent.
Took a Joel Turner clinic in May (after a shoot I shot mediocre in) I switched to gap. I'm a lot more consistent and feel very confident to shoot a pig out to 25 yards. Still figuring out my longer gaps for 3D but honestly the positive impact it has had there was pretty significant as well.
Only have killed five animals so far this year (our pigs moved down by the river I guess because of the drought) and only one using this method but I've placed decently in my last three shoots while still figuring out the gaps and tuning as it changed my draw length an inch or so.
Said I never would but after shooting over four pigs in a row early this year I had to change something.
GCook, curious ....... did you loose draw length or gain it in changing your method?
Lost an inch. Went from a high anchor at my temple to under my eye on cheek.
:thumbsup:
I was thinking that. Glad you got a system that is working for you and you are seeing good results!
I haven't seen the video on Jimmy Blackmon's method of marking the riser that you reference in your first post, Legolas. I'll have to look it up. Jimmy is well known for his videos on the fixed crawl, which is another method that is very useful for traditional bow hunting where most of the shots are within the range of 15-25 yards.
The rifleman taught me a method several years ago here on Tradgang that I still use, and I think he still uses too, that is very similar to the method you describe of marking the riser. This method is to use the top of the strike plate to aim the shot, similar to a mark on the riser, but perhaps a little easier to see. Using standard strike plates that either came with the bow or I have put on myself, I find that aiming with the top of the strike plate gives me a point on that is somewhere between 20-25 yards. It would be possible to trim the strike plate until the top was calibrated for a specific distance, like it would be if you make a mark on the riser. However, as long as I know from practice that the top of the strike plate represents point on at 22 yards (or whatever it turns out to be), I can use it to aim accurately at any distance I plan to hunt, from 15-30 yards, simply by holding the top of the strike plate slightly above, on, or below the spot I want to hit. Since I'm not changing anything on the bow or string, like I would if I used a fixed crawl, I can easily change to whatever other method of aiming I might want to use. Also, since I'm not using the point of the arrow to aim, I can use different lengths of arrows without changing anything, although of course arrows of different weights have different trajectories, but this doesn't change the POI much in the 15-25 yard range.
Every once and awhile McDave you come up with something that makes me want to grab by bow and run out and try !!!
I've always hunted shooting instinctive and really see no need to change. I can't see me trying to figure a gap or any other aiming method when a animal only offers a brief shot window.
It's getting easier with practice where out to 25 I hit the gap quicker and less thought so I'm hopeful it will become more "instinctive" over time.
But for 3D I'm constantly hitting animals I would only hope to before so it's beneficial.
It also made my alignment a little different and working on the back tension change has been a challenge as well. I expect some increase in DL as that improves.
Just focus on impact point, draw, release and follow through.
:campfire: :coffee: :archer2: :campfire:
Some of that stuff is too complicated. Harder than Chinese ritmetic. I just look where I want to hit and shoot. Yeh more I practice. The better I get.
Always been an instinctive shooter. Any attempt at aiming has always resulted in fliers for me.
For years I used the "grip it and rip it" method of snap shooting with terrible results, which always lead to me getting out of traditional archery. Around 3 years ago I got back into it and quickly changed to holding, aiming and shooting a fixed crawl for about 6 months until I finally swapped over to instinctive. If I ever make a change, it might be gap. I still have much improved before I'd consider changing anything at this point.
I have always shot instinctive Stopped hunting with trad bow for about 15 years and used sight on my compounds. Killed a bunch of stuff but never really liked the process.
Kept telling myself I did not have time in my busy life to stay proficient with traditional bows.
Well I have made time and enjoy the 20-30 arrows a day.
I look at the spot I want to hit. If I do my part the arrow will go there.
I have stuck with instinctive shooting for a lot of years.
A couple of years ago I was offered the chance to shoot Tom Clum's personal bow, a Poison Dart with (for me) his long skinny carbons.
I grouped quite well with it, good flight and all. I really liked that bow, by the way. But at twenty yards I was about eight inches low. Hmmm. It seems my vision was somehow subconsciously using the arrow tip. Don't know how else to explain it. The points weren't that heavy.
When I got home I took out my own bow and back to my normal shooting. But that did intrigue me.
Instinctive.
I'm pretty convinced we all aim, but some of us are in denial. :bigsmyl:
I agree. I aim. I look at the spot and shoot. That is my aiming method. The same way I throw a baseball. look at the glove and throw to it. I do not walk up and down the string, or crawl anywhere of shoot at the animals feet. For me my way is easier and I am too stubborn to learn those other ways. For my shooting at game at 15 yards or less it works great. Now guys shooting the way I described above will be better shots for sure past 15 yards. I will not deny that. That way is better for sure.
Quote from: BAK on July 09, 2022, 10:06:25 AM
I'm pretty convinced we all aim, but some of us are in denial. :bigsmyl:
Believe what you want, I don't really care.
It gets really old people telling other people how they shot, what they see and don't see.
Most of the time I don't even remember drawing the bow, much less where the arrow is.
I tried aiming once. It was scary! It was like I had no control. Same feeling as when I tried a release 37 years ago when I shot compound.
I went right back to instinctive and never tried it again. And yes, some of us look at nothing but the spot. Honest.
I also use a "mark on the riser" method. I call it a gap sight. I have several white dots on the riser for different yardages and then I shoot the windage by feel. I have tried a lot of different methods but my gap sight method seems to be the most consistent way to shoot for me.
As I understand what's being pointed out, if you have dots or markers on your bow
you are holding the bow vertically, so how does this work if you cant the bow.
I cant the bow at 45 deg look down the arrow, line up on target either under, point on,or above
depending on distance.
Split Vision, Split Finger, Deep Hook, Anchor middle finger in corner of mouth. Have been shooting this way for 53 years and see no reason to change. It works for me.
Quote from: UncasUK on July 10, 2022, 07:40:18 AM
As I understand what's being pointed out, if you have dots or markers on your bow
you are holding the bow vertically, so how does this work if you cant the bow.
I cant the bow at 45 deg look down the arrow, line up on target either under, point on,or above
depending on distance.
How is your shooting now? If I had to hold verticle I *might* have killed 1/4th of what I have over the years. I've shot animals with a horizontal can't and even a trotting hog 'reverse' cant.
I been shooting pure instinctive for over 50 years, it seems very natural to me. From the grip of the bow, my stance, my draw, my anchor, my release, and follow through is fluid and I hit my target most all the time. If I don't it was something in my mechanics of the shot I did wrong. I feel strongly that one must build his or her shot to make it feel comfortable and fluid to that person and be easy repeatable each and every shot. To increase accuracy pay attention to trajectory of your arrow this will help you in (Instinctive shooting)
I think what a few "instinctive" shooters forget is not everyone can shoot that way consistently. You may not be "aiming" or a better word might be "sighting" but your brain, eyes, muscle memory and experience is doing it without conscious thought. Just like many people cannot pitch shoes well, throw a baseball to a given point accurately or consistently make a free throw not everyone will be able to shoot without sighting.
Those who can, especially past 25 yards, are the exception.
GCook. Bingo
Quote from: GCook on July 11, 2022, 11:37:37 AM
I think what a few "instinctive" shooters forget is not everyone can shoot that way consistently. You may not be "aiming" or a better word might be "sighting" but your brain, eyes, muscle memory and experience is doing it without conscious thought. Just like many people cannot pitch shoes well, throw a baseball to a given point accurately or consistently make a free throw not everyone will be able to shoot without sighting.
Those who can, especially past 25 yards, are the exception.
I'm sure, but I'm not one of them. I also think that a few of those that can't shoot instinctive thinks nobody can. :campfire:
T, BINGO
Quote from: Terry Green on July 11, 2022, 07:27:45 AMHow is your shooting now? If I had to hold verticle I *might* have kill 1/4th of what I have over the years. I've shot animals with a horizontal can't and even a trotting hog 'reverse' cant.
Terry! I kilt my second deer last year reverse cant! Came by me at about 3 yards and bow was obstructed by the stand. Flipped it around and shot it reverse. I thought of your video. I actually have practiced it ever since. Only took 15 years to pay off. :biglaugh:
Quote from: varmint101 on July 11, 2022, 05:04:42 PM
Quote from: Terry Green on July 11, 2022, 07:27:45 AMHow is your shooting now? If I had to hold verticle I *might* have kill 1/4th of what I have over the years. I've shot animals with a horizontal can't and even a trotting hog 'reverse' cant.
Terry! I kilt my second deer last year reverse cant! Came by me at about 3 yards and bow was obstructed by the stand. Flipped it around and shot it reverse. I thought of your video. I actually have practiced it ever since. Only took 15 years to pay off. :biglaugh:
:jumper: :jumper: :jumper: :jumper: :jumper: :jumper: :jumper:
Sounds like you don't need to be worrying about any dots. :biglaugh:
Quote from: Terry Green on July 11, 2022, 03:19:54 PM
Quote from: GCook on July 11, 2022, 11:37:37 AM
I think what a few "instinctive" shooters forget is not everyone can shoot that way consistently. You may not be "aiming" or a better word might be "sighting" but your brain, eyes, muscle memory and experience is doing it without conscious thought. Just like many people cannot pitch shoes well, throw a baseball to a given point accurately or consistently make a free throw not everyone will be able to shoot without sighting.
Those who can, especially past 25 yards, are the exception.
I'm sure, but I'm not one of them. I also think that a few of those that can't shoot instinctive thinks nobody can. :campfire:
I agree. I've seen some lights out instinctive shooters who would challenge any gapper. However I'm not much past 20 yards. I envy those who can.
I also think we all aim. The difference is how we do it. Gap shooters, string walkers, etc. work out measured aim methodology using the conscious mind to the max. Others, such as instinctive shooters have shot at "the spot" enough times that the brain automatically adjusts the hold. If these guys let their subconscious mind do its work without too much external interference, their arrows go where intended. That's only my opinion. Personally, I believe that I use a sort of split vision (?) style. I don't have a naturally good hand/eye co-ordination when I draw, so I look at the point briefly to make sure it is more or less pointed at the target. Once I pick a spot, I no longer actually see the point and shoot like a pure instinctive shooter. In short, I think whether we deliberately line up a shot with the gap, etc. or use an instinctive point and shoot, we are aiming.
Sam, I aim with my eyes, and bring the equipment to me, and its just not limited to just 20 yards. My conscious mind has no idea where the arrow is. Hope to met ya some day GA boy. :campfire:
I do what Terry does
I never used any aiming methods even when I short compounds in the mid 80s.A guy was trying to show me how to use the sight on a compound and I just did not groove with it or really like it.So shot the compound with fingers and no sight.Thats how we did it in the nieghborhood and at camp wit with recurves.So I was used to not using a sight or aiming method.
I got into recurves and longbows in the early 90s and just shot them the same way I always had.Ofcourse I had to learn how to shoot them and that took some time and alot of practice.Not unlike shooting alot shots with a basketball or throwing a baseball etc.Most sports do not require a sight and thiers no place for them in most sports that do require accurracy and precision.Think about it.
To be a good instinctive shot requires good technique and in my mind lots and lots of shots to become natural at it and proficient.I used to shoot 200 arrows or more a day year round.Sure some talent helps as Mr. Cook pointed out and he made a good point.Some may and probably will do better with an aiming system and thats great just like shooting without an aiming system is great.No need to judge either way really.Instictive is really great for hunting especially in situations where things happen fast and you need to react and not think and those situations will happen if you hunt enough.
Have fun man and enjoy!
>>>-------------------->
I'm sure everyone aims, its just that some don't consciously aim. Some have a real hard time understanding that concept. :campfire:
I know I'm aiming because I am intently focused on my target, is there some subconscious reference point I am using ? probably, but I haven't figured that out yet
McDave well described the approach I use to get my arrow to hit where I want. I tried a variety of aiming styles from instinctive to gap at the target as well as crawling and this method of referencing the sideplate has been my go to for the past three years. My accuracy and consistency have never been better. The great thing about this method for me is that it works well for me in the deer woods and is legal at any 3D shoot that I attend. I should also say that as this has become ingrained it has become less of a hard reference and just something that I pick up in my secondary vision.
We are all wired differently and have individual learning styles and how we perceive stimuli, so what works best for one may not work for everyone. I wasn't happy with my shooting and felt that it had plateaued so I explored different approaches until I found what worked for me---and then ingrained it with lots of shooting every day. I always like to see others exploring ways to become better.
Finally, a topic that's never been discussed or argued about before. :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
Here's just another opinion that happens to be mine, so it is very highly respected and valued by at least one person.
Not everyone aims when shooting arrows but everyone does point their arrows when shooting. Aiming means using some (I'll call it artificial) device to aid in pointing...like a sight pin, arrow tip, knuckle, fingertip, dot or tape mark, riser edge, strike plate, etc. Gapping involves aiming since it relies on the air space between the arrow tip (or shaft), and the arrow point itself (artificial devices) to estimate where to point. Anything else that doesn't require any of these artificial aids to point the arrow at the mark is basically just pointing the arrow...some call it instinctive but regardless it does not require any sighting to assess where to send the arrow. With regard to aiming vs. pointing there is no such thing as 'gapstinctive' or 'split vision' types of instinctive, terms that are often cleverly used to mask what is simply a variation of aiming. Instinctive (not really but that's a common name given to it) truly is rather simple in nature...you look at the mark, point the arrow using the skills God gave you to do so...yes like throwing a ball or forking food into your mouth or looking over a car's hood to drive it), and rely on that 'picture' to complete the pointing and the shot. Simple in practice yes, simple in how it works...not so much. Beyond the interesting science of 'how' there's also a very real system involved in how one's body applies it, one that ironically everyone uses regularly even if without conscious thought. No amount of denial can change this reality, though many will try to wordsmith complicated denials. But there's no denying, you can direct arrows (or most any projectile) without 'aiming' them. And there's a satisfaction in doing so, in applying that 'natural pointing system' with regular success, that aiming simply has not and cannot match. It's part of the sneaky multitude of perks that keeping it real and low-tech brings.
Of course, there's no harm in aiming if that's your preference. But please, if you want to be a target shooting hero be transparent and consider forgetting the pretenses involved with '"I'm not really aiming my arrows just using my artificial devices to best advantage' approaches. Much better to just put a sight on your bow and enjoy the maximum precision that actual aiming hardware brings. The rest of us will wish you best of luck with your choice and be on our way, with arrows pointed with instinctive simplicity using bows also once regarded as simple sticks and strings (how ironic is that). That's about as close to furthering the idea of traditional as we're likely to get without actually defining the term itself (which for some reason we all seem loath to do). And I'm fine with that.
Nice TSP, very well said. :campfire:
Quote from: TSP on July 13, 2022, 10:51:12 PM
With regard to aiming vs. pointing there is no such thing as 'gapstinctive' or 'split vision' types of instinctive, terms that are often cleverly used to mask what is simply a variation of aiming.
One little correction, TSP. "Split vision" is the term popularized by Howard Hill to describe his aiming system. He never claimed that it was instinctive; in fact, he specifically stated that he was not an instinctive shooter. He used the term to make a distinction between his system of aiming and gap aiming, which he also didn't like. In gap aiming, gaps are calculated based on estimating the distance to the target and correlating that distance to a memorized or written chart of gaps. In split vision aiming, Howard placed the arrow point above, on, or below the spot he wanted to hit based on his previous experience with similar shots, without calculating anything. I suppose you could call the distance between where he was aiming and the point he wanted to hit a "gap" in common parlance, but the word has a more specific meaning in archery.
If these distinctions are not important to you, and you believe anyone who doesn't shoot instinctively should just use bow sights instead, that is your right. However, there are many of us who enjoy shooting in tournaments or hunting without using bow sights or shooting instinctively. I mean, it worked pretty well for Howard, and some of the rest of us would like to emulate him, or even change his method a little bit to suit ourselves. 😊
I started out gapping and did very well with it. But being strongly left eye dominant and strongly right handed, this meant closing my left eye. I switched over to instinctive and had some adaptation issues, and I don't group as well consistently but when hunting whitetails, I never felt closing one eye was the right thing to be doing. Also, gapping requires one to absolutely know the distance. 2 feet off can mean a complete miss, and I don't feel the need to drag a rangefinder around in the woods for a 20 yard shot.
Sorry, TSP. but I just can't accept your premise that instinctive is not an aiming method. I looked up the definition of aiming and it referred to pointing or directing a shot at the target. It did not stipulate the use of a mechanical sight or a physical calculation. A human brain can handle the computational requirements. I'm not trying to start an argument, but I do say that in one way or another we all aim, and yes that does include "pointing" the arrow at the target with the intent of hitting it.
McDave and Sam clear some smoke with this ....... excellent points.
Now the O.P. clearly asked ........ "What aiming method" do you use? If "aiming" is only for the target heros utilizing sights on there bows, then I suppose aiming is something that a 100% instinctive shooter does not do ..... so they have no aiming method? so the original question does not pertain to them so much? :campfire:
Quote from: LookMomNoSights on July 14, 2022, 11:47:29 AM
McDave and Sam clear some smoke with this ....... excellent points.
Now the O.P. clearly asked ........ "What aiming method" do you use? If "aiming" is only for the target heros utilizing sights on there bows, then I suppose aiming is something that a 100% instinctive shooter does not do ..... so they have no aiming method? so the original question does not pertain to them so much? :campfire:
I answered the question....
'I aim with my eyes'. :campfire:
Quote from: Terry Green on July 14, 2022, 12:37:45 PM
Quote from: LookMomNoSights on July 14, 2022, 11:47:29 AM
McDave and Sam clear some smoke with this ....... excellent points.
Now the O.P. clearly asked ........ "What aiming method" do you use? If "aiming" is only for the target heros utilizing sights on there bows, then I suppose aiming is something that a 100% instinctive shooter does not do ..... so they have no aiming method? so the original question does not pertain to them so much? :campfire:
I answered the question....
'I aim with my eyes'. :campfire:
:biglaugh: and there ya go, perfect! Maybe that's my answer as well, seeing as though I have a hard time explaining to someone who asks, how I aim and shoot accurately. I'm stealing your line Terry, just sayin' :thumbsup:
Quote from: Terry Green on July 14, 2022, 12:37:45 PM
I answered the question....
'I aim with my eyes'. :campfire:
Interesting perspective, and description. Because I've noticed since beginning to shoot 'instinctive' that I no longer have any visible perception of the bow, arrow or point, as opposed to when I was gapping (using the point to judge the gap) Both eyes are firmly fixed on the target.
Quote from: Captain*Kirk on July 14, 2022, 12:58:48 PM
Quote from: Terry Green on July 14, 2022, 12:37:45 PM
I answered the question....
'I aim with my eyes'. :campfire:
Interesting perspective, and description. Because I've noticed since beginning to shoot 'instinctive' that I no longer have any visible perception of the bow, arrow or point, as opposed to when I was gapping (using the point to judge the gap) Both eyes are firmly fixed on the target.
I'll mention again as I did in a spine post, Masters of the Bare Bow Vol II ........ Gary Davis talks about this aiming method and how the eyes cannot focus on something near and something far, at the same time. You only need to try that once to see that it's absolutely true. Now what someone can do though, is switch the focus back and forth, referencing both factors, before lets say committing to focusing on only one factor, such as the target, at the moment of the shot.
Quote from: LookMomNoSights on July 14, 2022, 01:10:20 PM
I'll mention again as I did in a spine post, Masters of the Bare Bow Vol II ........ Gary Davis talks about this aiming method and how the eyes cannot focus on something near and something far, at the same time. You only need to try that once to see that it's absolutely true. Now what someone can do though, is switch the focus back and forth, referencing both factors, before lets say committing to focusing on only one factor, such as the target, at the moment of the shot.
I can agree with this...when gapping, that was essentially what I was doing. Shifting between setting the gap and focusing on the target before release. Now, when shooting instinctively, I don't even look at the arrow.
Some good comments.
McDave, I think you misinterpreted my earlier post. I'm familiar with Hill's system and never said he shot instinctively (because he didn't). My point was that others today that purport to use his split vision system DO often suggest that he shot 'sort of' instinctively and seem to delight in also suggesting that his split vision gapping method is kind of pseudo-instinctive (my term). My belief (an opinion) is that one cannot use mechanical aides/devices as a necessary step to applying their 'aiming' approach and then claim they shoot 'almost' instinctively. It flies in the face of common sense. That's not a subjective view about anyone's choices (I care not if one aims or points, it's up to them) but rather a perspective based on the very real differences in aiming mechanically vs. pointing instinctively. One cannot have their cake and eat it too, at least not both at the same time.
Sam, its intersteing that in the vast and ever-evolving (may I say marginally chaotic) world of traditional archery one is hard-pressed to find a credible or at least widely accepted definition of what traditional archery actually is (and yes, I've tried), let alone what the finer points of aiming mean. And yet your first step in addressing the aiming question is to reach for the dictionary to look up the formal and quite generic meaning of 'aim' as if it can be applied directly without much forethought to the act of shooting an arrow? Lol, I think there's more than a little irony in that approach but hey, but I admire your attempt. At least its more credible than how many would approach it.
The differences between aiming and instinctive are real, we just choose to ignore them because its convenient to do so and avoids conflict in our own world of biases and personal convictions. I get that. With my take on the differences I'm not trying to belittle either of the approaches, just trying to clarify those real differences. No malice or slight-of-hand is intended.
How we direct our arrows does have a role in what we do. It deserves more clarity and attention than what we give it.
I am in general agreement with TSP's comments above.
However, on a slightly different subject, there have been a few recent comments among these posts pertaining to gap aiming that I take issue with.
When gap shooting, if the shooter's focus shifts between the spot to be hit and the point of the arrow, one should let down the shot and start over again. No good gap shooter does that; there is no way Howard Hill could have shot so accurately with so short a hold time if he had done that. If there is one thing that good gap shooters and good instinctive shooters agree on, it is that one's eye should remain focused on the spot from the moment aiming starts until the arrow is sticking out of the target.
It is true that one cannot focus on things at different distances at the same time. But just because one is not focusing on them doesn't mean that they go away; the image of the arrow point is still there in your out of focus peripheral vision, and that is what good gap shooters use to aim the shot. And that is what Howard Hill meant by "split vision:" an in-focus vision of the target at the same time there is an out-of-focus vision of the arrow point.
Some people find it easy to achieve split vision; others have to work at it, but most people, after they understand the concept, manage to do it without too much of a struggle.
Some instinctive shooters have the opposite problem of learning to ignore the arrow point until it seemingly vanishes. Some people evidently are unable to master this, and some of those people deny that it is even possible to ignore the arrow point to that degree, and that everybody who says they can do this are just trying to kid themselves and everyone else. Are some people really so ignorant that they truly believe that the only things that are possible are the things that they themselves can do?
Personally I've shot without sighting for the length of my traditional journey until the last two months and have been fairly successful in keeping meat in my and other folks freezers shooting that way. However I chose to make a change and although I shoot some 3D matches I don't consider myself a target hero or even much good at it because even using a gap system you have to be pretty good at judging distances. Still, at 35 yards and under I tend to be in foam more than not. Plus when it is flesh I need to be as sure as I can I put the arrow in the right spot. So even if they are as close as I always have shot without sighting (under 20 yards) having a way to be a bit more consistent makes sense to me.
And the comments about aiming at the ground and stuff is true, it's not really workable for me. So with a combination of anchor point and arrow length I can have my arrow point within 4" of where I want to hit from 12 to 25 yards. Under 12 I still just look at the spot I want to hit and the brain does it's thing.
I understand the satisfaction that comes from not sighting and letting my brain/eye/ body do it's thing and get it done. I also understand the disgust when somehow it fails to do it as well as I like and I lose a wounded animal.
What I don't understand is why guys who use the non sighting method of shooting look on those who use sighting methods with such disdain.
I also don't understand why those who can only use a sighting method don't believe others can shoot well without using an "aiming" or sighting method and want to go to such lengths to prove they actually do use one.
Why does it threaten folks what method someone else uses?
This is only an opinion that I have ........ I could care less how anybody gets their arrow to the target because I do it my way and it works for me and that's what I need to shoot animals or anytime I want to put an arrow on a spot. I don't care if you have a physical reference point on your bow that you use for gapping or you can put them in the kill or on the bullseye with no defined approach that you can explain to a person. We have the freedom to do what we want. Some enjoy trying new things, new methods, even after decades of going at it. Sometimes only for the purpose of understand an different way and sometimes to try and improve on something they are not totally satisfied with. Some have no desire to change anything whatsoever, ever .....especially if it all works for them. Good on all of it I say. What I feel (opinion) is that sometimes, and this is just an example: gap shooter vs. instinctive shooter - it can turn into the "well I used to walk to school, up hill both ways in 3ft of snow with no shoes" type of thing. Almost as if a true instinctive shooter is or should be regarded and recognized as "traditional"-er than someone who employs say a gaping method. I think that until you get a hard sight mounted to your bow with pins or aperture of some sort, you are shooting a bare bow and it's damn challenging. You know what I'll never not enjoy? Watching someone shoot a bare longbow or recurve with good form and put the arrows where they need to be with consistency. Two shooters on a line shooting right next to each other, putting arrows on the spot, one is just looking and one is gapping, but at a quick glance most couldn't tell the difference. The only person that really knows what their eyes are seeing is that person actually shooting the bow.
Split second shots made in the woods on game that result in meat in the freezer? With a bare bow? All very impressive (to me), both challenging, both respected.
If the bow is bare, it's cool to me. :archer2:
I have used an instinctive and/or gap method most of my life. It has worked well for me, but even so, I've always felt there could be something else that would enhance my accuracy. :dunno:
A few years ago, I watched a YouTube video of Zach with "the push archery" and he explained several methods of shooting/aiming styles. I had heard of string walking, but never took an interest or had anyone explain the mechanics of it. After watching how string walking is used/applied, I decided to give it a try. Much to my amazement, my shooting accuracy greatly improved. :thumbsup:
I've changed to shooting 3 fingers under and string walking. The only thing that I've ran into has been target panic, due to the thought process that goes with string walking. :banghead: I may end up taking one of those Joel Turner courses to get out of it.
I think the easiest way for me to describe the aiming process I use is subconscious aiming because outside of looking at the spot I want to hit I am not aware of any physical reference I am using. Some people would call this instinctive, but I believe instinctively aiming is not subconscious aiming. Although they are close and appear the same. The best example I can give is when Joel Turner asked my to point at a door in the distance. Just point, interestingly I was pointing at dead center of the door. I do not believe that was out of any instinct, but I agree with Joel it is how we are wired to subconsciously allow the mind to zero in on an object
I have been instinctive for 55 years, mostly bow hunt and only shoot targets to stay in shape a bit and keep my routine. I pick a spot, do not reference arrow or sight aid. There are many ways to get the job done, do what works best for you.
Relative to my 'there's a difference between aiming and pointing' convictions I think that whether or not an individual has firm views and beliefs about such things in their practice of 'traditional archery' speaks volumes about what traditional archery actually is or has potential to become. Indeed, how and why we practice almost anything in life says more about the substance of that practice than any word definition can accomplish. And therein lies the need for us to pay attention and be thoughtful about the how and why part of the things we do.
There is value and no small level of pride in feeling like there is something connecting us with the term traditional, something challenging, mentoring and even spiritual that we sort of feel but often stubbornly refuse to recognize. If present within us, that 'something' expresses itself in how we shoot, what we shoot, why we shoot and yes even in things like how we 'aim'...or not. It brings a sense of belonging and affirmation when we associate ourselves with a band of brothers otherwise know as 'trad'. On the one hand we are drawn to the idea of having a particular way of doing archery 'simply' as it once was, but on the other hand in the process of practicing it we often (intentionally or not) deny or even ridicule the concept in favor of pretending it has no meaning and makes no difference...for convenience or selfish motives or money/recognition. It is a peculiar thing this traditional archery, and like any other choices we must make it can define without words who we are as archers.
So is what we shoot, how we shoot, what types of gear we shoot and what mindset we generally have about shooting important to the practice itself? Of course it is. Otherwise what would be the point of identifying ourselves with sites like this having specific name references (like 'TradGang') highlighting it? This kind of name recognition psychology is not unlike a subconscious admission that things DO exist that set traditional apart from other forms or bow and arrow shooting. Of sorts, the term itself is a badge of honor that we like to wear proudly but don't always defend in public discussions or personal practice/ways of doing things. Perhaps we should.
It's no badge of anything. It's just a different discipline we choose.
We have the privilege of choosing a harder way because none of us or our families is gonna starve if we fail to take that deer or rabbit or pig or whatever.
It doesn't make any of us more of an archer, more of a hunter, more of a man or woman just because you shoot a "trad" bow. Much less how you determine the way you hit your intended target.
Those who think that putting down compound shooters or guys who use a sight or clicker or rest or . . . (fill in the blank) makes them somehow better have issues they should seek help for.
Pride goeth before the fall. For all of us.
I agree Cook, but I will say this....
When I gave up gun powder and went to the compound only, *I* became a better hunter...
When I gave up the compound for the tradbow *I* became an ever better hunter.
Ok, nobody is putting down anybody's way of shooting. I believe I've already said that and have explained as best I could the idea that what an individual chooses to do under their own cloak of traditional is up to them, while also describing some key aspects of simpler traditional (like pointing vs. aiming) that if nothing else are at least worthy of some consideration (again, it's just an opinion). No condemnation of one's choice of method or choice of approach has intentionally been suggested, except perhaps by a few participants who shall remain nameless. Choices reign, let's just leave it at that.
While true that not everyone holds the idea of 'simple' traditional in high regard or even admits there are any meaningful differences between it and other archery disciplines today, I offer the final follow-up.
Choosing to NOT see any differences, or choosing to NOT recognize any redeeming values to simpler stick and string mindsets and methods, is a viable choice but doesn't mean those differences or mindsets aren't real or don't have value. And choosing to regard simpler traditional as somehow an attack (? :knothead:?) on tech-based preferences, especially for the sake of protecting or promoting the latter, is illogical and wasn't why I commented. My intention was to objectively examine, and to some degree provide suggestions, for what traditional may be for those who believe that it's more than just an old-school idea without value. For those who don't believe in that then that's fine. But for sure, for this discussion the "You're biased against hi-tech!" back-door accusations are baseless and have no more place in this venue than they do in any other constructive dialog. In truth, there's only one way to logically approach discussion topics...either with an open-minded and constructive willingness to weigh the other side's views objectively and without condemnation, or not. I've no interest in doing or entertaining the latter.
And for the OP (Legolas), my apologies if I've commandeered your initial post in any way, that wasn't the intent. To the Administrator, I respect your authority for maintaining civility here (after all it's your site) and to that end please feel free to relocate or remove any of my comments to somewhere you feel is more appropriate. No problem at all. :thumbsup:
My subconscious absolutely runs the shot, like I said, I aim with my eyes. Like when I played basketball in school, I didn't have to consciously take note of where I was on the court or where my hands and arms were lined up, I just focused on the goal and my subconscious calculated the rest in a millisecond. I was 20% better from the field than from the free throw line. Too much time to 'think about it' at the free throw line for me.
I can draw an analogy from tennis, baseball etc as my subconscious runs the tennis stroke and whether to send it down the line(which I am not looking at) or across court as my subconscious knows where I'm at and calculates it all while I only focus on the ball.
Also in baseball, my subconscious knows where I am on the field and all I have to do is focus on the glove of the player I'm throwing to. I don't have to consciously do anything. I don't have to 'tell myself' when to let go. Same for me shooting the bow, again, the subconscious is running the shot. All I consciously do is notice when the window of opportunity opens while I'm all focused on the spot.
Everyone is different, some men figure the trajectory to the moon, and some fly the rockets. You wouldn't want to switch them at liftoff.
Some men are snipers and some men are gunslingers, both are able to get the job done. I'm just 100% gunslinger. It fits my make up, the game I chase and the way I chase.
:campfire:
Enjoyed reading this, I guess I'm a gun slinging sniper. Smooth motion up until release then fierce focus.
:campfire: :coffee: :archer2: :campfire:
Quote from: Terry Green on July 24, 2022, 07:37:29 AM
I agree Cook, but I will say this....
When I gave up gun powder and went to the compound only, *I* became a better hunter...
When I gave up the compound for the tradbow *I* became an ever better hunter.
I got better when I went to bowhunting as a primary. Difference is I didn't really hunt any further for the most part with the compound. A high percentage of my kill were under 20 yard shots. I've always valued bowhunting as a close and personal pursuit. However the power of the compound allowed me to take shots I wouldn't with a traditional bow (for example hard quartering) and I've become a more patient hunter and perhaps a happier one because I relaxed my need to chase bone and became more satisfied with how I choose to knowing it is harder (for me anyway) to take game cleanly with this gear. If nothing else even my practice is more engaging and satisfying with this equipment.
However if I had never used the rifle, the black powder, the compound, I wouldn't know the progression and understand the whole journey that many/most of us take to get to where we have chosen to be. That said when my ranch partners take a deer or pig with their equipment I'm excited because they have put away the rifle and are doing it with a bow. Even if it is modern archery equipment.
I understand it's a journey. And I have had a fun ride.
TSP I apologize if I read into your responses something that wasn't there or intended.
Cook, I enjoyed my progression as well, wouldn't take anything for it.
Bowhunting has always been 'up close and personal' for me. Yes, there are times that I have killed animals further than '20 yards', but also, when I did my stint with the compound no one I knew shot over 20- 25 yards. We never really practiced at longer distance.
However, I'm in the east where the perspective is different that Wyoming and 30 yards 'looks' like 20. Some one told me that when I went on my 1st antelope hunt, and they also told me to immediately start roving with my judo the day I got there and start shooting 30 and 40 yards to get the perspective down so 30 would look like 30 in my mind's eye.
I instantly related, and again due to basketball, as we always played in a school gym. Once we got to play in the Omni in Atlanta(long gone now) before Atlanta Hawks played. When we got there the place was so huge compared to what we were use to, the pre-warm up before the game warm up everyone was 'shooting air balls'. We all were coming up short. After that hour's worth of shooting, everything was back to normal, and our shooting was like being in our home gym. Our mind's eye had adjusted for the 'terrain' so to speak.
But yeah, we never would have considered taking shots with our compound like people do today. I saw a video over the weekend on youtube of a guy taking a shot from 65 yards at a bedded elk target and advocating it. He claimed his shot was perfect, but everyone in the comments said "shoulder' blade aint perfect".
Anyhow, I still hunt the same way with a trad bow, I haven't 'shortened' my distance or 'regulated' it just because I shoot trad. I worked hard to get accurate, but it still made me a better hunter all around. I don't worry if its 20 yards or not, as in WY my antelope was farther than that, but is was still a 'personal' bowhunt as the WY perspective made it so.
Great thread guys. :campfire:
I agree with what TG says. All those analogies are great. And for the record some are not good at hand eye things and that is ok. For them there are other aiming methods. For me It is so much simpler than having to know the yardage.
I reference my aiming method for hunting and 3D as split vision and it may be labeled incorrectly.
My point-on range for all my bows is 25 yards with exception of my self- bow.
I focus intently on the hair, feather or small spot that I wish to hit. Then I draw, anchor and set the window of light, using only my peripheral vision, between a silhouetted shaft and the target which I maintain focus.
For me, I have established that a ½" window of light will mark w/I an inch from 10 to 15 yards...I will focus slightly lower on closer targets. I use a ¼" window for 20 yards. The ½" and ¼" windows are not actually ¼" and ½". They are established windows that use. I don't know where the arrow tip is actually pointed, nor do I see what is in the view of the window. I just see an established window of light, like a shade opening or closing, from the focused-on target and the arrow shaft end silhouette...I don't look for the point. A very simple technique, accurate and less stressful technique that keeps my mind fully engaged on the target.
I am able to use the same two windows on all of my bows out to point-on. My range of bow set-up speeds is quite wide. Larry Yien taught me this aiming method over a decade ago and from then on, my competence level significantly climbed. One of my buddies uses this same aiming method and has one 3rd, two seconds and one 1st in the IBO Worlds.
Note: There are other aiming techniques that are more accurate. This aiming technique has personally never let me down in the field nor on the 3D range. Also, transitioning from 3D to the field or hunting with multiple bows during the season remains virtually seamless.
Yeah I quit watching a show called Western Extreme after the host shot a Kudu at 105 yards. There are some things that I believe just because I can, doesn't mean I should.
I believe my actions as a bowhunter can reflect on how someone sees the whole. Traditional bowhunters tend to be a conservative bunch. To me, that is a good thing.