Archery | What's All That Stuff on Olympic Bows?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 ноя 2017
- As technology advances, so do bows. You can add power steering to your car, but you've still got to drive it.
Further viewing:
Using the Sight
• Archery | Using the Sight
Sighting Tips:
• Archery | Sighting Tips
Using the Clicker:
• Archery | Using the Cl...
Everything About Stabilisers:
• Archery | Stabiliser B...
===
Follow me on Facebook:
/ nusensei 
Спорт
Some frequent questions / comments / criticisms:
Q: If it doesn't make it easier, why use them?
A: Instead of seeing it pessimistically as making shots easier, think of it as making difficult shots possible. There are limitations that a traditional barebow shooter cannot overcome and the equipment becomes the bottleneck, and no amount of skill can shine through inherent inconsistencies. Freestyle mitigates equipment as a bottleneck and allows a skilled archer to demonstrate top results over longer distances.
Q: Isn't it cheating?
A: Cheating is when you break the rules. If the competition does not allow extra accessories, then this would be cheating. In the open recurve division, this is permitted, and therefore not cheating.
Q: Doesn't it give you an advantage?
A: Not against other freestyle archers. If you're comparing a freestyle archer to a barebow archer, the freestyle archer should be able to outshoot a barebow archer. However, these disciplines don't compete against each other.
Q: Doesn't it take less skill?
A: Everything requires skill. Barebow has its own set of skills, as does freestyle. Success is measured differently. What a barebow shooter might consider a very good score or grouping would not be acceptable to a freestyle shooter.
What about the berger button ?
It would be better if you actually demonstrate it than only explain what their functions are.
Obvious troll is obvious
All these people talking about 'history' and 'ancient times', glorifying the simplicity of bows back then. If any self-respecting military a thousand years ago was able to make this modern type of bow, they definitely would! Anything to gain an edge over the enemy. Guess why soldiers are using guns instead of bows these days? Because guns are better at killing. And no soldier goes out into the field, removing the sights on their gun. They won't voluntarily handicap themselves like that.
So the idea that it's somehow 'better' to stick to barebone bows is utterly ridiculous. And yes, while you may say it takes more skill to use a barebone to achieve the same feats as a modern bow, a modern bow really just opens up new possibilities. A modern, fully equipped bow, can do things that a barebone couldn't dream of. Which, again, if an ancient archer back in -2000 BC could choose between their simple stick&string, or use the modern things we have available now, he'd definitely go for the bow that allows him to shoot better and more consistently. He would use the bow that makes impossible feats actually possible.
Don't feed the trolls
"it is easy to become prejudiced against things we don't understand" I was totally not ready for some wisdom here
@@Macrocephaly They are though.
I am Macrocephaly it is though guns kill people and theyre scary af. Whip out a glock in front of a random crowd and they will be running and screaming
@@wildk5367 So do kitchen knives, your point?
@@Edge9404 Well kitchen knives are meant to be used in a kitchen, the only goal for guns is to kill/harm people/humans
@@pineappleowl Not for olympics, hobbies, collecting? What about bows then? Should we ban archery as a sport because it can hurt people? Same about Javelins.
I tell people the stabilizer is the wi-fi antenna and the clicker is the USB connection to the arrow's internal guidance system.
good one
Thank you.
Waltham1892 o they believe you?
With as many gadgets that have wi-fi and blue tooth?
I normally get their attention for a little while till they figure it out.
Keep up the good work :)
"The shot is 100% the archer, The bow does not shoot itself" I like this statement. Could be applied to a lot of things in life.
I don't do archery. I've never done archery. I've never really thought about archery. But I came across this channel, and you've made it interesting. You've earned my sub.
don't know how i got here either but im not mad
Same: I was watching video game commentaries and this popped up. Now I’m subscribed. Funny how RUclips works, lol.
Micah Magnus Exactly! I was watching Call Of Duty WW2 videos on how to aim better 😂
listening to J Cole now I'm a subscrber
The Heartfelt Kid lol! I was watching League of Legends commentary
"As technology advances, so do bows. You can add power steering to your car, but you've still got to drive it" I'm waiting for the new tesla self shooting BOW
Or an iron-man suit. Dinner, 220m, 2 o' clock, estimated 90lbs.
Fire radar-guided munition 1? Y/N
And further, you can add driving A.I. to your car, but you still have to sit in the car!
power steering was made because people got WEAKER. So your trying to justify the fact ppl couldn't turn the wheel WITHOUT power steering..
PS Truck drivers had a thing called ARM STRONG POWER STEERING.
they NEED that tech because they couldn't hit the broadside of a fuckin barn without it.
Yet these new innovations do nothing for the car or bows overall performance, more like making the lazy or less capable Archer or the Lazy Less capable driver be able to enjoy the same thing hardcore Archers or Drivers can easily do without .
StuffMadeHere channel has made a self-shooting bow.
9:20 "archery at its basis is using a bow to hit a target".
You're wrong. Archery is using an arrow to hit a target. If you hit your target with the bow you're way too close!
LOL j/k great video.
Jajaja i'm always too close
Wait, so I’ve been doing it wrong this whole time?! I thought you used the arrow to shoot the bow!
What I usually do is let go of the bow instead of the string and hit myself in the head with the bow.
Aha, so you're supposed to just throw the arrow by hand? You use the bow to shoot the arrow to hit the target.
Wait you guys use bows? I throw the target to the arrow
So it seems the best take away is that they are all variable removers. When trying to make a contest for pure aiming and shooting, all this tech makes perfect sense for that.
Julius - You are correct.
Yah but being able to control the variables is what shows true skill. Why don't we just add a mount for the bow and a mechanical arm to draw the bow in order to remove the last two variables? All those attachments simply make things easier for people who lack talent to preform better IMO.
@@budc.8172 imagine practicing harder than everyone else in the whole world just to lose because of a breeze. and Olympic doesn't come very often...
@@phuuc8075 is there a gun shooting kinda thing in Olympics? Cause I am pretty sure that there's nothing on the bullets to stop them from moving sideways because of wind
Brendan Cribbs ...so get an Olympic Recurve set up, and pay an entry fee to shoot a national level tournament using the Vegas face. If those shooters clearly lack talent, you should win handily.
After you get your ass handed to you on score, and have made a fool of yourself, please tell us how much talent those archers don’t have.
Or, simply don’t comment about things you clearly know fuck all about.
I compete in rifle. Certainly, adding improved optics, balance, weight and trigger adjustment make the shot easier and of better quality. Neither of us is "Cheating" if the match rules allow for them, but as you note, the accessories DO improve what the shooter can do.
This is why there are combat matches that insist on a stock weapon with only very modest tuning, issue sights and trigger range, and unlimited benchrest classes where anything goes.
And this is why in the archery I do, using a bare wooden bow only, similar to Medieval longbows, I will never be able to shoot as well as with an Olympic bow or compound hunting bow.
So I would agree it's not cheating if it's within the rules of the sport. But it certainly does improve the shooting, or there'd be no point. It just means everyone has the same options for improvement.
This is more akin to the target pistols that are super bulky and shoot .22 paper rounds. It's become a whole different thing from the origin. An Olympic bow or a (sometimes even bolt action) target pistol *might* kill game or a person, but it's designed for something else now.
@@jacobstaten2366 yea agree. Half loads in the rounds, waaay too much stability add-ons. Not sure the bows make a big difference, but Olympic pistol is a joke.
yeah i dont understand why it is called cheating since both competitors have access to it
I always tell people the clicker is like a tachometer - You can drive your old truck by feel and be just fine, but start racing and having an exact measurement available makes all the difference.
As a marksman, hitting a target at 600 yards with an M4 is an excellent show with iron sights. Its an an expected shot with optics. With irons sights I expect you to reliably hit a man sized target at 300 yards everytime. I expect you to hit a man sized target at 500 yards everytime with optics.
I dont hold iron sights and optics to the same standard. We dont use iron sights in warfare anymore because they are worse than optics. Archery is the same way.
Acey Kerr - the optics are non magnified in archery tho. I’m sure an experienced marksman will be able to make a shot at 500 with a magnified scope, but comparing iron sights and ‘red dots’ is basically just preference.
the optics in archery arnt magnefied, but its still not the same as choosing between iron sights and red dot. remember, a bow does not normally have iron sights, or any kind of sights at all. so your not choosing whether to use sight a or b, but rather weather to use a sight or not.
who the fuck shoots from the 600m line with a carbine lmfao. And alot of countries still do use iron sights in CQB
Those that complain that the equipment makes it easier have to realize that the equipment brings its own difficulty. Yes, stabilizers make it easier to steady the bow, but now you have to develop more strength to hold the bow up. The more weight the better, but it takes more strength so more training. Just like a stronger bow will be more accurate, but you need more strength to handle it. A sight helps you be more consistent, but there is no rear sight so you need to learn to hold the bow exactly level and the same every time or the sight does you no good. As he said, a bare bow archer is aiming too, they just use other things like the arrow or aiming points on the target to aim, the sight just makes it consistent. The clicker helps you measure your shot but it's VERY difficult to master, the most difficult part of target archery. What if your clicker goes off and your sight isn't on target? Good archers will start all over again, but like a good pitcher now they have wasted strength and time and will be more wobbly and under more pressure on each try. Using this equipment is like going from the family car to a formula one. They are very difficult and complicated to drive, you can't just hop in one and go, it takes years of training. The same is true with this equipment. Also, all these gadgets have to be balanced correctly for good shooting to the specific archer, you can't just pick up someone else's bow and arrows. The angle of each limb is adjustable too. You have to know how to tune your bow the way a good mechanic tunes a car and engine for balance and reaction. Archers usually go to specialists to help them with this, there are many complicated interactions that make an arrow shoot straight and efficiently. These things don't work for you out of the box and the improvements require more athleticism, as do the longer distances target archers use. Most target archers start with nothing and only gradually add this equipment as they learn to handle it. One thing not mentioned is that the one thing that has made target archery much more accurate is not the bow and all its gadgets but the arrows themselves. Modern lightweight materials that are absolutely consistent give accuracy that is not possible with organic materials like wood or bamboo. I would rather shoot a longbow with carbon arrows than an Olympic bow with wooden arrows.
more strength to hold it up.. lol dunno about you but I doubt my 100 pound draw longbow is going to snap because you hung a 10 gram sight on it.. or a 1 ounce balancing rod... lol
dunno about you but you cant get much stronger with those take down recurves, the riser is normally metal.
I am very happy to see this video. i criticized you before for using a completetely optimized set up, which upon reflection was very naive of me. I understand this was due to my misunderstanding about the competitive nature of the sport you are heavily involved in. I highly appreciate your acknowledgement that for many shooters these attachments arent necessary if you just want to throw some arrows down range as best you can. I can only justify that first displaying all of the frills without context made me think you were not considering people new to the hobby. Iteach a lot of people the basics but only wish i could share more like you can. You are clearly a knowledgeable bowman and i hope to see more.
I've watched so many different channels trying to find information about bows and shooting. You are by far the best! You explain everything in great detail with is great! Keep it up!
To know something well is one thing.
To know it well and being able to explain it perfectly so that complete noobs can understand it is a much higher skill.
This guy owns it!
I think of it like a racing car, there are different classes of car, different competition. Cars that they use in competition surely are much more advanced than everyday car that people use on road. But still what makes the champion is still skill and a bit of luck. I mean, you don't expect the pro athletes to use the same basic equipment as what hobbyist use, right? This applies to EVERY sport. Better shoes, better helmet, better gloves, etc. So why archery is an exception?
Depends on the class. F1? Nothing about those cars have any comparison to reality. The tolerances are so low, they have to be heated to operating temp before they can be started. On the other end of the spectrum, there are "spec" series -- spec miata, spec E30, spec E36, etc. -- that have very strictly defined standards for virtually every component of the car; the point being, all the cars are (supposed to be) functionally identical and _driver skill_ is what makes the difference. (those are boring races to watch.)
the difference is race cars are a lot HARDER to drive than road cars, not easier.
Noone said archery is an exception. If it's easier, it's easier. Nothing wrong with it and definitely no need to dance around it. Also, a ton of people are missing the point. No shit an F1 car is harder to control and drive. Would you say "an automatic assault rifle doesn't make it easier to kill someone because it's much harder to operate than it is to operate a knife", too? SMFH.
The 'sameness' is there are always those have a 'my way is the best way' attitude because they need to feel superior (maybe overcompensating for something, or just dealing with their own self-esteem issues). I own a sailboat that is made out of fiberglass and is a monohull. There are those that say fiberglass boats have no soul and those that think catamarans are the best. I used to lead a large motorcycle group and the Harley/BMW/Ducati/whatever groups always had their noses up in the air about the bike they rode being the best. I shoot guns and have seen similar Glock/Winchester/S&W rivalries.
Me .. I just buy whatever I can afford and enjoy and smile politely at the 'mine is best' discussions.
Which I think is basically what NUSensei is suggesting.
These bows are harder to shoot too, not easier, they are just more accurate. They are much heavier (the heavier the better so you better train for it), you have no rear sight so you have to learn how to hold your bow absolutely consistently and level or the front sight does you no good, learning to control the clicker is VERY difficult, what if your clicker goes of and you're not on target? And the stronger the bow the more accurate it is so they are all tryng to pull the strongest they can while holding absolutely still, and practicng over 200 arrows (4-5 hours a day) a day to do it. They do not shoot quickly like instinctive shooters.This equipment has made the sport much more athletic and demanding, there is nothing easier about modern target archery. They make it look smooth and easy, but it's not.
I went into archery wanting to do trad shooting. I really love it. My club told me to still give the other stuff a try, which i did with pleasure. Shooting with a sight was not a thing i thought i would like, but i do. It's relaxing and fun, and for a newbie, it allows me to focus on the shot process.
I still mostly wanna trad shoot, but grabbing a takedown recurve with a sight is now on my to-do list. Go with an open mind guys, you never know what you'll like :)
Good content and serves 2 purposes, 1. it helps explain the equipment to those interested in trying Olympic recurve and 2. gives trad/barebow shooters (or probably more accurately armchair trad/ barebow archers) something to bitch about.
There's no reason this should be in my recommended lists but this is the most interesting channel I've found in the last 6 months
After seeing this video I will definitively buy bow with iption to mount all those stuff on my bow. I see it as good option for future if nothing else. I can imagine that at some point I will get tired of getting "good grouping" and want more precision. That was nice video.
It looks like Bumblebee is staring at you through the shed window.
i also noticed it😂
Oh hey! This is exactly what I wanted to know. Great timing.
profile pic sauce pls~
I mean it IS ugly, but so am I so who am I to judge.
"I'm so ugly, but that's okay, 'cause so are you
We've broke our mirrors"
The Bamboozler y
The Bamboozler Bet you’re better at picking up the bill at KFC than that bow 👍
I mean... it is objectively easier so yes.
Jason Armstrong Ice broken between friends are mirrors broken between strangers.
As an NCAA rifle shooter it's amazing how ignorant some people are about high end shooting equipment, rifle and archery. People here are saying "bullshit, it all makes the shot easier. This stuff sucks" blah blah blah. Now I have no experience with bows, but I have been a rifle shooter for 7 years now. I have some great equipment, top of the line. However, with all my great equipment, why am I not all American? Could it be others have better equipment. Of course not, some people have old guns with few bells and whistles, and they're miles better than me. It is because they are better shooters, that's it. No matter how many bells and whistles one has, it doesn't make them better, or make the process any easier. All these things do are take away variables. People need to stop bashing this stuff and realize how difficult the sports are even with top of the line equipment.
No Name I would imagine that adding bells and whistles can even ADD variables. I can slap my friend’s PEQ 15 on my rifle, and all it does is make my arms more tired because I haven’t trained with this particular bell/whistle
𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝒑𝒐𝒊𝒏𝒕 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒘𝒐𝒓𝒅 𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝒊𝒔 [𝑬𝑨𝑺𝑰𝑬𝑹], 𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒔𝒆 𝒘𝒉𝒐 𝒃𝒓𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒇𝒍𝒂𝒘𝒆𝒅 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒐𝒏 𝒐𝒇 𝒂 𝒓𝒊𝒇𝒍𝒆 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒔𝒄𝒐𝒑𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒂 𝒃𝒐𝒘 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒇𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒚 𝒂𝒅𝒅-𝒐𝒏 𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝒅𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒊𝒅𝒆𝒂 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕, 𝒐𝒇 𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔𝒆 𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒐𝒑𝒕𝒊𝒄 𝒐𝒏 𝒂 𝒓𝒊𝒇𝒍𝒆 𝒅𝒐 𝑵𝑶𝑻 𝒎𝒂𝒌𝒆 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒂 [𝒃𝒆𝒕𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒐𝒕𝒆𝒓], 𝒃𝒖𝒕 𝒔𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒎𝒂𝒌𝒆 𝒊𝒕 𝑬𝑨𝑺𝑰𝑬𝑹 𝒕𝒐 𝒉𝒊𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒕𝒂𝒓𝒈𝒆𝒕 𝒂𝒄𝒄𝒖𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒍𝒚 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒍𝒚, 𝒘𝒉𝒊𝒄𝒉 𝒊𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒂𝒎𝒆 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒃𝒐𝒘, 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒂𝒅𝒅-𝒐𝒏 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒐𝒑𝒕𝒊𝒄 𝒅𝒐 𝒎𝒂𝒌𝒆 𝒊𝒕 𝑬𝑨𝑺𝑰𝑬𝑹 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒐𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒕𝒐 𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒊𝒆𝒗𝒆 𝒉𝒊𝒔 𝒋𝒐𝒃 𝒐𝒇 𝒉𝒊𝒕𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒕𝒂𝒓𝒈𝒆𝒕 𝒂𝒄𝒄𝒖𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒍𝒚 𝒎𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒐𝒇𝒕𝒆𝒏 𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉 𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒐𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒃𝒐𝒘 𝒊𝒏𝒗𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆𝒔 𝒎𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒆𝒇𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒕𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒏 𝒂 𝒓𝒊𝒇𝒍𝒆.
𝑵𝒐𝒘 𝒍𝒆𝒕 𝒔𝒂𝒚 𝑰 𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒐𝒕 𝒓𝒊𝒇𝒍𝒆𝒔 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒆 1974 𝒖𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒍 𝒏𝒐𝒘, 𝑰 𝒄𝒂𝒏𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒏 𝒔𝒆𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒃𝒖𝒍𝒍 𝒆𝒚𝒆 𝒂𝒕 100 𝒚𝒂𝒓𝒅𝒔 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒆 15 𝒚𝒆𝒂𝒓𝒔 𝒂𝒈𝒐, 𝒋𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝒂 𝒃𝒍𝒖𝒓𝒓𝒆𝒅 𝒑𝒊𝒆𝒄𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝒑𝒂𝒑𝒆𝒓, 𝒔𝒐 𝒎𝒚 𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒕𝒔 𝒈𝒐 𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒑𝒂𝒑𝒆𝒓, 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒐𝒑𝒕𝒊𝒄 𝑰 𝒄𝒂𝒏 𝒔𝒆𝒆 𝒄𝒍𝒆𝒂𝒓𝒍𝒚 𝒃𝒖𝒍𝒍𝒆𝒕 𝒉𝒐𝒍𝒆𝒔 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒄𝒂𝒏 𝒈𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒑 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒎 2-3 𝑴𝑶𝑨 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒂𝒏𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒎𝒚 30 𝒓𝒊𝒇𝒍𝒆𝒔 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒄𝒉𝒆𝒂𝒑 𝒂𝒎𝒎𝒐, 𝒔𝒐 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒔𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒊𝒕'𝒔 𝑬𝑨𝑺𝑰𝑬𝑹 𝒐𝒓 𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒍𝒅 𝑰 𝒂𝒍𝒔𝒐 𝒔𝒂𝒚 𝑰'𝒎 𝒂 𝒃𝒆𝒕𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒐𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒉𝒆𝒍𝒑 𝒐𝒇 𝒔𝒄𝒐𝒑𝒆𝒔 !?...𝒉𝒂𝒉𝒂.
@@bagheofminhrau
So many boxes
BA GHẺ of minhrâu ...individually, it is easier for you to shoot. But competitively, if everyone has the same gear, from an equipment standpoint, it’s a level playing field. How do you stack up to everyone else? Are you a competitor, or an “also tan”.
That’s why in tournament archery there are different classes.
@@geebee3d thank you. That's science--control and variable
Because this is the internet, I have watched a bunch of archery videos recently for no particular reason. Got me wondering what all the doo-dads did, so great video!
Quality content as always Nu! I can see lots of people asking these questions when they start an archery course.
40% of this channels viewers have never held a bow in their life but still watch it cause this guy makes archery sound so interesting
your videos have been very enjoyable to watch. very informative without trying to spin the information to fit a bias - a very uncommon thing these days. I always wondered about this exact topic when watching Olympic archery and appreciate learning. While Olympic style archery is not something I am interested in trying, you have inspired me to pick up my bare bones bow and get it some use for the first time in many years! Thanks for the videos and keep it up!
Wow. Such a great explanation...such a great video. So well done. Thank you.
That. Was one of the most informative videos I've seen on archery. Thanks!
I have absolutely no idea how this ended up in my suggested feed, but I'm glad it did. Great video.
it's fascinating how every question I had about archery has been answered by videos from this channel. Great job!
This is a definitely offtopic comment but I genuinely kept glancing at your window to see if something pops out.
I would have paid someone to wait 5 minutes in to stand up, wave, and sit back down.lol
Now that I've read it I can't stop looking
i thought it looks like Bumblebee's head looking out
Hey what’s that cute anime girl on your pfp lol
Yo! just found out about your channel. This is a great content even though I don't have a bow :)
ArtAway Same, i found out via Leonard French
Learning how to use a bow before handling one is very useful. Hope you will have nice time once you get one. :)
At the end of the day competition archery is not the same as combat or hunting archery. Brilliant video, people are prejudiced against things they don't understand and you have done a great job in explaining the art of Olympic level target archery.
This did a great job of explaining why all of these things should not be used or allowed.
Instead of removing skills, they remove luck and randomness from the competition.
YoungTheFish yes. But. With enough skill, you can manually remove luck and randomness.
Novel Ventures To a lower degree.
aktually except for the weights, they removed skill...
Novel didn't watch to the end?
I agree. No you cannot remove luck and randomness through skill alone. Shooting long distance without a sight, you have to aim in the sky way above the target, now it's a guess. You can get better at guessing but you will never be good, just like how pro golfers practice for decades but have only a 1 in 2500 chance of a hole in one.
You could paint marks on your bow to help you aim but that would be the same thing as a sight and is against the rules anyway.
Ok you could use stickbows at close range but now 90% of the archery world is shooting farther than you and you'd have tons of hunters saying "I shoot twice as far as these fools, why is this in the Olympics"
It's probably just me but I think olympic recurve looks amazing with all these trinkets on it, the same way I love steampunk style with all the gears and pipes.
Thank you so much!!! Watching archery in the olympics right now and I was wondering about the bows and everything they have… great explanation!
Thanks for the explanation of Olympic gadgets, the wisdom you shared and being interesting throughout.
I think the clicker is not so much a draw length indicator than a shot triggering device to take away the decision to release. You must have the skill to draw the bow consistently to same draw length to use the clicker properly. Shooting with a clicker makes the release a bit cleaner because it reduces the tendencies to anticipate the shot that can lead to all sorts of unwanted muscle tensions.
The purpose of the clicker is to give you a consistent release point in your draw. The further you draw back, the more pounds of energy are stored in the bow limbs. More pounds means more energy and the arrow travels faster with a flatter trajectory. In order to improve accuracy, you must minimize variables like draw length, torque, etc. The purpose of the clicker is to tell the archer when the draw is exactly at the same point as the previous draw. This standardizes the amount of energy in the release and provides the arrows with consistent thrust. The arrows are custom cut to match the archer's draw and the clicker is set to that point.
Without the clicker, each release has a different amount of energy imparted. The result is arrows that are vertically in line with the target but strike higher and lower depending on how far back the draw was on each release.
Compound bow archers don't have a clicker because they draw into the "wall", which provides a consistent release point.
O Medina You should be able to draw to same length with or without clicker to use it properly. The clicker is only a draw length indicator for relative beginners.
Clickers are used by everyone except the absolute beginners. 3 mm of draw length difference results in a full 2 rings worth of variance at 12 metres, let alone 70m.
You keep saying it doesn't make the shot easier but everything you described does make the shot easier. If you use a device that helps remove a element that would normally make a shot hard it does make the shot easier. Its like saying if you put a rifle in a gun clamp doesn't make it easier to hit the same spot because you still have to pull the trigger.
It only helps in consistency.
It's like putting a grip on your rifle. It doesn't immediately make you do better, but it does make you better at hitting consistently. You still have to aim and pull the trigger while keeing minimal muscle movement. Minor muscle movement is the major challenge, anyways, and there's not much you can do about that with add-ons besides clamping it in a vice.
what op said is right. but rather than making your best shots easier to land, it makes your worse shots become better shots.
Helps in consistency is the same as making it easier. If you can't hold the bow steady and stabilizers makes it possible for you to hold it steady it is making it easier for you. I'm not saying they make it easy, I'm saying it makes it easier. And things like sights would make someone instantly better. If they didn't make it easier people wouldn't use them.
I think what he meant is that the actual shot process is not easier. The movements you have to do in order to shoot correctly are the same, but because you eliminate exterior factors (like stabilization and aiming), the shot process has more importance. So yes it is easier to aim and stabilize the bow, but actually shooting the bow is not easier.
DTFlash think of it like a rifle... the sights and silencer and cushioned butt stock don't help you pull the trigger. With a bow, "pulling the trigger" is the hardest part. Hope this helps :)
Just what i need. You just answered all my question about archery in 9 minutes. I loved your videos and your detail explanation!!
Thank you so much for this excellent explanation. It could not be more succinct nor easy for the novice to understand. Great job!
My grandpa has a bow that shoots pellets. I usually call it "shotgun"
ROFLMAO... well I just maintained my seat...
You sir are an idiot for thinking a zombie would be able to tell apart a shotgun's sound from his own groans (zombies are 'brainless' for a reason)
If you don't make sound, you won't attract zombies.
If you don't attract zombies, you won't kill any.
If you don't kill any, you don't get any legendary loot.
See the problem? You gotta make noise to get the legendary loot.
You were once like me but then you took an arrow to the knee?
Politically Incorrect Brontosaurus i laughed more then i should have, now i cry.
this is very educational...but next time...add some demonstration shots like the clicker something...on how it works.....but still...Kudos.... :)
Check out the rest of my channel. I have videos going into every component in far more detail.
basically, a clicker is a small metal rod, like he said, that rests on top of the arrow, as you pull back the arrow, eventually the tip passes the clicker, meaning it no longer rests on the arrow and moves because it is slightly bent and springs back to its normal position or simply because of gravity, it depends, theres a few different ways can work, this tells the archer when exactly they have pulled back the bow past a certain point, personally i stopped using mine because i feel it can be a bit distracting
Thanks for the reply Lasnight......since I am just confused...if an arrow has standard height...you would know how far to pull back the string....anyways...I am just a noob and curious about archery...thanks again....
Rab. C. Nesbitt yes, of course, theres a bunch of other factors affecting your shot and even after pulling past the clicker you can still pull the string back farther (as well as the opposite) but its a clear indicator of when youve reached that specific point
Thank you so much for this information !! This question's been bugging me for years, and I'd even asked an ex-amateur shooter, whose reply was not satisfactory. Now I feel my question's been truly answered.
Good I found this. I always felt that add-on rod is support in case the archer falls face down
Stabilizers are meant to increase inertia, not just weight.
Newton's Third Law Username checks out.
that username
He is referencing Newton's 1st law here...
They're talking about the inertia of the bow, not the inertia of the arrow.
hii 488 the bow doesn't have inertia, it's not what's moving
I'm not an archer, and this is fascinating to watch, but I have to say, it really does seem like through the entire video you're saying "this attachment makes this particular aspect of archery easier... but it doesn't make it easier." Stabilizing rods add weight, which make it easier for the archer to keep the bow steady because lighter bows move a greater distance from smaller hand motions... but it doesn't make it easier. The clicker allows for you to pull the arrow to an appropriate length without having to rely on muscle memory or other inaccurate measures... but it doesn't make it easier. Maybe since I'm not an archer I don't understand, but it seems like these additions do in fact make certain things easier, but the word "easier" is considered profanity to archers and so you refuse to use it. Power steering makes it easier for me to drive my car; it's a force multiplier that keeps me from having to fight with the equipment to make a turn. That doesn't mean driving takes less skill. My trombone has an "f attachment" - pull the trigger and instantly add three more feet of tubing. It makes it easier for me to play certain passages and hit some notes that are otherwise impossible to play on the horn. But playing the trombone doesn't require less skill.
Am I making sense? These things all do indeed make things easier, by removing or mitigating certain difficulties. In the case of archery, you might (entirely fairly) say that removing these difficulties allows the sport to be purely about the athlete's abilities, instead of the limitations of the equipment. Easier doesn't mean (or shouldn't mean) that you're being accused of having less skill.
The problem is that people *will* say that "Easier = less skill", and that's the point that I'm trying to clarify. The point of difference between using power steering in a car and using a stabiliser on the bow is that the stabiliser (and other accessories) don't enhance the archer's abilities. The point that critics make about modern bows being "easier" assumes that the accessories do the work for the archer, thereby removing the archer from the equation. This is true to an extent for compound bows (which do provide mechanical advantage), but the shot process for a modern recurve is exactly the same as a traditional bow.
So why use the accessories? Rather than think about the accessories as making it "easier", think of them as enabling an archer to be more precise. This is the difference between drawing free-hand and drawing with tools: the free-hand artist may be able to draw reasonably straight lines for their artwork, but someone using tools can design more elaborate patterns.
There are more things that can check to make sure that you are doing things more consistently, but in doing so you *have* to be more precise in your movements. The accessories punish users who don't have good form. The stabilisers help the archer keep the bow steady, but they add mass to the bow and require more coordination and conditioning to use well. The sight provides a clearer reference point than an arrow tip or gap, but it requires consistent head positioning and memorisation of sight/string picture. The clicker is a draw length indicator, but the archer must have millimetre-precision to activate it, something that *is* accomplished by muscle memory.
Having extra steps and checks, in some aspects, make the shooting *harder* - and many learners will feel this way. This is why most prefer not to use modern bows. A barebow doesn't require such a strict and precise routine, but at the same time the user can't expect to be as precise by using broader movements.
In short, describing any of this as "easier" distorts the narrative and adds to the misconception that modern bows are automatic shooting platforms. If I had to use the word, it would be that it is easier to use a barebow, but easier to be more precise with an Olympic bow. The key, however, is *potential*. An Olympic archer has a higher skill ceiling, but using a modern Olympic bow doesn't boost them to a level above traditional shooters.
I like how he address both sides of the argument but never discredits either argument.
Great presentation. Not sure how I wound up here, but I'm glad I did. Keep up the great work!
I only shoot dragon slayer great bows
Danger Noodle then you took an arrow to the knee
its been a year and lot of people are still missing the target.
1st. it is not cheating, it not barebone bow vs configured olympic bow, every archer compete in their respective branches, this is really obvious.
2nd. it not any easier to shoot, which everyone seem to forget what it mean, shoot, which is drawing the bow and release, you need to still pick up the bow and draw the string with your own fingers to shoot, that never change regardless of what bow you use, all this stuff is only making the aim more reliable, you can give this bow to a complete beginner and he won't make any great shots as he would with a barebone bow, i know, i tried and fail miserable regardless of the shiny toy that the instructors lend for a day, on the other hand, her daughter which is 14 years old literally destroyed me, and shooting and aiming are 2 different things.
3rd. Less forgiving, because everyone has stabilizer and sights, you are expected to make that perfect shot as much as possible, if you mess up, that could cost you the gold. And don't even bring compound bow and their tournament score expectation, try to get all 10, anything less might send you home.
The Olympic bow and its design of attachment is to remove as much luck or second guessing in the equation and make you more engage in the micro adjustment as every adjustment counts since everyone as access too it, the skill gap isn't any different to barebow or any bow, each one require the basics and each one require attention in their own field, especially if you reach Olympic level of archery, these archer aren't playing at a tournament club,they aren't playing for themselves, they are playing for their country and it will broadcast live around the world where everyone will mostly watching and want them to bring the gold for their country. Every archer in Olympic is highly skilled regardless on which match or branch they are playing on.
Its not that they are cheating. Thats a straw man argument. If its legal in competition, its not cheating. Its more of a question of, with all those aids, is this diluting the skill of archery?
I didn't think I cared at all about Archery. Then I came across this channel. You are very informative with a very good voice for relaying that information.
Thanks mate, been watching the Olympic archery for the past two days, and indeed the 'clicker' was the only part I didn't understand. Thanks for the great video!
Nobody:
RUclips: hey let’s put this on everyone’s suggested videos even though they have never watched a single video on archery
Ofc those things make the shot easier, that's why everyone uses them. Anyone not using them will be at a severe disadvantage.
Only if competing against each other. These are different classifications. It's an even field.
Why use them to begin with? It's compensating for lack of skill in the whole shooting process. When you cut out or minimize factors that the shooter is supposed to take into consideration and adjust for, it cheapens it.
As a shooter, there are basic fundementals and skills that need to be honed to get off a good shot. All these additions compensate for these skills. Which in turn over time gets diminished, or disappears all together. It's like using iron sights (bare bow) vs M68 Aimpoint (no magnification). It's easier to just put the dot on the target and hit (little to no skill needed) as opposed to lining up the rear and front sights (high skills and fundementals needed).
If everyone in the competition uses the same gear, which in archery it is pretty much the case, there is no difference, everybody is back at the same playing field again.
Great info! Was just watching some olympic competitions and this is super helpful. Thanks NuSensei!
I have no interest is Archery but I have been loving these videos because of the way you put everything together and also the way you explain things is great. Keep up the good work man.
Do a video with Lars Andersen. :D
That longbow is flatbow actually.
Everywhere else in the world (i think) its a longbow. In the UK its a flatbow & an English longbow is a longbow.
I really enjoy your videos content and your speaking ability. You make an already interesting subject even more captivating. Thank you.
Excellent video, perhaps one of your best. Very educational.
Thank you.
Geez people are so petty. Use whatever you have at your disposal to win with out breaking the rules. It's simple and fair. And while I think having sticks jutt out of a bow looks dumb, now that I know why they're there I can appreciate them.
I agree there.. but I have a large problem, why are these skilless ppl who NEED all this extra shit on they're bow just to hit a target 10 yards away.. WHY do the NEED it..
yet here I am in a group of longbowmen putting arrows in a man size target 100 yards away.. no gimmicks, just a bow and arrows... tell me.. why am I not an olympic archer? BECAUSE I WONT STOOP DOWN TO THAT LEVEL
I know it isn't but it sounds like : We used to throw bullet in the past and this gun doesn't take away the effort. you still have to vaguely look in the direction of your target :D
Der Nesor That's over dramatic as fuck.
Der Nesor To a rational person (not you)...this is more like comparing a rifle with no scope to one with a scope.
Wow 2 comments, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings :D
Der Nesor Nice, "I don't have any arguments, but I won't shut up" person! Great eye, he made TWO comments, what a bitch, right?
holy smokes this community is toxic
thank you so much for the very informative video, hope you keep up making all this quality videos
Your videos are well done with good information and a relaxed style. I am enjoying them. Good job.
I'd rather see all olympic archers throwing the arrows by hand. Using a bow is cheating :^).
this sport calls "Darts", mate :)
@@sergeylyzhin543 You don't throw darts 70 meters.
With all due respect, it makes little sense to say that these devices don't help or compensate for lack of skill. As you yourself mentioned, 500 points for bare bow is great, 600 is the minimum for freestyle. I assume we used the exact same archer in both situations (otherwise the comparison makes even less sense) that's an increase of 20% minimum just from the bow (seemingly). Or did I miss something?
The bow itself isn't the definitive factor. If you literally give an Olympic bow to a barebow shooter, they probably would not be able to attain that increase automatically. Olympic recurve puts more demand on a different set of skills - ones that require more precision. In some ways, using an Olympic bow well takes more skill than using a barebow well.
So in the comparison you used two different archers?
But more to the point, it seems like (to use a mathematical analogy, since I love math) these extra devices only give a small multiplier to the skill. If the skill is low, or negative, they do little, or even hamper (if someone is very "untalented" for archery that could be a considered to be negative skill. Like what I have for drawing.). And also, they require a small investment of skill to be learned how to use in addition to using a differently built bow. To use another analogy, it's like shooting with a pistol and a rifle. Both can be .22 caliber, but they require very different skills to shoot accurately.
It's more than these things shouldn't be compared. They are more like different bows rather than the same bow with skill multipliers. A master barebow shooter might be able to achieve 500/720 for a 70m shoot; a master freestyle shooter should be able to achieve 650/720. However, a bad freestyle shooter will be out-shot by a good barebow shooter (which is literally what happens to me these days). While you're expected to perform to a higher standard than a barebow shooter, if you're bad, you're bad.
NUSensei Thank you, it makes more sense to me if you put it that way. I think I understand.
Marksmanship fundamentals are the same on a bow and on a rifle, Target acquisition, sight alignment, trigger control(string release?) and follow through are all on the shooter. An expensive rifle or bow wont matter very much if you have not mastered your fundamentals. Awesome video. Makes me want to get into Archery! New subscriber :)
thx for putting your knowledge in a public place! I have learned a lot from you. please post more so me and others can grow. please foregive our prejudice or preconceived notions on the art of archery.
let's add laser pointer to the bow. it isn't make any different to how to shoot the bow too .
They might put a lazer beam on the bicycle bow one day, they've got everything else on there.
A laser pointer only works at one distance. The arrow travels in an arc. The laser beam is a straight line. Where the two intersect is the distance the red dot is accurate.
It doesn't help, arrows don't travel like lasers. even guns with laser pointers require shooters to make adjustments, no difference.
Try it, I think you will be surprised at the result.
@@oscarmedina1303 It's the same for a sight pin. Eye, pin and a point on the target are a straight line. For Olympics, the distance is fixed and known. No adjustments for distance are needed during the competition.
"Doesnt make the shot easier"...what crap, a sight would not be used if it didn't do its job and make things easier...
Thank you for all your explanations, it's all clear now
I've been going through these videos since I just began practicing archery. I'm a pretty good shot with firearms and I gotta say there's definitely a learning curve. I can't fault anyone for using sights or anything that makes a shot more repeatable. I know I'm certainly getting frustrated with my lack of repeatability with my archery. I'm not bad and can stack a decent group, but as you said it feels more like I'm just spraying arrows at the target instead of getting a precise sight picture each time.
I appreciate the explanation. However, from a layman’s point of view, using gadgets to assist the accuracy of the shot does take away from the burden on the archer. The problem you have is that your gadgets are too obvious. A formula one car has gadgets to make driving fast more effective, but they aren’t as obvious. People will engage archery more if you can minimize the visibility of these aids.
you couldn't possibly think a formula 1 car looks more similar to a street car than this bow looks to a barebow? f1 cars look like fucking airplanes. You don't look at f1 and think "oh is this f1?" you know immediately because they are so unique.
First of all I am not a specialist at all.
What I got from that video is while barebow shooting and olimpic shooting look similar they are basicly two really diferent disciplines. I do understand why they use those addons in olimpics (To make the most spectacular scores obviously. After all pro sports competitions are not about fun and fair-play but about big money and sure results. Fun and games are for amateurs.)
And you say it is not cheating, and still bow does not shoot by itself... I agree, but technically all those accesories DO make them score better than bare bow so it is kindof cheating (or at least would be if bare bow would be competing with all those accesories. When everybody use the same cheats in the end nobody has the advantage.)
So to sum up my thoughts. Great video. Great explanation. I get it... But I will stay with my not 100% accurate traditional bows. It just seems more fun to me when with all the skill archer have he also need a lot of luck to overcome small irregularities. That is extending human skill to max.
I love his try humor it makes me happy
I know nothing of archery and this was very informational and the quip's ware entertaining. Thank you.
To the people saying that it is easier because it allows you shoot more accurately. Let's do a thought experiment do you think if you were given this bow; would you shoot better than if you were given a traditional bow. Maybe if you are already highly skilled you would, but for us amateurs, we would suck with both equally bad.It isn't a shortcut that let's you skip practicing and refining your skills. You need to put in the same anount of work. Just because the tool allows for the natural skill ceiling of humans to be raised doesn't mean it is easier. Just like shooting a sniper rifle isn't easier than a handhun. But if you judge an expert handgun shooter against a mediocre sniper shooter at the same distance shot, the sniper would win. That doesn't mean the sniper rifle is easier to use. It means the comparison is flawed. I don't think anyone would doubt the skill and talent it takes to be an expert sniper rifle shooter and I think most would agree that it is probably harder than becoming an expert hand gun shooter.
so its like steroids?
If steroids reduced random factors and made the competition more of a measurement of skill, yes
kinda what i meant also if every one use it and you dont then you dont have a chance so you have to use it to be competitve even if you dont like it
Depending on the steroid, it might. Say a competitor got to the finals more tired because he got a harder group/draw that was randomized, a steroid that makes him recover faster would in this case remove the random factor.
Not the correct comparison, it's like having a fully equipped gym rather than just your body and a couple of bars in a park.
Using a rifle to compete with an archer would be the appropriate comparison
Thank you for this awesome to learn why that extra is on the bow. Great presentation easy to understand and very informative
You explain things so clearly - thank you!
A quick summary for those watching in 2019:
A bow is crafted with one stick and one string...
However, the more sticks you attach to the bow after it is crafted, the more easier it will be use it...
Beginners use one stick but pros use up to 3 sticks maximum (because four sticks involves the fourth dimension)
The fourth dimension is related to time which is outside the control of man and therefore using more sticks is not considered cheating because arrows can not travel the speed of light.
The only exception is to this is if you draw a right ray in a vacuum which is an ongoing arrow, but is impossible because there is not enough ink to draw forever...
Also pens are not allowed in archery competitions... that would be cheating.
To conclude...
DO NOT READ THIS POST... it is pure nonsense :(
Very simple question. If you took that same Olympic bow and took off all the gadgets, could you still hit your target reliably?
Me, personally? I'd have to practice and become familiar with the gap and/or string spacing, but I could probably hit the target reliably. Shooting precisely, on the other hand...
NUSensei Then there you go. All those gadgets just take away the need to learn the gap and string spacing. Basically taking at least part of the shot for you.
Memorizing gaps and string spacing is practically the same as acquiring sight settings - and purist instinctive shooters will argue that "you may as well use a sight". That argument has been going on for decades.
The sight doesn't remove part of the shot. You align the sight and acquire a sight picture the same way someone who stringwalks or gap shoots acquires a string picture. Except you have a more precise point of reference than the flesh on your face or the arbitrary gap the arrow and the arrow point.
It is more difficult to shoot barebow.
That is fact. Most archers can learn to gap or string walk quite easily, and freestyle shooters should be able to switch if they had to. Inherently, a barebow shooter will never be able to attain the same level of accuracy. Freestyle switches the focus of the competition around : instead of counting how many points they gain, they track how many points they dropped (placing it between barebow expectations and compound standards).
People who don't want that stress shoot barebow and enjoy it.
Sorry for adding to an older thread, but, as a historical/traditional instinctive archer, I'd agree with NUSensei here. To me, any bow that is more modern than a 1-piece long wooden stick shooting other sticks, "you may as well use a sight" as you put it. Basically, to me, it's a whole other category. If we use the 720 scoring system you mentioned in the video, where 500/720 is a great barebow score, and 600/720 is a mediocre freestyle score, then, I suppose around 350-400/720 would be a very satisfying score for someone shooting a historical bow. Now, some might say "youre just a much worse archer, you are getting just over half of what the freestylers are getting", but you have to bear in mind it's two completely different worlds, and a completely different set of training and skills, ie; I've trained my body to instinctively know roughly where to bring the bow to hit the target at X distance, as a historical archer. I don't use techniques such as gaps, string walking/spacing, etc, I just focus on the target, and my body knows where to bring the bow to to hit the target. If someone, in, say, barebow, were to say to me that at X distance, their arrows are point-on, or 2 inches above the bullseye, while I understand what they mean, I would have no idea what mine would be. They've done measurements, and extra calculations relative to me. Then when you move onto freestyle, its a step above again as regards calculations and measurements, with sights, etc. Basically, even though at the very core, from historical to barebow to freestyle, just drawing a string back and loosing an arrow at a target, they are extremely different skill sets.
Now, I'm saying this as an instinctive, historical archer, so ofc I'm going to be biased and probably come off as a "purist", but historical is much more fun imo. Instead of tracking how many points are dropped, like freestylers, as a historical shooter, you're happy to just hit the target and get some points. In saying that though, some people would equate happiness to an extremely high score, and freestyle would be definitely more suited to them.
Sorry to write such a long comment, but to use a real life example(that doesnt really have anything to add to the argument, just anecdotal) from an outdoor, 3-d target(where the targets are foam animals), marked distance shoot, where you fire 1 arrow at the target, at say 40 yards, then move to 35, then 30, then 25, then move onto a different target that could be at 65 yards, or 10 yards, etc, I remember I was in a group with one Freestyle, two compounds and myself, a historical shooter. The maximum score possible for the day was 720. The freestyler, and the two compounds, all got scores around the 650 mark, and were extremely unhappy with it, even though for 9/10 arrows, they would get the maximum score. I on the other hand, got around 385, and was delighted that I had hit the bullseye a few times, and was just happy to be able to go out and shoot. They were forever measuring, and adjusting their sights, and checking their sheet with all their distances and measurements, whereas I just looked and shot. I'm not trying to bash on them, its just different strokes for different folks I guess.
Truly nice set of information sensei
dude you are a great drinking companion, I've learned much while drinking and watching your videos. thanks. For a moment I thought of training to be an archer but I realized that I'll forget that when I sober up in the morning. great videos still. better than most of ytube.
Yes NUSensei, we know you have a full up target bow with all the top of the line goodies.
You can stop rubbing it in now.
Jesh...
Not at all.
(yes).
who wouldnt be?
Close enough, and more specifically, better than my stuff.
And, NO I'M NOT JELLY!
I have a mop handle and dental floss.
Ok, that made me laugh. :'D
I think its just a bit arbitrary. If you use sights. Why not magnify them. And why not use collimator sights. If use clicker, why not just stop the arrow at that point and have trigger to release it. If use stabiliser, why not just mount the bow so you just need to pull the string. And while you're at it, why not use compound? If we are upping the engineering game. Compund is as good as it gets. But hey ho. We just made ourself a crossbow. Which is not a point. So we need to go back. But to what extent? I think the 60s got it right. Full wooden barebow recurve. A fancy stick. Why overcomplicate a sport which is all about practice and feel for a bow.
The fundamental difference between modern recurve and compound is that a compound bow provides a mechanical advantage; a recurve bow still depends on the shooter to go through the whole physical shot process. The counter-argument to your main point about wooden barebow recurves is that the old-fashioned wooden bows aren't that good. The archer might be very skilled, but the equipment is a bottleneck. The manufacturing is not consistent, the equipment will be more affected by shooting conditions, and there are too many variables for even the best of archers to control. What modern equipment does is isolate more of the archer's skill in shot execution, so that flaws really are the fault of the archer and not the equipment.
The same could be said for many other sports, such as cycling. There will always be purists who don't want to see progress through technology advancement and prefer things the old way.
I don't have a strong opinion on either side, but I have to say:
I've never seen anyone say we should go back to steel frame bicycles.
That's a good explanation. Eliminating uncontrollable variables through the precision manufacturing of the equipment allows practiced skills to be highlighted over talent and luck. It allows archery to be more of a sport than an art.
I got my start in recurve bows and then target shooting w/ compound bows. But never knew a lot of this. Thanks for explaining!
I don't think I ever thought too much about archery, but here I am for some reason and I found the video every interesting
While i learnt alot about all the added stuff on olypic bows, i can't help but disagree about some of your saying.
Yes, in the end, both bare bow and olypic bow shooters have to do the same job, and they are the one mayking the bow fonction, not the other way arround.
But, even though, an olympic bow is not easy to use (i assume, i ve never personnaly seen one) once mastered, this bow will be more accurate and more reliable than the usual traditionnal bare bow. It gives the olympic archer some kind of "unfair advantage" over the traditionnal archer when it comes to archery range competition.
Comparing thoses 2 bows is like comparing a modern sniper rifle and a musket. Boths require skill to use, but as far as result is concerned, one of them will have a much easier time beating the second.
I personally don't consider Olympic archery to be Archery at all. To me it is a discipline based on performance.
While the very purpose of archery is to hit a target at range, i can not picture myself an Olympic archer shooting anything else than a stationnary target.
Gotta be prepared for the zombie apocalypse boyz! :D
It's only unfair if they're facing off against each other. They don't.
TeteBruleeFR Why do you compare olympic archery and bare bow? It's like saying cars shouldn't be used in car races because there is other tottaly different discipline that have nothing to do with it and is never seen facing each other. Like, lets say running. Different discipline that never compets with car races, silly right? You did exactly same thing.
PS: All disciplines are based on performance, and that is the right way. lol
You actually made the point yourself.
All disciplines are based on performance. While athlets on racing competitions specialise their body to their own discipline it is fair competition, becouse even if a marathon man can not out perform a sprinter on short distance, so the sprinter can not outperform the marathon man on the long run.
But as for car racing, or archery, it is not fair anymore, because in the end, they all get to achieve the exact same goal. Which is way we ended up separated them into differents leagues. Because making them compet with one an other is not fair.
And this is why i don't like Olympic archery or F1 racing. They are all so focused on performance, they become completly helpless outside of their performing field.
It's just a personnal opinion though, where i prefer to train myself at something that might (or might not) get usefull someday, you are perfectly free to train yourself to beat some competitiv tournment, and i respect that. I will just stay outside of theses because i don't see the point.
TeteBruleeFR Ah, right. You just have problem that sports are all focused on doing one thing good rather than few badly. You know what? Whole world works this way LUL
Well, because you can not drive a F1 race car outside of a circuit, nor hunt efficiently in forest with an olympic bow, i do not consider doing what they do the "good" way.
It's flashy and untertaining, but it does not mean it's a good way.
Efficiency can be flashy and untertaining, but can also be boring af. On the same line, the never ending seek of better performance can be an efficient way to make progress, and most advencment have been made by people that seek to do what they do, better than they are used to do it.
But most modern sports are mostly just an endless race of beating the next highst score, and they are so focused on it they lost all sense of common sense or praticability... If you call it the good way to do one thing, i fear we can not come to an agreement.
"The shot is still 100% the archer, the bow will not shoot itself." Is a disingenuous statement. All of the accessories to the (bare) bow simplify technique and reduce variability. Yes, the actions of drawing and releasing are there, but stabilization, aiming and consistency of draw length are artificially enhanced vs a bare bow. I will always be less impressed with someone who produces incredible scores with the use of similar aids than someone who can shoot well without. (Similarly unimpressed by small caliber shooters who can drive nails compared to say, hunting caliber shooters who group well -air rifle should not be an olympic event!)
Like I said, different standards. Olympic shooters shoot at smaller targets at further distances. As much as we want to admire someone's skill without shooting aids, this is beyond what is considered to be realistically achievable for a human. A barebow shooter can hit the same target, but at that distance scores are almost randomised even if you keep everything on the board. An incredible score with a barebow is a disappointing score with a freestyle recurve bow.Barebow is impressive *if* they match the accuracy of a freestyle shooter, but they don't - tournament results around the world and the world records show a huge gap. In reality, barebow shooters don't expect that much of themselves, and they're happier that way.
What's wrong with a little variability? It's boring to see people hit bulls-eye after bulls-eye. Why not let the pros miss occasionally? Besides, obviously if they removed the allowance for these aids on the bows, they would adjust the targets to appropriately account for the loss of general accuracy. They wouldn't keep the targets as tiny and/or as far away. It reminds me of one of the reasons I don't like watching the NBA much. The rules are so skewed towards the offense, and the players' offense is so good on top of that, that it gets boring watching them be successful so much, even when the defenders are doing things right. Give me a sport where the offense and defense are well balanced so I get to enjoy both aspects of the sport, or in the case of archery, where I can see people in competition be both successful and fail to a meaningful degree, and that is entertaining.
People do miss. You do realise that what you see on TV are the world's best, right? Even at the top, the elite archers are *not* hitting the gold every shot - the world records show that. Meanwhile, the average participant at club level is far from guaranteed a hit on target. What you see is a lot easier than actually doing it yourself.
what part of the technique is simplified?
"Is a disingenuous statement.", is it? There's a subtly of distinction between ease of shooting an arrow (not affected) and ease of hitting the target accurately. In truth it doesn't make it easier, just more likely. And I don't think they are aritficially enhanced in any meaningful sense. Artificial enhancement would be some kind of muscle support, ectoskeleton etc This is a natural ehancement.
I've been shooting for the better part of a year and am only now getting into these videos. I recently put money down on my own bow instead of my coach's and am all too excited to see it assembled next session!!!
I like the way you explained this, it was logical and easy to understand.
As a non-archer, I think the sight and clicker are cheating.
Cheating is defined as breaking the rules. The rules are codified in the discipline and classification, not based on what people arbitrarily decide should be "fair".
As a non-archer...no one cares what you think about archery. Why would they? You have no idea what you're talking about.
NUSensei ...modern archers are not cheating persea... mordern archers with all these gadgets to help them do not have the actual skills like the traditional archers.
Uatemydoodle Olympic shooters use both clickers and sight to increase performance and still shoot at different accuracy so there isn't really a problem. Its like a car owner complaining how formula one racer has a much better car for racing.
"I think the sight and clicker are cheating" - Why stop there? When shooting game, one could argue that the only fair, non-cheating style is to do it without any gadgets at all. So toss the stabilizers, clicker, sight as well as the bow, string and arrow! The prey would agree!
They should take all that shit off. I get that it's a performance enhancer, but the idea has become the institution.
I agree I want to see him shoot a round with everything on then take it all off and shoot another round to see how much of a difference there is.
Why?
When everyone is using the same stuff it really doesn't matter either way.
Exactly, but regardless why do some people feel they should dictate what style of archery others choose to shoot, I don't see Olympic recurve or Compound shooters going around telling trad/barebow shooters what to do.
barebow shooting isn't consistent enough at long ranges to become an actual competitive sport. that's why you add things that increase consistency. with increased consistency no one has a reason to miss a shot unless they are underskilled, because there are much less flukes. you can easily discard the lower skilled archers this way, while with barebow shooting there is too much room for variation that you can easily cherrypick 2 archers shooting results and show that the lesser skilled archer actually performed better than the more skilled one.
Thanks for the information, Nu-sensei.
very educational video... this really got me pumped up to shooting sometime... thanks!