Bow Poundage

Kernowlad

Active member
I like the lack of form needed in field archery, sure you need a consistent anchor point and a few fundamentals but you could be stood on a skool, crouched to shoot under a branch, shooting across a lake from a tiny patch of grass, shooting steeply downhill but at 5 metres and more.
Every shot is different.
144 shots from the exact same spot (or even just 60) did funny things to my brain.
 


geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
There is no doubt that archery can be made less repetitive. Running doesn't have to mean sprinting to find the person with the highest top speed.It doesn't need to be on a track; it can last a couple of hours or a few seconds.
But, shooting at a target and repeating the process doesn't have to be boring.
Ken Dodd was asked if he got fed up of telling the same jokes when he was giving live performances.
he said that he always tried to tell the joke better than last time.
Shooting at the same x can be done so that every shot is a new attempt at the best shots you can make.
 


AndyW

Well-known member
Each to their own I say. I wouldn't and can't shoot repeatedly at the same thing with any degree of consistency, some can and enjoy it - to a dyed in the wool field archer it's anathema.
On a field course every target is a new challenge, you don't know how far - you may not know exactly what target and where the kill is. You are reinvigorated every time you step up to the red peg. The appreciation only builds with years - as we take our first foray we see a target to be "hit", once done, on to the next. With years, this has gotten old and deepens into a wry smile as you turn the corner and see the shot - you note the lay of the target and the consideration that's been put into fooling you. Seeing the thought process when the course layer/s grey cells tick over and come up with " and if i put it there instead.."
A course layers greatest achievement is to hear a mutter of "you sneaky b******" followed by a chuckle.
Hearing people state they've had a s**t day with a smile that would make God weep is the true joy of course layers.
 


KidCurry

Well-known member
Must have shot between 500,000 and 1Million arrows in the last 33 yrs, probaly nearer the million. I doubt one was ever perfect. But tomorrow, when I'm on the shooting line for the 5000th plus time, I know that perfect shot is just one more arrow away.
 


Last edited:

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Each shot can be viewed as another chance to do something enjoyable. Skimming stone across a pond; throwing a boomerang and getting it to return; planing a nice piece of wood with a sharp and well set up plane. Shooting a field course, is the equivalent of skimming stones a cross different ponds. Throwing a boomerang on different trajectories. Planing different pieces of wood, rather than the same piece, repeatedly.
Field and target are different but don't they both require the archer to enjoy making shots?
 


Geophys2

New member
I like the lack of form needed in field archery, sure you need a consistent anchor point and a few fundamentals but you could be stood on a skool, crouched to shoot under a branch, shooting across a lake from a tiny patch of grass, shooting steeply downhill but at 5 metres and more.
Every shot is different.
144 shots from the exact same spot (or even just 60) did funny things to my brain.
I can't really agree that field archery doesn't need great form. I have shot field archery for a number of years now to MB standard, and the whole basis of my shooting, and that of the better field archers, is a solid repeatable shooting form. The shoulders/arms/head position and the shot cycle must be consistent from shot to shot, no matter what the rest of the body is doing to make it. If you look at the top competitions, like the European or World championships it is always dominated by the top target archers, Brady Ellison, Jesse Broadwater and their like who have as near perfect form as you can get.

I use target archery as a training process to get good form as ingrained as possible.
 


Last edited:

ArcheryFox

Member
I like the lack of form needed in field archery, sure you need a consistent anchor point and a few fundamentals...
Every shot is different.
I have to beg to differ on this one, though Geophys2 pipped me to a number of the points I wanted to make just above.
For me it was only once I started shooting field that I began to see how certain aspects of my form affected the shot and was forced to tighten up some parts of my technique.

For example, with target you can get away with the scope sitting consistently to one side of the peep, but in field you're going to start missing the spot if you aren't paying attention to the peep alignment (and bubble on slopes) to centre them every end. Becoming more aware of this made be a better archer overall, both field and target.
And the fact that you can be put in so many different positions: up, down, feet together, facing downhill etc. for me means that your form has to be even more solid to be able to get your 'T' correct and your anchor/peep in the right position for a variety of shots leaning uphill or down. As stated above, the execution of the shot has to be the same whatever you are in to ensure you hit the distance you're aiming for.

Whilst good form is not sufficient for being a good field archer - you also need to know your distance estimation, cuts, how to change positions etc. - it is definitely necessary.
 


English Bowman

Well-known member
I'll be another one to add that form is critical for decent results at field archery, and not just for compound. I've been told that you can't shoot constantly well with a longbow because it's not got sights modern arrows centre shot etc by people who are using all of those reasons as an excuse for poor shooting. The reason that they miss isn't due to the bow style, it's due to poor form. They tend to either get upset or stand in awe of people like Alex Newes, Richard Powell or Steve Burke, when in fact with some work on getting decent form, many of them could get to this standard.
 


Geophys2

New member
I'll be another one to add that form is critical for decent results at field archery, and not just for compound. I've been told that you can't shoot constantly well with a longbow because it's not got sights modern arrows centre shot etc by people who are using all of those reasons as an excuse for poor shooting. The reason that they miss isn't due to the bow style, it's due to poor form. They tend to either get upset or stand in awe of people like Alex Newes, Richard Powell or Steve Burke, when in fact with some work on getting decent form, many of them could get to this standard.
Yes I only shoot unsighted bows for field archery, and often beat the sighted bow archers simply because I have worked hard on maintaining good form. With the other variables in field, I want to take good form out of the things I have to think about, I want it to be automatic.
 


Mark2

Member
I think people might choose lower draw weights if MB and GMB could be awarded for shorter distances. I am not sure the GMB's who gained them at 90m would approve.
I doubt they would approve of the handicap coming down either, if the general level of skill in the UK drops, but that's life. There is a danger UK archery gets stuck in the dark ages if there is not desire to change. Without change there is only a managed decline.
 


KidCurry

Well-known member
Mike Schloesser 2018 Tri world champion ... form over experience
I think people might choose lower draw weights if MB and GMB could be awarded for shorter distances. I am not sure the GMB's who gained them at 90m would approve.
I wouldn't mind unless it came down to 50m or less. But, IMO, it's easier to shoot MB/GMB at shorter distances therefore more people would submit them forcing the required qualifying scores to go higher.
 


Mark2

Member
I like the lack of form needed in field archery, sure you need a consistent anchor point and a few fundamentals...
Hellfire! you can start wars making statements like that. Granted you need a more flexible approach to field archery, but to say you need a lack of form. Does that mean the worse your form is, or complete lack of form say from a beginner, is better. The more your form improves the worse you get? I would say you need consistency under a wider range of conditions, such that your form needs more flexibility, but not lack of form!!!
 


Kernowlad

Active member
Hellfire! you can start wars making statements like that. Granted you need a more flexible approach to field archery, but to say you need a lack of form. Does that mean the worse your form is, or complete lack of form say from a beginner, is better. The more your form improves the worse you get? I would say you need consistency under a wider range of conditions, such that your form needs more flexibility, but not lack of form!!!
Okay then, flexibility in your form.
I think you all knew what I meant...
 


Top