Is Archery the new thing?

[SckizoBoy]

I'm not trying to be rude or anything, but I've honestly read your post 30 or so times, and I have no clue what you are trying to say.

Well, looking at that pic of Jeremy Renner his elbow is turned up as it would be naturally (applies only to men, however, differing physiology etc. etc. etc.). With a dead straight stance, he can't avoid whacking it on release, and since the bracers protect the forearm, they're rather useless in such a situation...

Those without the arm strength to turn their elbow in at full draw get around this by having an oh-so-slightly open stance (i.e. me...) which does nothing to hinder technique. Their drawlength drops by about half an inch but overall, it's negligible (except to the drawlength of course). You can typically identify this type of archer very easily... they can't help sticking their butts out... -_-

 

[game-lover]

I've always thought of archery as something really cool. In my fantasies, I learned it right up there with gymnastics.

Still plan on it one day. Just for the knowledge.

 

[subtlefuge]

I'm not trying to be rude or anything, but I've honestly read your post 30 or so times, and I have no clue what you are trying to say.

Well, looking at that pic of Jeremy Renner his elbow is turned up as it would be naturally (applies only to men, however, differing physiology etc. etc. etc.). With a dead straight stance, he can't avoid whacking it on release, and since the bracers protect the forearm, they're rather useless in such a situation...

Those without the arm strength to turn their elbow in at full draw get around this by having an oh-so-slightly open stance (i.e. me...) which does nothing to hinder technique. Their drawlength drops by about half an inch but overall, it's negligible (except to the drawlength of course). You can typically identify this type of archer very easily... they can't help sticking their butts out... -_-

That sounds a lot more comfortable than the way I was taught. Of course, maybe I was also taught that. It's been a while since I quit, and this thread is giving me mixed feelings about whether I should try to pick it up again.

I can empathize with the man though, he was probably taught by a right-handed teacher. It's tough to always have to mirror everything. Us lefties have strange relationships with sports equipment and instruction.

 

[SckizoBoy]

Still plan on it one day. Just for the knowledge.

'For the knowledge'...(!) My sister did a PhD on recurve bow mechanics and dynamics... pretty much for shits and giggles... I gather you don't intend to take it that far... ¬_¬

That sounds a lot more comfortable than the way I was taught. Of course, maybe I was also taught that. It's been a while since I quit, and this thread is giving me mixed feelings about whether I should try to pick it up again.

I can empathize with the man though, he was probably taught by a right-handed teacher. It's tough to always have to mirror everything. Us lefties have strange relationships with sports equipment and instruction.

Same sister... bizarrely she's as good left-handed as right-handed (ranked top 20 in the UK in the mid-2000's). She's naturally right-handed, but for some reason she shot compound exclusively left-handed.

Anyway, I'm not sure about 'comfortable', but the stance isn't uncomfortable. If anything, I end up weirdly cocking my hip. Since it's in the place of the feet, turn your right foot to point towards the target and move your left foot forward by about 5-10cm. Opens out your chest slightly for full draw and as I say, it definitely isn't uncomfortable...

I maintain the almost closed stance for compound shooting, mainly because post-wall the arm isn't straight.

 

[Sean Hollyman]

I'm not good at archery, but I won't bow down to those who are.

And I'm not going to be strung along by the media, I hate it.

You mean, you don't think those guys should be calling the shots? Yeah, I agree with that.

Can't tell if really good counter-pun or serious..

>_>

Yes, I'm not exactly comfortable with some guy with a bow pulling the strings.

Is that Dora the Explorer?

If it is, I'm bolting it.

I'd say it's her, but it's a shot in the dark.

But anyway, if you're with me, enlisting others, so we can fight these archers who menace in the media. Quite frankly, I quiver at the thought of them.

We could try to, but it would be a bit of a hit and miss.

Damnit I'm running out here..

Well, we must always aim high.

(Me, too. Maybe we should stop before we shoot ourselves in the foot.)

Or the knee, we wouldn't want anything stopping our adventures now would we..

Oh, I don't know, your jokes have all been bull's-eyes so far, at least in my opinion.

You have a point. But sooner or later, I'm going to get the shaft :/

 

[Cowabungaa]

Meh, compound bows. They look gorgeous, all the sexy mechanical stuff, but they make aiming and stuff way too easy from what I've heard. I mean, clicking arrows in place so you can aim at your leisure? Puh-lease, that's for wussies.

What do you mean by that?

I was told that with a compound bow you can just draw your boy and click it in place so that you don't have to keep the bow drawn with your own strength. Keep it cocked like a crossbow I imagine. Gives you all the time you need to aim and all that. My brother told me stories about compound archers dominating field shooting competitions because that sort of thing made it a lot easier. Hence why I want to go for ye olde longbow archery. Trying to get the best result you can with the simplest possible tool. I'm going to start with recurve though. You gotta start somewhere.

That and they're quite a bit cheaper. Easier to maintain when civilization falls as well. An important factor y'know. But they do look sexy, those compounds.

 

[TheMann]

Never really made the connection. I've always been intrigued by archer-type characters, so I just sort of rolled with it, I suppose. If they're on the rise, more fun for me.

I generally don't really enjoy memes, and often find them incredibly annoying. But this? This is pretty fucking funny. Speaking of The Hunger Games, I'd never heard of it until the movie came out. At that point I was thinking "Huh, people are treating this movie like it's kind of a big deal." I didn't know that it was based on a book and that that book was popular.

As for me, I'll stick with my rifle. I've done a bit of archery and it was fun, but in the end I'm practical. Maybe it's not as glamorous, but shells are cheaper than arrows, are far more accurate, and I can carry way more of them.

Oh,but here's sort of a cool thing. In a pinch, you can string a (not compound) bow with dental floss. I did that once and it worked great. You have to use damn near the entire roll of floss, but still, neat party trick.

 

[Gilhelmi]

Archery isn't in. People who don't know how to hold a fucking bow are in. Specifically the hunger games chick. That is mind-fuckingly bad.

This guy is a professional archery coach, he commented on a few trailers of movies with archers in 'm.
http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2012/03/avengers-hawkeye-archery/
http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2012/03/the-hunger-games-trailer/
He found the hunger game chick good (i haven't' seen the movie nor am I archer, so I can't tell) and hawk eye apparently sucked terribad.
Seeing as the female lead in Hunger Games was trained by a olympian athlete, I'd say they did the best the could

I don't mind archers. They can be cool.

I think you just won the thread. Congratz.

 

[Gilhelmi]

Archery isn't in. People who don't know how to hold a fucking bow are in. Specifically the hunger games chick. That is mind-fuckingly bad.

Sweet Jesus... I saw Hunger Games a while back, I regret that immensely, but more importantly, Holy shit you're right, Neither of her hands are doing anything remotely correct in terms of archery. The hand on the string looks like she's got 3 fingers underneath (which is all well and good despite the fact that the pinkie isn't meant to be one of the 3) but what the hell is she doing with her thumb and index finger touching the top of the darn arrow? And her hand on the actual bow isn't much better, she's guaranteed to send the arrow way off course.

For the type of bow she is using, she is correct. Some bows do not have an arrow notch, So her hand position is correct. She is probably a better archer then most of us, with that kind of bow.

 

[TheFinish]

I did archery for two years before quitting due to life (came in 2nd and 3rd in a couple of tournaments too). I like the fact that movies are giving the sport a healthy boost.

As far as technique, I couldn't care less. Yeah, some get it better than others, but considering all the things Hollywood gets goddam wrong (basically almost anything to do with guns and trigger safety, the most egregious example being the hollywood silencer.) I can look past it if the movie is entertaining.

What I do hate is the lack of love for crossbows and slings in movies. Those two weapons were a huge part of medieval and ancient warfare respectively, but they never get used enough.

 

[mad825]

My brother told me stories about compound archers dominating field shooting competitions because that sort of thing made it a lot easier.

Compounds, recuves and traditional bows are separated when in competitions and they have different size and types of target faces.

Compounds aren't the only "cheating" bow, recurves can have clickers attached which allows the archer to draw from the exactly the same length. nock, draw, click, loose. The sad thing is that all the "good" recurve archers use clickers.

 

[SckizoBoy]

I was told that with a compound bow you can just draw your boy and click it in place so that you don't have to keep the bow drawn with your own strength. Keep it cocked like a crossbow I imagine. Gives you all the time you need to aim and all that. My brother told me stories about compound archers dominating field shooting competitions because that sort of thing made it a lot easier. Hence why I want to go for ye olde longbow archery. Trying to get the best result you can with the simplest possible tool. I'm going to start with recurve though. You gotta start somewhere.

That and they're quite a bit cheaper. Easier to maintain when civilization falls as well. An important factor y'know. But they do look sexy, those compounds.

Where in hell did you hear that?! Excuse my indignance, but biggest load of BS (the first two-thirds of the first paragraph, the rest is fine)...! *_*

But no, compound bows tend to be a lot more powerful (50-75% that of a recurve bow depending on who's shooting what). However, they have what's known as a 'wall', which is that part of the draw (about two-thirds in) which you have to get through for the let off. The 'wall' is where/when the poundage really shows, but once you're through it, the poundage drops by roughly two-thirds, so even though you're not carrying 60-80lbs on your fingers, you're still carrying 20-30lbs. Sure this isn't much compared to most recurves at full-draw, but you're bow arm has to be very steady with this weight (compounds tend to be, with full accoutrements about 25-33% heavier in carrying weight than recurves) both in terms of draw-tension and gravity, as deviations from aim are magnified in compound archery due to the ridiculous acceleration as after release.

Plus, compound archers typically have a standard of their own. For the Gent's FITA (36 arrows at each distance 90(122)/70(122)/50(80)/30(80)m, a good recurve archer will get 1100-1250 (max 1440), but a good compound archer is expected to get 1300-1350 (I'm not sure if Clint Freeman's world record of 1409 is still standing, but fuck me, it's a daunting prospect).

So, compounds are expected to own recurves especially Outdoors, and if a recurve archer beats a compound all other aspects being equal, there's typically a divide of: wow, good on you (recurve); and man, you suck (compound). Besides, they're typically treated as separate disciplines in mainstream competition. So, there's a reason why compound archery doesn't exist as an Olympic sport, while recurve archery does.

 

[SckizoBoy]

Compounds aren't the only "cheating" bow, recurves can have clickers attached which allows the archer to draw from the exactly the same length. nock, draw, click, loose. The sad thing is that all the "good" recurve archers use clickers.

Depends how you define 'cheating'... you a barebow enthusiast or summat?

Don't know about you, but I find the 'click' tremendously comforting... =_=

...

Sudden memory... can't remember how I did it, but I shot out at least four button-tips on my bow... seriously, no idea how it happened...

 

[DugMachine]

Here's the way I see it. Guns are too loud and take too long to reload. Arrows, aside from screaming arrows, are quiet, and all you gotta do is pull another arrow out instead of reloading a cylinder or shoving in shells/clips. That's it.

While you're right on the loud part... guns are pretty much on average faster to 'reload' than a bow. We're not shooting old style civil war rifles. Once you learn how to properly put a clip in you can't really fuck it up.

 

[Daniel Ferguson]

Rule of Cool.

 

[LetalisK]

Archery isn't in. People who don't know how to hold a fucking bow are in. Specifically the hunger games chick. That is mind-fuckingly bad.

This guy is a professional archery coach, he commented on a few trailers of movies with archers in 'm.
http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2012/03/avengers-hawkeye-archery/
http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2012/03/the-hunger-games-trailer/
He found the hunger game chick good (i haven't' seen the movie nor am I archer, so I can't tell) and hawk eye apparently sucked terribad.
Seeing as the female lead in Hunger Games was trained by a olympian athlete, I'd say they did the best the could

I don't mind archers. They can be cool.

Yeah, earlier in this thread an archery teacher pointed out something similar. I've just never seen something like that though, and it seemed to go against a lot of the rules I was taught, which is why it seemed so bizarre.

edit: not drunk, I swear, typos corrected

 

[TheFinish]

Archery is definitley something you can't just "pick up."

Yup. Almost my entire first lesson was spent on posture exercises. It took about 50 minutes before I shot my first arrow.

See I don't get this.

When my mate brought his training bow back from France when we were in school. He gave me the thing and about 10 minutes of blundering around I was hitting targets fairly consistently. I'm not going to lie and say I'd have won any awards. But I certainly didn't need any armguards or stance lessons.

The Bow was made to be a pick up and fire weapon. Mass made for low skilled archers in war.

Yeah, if all you want is massive volley fire with unskilled conscripted peasants. Good archers, like the now legendary english longbowmen, required a lifetime of training and VERY expensive and good quality bows. Same with the Mongolian horse archers.

The true weapon for unwashed masses was the crossbow, when it was introduced. It was much easier to use with little practice, it required less strength from the users because they could aid themselves with various doodads to draw it and it could punch through heavier armour at shorter ranges, qualities that easily balanced their more expensive production costs.

 

[BabySinclair]

Um..... archery instructor here, few things. Three underneath is a technique that is actually taught, not that often mind you, but is a basic string technique. The pinkie, well, sometimes it's on the string, sometimes it's not. Also something that some archers need to do if they have problems pulling back the bowstring.

As for the other hand, lacking a notch or arrow rest, you have to use your own fingers to guide the arrow, this if from experience. I've shot like that fine with a 40lb bow that didn't have an arrow rest and no notch. Takes some adjustment and practice but that's what archers used to do most the time. They may have a slight notch to make it easier to keep it in place and standardize their shots some but it was a necessary technique.

My apologies for the inaccuracies, just basing most of it what I was taught over several years of archery, but yeah I only have experience with the one kind, that was with Recurve bows that had an arrow rest, I was taught the 3 fingers underneath but the pinkie was kinda useless in it. and with the hand on the actual bow, i'm still kind of confused about her index finger placement, it seems like her fingers would be touching some of the feather(right word to use for it?)

No problem, most people think the three under is a horrendous thing so I defend it rather rashly as I've used it several times with younger shooters despite "well taught" saying it doesn't work. The pinkie only really helps if one's fingers can't handle the strain, but you're right, it doesn't add much and it makes it harder.

The index finger is tricky. The timing is a pain and it took me a while to get the timing right because of the reason you brought up. If you can't move it in sequence you'll destroy your accuracy when the fetching (word you're looking for) hits your finger. The exact timing depends on the pound draw and draw length of the bow but is a necessary challenge for some bows.

My apologies if I came off harsh. The written word can't convey vocal tones very well, something I rely on heavily.