Main Discussion Area > English Warbow

Standarts of accuracy

<< < (8/12) > >>

markinengland:
Rod,
I think there is a very real difference between your style of target shooting, and the kind of shooting that warbows were designed for. You simply are not compairing like for like.
In target shooting a light bow is needed so the "machine" that is the archer can line up his arrow point on his marker in the grass or on the target or perhaps above the target often with the use of a rubber band on the bow to give elevation. Often the archer will have a different bow and arrow set for each distance to allow him to be point on. Once the bow is set in place and the the anchor achieved, the archer holds and gives a very controlled loose. By this type of method and only this type of method (as far as I am aware) do target longbow archers pulling light bows achieve this accuracy at 100 yards. In terms of style they are very fixed and upright, use foot marks and are identical to a high tech archer apart from the fact that they shoot a wooden bow and wooden arrows and not carbon recurved limbs with carbon arrows.
A heavy bow archer cannot use these same methods, and by default cannot be so repetively accurate at a fixed distance. This heavy bow archer can be accurate though in a way the target archer can't. I have shot alongside Mark Stretton on a number of occassions and have seen his accuracy both at Herstmonciuex and in field archery. He pulls a heavy bow, he can shoot very well at unknown distances short and long using instinct. He may not be as accurate on a GNAS shoot, but who cares, he doesn't do that kind of shooting!
I have seen archers being very accurate on roving shoots at long unknown distances. Getting three arrows within three feet of the mark is very good, expecially when shot in wind and over obstacles.
Basically each type of archer can do stuff the other can't. Both may be good, but there is no real point comparing the accuracy of one by asking them to shoot like the other. You may just as well bung one of your GNAS longbow archers in a wood or on a roving field, take all his sightijg aids off him and see if he can be as accurate as the heavy bow shooter!

Loki:
I've allways had a long draw,even when i was a nipper i used to drag the arrow back to my ear,broke loads of bows like that  ;D.I stopped frequenting archery clubs because the instructers were allways trying to change my style and been quite bullyish about it,its a bit intimadating when your only ten and some hairy arsed man with a tash is shouting and balling at you "your doing it wrong!!",bollocks i'm doing it right,its you who's doing it wrong!Allways trying to get you on the wheelies too!I hate archery clubs!! ;D.
You dont need to anchor at the face to be a good shot,instinctice shooting can be just as accurate,you dont aim a stone when you throw it do you?

markinengland:
Loki,
I was on a roving marks shoot with some friends on Sunday. The marks were gallon metal cans on poles. At one point we were in the right position to shoot at one of these cans from about 40 yards away. Downhill shot with a bank behind and about 40 yards or so away. I really wanted to hear that clang so shot trying to "aim" with a "proper" stance. My first five arrows missed. I decided to do just what came naturally, concentrated soley on the can, shot instinctively and clang, clang, clang my last three arrows all hit and pierced the can. Great feeling and all done without conscious aiming, "proper" anchor, "proper" style etc.
I know I couldn't have done that shot after shot, dozen after dozen, but when the shot needs to count instinct does work just fine!
Mark in England

Rod:
Mark,
I understand quite well the difference in shooting morer than one style, having been involved in shooting clout, target at a competitive standard in both GNAS and BLBS as well as unmarked distance field in NFAS.
Also I shot small game as a child when it was still legal and in later years shot a 90lb bow with somewhat less accuracy than I could achieve with a bow in the 50lb to 70lb range of draw weight.
Your comments reflect the fact that there are two levels of archery at present.
There are those who seem to have some expertise in a narrow field of archery, and there are those who can make a showing in every discipline, though not necessarily be the top man in all or indeed in any one of them.
Rod.

Rod:
To continue from my last post. Without intending a pun, I think Mark misses the point.
It is not about who can shoot the highest score and how they do it and with what draw weight.
It is about establishing a base for future reference that can provide an initial measure on consistent accuracy.
What would one of todays heavy bow shooters say is his captain were to post him some 100 paces out and said " stay here all day and shoot anyone whosticks their head out of that sally porte".
Would his reply have been that he was not accustomed to shooting repetitively at the same mark at a fixed distance? I don't think so..
He would be, like the two men who were sent home before Azincourt when they could not shoot 10 in a minute, on the next boat home.
Rod.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page