Hype? WHAT hype?

[Pinelander]

When somebody gets it right with a bow design, and it's performance (not only speed, but shootability too) is considerably better than other bows.... why do so many tradtional bowhunters claim it is nothing but hype? I suppose there are different kinds of hype. The cool-looking hype. The quality craftsmanship hype. The speed hype. The accuracy hype. But there does seem to be a pattern. When somebody talks of beauty and craftsmanship, that is not considered hype. But when somebody talks of speed and performance, that is considered hype. I suppose objective data is always easier to pick apart than subjective data, since the latter is a personal thing. But it's also very clear that personal subjective views are used to claim "hype" of objective things, which in most cases are undeniable truths.... but still challenged as being "hype".

[Desert Archer]

Piney,

In this context I think the word "hype" is used the same as "spin" is used in political discussions. When the opposition states a fact you don't want to admit to, in the trad archery world it becomes "hype" and in the political arena it becomes "spin".

In both examples it is an easy way to ignore facts.

Dave

[Lambow]

I've taken note of this recent "Hype" thing also Dave.

To me, what it translates to is, jealousy & hatred.
Hatred of the metal riser, & jealous that it's a better shooter than their purtty bow. :2cents:

[Papabull]

The consequences for saying "it's hyped" are less severe than the consequences for flat-out accusing someone of lying. The latter can get you punched in the mouth - or sued.

The motivation, though..... It's human nature. You've got something you really like that shoots better than anything you've ever shot before but I don't have it and I like mine and even if I don't like mine... I'm not going to admit it so you must be "hyping" yours.

My dog's better'n your dog.... my dog's better'n yours.... my dog's better 'cause he... well... cause he's MY dog.... my dog's better'n yours.

[Martin Farrent]

It's just another example of vaguery in the face of the enemy, Piney.

As you note, those with a grudge towards the 'hyped' product very rarely come up with facts or figures, but will gladly contribute some totally phoney physics or trumped-up suspicions... to tell you, for example, why a certain design is flawed, but never to express that flaw in fps or percentage or any other unit one might measure and compare.

Last time I challenged somebody being nicely vague on the LW, he had the cheek to tell me to conduct the respective chrono tests myself (he had no figures of his own to offer). I mean: you doubt a silly theory, ask for proof... and get told to provide it yourself!

This behaviour annoys me quite a lot and using words like "hype" to degrade a product is only the tip of the dishonesty iceberg. It seems there are a thousand ways to diminish someone's merchandise and achievements without knowing the slightest thing about them.

And the saddest thing is this: By the time any debate gets down to the nitty-gritty, the twerp voicing the unfounded drivel has usually disappeared to other pastures - along with most other readers, who can't be bothered to get to the bottom of things but remember his pseudo thinking. Thus, he successfully sows the seed of doubt, despite his dismal ignorance.

Best,

Martin

[segolden]

Sounds like most of the scientific community today, actually. When confronted with facts or contrary theory, attack the person. SOP

[Martin Farrent]

It's also the cult of idol bashing, Segolden.

Idol worshippers can be pretty tiresome, but idol bashers are actually far more revolting. The former do no one any harm (in archery, at least, and discounting boredom as true harm), whereas the latter turn up as noble rebels against myth... but are often just plain destructive in their attacks on people's products and source of income.

When the myth is close to the truth, they lie and insinuate to smash it anyway. It seems to be in their make-up, an obsessive need to become anti-heroes and hence idols themselves.

"Hype" is what they talk about when nothing else works. Unless accompanied by some measurable evidence, it's often the vocabulary of an idol basher at the end of his wits.

Best,

Martin

[tuffshot]

Funny how hype works a 2 way street. The one with his new bow in hand hypes it up as being the best that he has ever shot and is the best of everything. Then someone else comes along and says his is the best and the first person has doubts in his mind as to whether the bow he has is "all that" after all.

Then again look at the classified on most sites. There is a whole list of hyped up bows there as well. Human nature is a very funny and complex thing.:)

[DAS]

Accusing someone of "Hype" is accusing them of intentionally over stating a point for some alterior motive. AKA, lying, just as Robert pointed out. It's the last feeble attempt to harm a product, person, or idea when all the facts fail to do so.
I've been very tempted to put $1,000 aside into a "prove it you idiot" fund. When this stuff comes up, just say "OK, you're so sure it's hype, bet me $1,000 your right", "you're so sure your arrow flight is perfect off that rug, slap a G note down and show me". There are hundreds of possiblities. That would shut them up in a heartbeat. The internet gives these fools access to the pulpit that they would never have in real life. If these arguments were in person, that is exactly what I would do. The cowards think they can hide behind an anonymous name and a keyboard. That is what empowers them. There's a lot to be said for public humiliation.

David

[JackNZ]

I ordered my DAS because of the "hype".
People I respect said it was good,some of them said it was better than good.
Man if it attracts words like "hype" then it must be REAL good.

Oh yeah,an it's got an alloy riser,,,,,I never noticed that,,,,,silly me.:D

[Van/TX]

Being the brain dead Redneck that I am, I'm really not sure what this thread is about. Still haven't figured out what a "traditional bowhunter" is. Thought at one time it was an archer who used a bow without wheels. Seems that is not the PC definition now:)

In any case the bow (whatever bow it is) will not make you a better archer. I see guys all the time jumping from bow to bow in hopes that it will make them shoot better. It ain't gonna happen:waaah:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/VanTX/Bows/JackHoward.jpg

To make a point. You will never master the bow that you are shooting now. As the Jack Howard bow illustrates above. Most any well constructed bow made within the last 50 years or so will get similar results.

It's up to the person pulling the string. I can see where certain types of bowhunters would not want a metal riser bow. It's not a slam to the bow it just may not suit their needs for whatever reason :) ...Van

[Pinelander]

Sorry Van, but I disagree.... there ARE bows out there that help an archer shoot better. The archer just needs to experience which ones those might be. Your premise that any particular bow cannot make an archer a better shooter is slanted too much towards the "it ain't the bow, it's the archer" mindset.

I know what type of bows help me be a better shooter and I would venture to guess that many archers are of the same opinion. There ARE bows out there that don't help much towards improving one's shooting skills. I've shot quality vintage bows and crappy ones too. I've shot modern quality bows and crappy ones too.... they are not all the same for ME, or for YOU.

My point regarding the "hype", is as I stated initally. When someone confirms to themselves that a particular bow has qualities that help them shoot better, there are always distractors that pull out all the stops to tell them they are only dreaming and it is nothing but hype. Thanks for confirming that..... :)

[Van/TX]

Piney no reason to be sorry if you disagree.

I understand of course that some bows or add on accessories to bows will make you shoot better (give you a better score). They will not make you a better archer as I said. Add a scope to a rifle, you will shoot better. A 16# bench rest type .22 rimfire will help you shoot better (smaller groups at 100 yrds), but it ain't gonna help you put more squirrels in the pot because you ain't gonna take that thing in woods to begin with.:) ...Van

Piney, what bow makes you shoot better?

[Harpman]

VAN, maybe this is off subject of this thread, but Your talking inherantly accurate, vs. usable accuracy....I agree with Your analogy, but I agree with Piney in the fact that some bows just plain shoot better, at least to one archer or another...Any well made bow, of any type, can be clamped into a shooting machine, and bust arrows at the ranges that bows are typically shot...This means nothing once that bow is clamped into the hand of a human being...Grip design and shape, deflex/reflex angles, length of bow, length of working limbs, mass weight, etc..etc.. all do something or other to make a bow more or less "SHOOTABLE"...at least in as much as it varies from shooter to shooter...I'm not a very good shot, but I can tell You without a doubt in My mind that I cannot shoot a longbow as well as I shoot a heavy risered recurve...I wish that I could, but that's not the case...Mostly due to the lighter mass weight, and the longbow having less deflex in the riser...I have much Respect for a good longbow shooter, just for that reason, and when I see an archer shooting really well with a longbow, it just brings up the thought in My mind of "How good could this Archer be with a good recurve in Their hands??"....A bow's inherant accuracy means diddly-squat if it cant help cover up the "Human Element"...Take care.....Jim

[Pinelander]

Van, that is a very good example as to how people can perceive advertising (then and now) as nothing but hype. I referred to "traditional bowhunters" because that is where I see the claims of hype more so than other venues. I suspect that much of the abuse of the term hype is based on traditionalists' hatred of the compound today with all it's gadgets and new-year models, and of course they have a tendency to assimilate progressive designs in recurves and longbows the same way.

Advertising is advertising.... but the quality and performance of a product is proven to be real by those that experience it. When a bow exhibits qualities that certain archers look for in a bow, it is not hype.... it is real. But there are many instances where those that have different personal preferences will just call it hype. I think it's just easier to call it that, than to find out for one's self.

What bows make me a better shooter? Obviously the ones I'm currently shooting.... or I wouldn't be shooting them. :)

The type of bows that help me shoot better are ones that are cut closer to center, the draw curve is very smooth all the way to anchor, more weight in hand (but not always), and exhibit very little hand shock. Also, bows that have above average limb performance allow me to shoot a heavier arrow out of a lower poundage bow (for hunting scenarios).

Yeah, I could shoot a 30 yr. old recurve and do OK hunting squirrels, deer, etc.... and I understand your thoughts about that. Hunting is a very spontaneous activity that requires an archer to be very familiar with his bow, equipment, and the game he hunts. But I also know that certain bows have qualities about them that actually do provide a better shooting platform (for me at least), and I would not refer to that as hype.

Obviously the archer has a big role to play... but so does the bow. Sometimes it makes me wonder just which hype is used the most... that of an archer's claimed shooting abilities or that of a bow's shooting performance. Now, where are those pointy rocks I was gonna lash on some cedars. :)

[Van/TX]

Piney, maybe if I understood what your definition of "traditional bowhunter" and "traditionalist" was then I might could figure out where you are coming from and why all the negative thoughts that you seem to bring here obviously from some other site. The name of this site is "TradTalk Traditional Archery" . Seems clear to me or maybe it's just hype:confused: :) ...Van

[Martin Farrent]

Van,

Isn't it pretty clear that a lot of us (including yourself) read and post elsewhere, and that attempting to strictly restrict our ideas and comments to what is being said on this particular site would be artificial? You know exactly which site Piney refers and you mean the same exact place when you say "some other site". That other site is part of the real archery world, as is this one, and therefore part of what we talk about here.

@all: It's interesting to note that the self-proclaimed prophets of 'anti-hype' are often rather willing to 'hype' some alternative to what they're bashing. There is currently much indication of this elsewhere ;) ... and no, Van ain't the culprit.

Best,

Martin

[Lambow]

Van,
I believe you're confusing "negative attitude" with the word honesty.
I've never seen any negativity in any of Piney's posts here. But he has made mention of negative threads on other sites, as i've done, and so has a lot of others on here, so what's the big deal. It's nothing to get all bent out of shape about. Is it ? It's just one mans honest opinion about things.

I'll try to help you out with the defintion of the word "Traditional Bowhunter", but i've got a feelin you already know what it means, but i'll try to school ya.

No wheels, pulleys, or cams.... Purty simple ain't it?

Traditionalist: Archers who shoot bows without cams,pulleys & wheels.

Have a good one Van, & try not to drink too much beer today.:)

[Van/TX]

Martin, the only archery sites I go to are traditional archery sites (like this one) so I suppose it's one of them:) ...Van

[Van/TX]

No wheels, pulleys, or cams.... Purty sinple ain't it?

Traditionalist: Archers who shoot bows without cams,pulleys & wheels.


That's my definition exactly Lambow:highfive: That's why the confusion on my part as to what Piney was talking about.

Gosh, I gotta wait another 30 minutes to pop my first beer. I have standards ya know :cheers: :lol: ...Van

[Van/TX]

I got another idea. Would someone direct me to the "other site" and the thread about "hype" that got some folks upset? I missed it (I always seem to miss the good ones) I'm sure it would clear up my confusion:cheers: 10 more minutes and counting:) ....Van

[Desert Archer]

The last one I remember was on LW and they were talking about David Soza's Dalaa and DAS. It was part of the usual put down by several individuals over there who can't pass up any chance to let the rest of the internet archery world know David's creations aren't really "traditional"... and he should just shoot a compound, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc and et nauseum.

Dave

[Pinelander]

Van, there was no recent thread about "hype" that I am aware of. But the instance that DA is speaking of is a good example.

When I speak of traditionalists and trad bowhunters.... I speak of archers and bowhunters that use recurves, longbows, and selfbows. But of course, there are some within that wide-breadth of a definition that will immediately scream "un-traditional!", "hype!", "do it the hard way!", or worse yet.... "go shoot a compound!".

I will now explain why this discussion came to mind with me (although I'm sure that some already know). I have shot Warf bows, Quinn bows, and have been shooting a DAS and several different Adcock ACS CX bows for the last several months and I AM THE HYPE BUSTER. Remember how some people used to claim these bows were just hype? Well, it ain't so....

One more "hype bow" to go and then the Hype Buster will rest....

Hype Buster out, LOL. :)

[Jaeger]

Before I got my hands on a DAS I figured at least some of it's reputation was hype. Then I shot one. It's no hype. It's easier for me to shoot that bow well, consistantly, than any other bow I have shot. It doesn't "make" me a better shooter but it allows me to more easily reach my potential.

I tried to convey this in a thread a few weeks ago on Tradgang. (something I rarely involve myself in) I got an email from a man who accused me of having a "compound attitude" and telling me I should just keep quiet. He felt attacked because I opined that people who are that wrapped up in what someone else is shooting is in a sad place. People are just silly.

I think the inclination to think things are hyped up is natural. I am, by nature, suspicious. With modern marketing such as it is things rarely live up to the hype that surrounds them. The DAS does. Sounds like the ACS does as well.

Piney, I think you should appoach the Discovery Channel for a new, traditional archery version of Mythbusters. Hell, you should do compound as well. There looks to be a lot of hype in that arena! What's your next conquest?

[Papabull]

No doubt about it, in this day and age there are hyped up products galore. I gets to the point that it's easy to assume everything that gets built-up like some super-product is bogus. But... sometimes there are REALLY good new things that come along, so "hype" isn't always just "hype". Sometimes it's just an honest appraisal.

[Martin Farrent]

But... sometimes there are REALLY good new things that come along, so "hype" isn't always just "hype". Sometimes it's just an honest appraisal.

And that's precisely what infuriates the idol bashers most, Robert. Notice that they rarely focus their venom on something mediocre - at least, the ones I'm think of right now.

Best,

Martin

[Pinelander]

Hoyt vs. Mathews.... battle royale of brand name loyalties. :goodvevil

It even gets to the point of name-calling, imagine that.

Black Swan belly-mount limbed bow (not hybrid or recurve, but actual longbow limbs). But of course it does have one of them there dang metal handles that has no soul. I did place an order for a case of that "Bow Soul" stuff, just in case. Hope it isn't just hype, or I'll have to re-sale it as the finest mineral water from that other side of the Mississippi. :eek:

[Jaeger]

You had better post pics and a review of that one. I heard it was coming and am anxious to hear more!

[waterone]

Over the last few years I have started to have a reaction to people who cry "hype" when conforted with anything new. Especially when it doesn't fir their view of the subject. In my field of utilities engineering, operations and maintence there has been more innovation in the past 5 years than in the past 50 years. to many in the field unaware of the changes and there are a LOT of them, anything that wasn't done 20-30 years ago is just "hype." the attitude that everything is over-advertised and marketed is kinda silly, really. Some of the stuff that was said about common household items back in the turn of the century was absolutley incredible. As I remember, some of the advertising of archery stuff back in the 60's was pretty incredible, too.

In some ways, if you examine even recent history, things are "hyped" a lot LESS than they were decades ago. the culture has a real problem with not having any knowledge, understanding and or respect for the efforts of people even 10 years ago, least of all those now.

What it boils down to, if you don't like something, it's easier to claim "hype" that examine a claim objectively and evaluate honestly. It seems to be even works in lesiure activities, where people have vested their identities to a product or idea. Think Trad is bad? Get in a discussion with some of these pseudo-professional bass fishermen, as to what is the better reel, the Daiwa, or Shimano reels, then ask for a cast-off! I have seen fist-fights ensue.

[Jeff Durnell]

It would seem, that as weapons get easier to use effectively, by effectively removing more and more of the human element, we'll 'realize' less of OUR potential, and more of the weapon's.

[Lambow]

It would seem, that as weapons get easier to use effectively, by effectively removing more and more of the human element, we'll 'realize' less of OUR potential, and more of the weapon's.

Yes... it's called a compound bow. A fella named Allen made the first one, and it has really evolved since... what, about 35 years ago?
I'll bet a lot of folks cried "Hype"back then!!!

[Pinelander]

Yep, that's the idea (at least mine anyways).... realizing more of the potential of the weapon I use. But I don't see where the human element is any less, unless of course I went out and shot a compound, LOL. Guess I must've missed something in regard to the human element during my previous 20 years of hunting deer with a recurve.

[Martin Farrent]

It's pretty easy to detect hype everywhere, if you pay too much attention to the idiots.

You have a mediocre product, so only idiots will hype it.

Enter the hype-bashers, who do a useful job in this case.

You have a great product, appreciated by a lot of people including some idiots. What the latter say sounds just like the stuff they issue about lesser achievements - so one is tempted to dismiss the product as more hype.

Which goes to show how important it is to listen to the right people.

Idol-bashers are guys who pose as hype-bashers, but are actually out to become idols themselves - the self-styled heroes of truth. ;) They exploit our mistrust of hype to play destructive games.

People who don't use the word "hype", but replace it with concepts like the "human element" must be very careful to know their own motives. If they're only rationalising ingrained conservatism or (worse) a tendency to idol-bash, they're not really out to help the community understand things better.

If, like Jeff (I trust), they're expressing the real sensations a piece of equipment generates for them, they should realise how subjective their verdict is. My own 'human element' is about doing the accuracy of the bow justice - if a bow facilitates better accuracy, I should also be achieving it. Good compound shooting is about the same principle. So is good selfbow shooting.

There is a human element about flying the Space Shuttle - it really doesn't operate itself. A very human element, if we take all the emotions most certainly involved. Yet the thing is packed with IT. Go figure... a plunger doesn't even need a battery, just a spring.

Best,

Martin

[Papabull]

It would seem, that as weapons get easier to use effectively, by effectively removing more and more of the human element, we'll 'realize' less of OUR potential, and more of the weapon's.

Yep. The crossbow immediately came to mind, But then again, it's been around awhile, too.

Actually, I see it quite differently. Shooting someting as effective and forgiving as possible allows a shooter to realize the most of his own potential because he's minimized the handicap of the weapon's inefficiency.

There are always selfbows and hickory shafts for people who feel that they shoot too well with more modern stuff.

[Jeff Durnell]

I have no agenda or vendetta against any bow maker or manufacturer. I think it's a wonderful thing, the variety of stickbows available to folks nowadays.... all of em.

I make all my own bows, for my own use, period. I can almost gaurentee that I'll not buy a bow the rest of my days, or ever put a single one of mine on the market. I don't read anyone's advertising or pay heed to folks who advocate the use of particular bows. Simply, it doesn't concern me because bows made by others don't interest me. So, any 'hype', real, perceived, or unwarranted accusations are for others to concern themselves with.

I was referring to the 'reaching my potential' thing. IMO, our potential is relevant to the kind of bow in our hand at any given time. One bare longbow will better help you realize your 'bare longbow' potential, while the next may impede that realization because it's tillered improperly, or doesn't fit your hand, draw length, or whatever. That part I agree with. Same goes within the realm of cutting edge recurves, or within the realm of compounds, or pistols, rifles, whatever. But to compare an INDIVIDUAL'S accuracy potential across a descernable 'weapon gap', say between a primitive selfbow and shoot arrows and a cutting edge recurve and carbons, or a barebow recurve and a tricked out compound, or a 30-30 Winchester and the best custom bench rifles, isn't a fair or accurate assessment of the abilities of the shooter. The weapons? Yes, perhaps... per application. But the more we allow any weapon and/or its periferals to do FOR us, the less of OUR ability the results of our shooting is going to truly represent.

:2cents:

[Martin Farrent]

But the more we allow any weapon and/or its periferals to do FOR us, the less of OUR ability the results of our shooting is going to truly represent.

I disagree, Jeff. One just stops measuring inches and looks at millimeters instead. :)

Best,

Martin

[Papabull]

Jeff, that's simply not the case. The better a bow shoots for you, the MORE of your potential you are able to liberate and the more your shooting represents your level of skill. Whether your sport is skiing, pool, shotgunning, archery, auto racing or golf, it matters not. Using the equipment that helps you maximize your potential is a critical part of the sport. Tiger Woods doesn't use antique yard sale clubs, although he could out hit you or I with them. Dale Earnheardt Jr. could outrace you with any similar car but has a whole team building and tuning the best he can get. I think it's would be a real stretch to say that their equipment does their winning for them, though.

It doesn't detract at all from your potential or personal ability to use equipment that performs best for you. I think it's a lot easier to insinuate that "I shoot better than it looks like I shoot because I don't shoot equipment that helps me shoot better" than it is to shoot equipment that does work well for you and accept that your shooting is just what it is with no "mitigating circumstances" built into your euqipment to lower expectations or improve ours or someone else's perception of our "ability".

[Bill Carlsen]

Lambow: I was around when the compound came out. Honestly, I don't remember a lot of hype....lots or curiosity and from what I remember a lot more of honest questioning and actual testing to see how the darn thing worked. Everyone that shot one the first time always shot over their intended target...the speed craze got into full swing. The reason why the compound gained favor was simple....it did what it claimed it could do and that was enough to get into the hands of many and in time it evolved. Many of us picked them up and shot them for a number of years. In time, I just came to the conclusion that the way I hunted and because they are high maintenance machines that my old recurves were better hunting weapons. What I see going on today in trad circles boggles my mind. Before compounds if a bow shot well it showed up in scores or as in Jack Howard's case, in pretty indesputeable demonstrations. Nowadays it seems that aesthetics and a lack of true understanding of what trad really is have many of us fighting amongst ourselves. Even when the evidence is clear egos seem to get in the way. I am sure that in the end the market place will determine what works and what doesn't. Some people will never really be willing to put their money down on a product that is clearly a better performer for their own personal reasons and if they have a deficient ego will fight to the bitter end and do mental/logical gymnastics in order to keep the arguement going. I've decided to back out of those messes. I know what works for me and I think I can often explain why and I do my best to do so. If someone wants to shoot inferior equipment they have the right to do it.:)

[Papabull]

If someone wants to shoot inferior equipment they have the right to do it.:)

http://www.tradtalk.com/mkportal/blog/images/33hank_hill_yup.jpg

[Jeff Durnell]

Papa, it IS the case and if anything, you helped me prove it.

"The better a bow shoots for you, the MORE of your potential you are able to liberate and the more your shooting represents your level of skill."

Yes, within that bow 'type'. Otherwise, no way... because the results ALSO represent the differences in the potential of the equipment. If it's not a fair gear comparison, then THOSE RESULTS cannot be used to fairly compare skill level. That's why competetive shoots maintain various gear classifications... why Nascars have restrictor plates, and why Junior won't be the only one putzin' around the track with a car off the lot.

Without some bow specs, you're insinuating that since a tricked-out compound, mechanical release, rangefinder, and all the other goodies shoots best for me, that it inherently offers the best representation of my archery skills. That's absolutely untrue. Too much of me, of the human element, of MY potential, is removed by the very things that make me more accurate with 'the compound' for it to be a fair assessment of my true archery skill. At that end of the spectrum, my actual results are due as much to the equipment's potential as the archer's. With a bare stick of a bow, a larger percentage of the results, good AND bad, are due to me.

"Whether your sport is skiing, pool, shotgunning, archery, auto racing or golf, it matters not. Using the equipment that helps you maximize your potential is a critical part of the sport. Tiger Woods doesn't use antique yard sale clubs, although he could out hit you or I with them. Dale Earnheardt Jr. could outrace you with any similar car but has a whole team building and tuning the best he can get. I think it's would be a real stretch to say that their equipment does their winning for them, though."

Right, as long as it's a fair competition, and a fair gear comparison, skills can usually be assessed by the results.

Apples to apples.

"It doesn't detract at all from your potential or personal ability to use equipment that performs best for you."

Right, it doesn't detract at all from your potential ability, within that gear classification. Whether you choose to shoot a metal-handled, fully adjustable Fita rig, or a selfbow off the knuckle, you should shoot the one in its respective catagory that performs well for you and continue to strive to do your best with it. Ain't that what this archery thing is all about?

"I think it's a lot easier to insinuate that "I shoot better than it looks like I shoot because I don't shoot equipment that helps me shoot better".

That ain't it at all. Don't get silly on me now, PB. I certainly won't 'appologize' for how I shoot with my chosen equipment. I don't shoot 'better than it looks' with selfbows and wooden arrows. I shoot them as well as I shoot them, period. I shoot better with laminated, heavy risered, centershot recurves with sights, better yet with loaded compounds and aluminum arrows, better yet with a flintlock, and better yet with centerfires.... The important part is, I assess my skills with each of them subjectively.

[Papabull]

OK, Jeff. For a minute there, it sounded like you were saying that the "easier" a bow is to shoot, the less of your own ability is involved, but now that I see that's not what you were saying, I agree. That's why I don't feel handicapped shooting a recurve bow against people with the more forgiving, faster, stable, quieter longbows. The longbow might be more forgiving, faster, easier to point, etc. etc. for other people, but I shoot better with the recurve, so that's what I like to shoot and we're as good an archer as our shooting says we are - no more and no less.

No one can claim any more skill than their shooting, itself demonstrates. I know I can't hit a ball like Tiger Woods and I sure as hell won't go around telling folks that if I used clubs like his that I could hit them like he could.... but just prefer a little more "challenge" so I use old beat up el cheapo clubs instead.

Now one nice thing about shooting really good quality well tuned and setup equipment is that you can see just how good you can really shoot. You don't have to guess or speculate. The bad thing, of course, is that you get to see just how bad you can shoot with equipment that leaves you no excuses and you don't have to guess or speculate about that, either. But the good outweighs the bad here...... because after you find out how good YOU can shoot without inferior equipment getting between you and your best performance, then you know where you stand no matter what you're shooting and you'll know if you don't shoot up to your potential, you know you still have the ability to improve. The bow might be more finicky and harder to get along with, but you know how good you really CAN shoot and I think that helps you get the most out of anything you shoot.

I figure it just makes sense for everyone to shoot whatever the heck they like to shoot and shoot it however they want to shoot it and they're as good at shooting as their shooting says they are and that's just that. If someone thinks they could shoot better with something else and doesn't want to shoot that something else because they think they would shoot better with it, I don't know what to tell 'em. That's a problem I can't solve for them.

[Papabull]

P.S. I think equipment classes are good. Especially the longbow, recruve classes. Some folks think longbows are so much better than recurves that it wouldn't be fair to recurve shooters to be in the same class and others think that recurves are so much superior that it wouldn't be fair to longbows to be in the same class.... either way...... it's good there are two classes, so people can compete against others with similar equipment.

What DOESN'T make sense to me is equipment restrictions that hamper performance. No arrow rests, no fast flight string, no tabs, etc... comes to mind. That's like a car race where the equipment restriction requires everyone pull one sparkplug out of their engine because one guy decided it would be cool to race his car that way.

[Jeff Durnell]

"I figure it just makes sense for everyone to shoot whatever the heck they like to shoot and shoot it however they want to shoot it and they're as good at shooting as their shooting says they are and that's just that."

.... as good at shooting the weapon they hold as their shooting proves them to be.

That, I would agree with.

"If someone thinks they could shoot better with something else and doesn't want to shoot that something else because they think they would shoot better with it, I don't know what to tell 'em. That's a problem I can't solve for them."

Here we go with the silly stuff again. I've never heard anyone say anything close to that, but you.

There are viable reasons to shoot weapons, or methods, that perhaps we're not the most accurate with, or more specifically, accurate with at equal distances. I do it most every time I shoot. I'm accurate to longer distances with many laminated recurves, and compounds of course, than I am with the selfbows I choose to hunt with. I simply prefer wooden bows and don't regret adjusting my effective hunting range to suit the weapon I'm carrying.

[Martin Farrent]

"If someone thinks they could shoot better with something else and doesn't want to shoot that something else because they think they would shoot better with it, I don't know what to tell 'em. That's a problem I can't solve for them."

Here we go with the silly stuff again. I've never heard anyone say anything close to that, but you.

Plenty of people say that, Jeff. They may not word it so disadvantageously, but that - basically - is what they mean when talking of the "hard way" or the "human factor".

(Btw, do you notice that you get a rather polite debate over here? Yes, I'm sure you do. I'm glad to see you show some appreciation by treating us all rather more cordially than you do elsewhere.)

Best,

Martin

[Papabull]

Jeff, people should shoot whatever they want whenever they want. I think we agree on that. And I think we agree that everything has a trade-off. You pick the equipment that gives you the tradeoffs you figure will work to your favor the most and run with it.

I must have been mistaken when I concluded that your remarks "But the more we allow any weapon and/or its periferals to do FOR us, the less of OUR ability the results of our shooting is going to truly represent." had something to do with our shooting results being a measure of our shooting ability. It sounded like you were saying that the more high performance the equipment, the less his shooting results represent his shooting skill. Now that we've cleared up that you're not saying that, I have to agree. Besides, until bows and peripherals shoot themselves, there's not much they do "for us". What does an arrow rest do "for us", that an arrow shelf doesn't do "for us", i.e. hold an arrow on the bow for launch. Sights help us aim, but even they don't aim "for us". They're just an aiming aid and, as such, put their users in a whole different equipment class, so that's not apples and apples, anyway.

There's nothing you can put on a stickbow that's going to transform it into a tackdriver. Only the shooter can do that and it's up to him how he chooses to utilize the equipment to get the best out of his own shooting. If someone thinks an arrow rest will help him shoot a lot better and he wants to shoot a lot better, then he should give it a whirl. If he thinks an arrow rest won't do anything for him because he can shoot as well without one, then he should keep doing what he's doing.

Ultimately, the shooter has to choose his equipment and set it up and that's all just part of the game. Play it how you like to play it. :) No one will get an argument out of me for enjoying the sport the way they want to.

[Pinelander]

So, are you guys trying to tell me that shooting a bow that has lots of goodies.... like excellent limb performance, or non hand shock stability, or 6 sight pins, or an adjustable flipper rest, or the holy grail of grips, or carbons with adjustable nocks, or durable footed cedar shafts, or a shorty stabilizer, or spalted sycamore veneers, or the finest string on earth, or inlaid bear prints in the riser, or deep core limbs, or antler limb bolts, or big beatiful shield feathers ...... has no bearing on how well an archer can shoot his bow?

Well, I'll be.... I guess all that stuff was just HYPE afterall. I won't tell anybody if you don't.... :D

[Larry Hatfield]

because someone shoots self bows, why is there an attitude that you have to be very close when hunting, and an acceptance that good shooting at distances is not going to happen?
golly, there were some pretty good scores shot sixty-seventy years ago with self bows in the york round.
do you think that somehow the quality of the wood is less now? i don't. i have seen some of the stuff being made and shot at flight shoots that disproves that theory.
maybe it's as simple as people not having the time and space to shoot their bow like we had back then. or maybe the power of mass communication has compressed expectations due to faulty information?
when i started archery there were no fences in the way of experimentation and no pre-supposed skill levels one could not get past with some work.
whats changed?
larry

[Papabull]

Yep. Just hype. :D

I don't know how many ways a guy can explain that if you want to shoot well then you might as well use equipment and techniques that are the best you can muster. What's best? Well, that's different discussion with room for endless debate. ;)

If you enjoy building bows, you might as well build the best you can of whatever style you build.

If you enjoy making selfbows, then you might as well shave the best wood you can to make the best bows you can.

The pursuit of excellence can take many different paths. Know which one you're on, savor it and try not to compare it to a different path because apples and oranges grow on very different trees. And if you don't care about being better at what you do, that's OK too. I just can't relate to it.

[van_fl]

Any crude bow, even a piece of dead willow branch will shoot arrows that are made the same in a repeatable place, at the same distance from spot on a target/game. The hard thing to do is to work at finding the spot and remembering how you did it.

[Wingman]

when i started archery there were no fences in the way of experimentation and no pre-supposed skill levels one could not get past with some work.
whats changed?

In my opinon, the introduction of the compound bow and its rejection by "traditional" archers. Prior to this, everything that came along was generally considered good and accepted. But after, there's suspicion toward anything "new", improved, or clearly the product of advanced technology.

Ken

[Van/TX]

And if you don't care about being better at what you do, that's OK too. I just can't relate to it.


Papa, we know that. Jeff knows that. Some folks just don't understand. And that's perfectly fine. What we (some folks) do is shoot at targets (paper, animals, whatever) with what we like to use. Not what makes us necessarly more successful (whatever that means) or score better. I like handgun hunting with a .357 revolver more than I do with one of my tack driving rifles. I could kill a lot more deer with the rifle. And do much better at the range. I really enjoy the "loud Bow" .357 (8" barrell Dan Wesson, it's bad ;-)) at 30 yard shots. I could do better with a .44 mag and a 2X scope at longer distance, etc, etc. I still don't understand what this thread is about. Did a search on LW and can't find anything related:waaah: Not that I really care:) ...Van

[Pinelander]

It's really OK if you don't understand what the discussion was about, Van. Although, I'm about as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, that you have a pretty good handle on the subject.

Participating with thoughtful ideas is always welcome, thanks. :)

[Pinelander]

:) Bow description-mania, from today's bow makers.... pretty cool, huh? :)

A. The end result is a highly specialized custom bow with a unique blend of performance, balance, speed, craftsmanship and unsurpassed beauty to meet the needs of today's most demanding traditional enthusiast. Over the years the design of each bow has been carefully refined to maximize the shooting dynamics and performance for peak efficiency.

B. Our longbows draw with exceptional smoothness and literally shoot "where you look". The dish-shaped grip gives a perfectly positive hand placement, resulting in an extremely accurate bow.

C. Lightning fast limbs are tapered and tillered as only ******bowyers know how. The result of all this effort and expertise is a bow.. a legendary bow...a ****** bow...whose smoothness, stability and speed will amaze you.

D. High performance in a stylish package, the ******* delivers an incredibly smooth release with unprecedented accuracy.

E. Tempered bamboo limbs and Cocobolo riser combine to create a stunning smoothness and blistering speed. A riser of Bolivian Rosewood and Zebrawood laminated with accent stripes, formed and molded to lock your hand in perfect position together with Red Elm or Black Locust limbs, produce a weapon that consumes you with it's performance and dazzling appearance.

F. Our bows are quietly efficient, soft in the hand, and did we mention FAST! We offer you what may be the most well rounded bows on the market, boasting speeds of over 210 fps AMO, while still maintaining shock free shooting comfort.

G. My recurves are not surpassed in smoothness of draw and arrow speed. These two items are most difficult to get in one bow. No one else has obtained this end.

H. If the archer wants to draw the same weight, the same arrow will fly faster and hit harder with a ******. Remember - There is no down side to increased performance. A good bow should be smooth on the draw and feel absolutely free of vibration and shock upon the loose. Our bows offer all of this plus great performance.

[rusty craine]

David did the homework to build a rather unique bow. The foundation was there he just had the good sense to reapply and reengineer the spects (that is in itself is unique - thinking outside the box)

the real fact is that if most of my hunting buddies got to see Michele Frangilli shoot they would be very un-impressed, I mean he uses a sight after all. Nothing wrong with my hunting buddies they just have no idea what kind of bow it takes to let an archer (not a shooting machine) shoot like Michele shoots. The other thing they don't have a clue about is just how good Michele really is. They assume that if they had his bow they would be able to win the hardware he has brought home.

any truthful statements you would say about Michele ability would be hype to my buddies...they actually think it is the bow. So this means it takes a fairly seasoned archer to pick up a bow and deside if this is indeed a special bow or what we are experiencing is the "New" bow syndrome.

Now really David bow in and of itself is no more "hype-able" than any of the high end FITA risers. the thing that is "hype-able" is David being able to think out of the box and use what he knew, sensed, guessed at that would put all the things together in a different package.

Now the problem is the "sales" side of the equation for David...a very hard place to be. He has money, time, reputation, and sales at steak. He has to defend the hype even if some half-wit like me has just put him in an ackward spot. In the end David will win if he can endure. the hype tag will go away and the true worth of his efforts will be the "line".

Of course while he is in the throws of getting his bow going, tradtional archery is the throws of growing up. I am really looking forward to campainging the "Elite" this spring if it gets out in time, the Elite is one of the sign posts that tradtional archery is growing up.

Talk, discuss, fuss all ya want or need to but mostly just have patience. The best is yet to come :)

rusty

[rusty craine]

certinally another sign post of traditional archery maturing is that Bob Morrison took some of David's idea to a ILF wooden riser. I had to have one of those too. I mean there are two sides of me. A poke and hope, I don't aim, instinctive dude and a "I aim like a big dog hiking his leg" dude. Now I can use my ILF limbs for my ego and my alter ego. That is progess :)

rusty -split personality- Craine

[Papabull]

Van/TX, you have a gift for taking things out of context, but while we're having fun taking things out of context, which bows do you think are .375 magnums and which ones are rifles?

I still don't understand what this thread is about.

I know that. Pinelander knows that. Some folks just don't understand and that's perfectly fine. That's why there are a lot of different threads. That way "some people" don't have to waste their time on threads they don't understand. :)

[Van/TX]

Van/TX, you have a gift for taking things out of context, but while we're having fun taking things out of context, which bows do you think are .375 magnums and which ones are rifles?


Thanks for the compliment, PB:) The rifles for me are like shooting instinctive with longbows. I've done it so much I don't even have to think about it. Running, standing still, no rest, it don't matter. Handgun, on the other hand I need to really concentrate and have a steady rest even at short range. I even made me a shooting stick to carry for that very purpose. I suppose the handgun in hunting conditions would equate to a heavy riser sighted recurve. Something that would require me to stop and think about what I was doing. More of a challenge I would suppose. I might try it some time:highfive: ...Van

[Papabull]

Thanks for the compliment, PB:) The rifles for me are like shooting instinctive with longbows. I've done it so much I don't even have to think about it. Running, standing still, no rest, it don't matter. Handgun, on the other hand I need to really concentrate and have a steady rest even at short range. I even made me a shooting stick to carry for that very purpose. I suppose the handgun in hunting conditions would equate to a heavy riser sighted recurve. Something that would require me to stop and think about what I was doing. More of a challenge I would suppose. I might try it some time:highfive: ...Van

You're welcome. Hey... You gotta do what you gotta do to keep it "the hard way" and maintain a good level of personal challenge and if you have to get a heavy riser recurve with sights to do it then you might as well go for it. Sounds like a plan. Of course, you could just take nothing but really long shots, too, and that might help increase the challenge without having to fork out the $$$ for a set of sights. Just a thought.

Just don't tell anyone if you do. The boys get rowdy when they hear about shots taken past spitting distance. I thought they were going to run Bob Gordon out of town on a rail when it was leaked that he double-lunged one at 40 yards a few years back.

:highfive:

[cthorness]

So much of this makes me laugh. Nothing personal, but I just don't get it. Is being asked why you don't shoot a compound really an insult? I have bows with and without stuff stuck on/thru them. I guess before coming here and some of the other "trad" sites I never gave it much thought. Before I hurt my shoulder, I shot longbows also. That was how I thought of it. Longbows also. I just don't understand. Archery is still about fun for most of us isn't it? I am ignorant about a lot of things, and this debate is just one more.

Papa Bull, are longbows really faster in general than recurves? I thought it was the opposite. I am often wrong about this stuff, so I have to ask.

[Papabull]

I don't think longbows are faster than recurves, but some people swear it's so. "why don't you just shoot a compound"? It depends on the purpose of the question. It's usually not an honest interrogative. In the same sense, why would someone feel insulted if they were asked "why don't you just hide some of your arrows under leaves and break the rest now and save yourself the cost of paying to shoot the course"? It's not really suggesting a way for them to save money. It's really telling them that as an archer, they truly suck.

[cthorness]

[QUOTE=PapaBull]. That's why I don't feel handicapped shooting a recurve bow against people with the more forgiving, faster, stable, quieter longbows. The longbow might be more forgiving, faster, easier to point, etc. etc. for other people, but I shoot better with the recurve, so that's what I like to shoot and we're as good an archer as our shooting says we are - no more and no less.


PB I misread your post, sorry. I understand the intent behind the comment about compounds, I just am surprised everytime I hear or read it. Apples to apples oranges to oranges. I know. On the otherhand they are both fruit!

[Papabull]

Hey... if they figure they're faster, more stable, more forgiving, I'll let them have that and I'll keep shooting my unforgiving and slow recurve. But then I don't want to hear about how I've got a huge equipment advantage over them, either. They can't have it both ways. :D

[Van/TX]

Sorry, just couldn't help myself. I love hunting, even with firearms
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/VanTX/Guns/WalkingStick2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v77/VanTX/Guns/FirstBuck2004.jpg:highfive:

I can understand removing this post. No problem with me:D ...Van

[Lambow]

Van... you look like Dirty Harry with an aimpoint in that 1st. pic!!!!!!

Looks like that buck made you're day. :lol:

[Pinelander]

Say Van, how much time do you guys down there get to hunt whitetails with handguns? Here in Illinois, it's only about 5 days I think. That's a pretty nice buck there, alright.

[Van/TX]

You can hunt with handguns during the regular deer (firearm) season in Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana. That's all I know about:)...Van

[James Wrenn]

The best performing bows are bows with the best design not what shape the limbs make and that ain't no hype. :)
Van I have done a lot of hunting with my handguns as well but my contender shoots like your rifles. :lol: They still make a big bang however. ;)