It's all memorized sight picture shooting. Doesn't matter what you want to call it.

Sounds like you're pretty new to this so I'd recommend building in a go/no-go point in your shot rather than releasing when it feels right.

 

It's all memorized sight picture shooting. Doesn't matter what you want to call it.

Well, of course, but I'd sure like to know in case anyone else more experienced is doing it, so that I might be able to learn/emulate.

Sounds like you're pretty new to this so I'd recommend building in a go/no-go point in your shot rather than releasing when it feels right.

Can you elaborate a bit more on what you mean by go/no-go? If I'm interpreting your message correctly, I think I already do that and it just meshes into loosing when it feels right. No, no, no, ehhh, okay, seems good, release and follow through.

 

Gapstinctive.
DDD

 

Gapstictive.
DDD

Yeah, not gapstinctive. I focus entirely on my target during and in the moments leading up to my release. Of course, you'll have to take my word for it when I say that.

Also, whatever gap I might take note of when I peek at it is lost, since I don't peek when I'm anchored.

 

When you say you take a quick peek at the arrow, I interpret that to mean that you briefly focus on the arrow point, and then focus back on the spot you want to hit. What you need to do instead is never shift your primary focus away from the spot you want to hit. As you swing the arrow up, at some point it will enter your peripheral vision. While maintaining your primary focus on the target, you continue to see the out of focus arrow point and part of the shaft in your peripheral vision. You aim, using whatever variation of gap or instinctive you want to use, by reference to the out of focus point, which stays in your peripheral vision until the arrow is released.

Alternatively, you could shoot purely instinctively, without paying any attention to the arrow point at all, although you may still be aware of it in your peripheral vision.

Either way, momentarily shifting your focus to the arrow point while drawing the bow is nothing more than a distraction.

 

I've certainly tried what you've described before, and I've been shooting purely instinctively. The former is awkward for me, and the latter is what I prefer over the two. I even intend to keep shooting purely instinctively from time to time, or perhaps after a couple arrows with split-vision or the shooting method I've described.

I'd have to experiment some more, but at least with the few dozen arrows I shot today using the method I've described, I was more consistent than I have been with pure instinctive. Just my odd blend of different shooting methods that works for me, I suppose. Hasn't been distracting at all, so long as I draw steadily and blink before shifting my focus.

 

It's the terribly named 'gap-stinctive', very common, but in your case you are looking at the point rather than leaving it in your periphery. Split vision includes an awareness of the gap, but is not consciously set.

As you get better at it, you will have no need to look at the point. Your bow arm will rise to exactly "there", no thought involved, making the sight picture you have learned is good for something that appears "that far" away, and relative to your arrow point in your periphery.

You may be shooting up close for now. Shoot out to 20m or beyond. Your point will be unavoidable in your periphery. There is no need to look directly at it. Keep your focus on the target.

Of the different styles of aiming I have learned, this is the one I most enjoy. But it is good to learn them all and choose. Archery should be a pleasure, first and foremost. There may be a style you like even more.

 

Thank you for a more measured response.

I have been shooting at 20 yards, so very close to 20 meters. Indeed, the point is unavoidable in my periphery, and I have used it in gapstinctive/split-vision before, both early in my archery journey and very recently. It has always felt awkward, unfortunately. Of course, I recognize it is inherently more accurate, and the results have personally shown me themselves; but that fact is largely unimportant when, as we agree, "archery should be a pleasure."

Keeping the point out of my focus, to be sure, is not the issue. In fact, with what I and some others might call pure instinctive, I can easily disregard the point for the mark. With this aiming method I've described, I'm consciously choosing to peek at my arrow before returning my focus on the mark.

 

I think I discovered a sort of hybrid between instinctive and split-vision shooting for myself. For this post, I will recognize these terms as they are defined here.

The aiming method I experimented with today goes as follows:
1) I focus on my target only.
2) I bring the bow up as I am drawing (Hill style swing draw)
3) As I am close to full draw, I take a quick peek at the tip of my arrow.
4) Bring my focus back to my target only, anchor, and release when it feels right.

As is hopefully evident, this aiming method combines elements of instinctive and split-vision. It is my understanding that an archer using split-vision will peek at the tip of the arrow while anchored, but as I mentioned, I am peeking at my arrow before I reach my anchor. will notice the tip of the of the arrow in the peripheral vision while anchored, but as I mentioned, I am peeking at my arrow before I reach my anchor.

Is there a name for this aiming method yet? Is it still just split-vision?

Otherwise, I'd like to call this split-drawing or pre-splitting. Still on the fence about it. I find shooting in this way preserves the fluidity and satisfaction that I love in instinctive shooting, while also enjoying greater consistency and predictability that comes with split-vision shooting.

Gap

 

Olive, First it sounds like you are doing well, developing your personal style and method, which all good archers must. McDave's comment is good. Methinks your 'peeking' is an extraneous step and may fade away as you gain more confidence in your process. If so you may arrive at what I think of as 'natural aiming'. Unlike many on here I do not think we should focus over hard on the target center. Look at it during preshot, and send it as a goal to your subconscious mind. It can aim better than you can, so it is enough to tell it where - the middle of the middle. Then shift your focus around to your back, and to shot execution. Eventually, if you make a good shot you will find that your subconscious has sent the arrow to the right place. You set the goal, it aims to hit it, naturally. - lbg

 

Glad to see you here, and thank you for your response.

I most certainly agree that my peeking my fade away. Even in those few dozen arrows I've shot, the time I've spent peeking shortened over time. Perhaps it'll drop down to zero. It's something I ought to experiment with the next time I'm on the range. Maybe this style of shooting will be relegated to warmups only.

As for your suggestion, I have been "pre-aiming" with pure instinctive and continue to pre-aim with this method. I've learned a few weeks ago that the key is not necessarily to hold my anchor for an exorbitant amount of time, so much as it is to take more time between shots to allow my subconscious to take in the mark.

 

Its all the same thing and you are making a big deal out of slight variances that arent important.

Split vision/gapstinctive/shotgunning - everyone finds their own personal balance between looking at the arrow and the target.

You look at the target and stay mindful of the arrow - some people pay more attention to the arrow than others.

I would recommend learning to gap first - and using a consistent form with it.
The style of shooting you are doing will come naturally as you learn to gap and develop good repeatable form.

 

Its all the same thing and you are making a big deal out of slight variances that arent important.

Split vision/gapstinctive/shotgunning - everyone find their own personal balance between looking at the arrow and the target.

You look at the target and stay mindful of the arrow - some people pay more attention to the arrow than others.

I would recommend learning to gap first - and using a consistent form with it.
The style of shooting you are doing will come naturally as you learn to gap and develop good repeatable form.

And if there are variations in the ways and extents people pay attention to the arrow, and none of them are universally suitable, this lady will continue to share her curiosity on this open forum. Thank you.

[EDIT: For the record, Carboniac's comment has been heavily edited, whereas it was originally much more dismissive and far less productive.]

 

Well if youre going to be snitty.

You didnt didnt "discover" anything new. It doesnt need a new name.

 

I recommend not to think about gaps at shorter ranges. Aim naturally.

Further on that: I have pupils start up very close, 6 feet away on a tall target. Many olympians practice this way. The idea is not to aim at all but focus solely on execution. After a few days of that begin the 'walk back' method taught to us on here by Steve Morley, four time world longbow champ and instinctive aimer. He died too soon, leaving a young family and a champion archer wife.

This practice could be at home, down the hall at the linen closet. No stray arrow will get through that or do much harm.

Outdoors I use a paper plate as target. If you hit it, walk back several steps and shoot again. Do not aim! Execute a strong shot! If you hit, walk back. If you miss, try again. The idea is to see how far back you can get with a quiver of a dozen or so arrows,. I had one strong female pupil get back to 40 yards.

This is my own favorite practice. When people ask how I aim, I reply 'I don't really know.' I don't aim, I yearn - dead solid perfect, plumb center. - lbg

 

No worries about the gap. I don't take any note of it.

 

You are doing what Hill described NOT to do in his book in the 40s. Jerry Hill wrote a little book that did the same, but pointed the little, more visual to the shooter than the watcher, hook at the last bit of the the draw. The peeking you are doing is what Hill warned to never do. When I am working out my point on aim distance for a particular bow and arrow, I have done the same. When I did it I shot more static, tightened up for a bit to allow my focus to return. It has a problem that comes with it, your off side eye has a better angle to the arrow tip and will try to take over the shot. If you have a bow that is very easy to draw or shoot split finger and you can draw the arrow without the bowstring, you can practice blank drawing with out releasing. Hill wrote of fixing your eye on an exact spot then bring your finger up, WITHOUT LOOKING AT IT, point at other exact spots, WITHOUT CHANGING YOUR FOCUS ON THE FIRST EXCT SPOT.
A real life example of what can happen with the peeking. I switch hands often, For a time I had two 51 pound Robertson Purists, one left hand and one right hand. I thought I hit the magic button with those. One day while hunting with my left hand Robertson, I saw a turkey coming. It was going to be a very downhill shot. I had my back up to a tree and sitting on my Nifty seat. When the turkey got to a 'good' spot about 25 yards down the hill, I drew. My balance felt a bit awkward, and the thought flashed in my head that this was a new position for me. I took a major peek at the arrow. When one draws right handed your eyes see two arrows, they will be in focus per each eye, human eyes have a very short 'F' stop. The arrow on the left is what the right eye sees and the arrow on the right is what the left eye sees. Reverse that for shooting left handed. Anywho, I drew i held a bit, it looked wrong, I 'peeked'. Without thinking, I adjusted and missed the turkey 2 feet to the right. He left I took out a second arrow, confidently drew and aimed at a leaf where the turkey had been, while finishing the draw without peeking, and hit the leaf i was looking at.

 

I think you're shooting instinctive. I don't think you're gapping because gapping is judging the distance from the spot you want to hit AND where the arrow is in your peripheral vision. I can't look at the top of a door and then the door know and tell you how far that is, but if I see one in my peripheral vision, I can.

Bowmania

 

Hey, sounds like you actually understand what I'm talking about!

 

Split-vision is misnomer with a longbow or recurve, unless you shoot with a thumb ring like a horse bow. Horse back archer reference to split-vision right to left, not up and down.
If your trying to explain your subconscious setting the gap. That's done over time with tons of shooting and bridge work. Just like pointing your finger.
DDD

 

I'm pretty sure I'm doing both left-right, actually. With the way I'm anchoring back to my ear (that's a whole 'nother topic I discussed in another thread), I recognize that the tip of the arrow is not horizontally in the same plane as my target if I am using split-vision. I could certainly line up my eye like I used to when I was gap shooting, but it feels too awkward for my personal preference, both with my current anchor and with an anchor on my face.

But of course, with the method I've described it's not really a gap for the reasons I explained to you previously. Bowmania has a pretty good analogy for what I'm doing.

 

No matter the way your aim! Archers most make a conscious decision to make that perfect shot happen especially when hunting.
Any less than that your flinging arrows and that's OK too for fun too.
DDD

 

Drawing to your ear is a type of face walking or floating ⚓ snapshot. But not as accurate as stringwalking with a string blur. Unorthodox you are. So make up your style and call it what you want.
DDD

 

Hehe, unorthodox indeed. This may swing the level of orthodoxy one way or the other, but I've actually been using the tip of my thumb to anchor with where my earlobe meets the rest of my head. It's actually pretty repeatable, but I've found that my point of contact has naturally gotten lighter, and now my thumb barely brushes my earlobe.

 

Only to comment that a floating anchor is necessary if exploring combat and horseback archery traditions (Kassai), but I know near zero about either.

 

In my case, I'm more or less following the historical convention to maximize the power out of my bow, as Ascham details in his Toxophilus. It is without purpose today, given I won't expect to be fighting in Agincourt any time soon, but it is a style I prefer for the historical aspect. I also prefer it simply because I like to feel the full strength of my bow in my hands.

On a semi-practical note, I also accomplish a 28-inch draw when I draw in this way. Otherwise, it is shorter. Of course, I know that benefit alone does not make this more practical, but it is one helpful, little quirk.

 

I use a similar draw and "anchor" for thumb shooting non-center cut horsebows.
That doesn't change the process though. I'm holding on focusing on expansion as the string leaves my thumb. Indeed the only real "anchor" in this technique is getting into perfect alignment.

I think that not stressing about accuracy is a good thing with these techniques. Eventually not being able to hit where you want gets to be old and if you build in a good process now it won't be difficult to change your techniques to effective ones down the road.
Build a poor process and that change will require a lot of work.

 

I think that not stressing about accuracy is a good thing with these techniques.

It's been a bit of a fine balance so far. My expectations are lower, but still not low. Naturally, I still aim to get tighter groups and be able to hit exactly where I am looking, which has all been happening more frequently.

 

Grantmac can probably outshoot everyone here. how do I know? Scores. Direct measures. Plain to see. No voodoo. No ego. Facts. Hard Data. No feelings.

Which brings me to my point and question:
Since you’re shouting 20yds you should score it. If you’re not accustomed to it then shoot the target face for a week or til you get use to it then score it. Report. You’ll get ten times more beneficial advice. If you’re really brave you can share vid. Everyone here is pretty dang nice with stuff like that.

has Anyone ever been to another forum? Cars or trucks? Guns? Clothing? You know what they do there? They talk about personal opinions but they also talk shop. “My truck is super fast it has this or that”. Then they actually tell you the 1/4 time or mph. Or horsepower. They say it measures this or it measures that. Everyone here avoids that like the plague. No one likes to measure except draw weight and 89% front of center. I’d take everyone’s advice with a grain of salt or pm them and ask them what kind of scores they are shooting. Also them knowing what you are actually capable of is much more important than naming a certain style.
Different bits of advice depending on where you are and what you need rather than everyone being easier to help and guessing.
My $0.02

 

Thank you for providing your perspective. I unfortunately have no numbers to point to, since I am using 3x3 in. cloth patches cut from old clothes instead of target faces. "Better/worse than yesterday" is the very rough metric I use.

I suppose I could begin to purchase target faces or use a measuring tape, but in all honesty, it is an unappealing prospect. Of course, I recognize the limitations that come with that, but I would rather worry about numbers in my studies and my work only.

 

Alright, I let loose of a few dozen more arrows, and I have new findings. McDave and Longbowguy, your speculations are mostly correct.

First things first, I am not more accurate with the aiming method I've described compared to when I shoot fully instinctively, at least once I am "geared in." If it's my first arrow or two of the end, then sure, my arrow is more predictable. Otherwise, full instinctive is just as good, if not better.

In fact, as noted by a few others, it has some downsides. After a while, peek at my arrow is just distracting, rapidly straining my ability to focus. I originally noted that this aiming method is just as satisfying as pure instinctive, but after back-to-back comparisons, I have to say I vastly prefer the latter. The latter is much more natural and fluid.

Ascham describes this as a "shift," and I have to agree with him and the others who have said or implied this. At most, this is a shift that I can employ with my first loose or two in an end, just to roughly get my bearings. Afterwards, it has no purpose. As Longbowguy said, however, it is likely that this shift will one day be entirely shed, and I do seek that day where I can loose my first arrow as confidently as I do my tenth.

For those of you who have invited and sustained open discussion, thank you.

Unrelated P.S.
I really need to stop accidentally liking comments when I hit reply.

 

The naysayers cannot hold back, especially about the swing draw and not calculating the gap. Now they claim that natural aiming cannot be as accurate. I say bull-oney. It is sometime uncannily accurate, like magic even.

I won the California state indoor champs at 20 yards about 10 times in a row with the swing draw and instinctive aiming, or whatever you call it. I didn't practice it much and was surprised for quite a while that some gapper with long, heavy arrows did not beat me. They never did, in the longbow division with wooden arrows. Never. I gave it up because my trophy room was getting full. I am getting elderly but I think at that distance I may be even better now. Didn't wreck my shoulder- helped heal it when something else did.

Our ancient methods attract a lot of bum dope commentary. You have to judge the sources. I practice at home at 6 ft down the bathroom hall toward the linen cupboard into a cardboard box stuffed with couch pillows and rags. A person could do that in a basement, a garage or in the yard toward their own abode without much alarming neighbors. 6 ft practice is some of the best and fine for fitness. Go to the range when convenient. - lbg

PS: Anchor is a misnomer; a gentle touchpoint or two is sufficient. I got that from 4 time world longbow champ Steve Morley, on this site. - lbg

 

The naysayers cannot hold back, especially about the swing draw and not calculating the gap. Now they claim that natural iming cannot be as accurate. I say bull-oney. It is sometime uncannily accurate, like magic.

I won the California state indoor champs at 20 yards about 10 times in a row with the swing draw and instinctive aiming, or whatever you call it. I didn't practice it much and was surprised for quite a while that some gapper with long, heavy arrows did not beat me. They never did, in the longbow division with wooden arrows. I gave it up because my trophy room was getting full. I am getting elderly but I think at that distance I may be even better now, Didn't wreck my shoulder- helped heal it when something else did.

Our ancient methods attract a lot of bum dope commentary. You have to judge the sources. I practice at home at 6 ft down the bathroom hall toward the linen cupboard into a cardboard box stuffed with couch pillows and rags. A person could do that in a basement, a garage or in the yard toward their own abode without much alarming neighbors. 6 ft practice is some of the best and fine for fitness. - lbg

PS: Anchor is a misnomer; a gentle touchpoint or two is sufficient. I got that from 4 time world longbow champ Steve Morley, on this site. - lbg

Truly, you're inspiring. Thank you again for these words of encouragement.

 

I do think the increasing score issue points to the problem with using competition scores as a useful metrics. And leads to question of why people are doing it.


Archery is being distorted from a an exercise in casting effective projectiles to a more contrived activity with a lot of compromises to get the very tightest scores.

Sort of like comparing benchrest shooting or small bore riflery, to hunting and combat shooting. Its more accurate but its hardly the same thing anymore.


NOTE: Thats not to say keeping track of your accuracy is bad. You dont need specific targets and scoring rules. But if you dont actually keep track youre probably fooling youself.

 

I’m talking about basic tracking. Don’t score a 10rimg WA face. Put up the proverbial pie plate at 17yds and shoot 10, 3-5 arrow ends. In the middle of the plate put your piece of square cloth.

how many time did you hit cloth
How many times did you hit plate.
How many times did you miss the plate.

Could you imagine trying to get good at anything and not tracking it in any way or even knowing.

Example: I can lift a lot of weight. I’m a man. A strong man 👨🏻. I can do tons of pushups and a gob of weight on my bench press in my garage. How many push-ups you ask? Don’t know. Don’t really like to count. How much do i bench press. Believe me it’s good and I’m getting better. I’m playing with grip width and it really seems to be helping.
I also run a lot. Running is life. How long have I been running? How far? How long does it take me? Well I’m super into running and have been doing it for 3 months now. I run a lot farther than I use to but I like to not know because im not really into that. How fast? Like time on a watch?! Wow that’s pretty modern I’m not into that.

It would be a lot better for the runner and lifter to know about the most simple things instead of going ostrich on the subject. I’m going to go so far as to say without the ability to confront that one is doomed to mediocrity. Or worse, permanently ingraining the mediocrity and then going nuts trying to rationalize it with the image of being a runner. Sorry if that’s mean or snooty sounding I’m trying to be sarcastic/funny/flippant to get the pint across.not all directed at you either. It’s a concept for all.

I said and thought the same stuff and so have a lot of the people giving free advice. That’s WHY they are giving the advice. You’re still only in the struggle of fun with yourself. This seemingly “target shooter” stuff is important. Every single culture that has ever bent the arc has a MEASURE of skill. You can use the measure on day 1 for a child and you can use the measure on day 10,000 as you progress.

I shot 3d for ever. I’m calling it learned or instinctive or whatever. I did not have a dialed process and I couldn’t tell you what I was doing. I shit 3d deer in my back yard and kept track. I went to 3d tournaments and scored. I’d even turn in my score card at my first tournament 😱

 

Carboniac I dig what you are saying but I would counter that Competition scores are MORE useful metrics because they show what you can do when the crap hits the fan.

 

Why is that good?

Its seems that exposure to performance anxiety doesnt make people better it makes them worse over time.

Ive talked about it before how in hunting(more rifle than bow for me) I became a better shot as I learned to control my adrenaline and euphoria while while seeing game - if I started associated performance anxiety with shooting I think I would be a worse shot.

I think the value of competition is that it gives you a real metric and makes you accountable to it. I dont think the performance anxiety part is productive, I think its an unfortunate side effect, especially in something as slow and methodical as target shooting with all the time it give you to think about the process during the process. .

 

Doesn’t have to be a certified competition. Anything that puts the pressure in is good. I will call an archery friend or a couple of em and say I’m shooting this one for score and am gonna do my best. Then have to report back.

 

A1 steady aim will keep track of your shooting. Here's mine when I was doing some EPE testing.

DDD

 

Insert Gretzky quote here.