[Soumi]

All those circles makes me dizzy.

These are the only spots I care about.

 

[J. Wesbrock]

Nice doe...good shot! Venison tastes better than paper anyway.

 

[Viper1]

Gents -

When I first replied to this thread, I said that a picture of a group was pretty meaningless. The purpose of the exercise, and the inherent value of shooting for score, is to remove "luck" from the equation. Shooting a single arrow dead center into a target or an animal means even less that a picture of a group. Even the worst archer is the world will hit what he's shooting at sooner or later. Shooting two, even three dead center can be a "hot streak" another term meaning luck. Now, shoot 60 arrows and take an average, that says a lot more, because (while not impossible) luck won't hold out that long. That's why shooting at paper and keeping score is a valid benchmark.

Back to reality.

The five spot target is pretty tough for most barebow shooters. It really does force a very tight focus, while having to change targets on every shot and there's very little room for error. Most good shooters will drop about 20 points when going to a 5 spot from a single spot.

Dwayne - BTW, I have a 280 and a 282 under my belt, BUT that was a long, long time ago. My best recent score (last year) was a 274 and that was way above my current average. Guess I must have been lucky that day .

Viper1 out.

 

[citori]

thanks Dwayne/viper

That will give a lot of guys something to think about.

I have never shot a NFAA round with a recurve/longbow barebow.....But spent a LOT of time shooting 5 spots with a wheel bow....

gonna have to try it with "trad" gear.

If I remember correctly in the past some guys mentioned things like 3" groups....that would be a 300!!!!!! I think that some may be a LITTLE optimistic

99.9% of wheel shooters CANNOT do this!!!! A 300 with ANY archery equipment you choose from selfbows-unlimited compounds is a GREAT accomplishment!!!

I also have a buddy that gives me the "I cant hit paper/clay birds/tagets perfect but put hair/feathers on it and it is meat"..... Gotta love this type statment

This response is not meant to make anyone mad or call anyone out......I have not seen any of you all shoot. If you are one of the elite handfull in the world who can shoot that well my hats off to you!!!! I just think that a lot of the time people are not really honest with themselves on their true ability with archery equipment.

thanks
citori

 

[DwayneR]

Hello Citori,

I have not seen any of you all shoot. If you are one of the elite handfull in the world who can shoot that well my hats off to you!!!! I just think that a lot of the time people are not really honest with themselves on their true ability with archery equipment.

Citori, you can actually tell the ones who have shot in the 270's , 280's, 260's.... You can also tell the ones that *think* they shoot that high too...

There comments on their ability does not jive with the abilty to shoot such scores. It takes a lot of knowledge to tune a bow to score high. It is not just a simple "set the nock and go". A arrow rest is a huge improvement... Brace height is a huge difference. Arrow spine "can" be a huge difference.

And of course... like you say... some folks shoot a hell of a lot better than they think... And when you put them on Paper...if they score a 200, they are doing damn good!. But by golly... they can hit those stumps they are shooting at all the time! And those cans! (yeah sure)... Those cans??? I do not know about carbon, but those cans (aluminum cans that is) tear up aluminum arrows very badly...Bends them right out of shape... and that is with a 2315 to boot!

Vipers right... pictures of groups are worthless. Animals hanging with holes in them are worthless. Anyone can do a one shot luck. But paper starts to take away that "luck" factor, and bring reality into the picture. What about those "fliers"? they missed the animal, so lets not count that as a picture of a "kill". That miss is counted as zero when you score, and really hurts your average.

And by the way... shooting paper has proven to be more healthier for you... It has more "fiber" in it...

Dwayne

 

[J. Wesbrock]

And by the way... shooting paper has proven to be more healthier for you... It has more "fiber" in it...

Dwayne

So does tree bark.

 

[njshadowwalker]

Just start with a big taget and keep shrinking it.

Even compound shooters have days when they cant buy a bullseye. Trust me i know!

 

[DwayneR]

Hello Nj,

Just start with a big taget and keep shrinking it.

Well... Yes and no...depending on how you look at it. Shrinking it causes the whole target to get smaller... That means that 3 1/4 inch circle in the center may end up being only 1.5 inches if shrunk to fit on a 8x10 paper. If you place this at 20 yards, How can you compare your score with others? If you shoot a 180 on a shrunk target, that may be equivalent to 250 on a full size target!... But at the same time... If you score a 250 ...wow!

Am I understanding you correctly? Or did I miss the boat altogether?

Even compound shooters have days when they cant buy a bullseye. Trust me i know!

Like me...<g> (Dwayne with his hand raised up).

Dwayne

 

[Soumi]

Well I'm sorry but pictures of animals with good shots does mean something to me. I really credit the guy who shot the grouse with his bow. That's not an easy thing to do. Personally, I first and foremost am a bowhunter. I practice on the 3d range and in the woods. Never shot paper targets much at all and don't really care too. It might prove who is the best archer but to me that's not the point. The point to me is spending my time in the field and being able to make the shot if it presents itself. If I never get a shot, that's ok too, I'm still in the woods where I love to be. I have no desire to be a target archer and the way I practice does just fine in preparing me for hunting. Peace and Merry Christmas.

 

[njshadowwalker]

Hello Nj,



Well... Yes and no...depending on how you look at it. Shrinking it causes the whole target to get smaller... That means that 3 1/4 inch circle in the center may end up being only 1.5 inches if shrunk to fit on a 8x10 paper. If you place this at 20 yards, How can you compare your score with others? If you shoot a 180 on a shrunk target, that may be equivalent to 250 on a full size target!... But at the same time... If you score a 250 ...wow!

Am I understanding you correctly? Or did I miss the boat altogether?



Like me...<g> (Dwayne with his hand raised up).

Dwayne

I dont mean for score. I mean in general. In other words....dont go out there with a 1" circle and be mad that ya cant stack arrows. Start with that paper plate but gradually shrink it (or shrink the acceptable size of the kill zone).

 

[CLASSICHUNTER]

Please

Can some one please give the exact measurement of these targets, when I read posts above you get 3 -31/2 inches for the 5 ring , could some one give circumsanses and scoring per ring in a simple form so we can make some....
thanks in advance, here in canada I think targets are fita style and sizing ...:darkbeer:

 

[DwayneR]

Can some one please give the exact measurement of these targets, when I read posts above you get 3 -31/2 inches for the 5 ring , could some one give circumsanses and scoring per ring in a simple form so we can make some....
thanks in

Yes they are the EXACT SAME SIZE as the FITA Targets...40cm Rings and all..

The only diffence is, you combine the 9 and 10 point ring and call it the 5 point ring.

Combine the 7 and 8 point ring and call it the 4 ring.

Combine the 5 and 6 point ring and call it the 3 ring.

Combine the 3 and 4 point ring and call it the 2 ring.

Combine the 1 and 2 point ring and call it the 1 ring.


Dwayne

Edit... If you look up this thread, I uploaded a target... It is the exact size you want.... GRanted, it doesn't have all the rings, but it has the first 3 rings...The Bullseye is 3.2 inches... or approx 3 1/8 of an inch. The target I uploaded was made to the exact deminsions. You can use that for the ring size and Bullseye.

 

[CLASSICHUNTER]

Great

THANKS DWAYNE makes it simple...

 

[wetraptor]

I'd like to make a point about concentration in instinctive shooting that is relavant here. The best shooters with traditional equipment in 3-D shoots (where longer periods of concentration and focus are necessary) are the folks who can continue to focus and concentrate over the time period. One thing you learn early on is that it takes practice, both physical and mental to get better and consistent in such a situation.

On the other hand, to hunt well you need to usually just make one shot, and make it count...and you need to "at will" draw on that ability to concentrate to a high level for the few seconds you are focusing for a shot. With practice most archers get to a "auto pilot" on shooting with the physical skills, but the mental focus is what enables you to really become a successful hunter. Reasonable practice will usually result in a fairly straight forward ability to shoot pretty consistently during practice.

When I was practicing in the past (and for that matter now too) I would get to a point where I was just plain tired and shooting sloppily...but right before I quit I would always summon all my concentration and focus and shoot one more arrow to prove to myself that I can do it when I need to. Usually, I was and still am successful with this intense effort and that is pretty much what I try to always maintain. I'm not so concerned with making 50 straight shots at a 3-D shoot as much as being able to make a decent shot when I have to... when hunting or just for reassurance whenever I really bear down and demand it from myself.

Just thinking out loud.

RB

Thanks Rob B, been shooting for over 50 years and your short comment was one of the most insiteful I have ever heard. I shoot a Hoyt Pro Medalist 32# 70", bare bow and realize I will never compete better with anyone than myself. In the end, that is all that matters. Thanks

 

[John49]

I have always shot fita targets indoors, never tried a nfaa target. Last winter, I averaged 465 in fita barebow class.(600 round) Is there a formula or some sort of indicator to convert that average to a nfaa 300 round? Just curious what I could expect to shoot nfaa style. John

 

[Dave T]

Well I'm sorry but pictures of animals with good shots does mean something to me. I really credit the guy who shot the grouse with his bow. That's not an easy thing to do. Personally, I first and foremost am a bowhunter. I practice on the 3d range and in the woods. Never shot paper targets much at all and don't really care too. It might prove who is the best archer but to me that's not the point. The point to me is spending my time in the field and being able to make the shot if it presents itself. If I never get a shot, that's ok too, I'm still in the woods where I love to be. I have no desire to be a target archer and the way I practice does just fine in preparing me for hunting. Peace and Merry Christmas.

The original post, and thus the thread, was about 20 yard groups. Why do some of your feel it necesary to tell the rest of us you don't shoot groups, don't believe in shooting groups or only care about shooting one shot into animals not paper?

Nobody said you had to shoot groups or should shoot paper. It was a question for those who do. Are you so insecure you have to reinforce you own belief system, even when it isn't the topic of discussion?

Dave

 

[RodB]

My original remarks were basically trying to get the point across that you don't necessarily have to be able to get great groups...just be able to make a shot when it counted...and that is of prime concern for most bowhunters. ..and I was probably trying to make the point that for many archers getting good groups may not be important.

There is certainly nothing wrong with shooting for grouping, we all do it now and then, and I plainly said it took the ability to focus over a longer time period to do it well. I'm sure most here did not mean to criticize that approach. If you look at what has been said, the ability to keep shooting well and concentrating over a time period was more or less described as a challenge and not very easy...but an alternative for a hunter was offered up ... being able to really focus when you had to...which is easier than shooting in competition. In practical applicaton, field hunting demands not only the ability to really focus when you must, but to keep control of your adrenalin rush in the excitement of the hunt. That venue in no way detracts from target shooting, its just a different perspective...and perhaps many hunters haven't thought about how small they could actually get a group.

One final thought...when I was shooting for practice I always liked to see a good "grouping" as it showed a fairly relaxed ability to shoot consistently. . .but as time wore on, as a hunter I much preferred shooting at a clean target (3D animal) with each of several different arrows because it was just great practice for hunting... where you only have one shot and the range is different every time. You walk up, size up the situation and make the shot... hopefully a "kill shot". Now this is "demanding" but not as difficult as putting 10 arrows in a 2" circle at 20 yards.

RB

 

[Soumi]

The original post, and thus the thread, was about 20 yard groups. Why do some of your feel it necesary to tell the rest of us you don't shoot groups, don't believe in shooting groups or only care about shooting one shot into animals not paper?

Nobody said you had to shoot groups or should shoot paper. It was a question for those who do. Are you so insecure you have to reinforce you own belief system, even when it isn't the topic of discussion?

Dave

Vipers right... pictures of groups are worthless. Animals hanging with holes in them are worthless. Anyone can do a one shot luck. But paper starts to take away that "luck" factor, and bring reality into the picture. What about those "fliers"? they missed the animal, so lets not count that as a picture of a "kill". That miss is counted as zero when you score, and really hurts your average.

And by the way... shooting paper has proven to be more healthier for you... It has more "fiber" in it...

Dwayne

Sorry to ruffle you or stray off target, get it, but I was responding to this remark. Fact is many of us shoot for different purposes. I do shoot groups, just not at 5 spot targets which seems to be the only thing that was being considered. I practice groups all the time. I shoot at a 3d target at 10 yards, back out to 20 yards, go to 15, then to 30, out to 40 and see how I can group. Or I'll just fire off 5 at 20, which if you have to know I can do pretty well. but my point is we don't all shoot paper and it's not the only test there is as to wether or not you're a good archer. In the world of bowhunting, it's the first shot that counts.

 

[Viper1]

Rob -

I agree with everything you just posted and I particularly like the word FOCUS over concentration. But, here's the rub. Without practicing for "groups", which seems to be a nasty word in some circles, all that focusing will do, is train you to focus on a given point. While that's great, and it really is a necessary skill; without paying your dues at the butts shooting those groups, all that focusing won't make your anchor consistant, your shoulder alignment correct, your release (follow-through, actually) clean and your bowarm steady. After you've paid your dues, then that ability to focus pays really pays off. The other stuff I just mentioned becomes automatic, and the focusing really is what sends the arrow to its mark.

I still contend that most people miss, not because of poor aiming, by poor form. Form first, focus second, and then the aiming becomes a non-event at usual hunting distances.

It's been my observation over the years, that an increasing number of "bowhunters" beleive that the "force" will take over when placed within range of a trophy buck or whatever. I don't believe it works that way. Development of the mechanical skills, making them automatic, by "shooting paper" is what makes that one shoot the best it can be and not just luck.

BTW - a 3D round doesn't take that much sustained focus. 40 arrows over 2 to 3 hours isn't that big a deal. 60 arrows in 45 minutes - different story.

Regarding your last statement:

I...when I was shooting for practice I always liked to see a good "grouping" as it showed a fairly relaxed ability to shoot consistently. . .but as time wore on, as a hunter I much preferred shooting at a clean target (3D animal) with several different arrows because it was just great practice for hunting... where you only have one shot and the range is different every time.

You really didn't mean DIFFERENT arrows right?

Assumimg you didn't mean that, I also have to fully agree with what you said, because it was exactly what it took me several paragraphs to reiterate. You shot groups first, then shot single arrows. Build the foundation, and hone it for your intended purpose!!! :thumbs_up

Viper1 out.

 

[ronroettger]

Back in the mid 90's I shot a 264 indoor score with my 60# Bear Kod. often shot in the 250's(96 was my best 20 arrow score) I was Happy with that! in 1995 I shoot 4 Trad. 3-D shoots with the same bow, Results out of 146 total targets (56-30-30-30) I hit the vital on 139 took 1st place at all four shoots competing against about 1000plus,300,200,and 100 others. Because of a new job, and and spending more time teaching Bowhunter, and Hunter Education, and working on Wisconsin Conservation Congress items I dont shoot as much! My indoor scores for league last winter were 208-238 goal is always to shoot 80 for 20 arrows, and 240 total, shot some 80's last year but not a 240. League starts in 4 weeks, because of recent open heart surgery I am going to shoot a 45# recurve to start the year! Hope to shoot a 250 plus this year!