Large targets vs small targets

[James Park]

One thing I have noticed is that we shoot better groups at small faces than at large faces. For example, at 50M on a small FITA face we can get good groups (unless it frightens us simply because it is small), but if we then put up a large FITA face our expectations are much higher but our groups are possibly worse. I have tried to see if it is the quality of my aiming that does this, but I think it is not. So, why?

[Ozzy]

I agree James. :o
I assumed it was due to a more concentrated focus on the smaller aiming point, perhaps also a better follow thru.
Sometimes even a tiny piece of plain paper as a target on a butt can result in improved grouping. :roll:

[James Park]

Another related aspect: From the relative difficulty, we should score the same at the 70M distance of a FITA as we do at the 50M distance. Elite archers certainly do so. However, the average archer often seems to score less at the 50M distance than at the 70M distance. Why do you think this is?

[Jay Bowden]

Interesting topic Jim.
I was thinking this after shooting a Canberra yesterday. I shot
294-293-294 for 60,50,40 respectively. I have encountered this many times before where your longer range scores are better than your shorter range ones.I think that you tend to aim more generally at the long distances and are happy to just get gold,and inevitably you get more tens than when you aim to get a ten.
One way around this would be to shoot a smaller powered scope at the shorter distances.I have yet to try this theory,but I will do so in the coming weeks.

[Marcus]

I think what you are talking about Jay is a comfort and sight settings thing.
On sunday I shot 302 at 90m in the wind and 307 at 70m. Never got settled at 70m, but at 90m was in my comfort zone (in fact may have shot higher had I stayed at 90m). I think this was due to
Sights never got right, took 3 ends to get a 10
Form wasn't as good, perhaps my peep is a little off
Lack of practise, have not shot enough outdoors recently.

Interestingly my 50m was better, but still took 3 ends to really get it right, same at 30m. Result, better sight settings and more practise.

In your case, possibly relaxed a little and did not focus enough untill it was too late.

With the 50m thing I think it is fear. So many archers are afraid of the smaller face and it shows. I watched Nicole shoot a 4x 59 on a large face at 50m then walk over a couldn't keep them in the red on a small face. 4 weeks later she was shooting just fine on the small face, but she initially didn't want to shoot the small face.

[2Dogs]

You should try shooting a Canberra Indoors!!....freaks you out.

We all shoot it terrible up here.....I've shot better Canberra in Gails :o

[Michael Naray]

I was shooting a Sydney on the weekend and shot an 88 rating at 70m and a 72 rating at 40m.

Part of the problem - not all, I'm no expert - is that we are taught to aim "at the gold", but the gold is so much bigger with a big face/short distance combination that your radius of excursion explodes. At 50m on a small face I can consistently shoot groups of 4milliradians (20cm) but on a large face it blows out to 6milliradians (30cm). To test the "too much gold" theory I offset my sight's windage by 2.4mm and aimed off, very precisely, at the black line between the red and the gold on a large face. My groups immediately snapped down to 4milliradians again.

I imagine this would be easier with a compound, due to the use of a magnifier.

Probably won't work for everyone, but it worked for me.
-mikey

"If you learn 'indoor' techniques, you will think narrowly and forget the true Way."
- Miyamoto Musashi

[Marcus]

Not really easier with a scope.

I think that is right, alsoyour acceptable group size increases. Personally I think the advent of the inner 10 and then X ring led to the 1400 being shot. Because we now go for X's instead of 10's we group better and more central than before.

[James Park]

Because we now go for X's instead of 10's we group better and more central than before.
Good point Marcus.
I think it is quite important that we have in our minds that we want X's, not just 10's when we are shooting the short ranges. Especially at 30M in a FITA I try very hard to be in the X. Also quite important for indoor and field (you just need to look at the X-count for Bryce and Leigh at the Sherbrooke Silver Cup last year - while they were only a few points ahead of me they got way more X's and hence were then less likely than me to lose points).

[James Park]

One thing I have noticed:
In FITA Field, the 80cm target at 50M is regarded as quite easy. Generally regarded as wrist-slashing territory when the top compounders miss the 5 ring.
In FITA target, the gold at 50M is the same size as the 5 ring on the 80cm field face.
However, few of us ever get through the 50M range of a FITA without straying outside the gold. It is difficult to achieve.
What is the difference?

Similarly, at 30M in a FITA, we very much expect to hit the 10 ring just about every shot. However the FITA Field shot at 30M at the 40cm face is regarded as difficult. The 5 ring on the field face is the same size as the 10 ring on the FITA 80cm face. So, again, why the difference in the way we approach it?

[mike]

A lot of it comes down to expectations I think.

most of us expect to lose a considerable number of points at every range of a FITA. We try not to shoot that way, but ultimately our intelligence gets the better of us and we realise that even if you are shooting 1360s, you are still losing 80 points. So we step up to the line anticipating some losses, and just try to shoot in a way that gets the most number of points.

in field, we don't have this expectation. We make a few errors and that costs us a few points and then we finish with a 355 -- no slashing of wrists needed. We step up to the harder targets knowing they are a challenge but also knowing that if shot well, no points need be lost.

Perhaps where people such as Clint do better is that they have over come that little quirk of psychology and now step up expecting only to shoot each arrow as well as possible, anticipating that the norm would be to shoot a 10.

IMO it is much better to try to shoot a succession of 10s than a succession of 60s, even though practically they amount to the same thing. Its just that it is sooooo much easier to shoot 1 10 than 6 in a row and so on that principle, all we should ever try to do is shoot one 10 at a time.


Problem is that it is almost impossible not to be calculating totals in the back of your mind (it just happens after youve been shooting for a few years I think -- comes naturally). Trick is I guess to blank out that little voice and concentrate on just shooting one 10 at a time.

[Flex]

I just try to shoot 1 good shot at a time.Some days thats easyer than others..

[Marcus]

Problem is that it is almost impossible not to be calculating totals in the back of your mind (it just happens after youve been shooting for a few years I think -- comes naturally). Trick is I guess to blank out that little voice and concentrate on just shooting one 10 at a time.

Oh yeah this is hard. I've been shooting and scoring archery since I was 12 and can add up most scores without actually counting. I know that 10 10 9 9 8 8 is a 54, I know that 6 x 54 = 324 etc etc. (once someone shoots 6's I have to stop and think)
Even when I only put the arrow totals in I know roughly what I will end up with. :( Can really stuff me up at times, other times I can use it to my advantage. I don't panic when I shoot a 6 on my first arrow, just means I may end up with a 56 that's all.

[mike]

Agree Marcus, it can devastate your day if you start thinking this way. But only if you are susceptable to it. It is possible I think to be "mentally tough" to discussions about scores, mental tallies etc. It is possible to actively discuss scores, possible totals, how many more 10s you need, what your opponent is doing etc. and then still get on with the business of shooting well for each shot. It is something I practice at tournaments.

I find you can get a big positive out of being aware of your capabilities in a given scenario -- eg if you are 2 points down to an opponent with one end to go and he is shooting 57s, then you can use this to shoot a 60 and perhaps put him out of the game. Otherwise you might have been content with the 57s that you yourself had been shooting. It does work sometimes.

But, ultimately the number one strategy is to view each arrow as an individual entity and an opportunity to shoot your best shot and shoot the highest possible score -- X. Round totals are built from individual arrow scores...

[Marcus]

Agree Mike. I personally practise this alot. I will make an effort to track my scores while practising because fact is when you are at a shoot with a leader board you may not escape it.

[Clare Barnes]

...(once someone shoots 6's I have to stop and think)...

Adding up high scoring arrows is easy - that's why longbowers have to be good at mental arithmetic!! :lol: :lol:

[Zoe]

I will make an effort to track my scores while practising because fact is when you are at a shoot with a leader board you may not escape it.

Good point Marcus (and Mike I suppose). The sport is so heavily 'score-centric' as opposed to the focus being on winning or losing, that it's impossible to put the score out of your mind completely. You only so much as have to overhear the scorer on your target mutter your score once during a round, and then no amount of sticking fingers in your ears going "not listening, not listening" will stop the mental gymnastics that involuntarily take place telling you the score you are likely to end up with. That being the case, I agree, don't hide from it, embrace it and learn to deal with it and try to keep it as something completely removed from the shot process.


Might be why it is sometimes more relaxing to shoot in a gale, as it turns the whole thing into a competition against other people, and score loses its relevance. Same with Matchplay.

[Michael Naray]

Last FITA I shot (Mt. Petrie) I knew after my 90m score that I would finish with 1200-1210. For 70m and 50m I was counting down every end and then for 30m I was counting down every point lost on every (non-10) arrow. I finished with an X10 on the last arrow for a 1204.

I found that doing this kept me far more focused than ignoring my score and just trying to shoot.

-m

"For though all persons are equally subject to the caprice of fortune,
yet all good men have one advantage she cannot deny, which is this,
to act reasonably under misfortunes."
-Plutarch, "Life of Otho"

[mike]

But Michael what did you score for 90m? You see I think what people are getting at is that you may have prevented yourself from getting say 1240 by taking that approach.

Reason i ask is that when I started, people used to say that you needed a 300 at 90m to get a 1300. People refered to "points in the bucket" or out of the bucket or "points up" or "down" on that 50 average. If you didn't shoot 300 at 90m it made it hard to shoot a 1300.

Reality is that you can shoot a 1300 from something like 285 (I've done it) without much difficulty. (I think my best effort in this vain is something like a 1315 after shooting a 290 I think). It just about being able to put the bad ones behind you. Good scores are constructed out of making good individual shots repeatedly. But you don't need a 10 every single shot.

You can put one in the 3 and still shoot a 53.

[Marcus]

Reality is that you can shoot a 1300 from something like 285 (I've done it) without much difficulty. (I think my best effort in this vain is something like a 1315 after shooting a 290 I think). It just about being able to put the bad ones behind you. Good scores are constructed out of making good individual shots repeatedly. But you don't need a 10 every single shot.

With you on this one!

[Michael Naray]

But Michael what did you score for 90m? You see I think what people are getting at is that you may have prevented yourself from getting say 1240 by taking that approach.

I understand what you mean and thoroughly agree; this is often a problem. However, the estimate was based on careful analysis given the following facts;

1. weather was turning with building wind and intermittent rain - there was actually a half hour interruption due to a thunderstorm during the 50m set, and humidity was extreme;
2. I was shooting very well that day and knew that I could get to within 10 points of my PB on every distance, if conditions were perfect;
3. given that my 90m score (263) was down 25pts on my PB, due to conditions not being perfect, I knew that statistically, I was most likely to end up within 65-75 points of my PBsum of 1278 (at the time), which put my most likely score at 1203-1213, which I then rounded down - the weather was getting worse, remember - to 1200-1210.

This quick analysis, done at the end of the 90m set, allowed me to see that I had a very real chance of reaching my goal of 1200 that day. To explain; I actually drove up to Brisbane from Sydney for that weekend for the sole purpose of getting my 1200 Star within my 1yr deadline, as it was really my last chance to do so, given the tournament calendar.

Realising that I could do it allowed me to stay absolutely focused on the task at hand, which I then pursued with sheer bloody-mindedness. If I had not worked out a realistic estimate, I would have - as I have done before and since in adverse weather - simply abandoned the focus on scoring and used the day as a "practice FITA", working on form and not worrying about my score, hence not bothering to aim off or otherwise compensate for conditions. As it turned out, my 30m score was my best tournament 30m set, and my second best 30m set ever, so rather than limiting myself, I was very happy that I stayed focused and pushed myself to shoot as well as I possibly could. I do not think that I would have shot so well without that goal constantly in mind.

Agree Marcus, it can devastate your day if you start thinking this way. But only if you are susceptable to it.

I agree with mike on this point; how you handle yourself when competing is very much an individual trait. At the moment, I haven't yet learned the mental training that the top level archers have, so I will fall back on the abilities I know I have; in this case, a very focused determination. If you think archery takes focus, try clinging to a cliff, 25m off the ground and facing a 30m fall if you slip. :wink:

Anyway, all of this is getting off the original thread of "too much gold." Anyone want to go back to that topic? :)

-mikey


"There's no such thing as bad weather;
there's only the wrong clothes."
- Billy Connolly