| This is getting interesting. Rather than numerical goals the idea of setting "form" goals and plotting these on a linear scale (Likert Scale if you're scientific) is one thing that I use and have used over my years of competition in other sports. Matching these with how I feel on the day and the conditions can show improvements or reasons for deterioration and so on. I have not yet come accross a sport in which your "head" does not get in the way and setting goals can screw you.
How many of us shoot with the aim of shooting good groups regularly? The Head Aardvark - a wily old beast - tells me to go away and shoot so that I can consistently put all my shots inside the red rings. When that's done put the target at ten meters further off and do it again and so on.
I have mentioned what Al Henderson says before. Make it your goal to keep shooting inside the red rings. If you do that, how many arrows will land in gold? Perhaps 50%? Pretty bloody good,eh? Now why not that sort of target setting, rather than a numerical score.
Another sort of goal might relate to "practice" or serious competition. Do you shoot the same kind of scores in a FITA star as you do in practice? A goal I use is to close "the gap". I know that I can shoot "X" regularly for a Portsmouth in practice but that this is "X" minus 20 in competition.
I'm interested in It's My Party And's shooting in low light conditions. Blind Bossing has the same effect for me. Trying to shoot the form and "feeling" what is happening. Then trying to reproduce it in practice or competition (muscle memory) there's another goal.
The numbers are, for me, a means of measuring if it's working.
__________________
All it takes is all you've got  |