Push, Pull, Expand

[JohnK]

No, I mean that a line drawn through the bow arm starting at the rear shoulder (or scapula, but both seem to work on most examples I've seen) should point to the right of the target (for a R/H archer).

Of course, the archer will look down and see their bow hand directly below the target, but as Rik says, the string and arm cannot occupy the same spot.

[pwiles1968]

Finished my course recently and I was taught to Pull, the importance of arm position, alignment, back tension, grip, release etc was stressed, the coach would watch us shoot and point out if we were going wrong this was initially on a bare boss and with a bare bow so all we should be thinking about was form. The bow arm should be straight but not locked, it was explained to me that if I held my arm at my side relaxed then just raised it to the target as if shooting this is the correct elbow position.

She still watches me shoot and will occasionally point out if she thinks I need to concentrate on a certain area.

[joetapley]

as Rik says, the string and arm cannot occupy the same spot.

OK I accept that is technically an argument .

Forget the previous rubbish. Apologies all. This is quite complicated as there are parallel movements as well as angular ones. A lot depends on the archers physique. Yup I'd agree with John that the bow arm is angled wrt the plane of the bow - how much is highly variable I think.

[Barry C]

Now we have a korean head coach does anybody think the gnas "general" theory will move closer to a Korean style akin to KS Lee?

[geoffretired]

The draw force line is used frequently to describe the position of the two hands and the drawing elbow at full draw. Viewed from above it will be about the same line as the arrow. Viewed from the front of the archer, that DFL will be tilted down slightly compared to the arrow. The arrow is pointing to the gold or above, so the bow arm must be pointing to the right of the gold.
The push and the pull are equal whatever you "think" you are doing. The harder you pull on the string, the harder you must push into the bow. What really matters, I think, is the understanding in the archer. If the archer thinks the bow arm has to keep still to hold the sight, then it will keep reasonably still, but usually well into the follow through too. Sometimes, thinking "push" can give the archer the impression that the drawing hand is not working so hard and a dead loose can be the result. I ask my students to come up with something( expand, open, wider) that gets the feeling of both working all the time and into the follow through.

[joetapley]

Now we have a korean head coach does anybody think the gnas "general" theory will move closer to a Korean style

I doubt we'll get the UK squad running up and down Ben Nevis carrying a rucksack full of bricks .

Suk is ex Italian coach so maybe more towards the "Italian" style .

[JohnK]

Originally Posted by Barry C

Now we have a korean head coach does anybody think the gnas "general" theory will move closer to a Korean style akin to KS Lee?

I hope so. He has to fight against 150 years of fossilisation, ahem, sorry, tradition.

[GeoffT]

Originally Posted by JohnK

I hope so. He has to fight against 150 years of fossilisation, ahem, sorry, tradition.

Careful John...you'll get drummed out of GNAS if you start telling the truth

[Rik]

Originally Posted by geoffretired

...
The push and the pull are equal whatever you "think" you are doing. The harder you pull on the string, the harder you must push into the bow.

Yes, that's obviously true (otherwise your bow would be moving forwards or backwards at full draw!). I think the words are a little deceptive though. The difference between "pushing" and "pulling" in this context is where the movement occurs to get you through the clicker. That is to say; "pullers" move the back half, off a static front. "Pushers" move the front, off a static back half. Or that's the perception, at least.
Interesting point: if compounders think in terms of push/pull, it can't be to get through a clicker, can't even be to do with movement, if they pull against the stops... Do more compounders consider themselves "pullers", I wonder...?

Originally Posted by geoffretired

What really matters, I think, is the understanding in the archer. If the archer thinks the bow arm has to keep still to hold the sight, then it will keep reasonably still, but usually well into the follow through too. Sometimes, thinking "push" can give the archer the impression that the drawing hand is not working so hard and a dead loose can be the result. I ask my students to come up with something( expand, open, wider) that gets the feeling of both working all the time and into the follow through.

I'd agree there. It doesn't really matter how the archer thinks about what they are doing, it's the result that counts. If thinking "GOLD!" or "push" or "pull" or "float" or "pink flower fairies"(!) helps them get it right, then that's the right way for them to think about it. So why do some people think about pushing, and others about pulling (or something else entirely)? I think it's just a tag they hang on their form, to help them identify it. Of course, choosing a tag whose associations conflict with what you're trying to achieve, might interfere with the process... I wouldn't recommend someone to focus their attention by thinking: "miss"...

[geoffretired]

I like your thinking,Rik. Good to bounce ideas around and clarify what WE really mean etc.
As a compound shooter, I do "open" myself against the stops. There is very little movement because of those stops, but the important thing for me is to keep working. If I rest, there will be a soft shot sometime, and a collapsed one soon.