back tension - fact or fiction ?

[Des]

I would say that 'an' answer to the original question is there's a difference between having 'back tension' (or whatever) and having good or correct scapular positioning.

I can take the load off my drawing arm at full draw, use my shoulders to hold the weight while tensing/focusing on the muscles around my shoulder blade to bring my elbow into line. I then keep the tension on and think of expanding through the clicker. This has worked ok for me and has got me to high 1st Class low Bowman scores but i believe that if i had 'correct' scapular positioning, i would have a better chance of progressing.

During the indoor season i made an attempt to change my form, get my elbow down and move/sink my shoulder blade into a better position. I could do it with a very light bow (12lbs) but anything more and it seemed impossible. Some great advice from Yorker made a lot of sense, and certainly helped me to see the light at the end of the tunnel at the time.

I guess i've been shooting the same way for a long time and any major change like this would be difficult. Plus, a bit of impatience and frustration took me be back to my normal form but who knows, i might give it another go eventually.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by geoffretired

How about "Moving into alignment".

Isn't the problem with 'back tension' - and even more so with 'get it on your back' - that it's put forward as The Answer. That back tension is proposed as being both necessary and sufficient.

I don't think you can achieve good alignment without using the large muscles in your back, so when alignment is good the back muscles are in tension. (In tension, Sam, which is a correct scientific description of the only way that muscles work, not tense which is a common usage which is describing something else - muscles in opposition.) So back tension is necessary - but it is not sufficient. You can get weight onto your back muscles and still not be in alignment, which doesn't do the job at all.

So back tension is necessary but not sufficient.

Correct alignment is both necessary and sufficient - so I'm with geoffretired, as above.

Correct alignment is easier to teach - certainly to juniors, which is where I spend my time - than which muscles to use to get there. The correct muscles get used, because it's the only way to get there!

John

[geoffretired]

JohnR,
My thinking was much the same as yours. The movement aspect was key too. Hopefully, "moving into" will be followed by "movement beyond" when the release is executed.

[GeoffT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Isn't the problem with 'back tension' - and even more so with 'get it on your back' - that it's put forward as The Answer. That back tension is proposed as being both necessary and sufficient.

I don't think you can achieve good alignment without using the large muscles in your back, so when alignment is good the back muscles are in tension. (In tension, Sam, which is a correct scientific description of the only way that muscles work, not tense which is a common usage which is describing something else - muscles in opposition.) So back tension is necessary - but it is not sufficient. You can get weight onto your back muscles and still not be in alignment, which doesn't do the job at all.

So back tension is necessary but not sufficient.

Correct alignment is both necessary and sufficient - so I'm with geoffretired, as above.

Correct alignment is easier to teach - certainly to juniors, which is where I spend my time - than which muscles to use to get there. The correct muscles get used, because it's the only way to get there!

John

I thought I was going to agree wholeheartedly with you there John. I believe that correct alignment is necessary but not sufficient.

The archer could be perfectly aligned, but if the movement that creates the shot does not come from the right place then the result is poor shot. One can be perfectly aligned and then collapse/forward loose.

[ASW1973]

The archer could be perfectly aligned, but if the movement that creates the shot does not come from the right place then the result is poor shot. One can be perfectly aligned and then collapse/forward loose.

and this is where the problem gets worse.
1) there is no movement to create a shot
2) there is no activation of muscles
both of these teach a cognitive control which is disastorous
you can not forward loose off perfect alignment, if you do it aint aligned

so finally: if you set a shot up right it cant help but go click no cognitive movement needed

[not dead yet]

back tension thread, i cant believe LMP hasn't written something about me here.

compound ,up anchor,(reference for coaches) aim click bang .

hardly any movement in arm/ shoulder. basically a dead loose.
BUT, i know its on my back, i never get muscle ache in my biceps..
its as if my shoulder blades are as far inas they will go, so there no movement or place for my elbow to go back.

tried to explain this to so many people, no one can understand.

recurve same really not a dead loose but the arrow has gone b4 you have moved 1/2 an inch. so really if its on your back. ???

longbow different matter 65lb longbow i've defo got back tension.
that thing is fast

[Jerry Tee]

For me it's a yes. The back tension happens, after I find the back wall. I find it easier on the compound because there is no actual movement involved, just a loading up of the fingers before loose.