Maximum draw length on a 68" bow?

[JohnK]

The problem you might have with Borders is finger pinch. I've drawn 68 and 70in Borders to 32.5in and they certainly don't stack.

However, I'd still be inclined to stick with 70in limbs, or perhaps even some 71s.

[buzz lite beer]

Beat me to it JohnK, when the draw becomes extreme and a clean release is sacrificed and you get sore fingers due to pinching, you need longer limbs.

[not dead yet]

ask big bloke with a stylist..... he is a knowledgable huge beggar...ex GB ....ENGLAND........county....oh and he started as a welshman

[Rik]

Originally Posted by Kae

I'd never of thought that of you......... lol.

Well... All mathematicians are pedants, but not all pedants are mathematicians... That is to say there exists A such that A is a pedant and A is not a mathematician...

[Random_guy]

Surely it should be let A = the event that person X is a mathematician, and let B = the event that person X is a pedant then A => B but B =/=> A

Oh dear.....................

[Psychobiker]

I was shooting a 68" until my 70" arrived. The 70" is immesurably smoother

[Murray]

If it's "immesurably" smoother, how do you know it's smoother?

I only draw 27.5", but I found that I got better results with my 70" WinEx limbs than my 68" ones I have now - unfortunate but there you go. With modern limbs, I think the "additional cast" argument is overrated.

[Psychobiker]

It's like drawing a bottle of Jim Beam as opposed to Tesco whiskey

[Rik]

Originally Posted by Random_guy

Surely it should be let A = the event that person X is a mathematician, and let B = the event that person X is a pedant then A => B but B =/=> A

Oh dear.....................

But you're talking in Mathematics. I was talking in logic. I don't think there is a '=' operator in logic... The closest you come is the double implication 'if and only if'...
So...
let A represent the proposition 'X is a mathematician'
let B represent the proposition 'X is a pedant'
then A => B and not B => A
(using => for 'implies' as the damn PC doesn't seem to have the correct characters...)
or, rewriting the first term in a more fundamental form: ¬A or B

[Kae]

Originally Posted by Rik

But you're talking in Mathematics. I was talking in logic. I don't think there is a '=' operator in logic... The closest you come is the double implication 'if and only if'...
So...
let A represent the proposition 'X is a mathematician'
let B represent the proposition 'X is a pedant'
then A => B and not B => A
(using => for 'implies' as the damn PC doesn't seem to have the correct characters...)
or, rewriting the first term in a more fundamental form: ¬A or B

pfft there is no such thing as Maths and Logic in the same sentence