Matt there is also the time in England where every man was required to practice archery every sunday, therefore artists knew about archery, being that they had to practice it.
Thanks for liking my comment! This is the most likes and resposes to a comment I have ever had, thsnks everyone! Thanks for the response Matt spfcifically.
If everyone did it, why was there a law to enforce it? It's a monumental assumption that the law was always obeyed. And not all the medieval art in question is from Britain.
Nathaniel Wilcox : I agree with you on the Britian art work but some of the art work that Shad shows is German, Italian, French, and Spanish. They showed the arrows on the right too,
Hi Matt, great video! Your input to the discussion is a treasure. I had to chuckle when you switched over to shooting on the right, straight after the left. Even before you shot I had a strong feeling of what would happen ^_^ Whenever I do that it takes a good 10 to 20 arrow for me to reset my sight picture to account for the different trajectory, although it is getting easier lately and I’ve seen others switch without needing any reset shots, which is a point in favour to your theory of people shooting on both sides depending on what was needed. Alas for me at the moment my shots still fly strong to the left or right directly after switching. As to which side was more prevalent? I think a fifty/fifty split is possible, but I agree with you, 70/30 looks to be more representative of the artwork. I did come across a researcher who looked through the John Rilen’s Library in the university on Manchester (a response to the Lars Anderson video) and found a 50/50 representation in the side of the bow the arrow was placed on in medieval art, but this was with a smaller sample size. I haven’t done an exact count but looking more broadly at the moment it does seem like the left has more depictions. Absolutely phenomenal video mate, and I can’t wait to see your further experimentation.
Have you seen Joe Gibbs using the Instant Legolas, Shad? It's an amazing device which cuts out the nocking time entirely. Yet, it seems Joe barely increased his shooting speed? Doesn't that ruin the Cradle Draw, which is much slower than the SIL? To compare, he can shot a 160# bow in about 5.5 seconds per shot. The 120# bow using the SIL was about 4 second per shot (3.92 seconds on average). So, if your bow is an entire 40# lighter, it allows you to shoot 27% faster. But draw weight makes a huge difference to speed, where he was able to shoot a 95# bow (similar to yours) at 1.5 seconds per arrow. So at that rate, even with the SIL, heavy war bows don't seem to get much advantage, as Jack from Historical Archery told you in his video where he tested your draw for you. It seems the heavier the bow, the less useful reducing nocking time is.
@@Meevious "Joe shot 5 shots in 8 seconds with the *_95_* lbs Instant Legolas (0.625 shots per second) and 2 shots in 8 seconds with the *_ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY POUND BOW_* (0.25 shots per second)." ...Didn't you read my comment? I counted the number of frames for each shot, counting from the moment the string was released. ""That's 2.5 times faster (250% faster)."" Gee... I wonder why?
@@vanivanov9571 No one knows the point you're trying to make. Yes the Instant Legolas can shoot fast, that's what it was made to do, so? You seem to be acknowledging that speed is advantageous, and shooting on the right has a biotechnological advantage in obtaining speed. What you're saying doesn't contradict this, in fact it seems to be supporting it due to the acknowledgement that speed is desirable. If you're trying to say you will shoot slower with a 160lb bow, well clearly, but this doesn't discount than any additional speed on such a heavy bow would not be desirable, nor do we know what speed is truly achievable in that range. Joe does not attempt speed shooting records or try different styles that give speed advantages. He shoots the normal way he shoots, just trying to go fast. This is far from how fast he could really get. The main point of contention that you don't seem to be addressing is that some people have been saying speed is too hard to obtain with a warbow, but 100lb is most definitely in the warbow range and I've developed a very decent speed (8 arrows in 30 seconds) without much practice because I'm taking advantage of the significant bio-mechanical advantages of shooting on the right side. Indeed I'm shooting faster than most warbow archers already because so few even attempt speed shooting with them. What you are saying doesn't discount this at all. You're not making sense.
@@shadiversity My point was quite clear, and I'm sure anyone reading can understand. As you say, the Instant Legolas is much faster than your technique can ever be. And yet, the shooting speed between a 160# bow and a 120# SIL bow is quite similar. So, let me make the question simpler: *With practice, how much faster will your technique be, compared to the orthodox technique?* It seems the SIL will speed things up much less than 27% (the difference between the 120# SIL and 160# ELB). And your technique must, as you agree, speed it up a lot less than the SIL can. At that rate the increase, even if one became very proficient, may be 5% or less? How much would you estimate, optimistically? As you said before, the traditional Mediterranean draw is more accurate. It can also be quite fast as Ken Hicks showed, thus far matching your Cradle Draw. So why would we give up greater accuracy and a cleaner release unless we were getting a substantial boost in rate of fire?
@@vanivanov9571 I never said it's more accurate, please, find me the quote. I may of said it *might* be more accurate, but that could be wrong because I've seen some tremendous accuracy from shooting on the outside of the bow with the Mediterranean grip as shown by Lars Anderson in one of my videos. I know I'm more accurate than when I shot on the other side. This doesn't mean everyone will have the same experience, it's what the individual archer prefers. For me there's more advantages to shooting on the outside and all the theorizing from you will not change what my personal experience is, as much as you seem to hate that reality. You comparison with the SIL is flawed as Joe said shooting with it felt like the bow was up to 40lb heavier than it is normally and he didn't even do a speed test with the 120lb, only the 95lb, so we don't actually know how fast he could get. This means his drawing speed he had with his 120lb SIL-bow was much slower than normally and thus your theory is pointless. Also, shooting on the outside it's not just a matter of being inherently faster, which it is, it's also that you can become faster much quicker than practicing on the left. I'm expecting that with a lot of practice I'll be able to shoot an arrow every three seconds with my 100lb bow and I plan to do that with a 120lb in time. However longer it takes me to draw a heavier bow, I'll still have the same speed benefits in reloading the arrow and knocking, so overall I'll still be faster. There are other benefits to shooting on the outside, for instance I find it easier to shoot standing upright with it on the outside, while shooting on the inside encourages leaning forward which takes more energy to maintain because your weight is now away from your center of gravity. I find it easier to draw heavier weights and for longer periods of time. All very valid and real advantages.
Quick point - I caught the smirks every time you put the two fingers up. I got to admit, I chuckle almost every time an American does that for "two" in a gesture that we definitely use for something else. I like that you brought up the different systems for rapier and compared that the longbow. I'm not sure if it's something the "pro-right-side arrow" debaters have used when being rejected by those who claim there's only one way to properly use a bow. As someone whose been watching Shad's videos, I'm glad you decided to add your opinions on the matter.
I like it in The Colour of Magic (2 part TV film with Jason David and Samwise Gamgee) when Twoflower uses his guide book. He does the gesture the American way at first and the innkeeper takes offence. He then checks the book and realises his mistake and corrects it. (Enjoy my irrelevant comment)
Just gonna go on record here, and say that LumpyBumpy was only tillered to 30", so if you pull it to 32" and it fills the air with beautiful pieces of firewood it's your fault :D
Matt, regarding the artwork that shows archers with their legs crossed, I've seen this same position that you mention and at first I assumed it was artistic silliness but when Shad started to raise this discussion it opened up a lot of questions about medieval archery and I decided I wanted to see if there was something going on with that stance. What I noticed is that the crossed-leg position feels (to me anyway) like I'm able to engage my legs a bit more into the draw and it also (again, for me at least) felt like a more comfortable position to lean back when drawing with the arrow on the right side of the bow. I'm not sure if it proves anything but I recommend heading outside with a bow and trying the stance for yourself just to see if you notice the same things I did. I don't have any scientific testing to say something concrete but I definitely felt like the legs crossed helped me lean back to draw on the right side, putting weight on my back foot. I stood with the toes on my lead foot pointed at the target, with the rear foot angled 90 degrees so pointing the same direction as my chest would be. This kept my balance steady and let me put weight on my back foot and really sink into the draw. For reference I'm 5'11" with a 77" wingspan from fingertip to fingertip and my longbow draws at 58-60 pounds with my reach.
I should add that the position worked much better for me when I bend my rear leg at the knee. Helps lower center of gravity and keep me balanced in an otherwise awkward position. Also helps me lean back a bit more and really dig in for the draw.
Matt, back in the day when you practiced Hung Gar kung fu, did you ever use the cross-legged step ("kei lun bo"; spelling varies)? I suspect it might be similar to what medieval artists were trying to depict, but, as we know, medieval artists sometimes struggled with getting perspective right, and it's not really a natural position to begin with. I don't have a bow to play with right now, but, substituting an exercise band, it does seem to allow for the torso a large amount of freedom to twist after the bow has already been drawn, and might allow for better tracking of moving targets.
My wife's youtube drama "so this person is cancelled by everyone because they are racist and engeneered a situation to discredit another makeup artist" My youtube drama "THIS MAN SAYS YOU CAN DRAW A BOW A DIFFERENT WAY"
There are plenty of bitchy, narcissistic and racist mens men out there. Mainstream culture is so void and pointless, controversy is the only thing that makes it interesting.
Having spent some time in the army I’ve got to say that everyone runs their gear and kit in their own special way “if it’s stupid and it works, it really isn’t that stupid.” Loved you saying into this conversation Matt!
I know this is an old video, but I wanted to say YEEEESSSSS!!! Absolutely. I'm. A hunting archer, that's my background, and I promise I would make adaptations that would drive a target archer mad. I'm tall and skinny, and shooting my 66 lb "elk and bear" recurve is different for me, method and otherwise, than it is for my 5'10" friend who has much shorter arms and much broader shoulders. I've taught a bunch of people "instinctive shooting" but some guys just CAN'T do it and get DEADLY at gap, or split-vision shooting. Etc. It would all add up, and every archer would be a little different.
@@JayM409 yeah they sure do, but once you get in the field they leave us alone. But 🇨🇦 is cool they let the boys go to work, some other countries not so much
As for the depictions of crossed leg shooting, clearly they were using a superior knowledge of body mechanics. Winding their bodies in one direction like a spring, so they may spin and strike - performing the most complex of medieval trickshots. The three sixty quickdraw.
Very interesting to hear you chime in on this, but I really have to admit that the apex of this discussion can only occur once Lindybeige gets involved to specify which side of the bow they drew _fire_ arrows from (since we know they were so ubiquitous and fundamental to medieval combat). *FIRE ARROWS!!!!*
Shad did raise the topic of shooting from the left for the sake of accuracy, versus from the right for the sake of rapidity. Incidentally, he also showed that there are mechanical advantages to drawing from the right and with a leaning-forward stance, making loosing arrows easier on him (effectively allowing him to use a heavier bow both more rapidly and for a longer span of time).
I learnt to shoot a bow mostly by myself in my backyard as a kid. Putting the arrow on the right of the bow was what I did instinctively. It just felt more natural and streamlined to put the arrow on the side of the hand I was using to retrieve them from the quiver. So yeah, I would be really surprised if some people in the past didn't do the same (and it certainly didn't prevent me from hitting the target).
I think its the same with any sport. In hockey, skateboarding, snowboarding, baseball the "wrong side" is called goofy. If you skateboard as a right leg person, your supposed to have your dominant leg on the back, but a lot of people (~30%) will do the opposite because its more natural, same with holding bat in baseball, or hockey stick etc. It might be thing about being kind of hybrid handed, where you feel more conformable doing something as a leftie, while your dominant hand still being right. I think archery is in this category. My own experience i have felt that this "goofy" is consistent to sport to sport, so there has to be some brain wiring behind it.
As Matt noted near the end, longbow shooting, especially for high poundage longbows, is more instinctive than modern target shooting. The archer is already instinctively through practice compensating for the archer’s paradox. As such, accuracy with a longbow really comes down to practice.
Even Shad said that the orthodox method is more accurate. I'd like to see someone use his method to hit targets at 50 yards. English longbow archers were tested on their accuracy at far greater distances.
@@vanivanov9571 Shad said _HE_ was more accurate orthodox because of previous practice and it *MIGHT* be easier to be less inaccurate orthodox. Not the same. Frankly I concur because the ONLY difference is that unaccounted for frictional twisting involved in the string release will tend to either roll the shaft into or away from the bow. Release the string with sufficiently low friction that string doesn't twist on release or counter twist during the draw or produce a consistent effect and this consideration goes away. Unwanted twisting of the string still affects orthodox, but as I started orthodox I couldn't tell you if it's harder to learn not to the other way around. Guess we need to finda group of noobs somewhere because all I'm learning at the moment is 'how far left' to aim.
@@buzzkrieger3913 ....Some people will shoot with the THUMB DRAW on the left side in competitions, where accuracy and points matter most. Being able to aim with the arrow is that good, in a competition, though most stick to instinctive shooting and other methods of aiming. For the Mediterranean draw, even Shad admits it is more stable and accurate, just that he claims the many issues with his draw can be solved. You are going to have to aim pretty far to the left, because this is what happened when you shoot with the cradle draw: /watch?v=Hxvws_S1bf8 Someone mentioned testing the penetration of the cradle draw against a wooden board, and said it halved the penetration.
Instinctive... Disqualified.. And shame on mr easton for using it. You call your Block and parryies by name. Instinctive is like calling all of sword fighting fapping about
Also a serious thought. Dominate eye vs dominate hand. I for example am left eye dominate and right handed. So I shoot a pistol/revolver with my right hand and use left eye, and fire a rifle play pool use a bow etc with my left hand.
Dominant eye is pretty easy to train. When shooting handguns and rifles I used to practice switching back and forth. I make that switch a lot in photography too.
As far as I understand, Shad does not argue for 50/50, he is opposing the view that the right side shooting is impossible/dangerous/wrong. Nothing on prevalence of one over the other.
agreed. How prevalent right side shooting was compared to left side was never a topic of discussion, only that both methods were indeed practiced with regularity.
@pel thoron His theory has changed about a dozen times, and he declares himself proven right when he lowers his standards into the ground. He originally claimed he would test his orthodox shooting speed versus his unorthodox shooting speed... but now he's just trying to catch up to an old man, who may well have been using a heavier bow. It's all pointless, of course... Even with the Instant Legolas, Joe Gibbs could barely shoot notably faster. I should dig up the numbers for that.
@@midshipman8654 He didn't. Right from the start he said that right-hand side method clearly was used sometimes, but not all of the times. It is his opponents who were saying at the beginning that this method was never ever used in medieval, now changed their stance in accepting that art clearly indicates that it was used, and now talk how Shad suddenly wanted to prove that everyone shoot from the right. All this bullcrap reminds me of AR-15 MOA-wankers, who cannot accept AKs and ideology behind it.
Van Ivanov Joe Gibbs shot significantly faster when he used the instant legolas. Edit: I just dug the numbers for you. Instant Legolas equipped longbow shot 5 arrows while regular longbow shot 2 arrows. This just made the rest of your statement irrelevant.
Hey Matt, from a biomechanical standpoint, I can tell you a big part of how you can pull so much more, and more easily and hold it back with the arrow on the right/outside. When you draw on the outside, the bow is farther across your body, so the force of the draw is translating directly THROUGH your upper skeletal girdle instead of around it -- through the clavicles, scapulae, and upper thorasic vertebrae; plus the humeri are lined up better with them instead of hanging out front. Look at the video and see how you even get your head out of the way intuitively to let it line up through the bones. This means your bones are carrying most of the standing pressure of the draw, and at full draw your muscles are mostly just having to stabilize the bow & string, not fight back the full draw weight. At that longer draw, your drawing elbow is also farther back, fist tighter to your body line, so the string is pulling forward on the elbow and not sideways, which makes it easier to hold there. It's built into the trigonometry. As for aiming, it was hard to be sure from the camera angle, but it looked like you were still basically aiming with the bow looking directly forward, and not at the flight angle of the arrow itself compared to the bow. This is because your set-point at full draw -- having gotten your head out of the way -- was deeper back into/around your own centerline (and lower), so the back of the arrow was farther to the left than you usually have it, so the arrow was actually pointed farther to the right (and upward). At the close-up viewpoint of your eye, you are only looking at the front half of the arrow, so you can't see that directly. You'll just have to compensate a few more degrees. The arrows were flying straight, so you just have to move your aim point left and down a bit to hit true. Think of aiming from the BACK of the arrow, from your drawing shoulder, not the tip or your cheekbone, and it should be good. "Shoot from the feathers." I'm from an old archery family going back to medieval swiss woodsmen, and I had to make similar adjustments for various situations as part of family tradition & hunting. If you think about aiming the back of the arrow pushing forward, instead of the tip leading, you'll find you can adjust to a lot more "improvisational" shooting scenarios, like drawing switch-handed, arrow on either side, from behind a tree trunk, etc. Last tip: if you need more help keeping the arrow on the thumb, don't start with your drawing hand fully closed on the string. Start with a semi-open "spear hand" hold with the string inside the last knuckle, and close your hand into a "bear claw" or semi-fist at the final position as you draw. This will put a little bit of inward torque on the string to keep it faced properly as you draw back, instead of turning outward and pulling the arrow off the rest/thumb. Happy shooting :)
I have done archery at various points growing up using the "standard" european draw with the arrow on the left but have recently got into the thumb draw with the arrow on the right. I find that for aiming, simply shift the bow its width to the left and hey presto, you're still looking down the arrow. I think what throws people off is the fact that the bow is now "in the way". All it is is practice though. If you were to sit there, from fresh and learn how to shoot from the right, you'd be just as competent as you were on the left
Is the eastern style thumb draw comfortable when compared to a two finger pull? What about fatigue after loosing many arrows? I'm really interested in that style of draw and shooting, since many of the best archers in the world did it, so there must have been something to it.
@@-Zevin- it's different in the fact that different parts of you fatigue but its the same as 2 finger in a lot of ways. You just have to practice and youll strengthen yourself up. I still prefer European style over the eastern style but it's pretty fun and you just have to practice practice practice. I don't think it helped when I had been using a longbow all the other times and I changed over to a horse bow because the draw length is much shorter so you dont come to "rest" in a locked out position so you feel like you're half arsing the shots but yeah, its different but very very similar. just make sure you get a thumb ring and you'll be pretty much good to go
@@-Zevin- *addition* it can hurt the nail area of your thumb though if you're drawing higher poundage bows and are having to really clamp down on your thumb with your finger
If you keep both eyes open, you'll see your target "through" the bow. I think this is why some historical Asiatic bows had geometric designs near the handle like on antique Manchu bows. Probably acted like a sight window.
Thanks for adding to the discussion. The main thing I've taken from the whole debate, is that a longbow is not simply pulling back the string and firing it at the enemy. If one way is beneficial then it will be used when it's the best option. Thinking of the logistics of warfare, I doubt that an army was always able to have high quality arrows. Having 2 quivers could be useful for an archer the differentiate between arrow heads, or quality of arrows. There would be little point in putting extra effort into a precise shot with a damaged arrow, or an arrow that was made shoddy. However, when you're not worried about hitting a friendly then any arrow will do. To me it seems that the left side is more accurate (but that could due to experience) but the right side may be faster and easier. We accept that a longsword will be used differently depending on the situation (armor and weapon of an opponent) but a lot of people can't accept that a bow could be used differently depending on the situation.
Matt, I think you are spot on with your assumption that expert bowman chose the side of the bow depending on his needs. I come from a Japanese martial arts background, and we were always taught that you have to be able to use the weapon with either hand, because in real combat, you might just lose the use of your good hand, so it makes perfect sense that people in the past whose lives depended on being able to use a weapon would know how to use it any which way. This idea of the 'correct' way of using weapons are a recent convention. Even in Japan, 'conventionalists' will tell you that the right hand always goes on top of the left when grasping a sword (even for left-handers!). That way of thinking came about in the Edo period when Japan was at peace. In the Warring States period that preceded it, they didn't worry about such things because surviving was the priority. One final note on pronunciation if you will allow me, I thought it was amusing that you pronounced 'kudos' the way you should have pronounced the Japanese style of archery 'kyudo'.
I read a source many years ago, can't remember what it was for the life of me, that mentioned that in the artwork that depicted the archers with the legs crossed it was showing an archer that had spun around quickly to shoot dehind him and the angle of the artist showed the legs in a crossed manner. Sounds good but I don't know. Love your videos and the content Matt, keep it up!
I find I must agree with your assessment that a single archer may have used more than one way to shoot their bow. I wonder why this never occurred to me before. Good video, thanks.
To me, the most important aspect of Shad's video: he's essentially self-taught and has been trying to work out how's the best way to do things. He has access to modern technology, but what he's finding is that the historical depictions are "correct" in terms of the depictions of techniqueS. Medieval people weren't stupid, they just had different locus of knowledge.
And also different needs. Shoot on the off side for more power/range or volley shots? Shoot the standard side for more accuracy and close range? Maybe the cross legged thing has to do with more stability in the shot or something? Maybe the lean forward draw on the bow was indeed to make repeated draws in combat less tiring in a long 4 hour battle? You have to think of these things from a practical stand point, not a competition archer standpoint. Some times you will do a sub optimal technique cause there is a benefit to doing so.
@@braddl9442 Precisely! "Sub-optimal" is contextual; in software (my area of expertise), what is ideal for one problem will be worst possible for another. In engineering, EVERYTHING is a trade-off, so why wouldn't this be the case in archery too?
@@edwardcullen1739 Doesn't even need to be for software engineering. Anyone with a basic understanding of modern firearms, which are also ranged weapons like the bow and arrow, would see this tradeoff easily. Firing in full auto is fastest but very inaccurate. Firing in a standing unsupported position in semi-auto is slightly slower, but more accurate. Tightening the sling, crouching down, or even going into a prone position would also further increase accuracy, but also take a lot more time to get into. In all these cases, there's a tradeoff between speed and accuracy, so you pick whichever one is most appropriate for the situation. You want to be as fast as possible while still being sufficiently accurate. Key point being sufficiently accurate, as it doesn't really matter in a battlefield sense whether you hit a man dead on the chest or a couple inches to the left, as you still hit in in the vital spots. No need to be more accurate than needed and slow yourself down. Thing is, all that goes without saying for anyone who understands even the basics of modern firearms. Even if all you did was play a couple matches of Call of Duty, you'd understand this concept. So I don't know why it became a controversy with regards to archery outside of Shad's point that since archery hasn't been a battlefield weapon for centuries, everyone focuses purely on highly accurate target archery over everything else. That's fine, but it does skew perception when it comes to discussion of how bows and arrows were used in actual medieval warfare.
As a followup: look at Joe's shooting from multiple angles. ua-cam.com/video/MjY2QrU4sm4/v-deo.html Or you can also look at Mark Stretton. He is hinging at the HIP and keeping a neutral spine (like a deadlift) and achieving maximal expansion with his chest and back while shooting on the left side. The reason Matt is getting less draw length on the left is simply due to bending in the upper part of the thoracic spine area, nothing inherently to do with the arrow placement. The arrow placement is actually pretty much irrelevant.
just wanna say that, the archery club my parent and I used to be at (till it burned down 2 decades ago) everyone had the arrow on the right side, with any bow (old longbows up to state of the art composite bows) I also distinctly remember my father asking at a shop for a strings that were twisted the "correct" direction and was severely annoyed that they didnt have the ones for right side arrows anymore because this or that tournaments (Olympic?) rule set made them obsolete
I thought it might be interesting to add the perspective of an archery coach in here. For context behind my opinions: I am a level 2 archery coach (UK standards) with a history of competitively competing and coach recerve and longbow, and a history degree predominantly focusing on medieval Europe (including essaying on the topic of the efficacy of longbows). Firstly, I hate to discount your findings but I believe the extra draw length achieved on the right hand side is all to do with poor form and incompatible posture (back, neck, front shoulder all noticeably different between the two shooting styles) and would probably be brought into comparability with practice and technique adaptation for the standard shooting position. The reason, I would venture, you aren't hitting with the arrow on the right is due to two aspects. The first is probably the fact that the extra draw length achieved throws your technique out and means shoulder/back muscles are not in a place to properly control the release. I would also suggest that shooting in the three finger style from the right hand side works against the mechanics of the release and encourages the arrow to skew to the right but without the body of the bow to support it (think archers paradox with the arrow flexing in the same direction but without the body of the bow in the way). I feel like to effectively shoot from the right hand side of the bow a thumb draw is better as it reverses the mechanics of the release and forces the arrow to behave as normal (but on the other side) it also has the advantage of holding the arrow to the bow without the need to lean at awkward angles (found this out after the months of working with a competitive horse-Archer). Historically speaking, I highly doubt there was a set form or way of shooting as it was probably taught locally by word of mouth with no set discipline (how could you have such a thing in a society vastly populated by the illiterate). From personal experience, with practice, it is entirely possible to shoot 15 arrows a minute from a longbow with fair accuracy, in all but utter panic scenarios, is fast enough to not need to compromise accuracy for further speed and I have no doubt that the 18/20 arrows a minutes described in some primary sources would be entirely possible after a lifetime of practice. Personally I find it difficult to place massive reliance on paintings for analysis of detailed techniques due to the fact that monks (generalisation) would not have been interested in the minutia of techniques or necessary exact portrayal of events, as often stances and gestures indicated interaction between characters more than "this is how that person was standing".
Regarding those chiefly English sources of the time, consider that neither clergy nor artisans/craftsmen-nor fine artists-were exempt from the mandate on archery being the only sport or game or like activity to occur on Sundays. Within a few decades, this became an explicit order for all men of age to train in archery on that day of the week [as well as on holidays], and it could not be ignored so easily as a result. Every household had a bow, by law, and that was the case for roughly the next three centuries. Artwork being a poor source is a flimsy excuse, based on bad experience with and/or stereotypes of modern artists who don't look at extant examples of the things they recreate in their art. Creative licence is one thing-being ridiculed by contemporaries for a gross, obvious, and fixable mistake is another.
9:16 Funny thing is I started archery with thumb draw and whenever I try shooting med. draw with the arrow on the left I get the same fishtailing you described, but if I shoot like Shad with the arrow on the right (which I'm not used to ether) I don't get quite as much. So it really seems to be about practice and user preference.
You're most likely fouling the draw/release by 'rolling' the string. At a short range try really focusing on how your fingers feel as you first grasp the string, draw, and then release. A thin tab/glove will really help, even a couple of shots with bare skin. Because your 3 fingers hinge at different lengths you'll need to open them in subtly different ways to usual for a clean release and be careful how you align your knuckles as you close your fingers. If your bow is light enough try the Flemish draw (just index and middle fingers) it can be helpful figuring out how your fringers interact before going back to the 3-finger Mediterranean. Lastly pressure from your index and middle fingers can do surprising things to the arrow. If you aren't 100% sure, you can get tabs with a finger spacer or place all 3 fingers under the arrow to test.
@@buzzkrieger3913 Yeah the true culprit is my ring finger (the little bastard). But my main point was that whereas Matt has more issues making a proper release with the arrow on the right, I have more issues making a proper release with the arrow on the left.
@@comrademcsalty7676 :) NPS, thought I'd drop a little help if I could, hope it was taken that way. Matt's issue is likely more on the draw vs string and an errant input on the bow on release from his new arm positioning. Both of you are most likely increasing pressure between arrow and bow on release, amplifying flex, etc. Same problem, but opposite negative rotational input. Out of interest how do find the difference in arrow placement with a thumb release?
Matt's comment about the rapier: that there are different styles of rapiers and different systems of rapier fencing to show there can be various ways to shoot a war bow makes a lot of sense.
Practice practice and even more practice! That is all. You are instinctively aiming/compensating for the arrow on the left so ofcores you can't hit things on the right but 100% it is just all about practice! Happy to see more people trying this out rather then just saying that it is impossible
Matt and Shad commenting on each others videos like this makes me happy. It's a healthy way to have a discussion, instead of name calling and just saying people are wrong.
I've been saying this as an American that uses ranged weapons, just more modern versions. When I was learning sight picture for pistols and rifles, the instructors teach the general sight picture and the best ways to hold the gun to handle recoil competently, but there's actually several grips for modern sporting rifles, such as being tucked in, turning the wrist so that you're just bracing the fore grip, or the modern C clamp grip are all valid. So they teach those and a concept called "Shooter's Preference." That is, as long as your sight picture, trigger control, and recoil management is on point, then however you hold the gun is irrelevant, because as long as the bullet goes into the target, and allows you to get a tight grouping, and manage the recoil of the gun competently and safely, then that is what you should be doing. I wouldn't be shocked if in Medieval Europe, there was shooter's preference for bows and cross bows, and this could very well be what we're seeing. That's my hypothesis anyways. As the old saying goes, "There's more than one way to skin a cat."
Edward III law requiring everyone to practice archery meant that in England for a couple hundred years the artists would have known how to shoot a bow.
Lovely review, i think i want to give some extra insight about bow shooting. 1st, earliest bowman have mindset that bow was basically extremely long spear, so someone that was proficient with 4 m+ pike find it not much difference between stabbing with spear tip and "stabbing" with arrow tip, this was the explanation why old bowman dislike sighting system, because they did not use sighting system with spear. Old bowman prefer to train their rate of fire than precision so they can "stab" faster with their arrow. Modern archer treat bow as marksman weapon, so they train their precision but sacrifice rate of fire, by using sight system.
@Jon Goat Why would anyone want to buy Denmark though, or even half of it? I mean, I'd say just spend some of it on Copenhagen and then buy yourself a nice slice of Switzerland with the rest.
"Sometimes with the legs crossed over" If you're under heavy attack, you haven't the time to undo your fly, and you wouldn't want to wet your breeches or leggings. Hold it in until you have a free moment.
@@mariusmioc3045 Some historical sources regarding Azincourt say that due to dysentery some English archers fought without hose or breeches, so no need for crossed legs :)
As a person who has only shot a compound bow from the left side it is very surprising and interesting that it makes such a difference when you change sides with the arrow.
Way to demonstrate the conundrum Matt. I really appreciate this video. Hopefully now, the two sides can call a ceasefire and realize the people from the time didn't give a damn and did what worked for them. I feel like I've learned something.
I did Kyudo on a competitive level a couple of years ago (Heki-ryu or Heki style), here's some pointers on the technique: In Kyudo you have to put a twist in your drawing hand counter clock to keep the arrow on the bow so it doesn't fall off. Your thumb on the bow hand is not supposed to hold it, just guide it. At the same time you are putting an "outwards" twist in your bow hand (counter clock seen from above). This double twist is intended to add more power in to the draw and is often sited as a reason why Japanese war bows were lighter that their European cousins.
I discovered while shooting with a shoulder injuring that the lift and lower (as suggested) actually does work to engage different (stronger) muscles while drawing, so ...
I don't know if you will ever get around to reading this but with your style of shooting, your muscle memory is correcting for the arrow being pushed to the left by the bow. When shooting on the right you have the force in the opposite direction. obviously it can't be understated that you can't "aim" in the conventional sense with the arrow on the right and most people that do shoot on the outside of the bow shoot instinctively which requires its own practice. I shoot a turkish horsebow,( coincidently one that you have reviewed on your channel) and most of the skills that I use for reducing the force on the arrow during release don't work so well on longer heavier bows( like Khatra and string twisting), so if you want to get better with shooting on the right you may just have to practice more haha. Good luck and cheers!
Coming very late to this, but anyway... with a long bow I find that canting to the right in order to shoot on the left keeps the lower limb and lower half of the string away from my legs, which would seem to be a good idea especially if i am taking a broad stance to support leaning back from the hips to make a long shot. IIRC the peoples who used thumb rings generally using short 'horse' bows and with the shorter limbs this would be less of an issue - though of course there may be a horse to consider as well... Leaning from the hips possibly explains some of the different postures depicted by artists. The basic posture with both hands, elbows and shoulders close to being in the same horizontal plane gives you the greatest resistance to the tension of the drawn up bow. If you just drop one elbow and raise the other not only does the draw length decrease because of the changing geometry but also because you are using the body less effectively - you're not as strong this way. And because you are no longer well aligned when you loose your bodies reaction to the sudden loss of tension will be relatively chaotic, reducing accuracy. So best to keep the alignment of the arms and tilt the entire upper body for major changes in elevation. Just off now to have a look at Shadiversity...
Your two arrows you fired from the "wrong" side of the bow looked to be a consistent landing. I'm confident it's an aiming issue from what I saw. I think Shad made a point of needing a twisting technique to help with the arrow falling away. As for the arrows hitting sideways, your arrows might not have been weighted for that style of shooting (Or possibly the twist Shad mentioned corrects for it in some way?). Since you are changing the technique, sometimes you need to change the equipment as well. Now, I would also wonder if maybe bow construction might need to be considered for trying to optimize the new style. (Assuming you want to completely convert.) If you want a shoot on either side bow maybe that needs a different construction as well? But it's been fun seeing people try it and see people fighting the conclusions and thus testing it out.
One thing I noticed is that when you were drawing from the opposite side of your dominant arm (left side for you) is that it did not appear like you were drawing with your back, rather that you were doing so with your arm. Also the primary reason (that I know of) that we draw with an arrow resting opposite of our dominant arm is that the pull from the arm then pulls the arrow into the bow helping to hold the arrow there rather than pulling off to the side.
I think it's more the release that's the issue, a right hand release displaces the string slightly to the left as it comes off the fingers so the tendency of the arrow to move right is limited by it pressing into the bow.
War bows are interesting! I have only practiced modern hunting archery technique, so my arrow has always been on the left side. I have shot a compound and recurve, burt not a longbow. I think this video along with the Tods workshop has properly stoked my intrest in traditional war bows!
Years ago, I noticed something when looking at chopstick tutorials: there are a number of different techniques, and some of them I can't mimic because my fingers seem to attach to the hand in a slightly different position than theirs. The same principle probably applies to holding arrows, different people have different shaped hands and hold things differently.
not necessarily a lot of time semingly obvious things were not done in history without prompting. for example, the hammock, despite its conceptual simplicity, was not known in europe until they were encountered in the new world.
@Jon Goat actually yes, and that is the basis for my comment. I had trouble in basic training shooting because my arms have a slight deformity in that they are too short. I could not aim correctly while holding the proper arm positioning. When my drill sergeant realized that I could hit 40 out of 40 using a different arm position, he said, "If you are in my foxhole, I don't give a damn how you hold your arms, as long as you hit your target." When a different drill sgt laid into me for improper shooting stance and I told him that I was following the instructions of my drill sgt, our Captain told him to let me shoot as I had been doing.
@Jon Goat The purpose of training instructors is to prepare you for war & to weed out those who are not mentally capable of being a soldier. Once you leave training, unless there is a specific reason for doing something a particular way, getting the job done is paramount. Only in movies are officers barking at soldiers, "It's my way or the highway."
By mentally capable of being a soldier, I am not saying anything bad about those individuals. It is a fact of life that not everyone can be a soldier. That's not a bad thing. It's not a good thing. It is just a thing.
I haven't seen much thought going to the military unit. If a dense unit of archers are required to loose many volleys in a short period of time, the arrow on the right means that they are quicker and packed tighter - therefore more lethal per yard of frontage - and more accurate as more archers have unobscured lines of sight to target.
Sir John Smythe had this to say about shooting with two fingers in his 1594 manual: "I would have no man chosen to be an Archer that had not so practised the vse of his bow from his youth, that he should bee able to shoot strong, or at the least of a conuenient strength and long arrowes, and therewithall v∣sed by continuall exercise to draw his arrow with three fin∣gers, and not with two (according to the new fashion) to the head: of which shooters with two fingers, I would haue none to be alowed for archers,* how faire soeuer they shoot, vnlesse they could verie well reforme themselues from that fond new fashion: because that in their so shooting they loose a great deale of the strength of their draught."
Yes Smythe is a problematic source (but very cool!), due to the date. Military archery had been dying for a long while by this date, so his referring to two-finger draw as a new thing is quite weird when we see it in much earlier medieval art. I suspect, as with so many things, that we are missing some of the context behind Smythe's work and what exactly was happening with archery in England in the 1590s. If we draw a comparison with something like Silver's swordsmanship treatise of the 1590s, then it is clear that often these books were just one person's opinion and that often involved contradicting other people's opinions, but it doesn't always reliably tell us what the general opinions held by other people were, nor what was being done 10, 20, 50 or 100 years earlier. George Silver, for example, is not really representative of most English fencing of the 1590s (probably) and certainly not of swordsmanship in the 1490s. But nevertheless, Smythe is a really rare and valuable source, when we have so little else to work from.
@@scholagladiatoria why not adresse the load distribution on the hand when using two fingers vs 3, there are very good reasons to use 3 fingers, using two seem more intuitive, but higher draws strain the hand so you want that ekstra load distribution that also helps keeping the hand and wrist lined up without twisting the string., also drawing with the elbow down as seen on many pictures is also more intuitiv snd shad claim people will do is natural, yet we all know teknuiqe is important, if not sword fights would Just be flailing abou. Edge alignment etc.
@@scholagladiatoria Michel Le Noir's circa-1515 *l'Art d'Archerie* also specifies a three-finger draw: "And every good archer should, as I have said before, draw his bow with three fingers and to his right breast, as by doing so he can pull a longer arrow." As does Roger Ascham's 1544 text: "[w]hen a man shooteth, the might of his shoote lyeth on the foremost finger, and on the ringman; for the middle finger Which is longest, like a lubber, starteth back, and beareth no weight of the stringe in a manner at all."
It is worth bearing in mind that medieval Europe covers, depending on how you count it, at least 500 years of time and many thousands of miles of space. For most people, for most of that time, travelling long distance would have been uncommon and most commoners would not have had a huge life expectancy, so considering there to be a standard way of doing anything over such a vast span of time and space with limited communication seems unlikely! My uneducated guess is that local clusters of one technique or another would spring up spreading if they worked, shrinking if they didn't, being replaced altogether as new techniques were discovered. I also suspect that no one would have been too fussed about archery technique as long as arrows were hitting the target!
Life expectancy for commoner would be no different than nowadays 70-85 years, high mortality was in early childhood, if you reached 14-15 years old you would most likely live a long life
Dropping down is better than going up.. Dropping should use the back muscles, like a lat pulldown... Going up will use your shoulders... That being said, going up, with a lighter bow would make a great exercise for shoulder health. It reminds me of using an elastic band and stretching it out and going up and down a door frame, left hand, and right hand on each side of the door, constant shoulder pressure until you tire out.. it's a physical therapy exercise for shoulders. But that way should tire you very fast. Dropping down using the back is a much larger muscle group.
8:42 and I doon't know why anyone would think otherwise. What about human history suggests uniformity of action? Literally, you go over the hill and people do things slightly different than how you do them, doesn't mean it's the most efficient way, but it's entirely possible humans never discover the MOST efficient way to do anything, especially once things like tradition get involved. Even in our modern society where the exchange of information is hyperfast and can homogonize things across culture groups, you still get people just doing simple things their own way. It's called style, and people always assume their's is the right one.
It has indeed been interesting results from Shad, and im really looking forward seeing him getting better, and also increasing his draw weight. I think the more common way of draw today was also more common in the past, but im surprised how adamant people are what is the "right" way of doing it. Like you say "many ways to skin a cat"
to be fair, people on both sides have been quite polemic about it. it isnt just the right only crowd. some people seem to also jump on the left bandwagon because its the new hip thing.
Steve Coates kinda agree. god that was stupid. but i think this is a more fruitful debate than that one. i think if a arrow was used on one side or another is a little more reasonable than if a bowman would do 360 spin shots and quick fire. although again, there was some merit to lars’s stuff too beyond the pomp and circumstance.
@@midshipman8654 Lars trick shooting is very skilful and quite entertaining as an art form I just never saw any point to it. Likewise this debate seems a bit pointless, I'm sure some archers of the period shot from the right from preference but some of the claims seem to be heading for the 'lost secrets of the ancients' territory.
Ref the crossed leg stance. In Malaysian and Indonesian martial arts there are crossed legged stances as part of moving and they are perfectly stable. It seems weird that they do not exist in rapier? It a way to defend and then move on your off side.
A considerable number of the archers in the Agincourt campaign were mounted. Many of those were used as mounted scouts. Mounted archers may have preferred to place the arrow on the left while on horseback, because the bow is tilted to the right, and on the right while on foot.
You have misunderstood something you read. Mounted archers in the English armies of the period only travelled by horse. They dismounted to shoot. From the whole Hundred Years War there is only one (quite dubious) reference to an archer shooting from horseback.
I'm totally with you here. But I think shooting the arrow from the left of the bow comes more "natural" in the beginning. As a beginner I can tilt the bow and rest the arrow on the bow which makes it much easier for me to reload. Most people will stick with the method learned first.
Thank you for finally suggesting it is situation dependent. I suggest that right side was used for distance. If you look at spring compression If I recall a lot of energy comes from the last 10 percent of compression.
There's a couple of reason that's likely not the case. The first is that Jack from Historical archery found no advantage, because you can easily adjust the position of your arms when drawing, independent of if the arrow is two inches to the left or right at the tip. And the second is that the arrow has a tendency to fly SIDEWAYS off the bow: /watch?v=Hxvws_S1bf8 Oh, also over-drawing or "stacking" is generally a bad idea.
Any half experienced Archer would have no problem drawing an arrow either side to maximum draw length without a thought. Once the muscle development and technique are in place it makes no difference. The question then is why shoot on the right? There may be reasons to do so, but ease of draw weight is not one of them.
@@mikegregory2492 Joe Gibbs showed there is no reason to do so. Even if the Instant Legolas, his time barely improved at all... despite using a significantly weaker bow. The IL is obviously many times better than Shad's technique, so if it barely makes a difference... there is no point. It was about 4 seconds per arrow with a 120# IL bow, compared to 5 seconds per arrow with a normal 160# bow. Obviously, the difference will be much less, given the same draw weight.
@@mikegregory2492 You may be interested to know that Shad has taken the time to reply to me three times in these comments, with some very long and personal posts. He must like me very much.
That 'high rotation' draw looks slightly risky to me for heavy bows; there's more stress added to the shoulder and minor pec than strictly necessary. Why add a range of movement to your rotator cuff when you should aim to be as efficient as possible in prising open the bow with both arms directly engaging your back muscles. Its perfectly possible to do this with a more lateral movement with an appropriate stance. This becomes quite important with longer shooting sessions, fatigue, minor dehydration (hangovers) etc. Also the point about drawing 'right of bow' being potentially more effective in draw length is moot. One month of regular practice you would be reaching full draw with ease whatever side (but slightly less with 'L&B' I trust - every time you drew it back to the limit I was starting at the big knot in terror!).
Good points. You should check out Ryd's response video, where he covers a little of that: /watch?v=ohomC2hp3Ac Justin Ma also made a great video on the proper form with a warbow, though I expect you already saw that one.
@@mortenjacobsen5673 Did you see that when Jack was injured testing out Shad's technique for him, Shad never offered ONE word of sympathy? Instead, when we were worried Jack might've permanently ruined his shoulder or might be unable to shoot for three+ months, he said, "I look forward to more of your videos!" He also ignored Jack's points from the video completely, and he even criticized Jack for performing the technique "incorrectly." To top it off... Jack ended up apologizing to SHAD for daring to get injured!
So one of the issues that comes up in modern firearms shooting is eye dominance. I wonder if that has any play with this as well? I don't know too much about archery so I don't know, but for a left and right eye dominant person using a gun can either be a bit different or completely different. It gets even more complicated when you get issues like a left eye dominance in a right hand dominant person. Because now you're wanting to use controls with your right hand but aim with your left eye. I wonder if any of that can translate into issues with shooting a bow?
I've always thought Matt had higher Strength than Shad. Like Shad was always like a battle-sage type with average fighting skills and stats and quite high magic, while Matt was a pure swordsman with high Strength, turns out Shad was a Tank all anong?
To be fair, Shad has been building up to 100 lbs over the course of several months while Matt has not done much archery recently. Essentially, Shad has been multi classing into Ranger lately while Matt is a straight up Fighter.
Body types. Matt looks more ectomorph to me, Shad more meso.. So, not really a surprise 🙂 Also, Shad seems to have shed a few recently... (Edit: fix autocorrect)
Different muscle groups. Archery muscles aren't the same as one would for swords and polearms. Shad has been practicing archery a lot recently while Matt have not. Shad also got surgery which helped him be more proactive and lose some weight. I still get the impression Matt would be the better swordsman though.
Matt, I agree with you and Shad the historically arrows were probably done on both sides of the bow, I also agree with you the splits probably close to 70/30, and I really like you bringing of the shooting stance changes because we see them in today's warbow archers as well. However on shooting stance please for the love of God stop leaning backwards You're going to hurt your lower back. This is the part that bothers me about this argument right now. Look at Joe Gibbs, Colin Gair, or Justin Ma shoot they all have that same posture of pushing their chest out to engage the big back muscles more but they hinge Forward at the hips. This takes a lot of the strain off the lower back and keeps the weight distributed across the big muscles. if you don't have that hinge and you just lean backwards you're at real risk of hurting yourself. Talk to Justin Ma him and his co-author (who's name escapes me) they did a lot of research into the body mechanics of drawing warbows for their translation of Gao Ying's historical treatise he would probably be able to put science to the positioning.
I'd expect the 'crossed legs' in artwork to be a reference to an archer with a 'twisted' torso. If your legs are oriented in one direction, but you twist your torso to shoot almost backwards then from certain angles it does look like your legs are crossed. Not sure if there's a benefit to shooting like that, but it's more feasable than actually having crossed legs.
Use a 3 fingers under technique to eliminate the pinching of the shaft. Pointing finger placed under nock, no thumb touching arrow. Get arrows 2-3 inches longer to avoid over draw and injury.
Practice makes permanent not perfect....as a self taught archer I naturally knocked on the right hand side I can group 12 arrows within 6 to 8 inches at distance knocking to the left just felt fiddly to me
Also Justin Ma and the guys at Way of Archery have absolutely mapped out to the detail how and which muscles to activate to draw extremely heavy bows with the thumb.
Matt are you familiar with Khatra? Armin Hirmer has some good content on that technique and he stated that it helped with shooting from "the wrong side".
Matt, may I make the suggestion of you putting your indexfinger on the arrow when you have it on the right hand side of the bow? That is one of the methods of making sure, that your arrow doesn't drop off the bow. You might even tilt it on the side without dropping it, like in the ridicoulus new Robin Hood movie.
I’m wondering about the ways in which the “archers paradox” might have been manipulated historically to different effect? I’ve seen videos of people arcing arrows from behind cover and around corners without ever exposing themselves or exposing very little. Do you have any information to share regarding archery from horseback or from the back of chariots? Thank you, sir, for the wonderful content you’re so steadily releasing to the world. Your depth of knowledge is apparent, which makes for a fascinating way to spend one’s time. Looking forward to the next one. Onwards!
Saw a video from a Maltese archer where he explained a little twist of the string as you draw to stop the deflection of the arrow when it's on the right.
Do not forget to always draw with *both* arms plus back muscles. Not only it makes easier to draw, it lessens the risk of injury, as you are distributing the force instead of concentrating in a single muscle/ body part.
I think it would be much easier for him to hear the word from a native speaker once than trying to get how to pronounce it by reading the comments. I mean, even the transcription won't help him if he doesn't know how to interpret it correctly to begin with. Case in point - literally everyone and their dogs butcher the name of Ryu from Street Fighter.
@Jon Goat It's not really difficult for an English speaking person to speak Japanese words after hearing them, since you're not really required to learn new tongue movements. It's just the fact that きゅ is not the same sound as きゅう and ど is not the same as どう . You need to either hear it or know how to read the transcription to know the difference.
@Jon Goat Actually, I should correct myself here - you may need to learn new tongue movements, but it's certainly not the case with these particular sounds.
Hey Matt: from a biomechanical point of view, when you use the 'drop down' technique with the arrow on the right you seem to be engaging more of the latissimus dorsi rather than just the interscapular muscles which give you a larger muscular cross section and therefore strength. You can also engage your lats through a much larger range and more symmetrically making the torso (with practice) much more stable. (Disclosure: I used to be a physiotherapist so have some understanding of biomechanics and kinesiology)
You should check out Justin Ma's video on the proper draw, and also Ryd's response video: /watch?v=ohomC2hp3Ac Moving the tip of an arrow two inches... there's no reason that should affect your draw.
Then you can explain how a isometric bow arm will be stronger reduce compexity , and put les stress and compression on the shoulder. Pluss you get to distribute the work load on your bones, and dont forget that streach reflex that loved to tear tissue, also if you could .. How levrage works and can pop joint and break bones...
@@vanivanov9571 I don't see why it wouldn't. If you are altering the angle of say, a flatbow, to accommodate the arrow being a good few degrees off to the right, then obviously the muscles being used will change assuming same stance (if you start leaning maybe you can engage the same muscle group). It's so strange to hear someone say that a few inches doesn't make a difference in a full body action like this. A few inches in bowling is the difference between a perfectly fine throw and a giant bruise on your hip and a bowling ball flying off to the side. A few inches in skiing is the difference between pushing off the snow with a ski pole and stabbing yourself in the foot (granted it's a tough boot so you are probably fine). Every single change to your form matters.
@@Alex_Fahey To move the tip of the arrow two inches... your hand moves less than one inch. Now, keeping the arrow on the bow without tension, via Shad's technique, that can surely mess you up. Jack of Historical Archery tore his shoulder, as keeping a heavy war arrow on his bow was not easy. Notably, Shad had said you are perfectly safe with an extreme reverse-cant ,so long as "your shoulder doesn't move." Jack's shoulder did not move, from the cant... so it wasn't very good advice.
Try it next time with a Mediterranean draw on the right side, and let us know how accurate it goes. I'm amazed there are people who think these draws are interchangeable.
@@martytu20 That's a specialist draw only used for sport, so far as anyone is aware. You can shoot a little more accurately that way, so it makes a difference to your score. But not everyone does that in the competitions, either, so it isn't a competitive necessity.
I would love some investigation into the development of both longbow and composite bows from prehistory to 17th century. Specifically how efficiency/draw weight improved over time. For example, had an English warbow existed for centuries but was simply never made as powerful because there was no need? Did the knowledge exist to make an equally efficient 160lbs longbows exist in say 1000BC? I've read account were apparently Egyptian chariot archers had such bows but were the designs as efficient? Kind of how Tod demonstrated a modern 150lbs crossbow having nearly as much penetration as a 850 medieval crossbow.
I appreciate your testing the standard method, but I must point out that in your first and final examples before your target practice you were still doing a bottom-up draw on both sides or mixing it in a wierd way with standard. With standard, you should not have to drop down before pulling up. instead, you raise it over your head, undrawn and then draw as you drop your bow from above your head. Your explanation on the mechanics was spot-on.
@@scholagladiatoria no problem I find that Google translate has quite good text to speech algorithms(at least for languages I know) just copy and paste and hit speaker button. I hope I didn't came as harsh critic, I am long time fan of your vids so good job cheers!👍
"kyūdō", pronounce the y as a consonant then say the ū like the name of the letter (but drag it out a little). Likewise, drag out the ō on the end of the word. The "ky" in Japanese (or other consonant-y combos) are similar to the difference between n and ñ in Spanish.
One thing to note is how bows were used in war usually at range and in a similar manner to a mortar. It could be a method of increasing range or counteracting windage etc
I have wondered, since this topic cropped up that shooting on the left appears to be more accurate that hunters and longbow specialists shot on the left but guys drafted in to the army and not as practised shot their warbows from the right to get the shot off from the extra weight bow. It was tolerated since in military archery rate of fire was more important than accuracy. It was not like one was going to miss that block of 2,000 Frenchmen and was bound to hit someone.
Nice theory, but unlikely. The Archers would all be capable due to the requirement for Sunday training from a young age, but also the selection of Archers for campaigns meant they had to meet decent standards. The benefit of shooting to the right of the bow in terms of efficiency of draw weight is zero. It's an internet fad! That is not to say they did not shoot from the right, or that there are other potential benefits of doing so. But as far as making it easier to draw a bow - nah!! But the thing is, the old popular image of the 100 years war is of long range shooting, but it is increasingly believed that more direct shooting was involved, requiring more accuracy. The source of this theory? Old pictures! But its pretty fair to say that long range shooting did take place too.
@@mikegregory2492 In addition to the problem that Shad's technique doesn't allow him to outshoot an old man.... even the Instant Legolas doesn't help that much. A 120# bow shot at 4 seconds per arrow, by Joe Gibbs, who can shoot a *_160#_* bow at 5 seconds per arrow. Equalize the draw weight, and the difference would be far slimmer... and the Instant Legolas is a LOT better than Shad's technique. It's like warbow archers told him from the start... most of the time is in the drawing, not in the nocking, so it makes very little difference.
Matt there is also the time in England where every man was required to practice archery every sunday, therefore artists knew about archery, being that they had to practice it.
Thanks for liking my comment! This is the most likes and resposes to a comment I have ever had, thsnks everyone! Thanks for the response Matt spfcifically.
@@nathanielwilcox4947 when it was repealed,I don't remember?
@@maximilianolimamoreira5002 I don't remember either.
If everyone did it, why was there a law to enforce it? It's a monumental assumption that the law was always obeyed.
And not all the medieval art in question is from Britain.
Nathaniel Wilcox : I agree with you on the Britian art work but some of the art work that Shad shows is German, Italian, French, and Spanish. They showed the arrows on the right too,
Hi Matt, great video! Your input to the discussion is a treasure. I had to chuckle when you switched over to shooting on the right, straight after the left. Even before you shot I had a strong feeling of what would happen ^_^
Whenever I do that it takes a good 10 to 20 arrow for me to reset my sight picture to account for the different trajectory, although it is getting easier lately and I’ve seen others switch without needing any reset shots, which is a point in favour to your theory of people shooting on both sides depending on what was needed. Alas for me at the moment my shots still fly strong to the left or right directly after switching.
As to which side was more prevalent? I think a fifty/fifty split is possible, but I agree with you, 70/30 looks to be more representative of the artwork. I did come across a researcher who looked through the John Rilen’s Library in the university on Manchester (a response to the Lars Anderson video) and found a 50/50 representation in the side of the bow the arrow was placed on in medieval art, but this was with a smaller sample size. I haven’t done an exact count but looking more broadly at the moment it does seem like the left has more depictions.
Absolutely phenomenal video mate, and I can’t wait to see your further experimentation.
Have you seen Joe Gibbs using the Instant Legolas, Shad? It's an amazing device which cuts out the nocking time entirely. Yet, it seems Joe barely increased his shooting speed? Doesn't that ruin the Cradle Draw, which is much slower than the SIL?
To compare, he can shot a 160# bow in about 5.5 seconds per shot. The 120# bow using the SIL was about 4 second per shot (3.92 seconds on average). So, if your bow is an entire 40# lighter, it allows you to shoot 27% faster.
But draw weight makes a huge difference to speed, where he was able to shoot a 95# bow (similar to yours) at 1.5 seconds per arrow. So at that rate, even with the SIL, heavy war bows don't seem to get much advantage, as Jack from Historical Archery told you in his video where he tested your draw for you. It seems the heavier the bow, the less useful reducing nocking time is.
@@Meevious "Joe shot 5 shots in 8 seconds with the *_95_* lbs Instant Legolas (0.625 shots per second) and 2 shots in 8 seconds with the *_ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY POUND BOW_* (0.25 shots per second)."
...Didn't you read my comment? I counted the number of frames for each shot, counting from the moment the string was released.
""That's 2.5 times faster (250% faster).""
Gee... I wonder why?
@@vanivanov9571 No one knows the point you're trying to make. Yes the Instant Legolas can shoot fast, that's what it was made to do, so? You seem to be acknowledging that speed is advantageous, and shooting on the right has a biotechnological advantage in obtaining speed. What you're saying doesn't contradict this, in fact it seems to be supporting it due to the acknowledgement that speed is desirable.
If you're trying to say you will shoot slower with a 160lb bow, well clearly, but this doesn't discount than any additional speed on such a heavy bow would not be desirable, nor do we know what speed is truly achievable in that range. Joe does not attempt speed shooting records or try different styles that give speed advantages. He shoots the normal way he shoots, just trying to go fast. This is far from how fast he could really get. The main point of contention that you don't seem to be addressing is that some people have been saying speed is too hard to obtain with a warbow, but 100lb is most definitely in the warbow range and I've developed a very decent speed (8 arrows in 30 seconds) without much practice because I'm taking advantage of the significant bio-mechanical advantages of shooting on the right side. Indeed I'm shooting faster than most warbow archers already because so few even attempt speed shooting with them. What you are saying doesn't discount this at all. You're not making sense.
@@shadiversity My point was quite clear, and I'm sure anyone reading can understand. As you say, the Instant Legolas is much faster than your technique can ever be. And yet, the shooting speed between a 160# bow and a 120# SIL bow is quite similar.
So, let me make the question simpler: *With practice, how much faster will your technique be, compared to the orthodox technique?*
It seems the SIL will speed things up much less than 27% (the difference between the 120# SIL and 160# ELB). And your technique must, as you agree, speed it up a lot less than the SIL can. At that rate the increase, even if one became very proficient, may be 5% or less? How much would you estimate, optimistically?
As you said before, the traditional Mediterranean draw is more accurate. It can also be quite fast as Ken Hicks showed, thus far matching your Cradle Draw. So why would we give up greater accuracy and a cleaner release unless we were getting a substantial boost in rate of fire?
@@vanivanov9571 I never said it's more accurate, please, find me the quote. I may of said it *might* be more accurate, but that could be wrong because I've seen some tremendous accuracy from shooting on the outside of the bow with the Mediterranean grip as shown by Lars Anderson in one of my videos. I know I'm more accurate than when I shot on the other side. This doesn't mean everyone will have the same experience, it's what the individual archer prefers. For me there's more advantages to shooting on the outside and all the theorizing from you will not change what my personal experience is, as much as you seem to hate that reality.
You comparison with the SIL is flawed as Joe said shooting with it felt like the bow was up to 40lb heavier than it is normally and he didn't even do a speed test with the 120lb, only the 95lb, so we don't actually know how fast he could get. This means his drawing speed he had with his 120lb SIL-bow was much slower than normally and thus your theory is pointless.
Also, shooting on the outside it's not just a matter of being inherently faster, which it is, it's also that you can become faster much quicker than practicing on the left.
I'm expecting that with a lot of practice I'll be able to shoot an arrow every three seconds with my 100lb bow and I plan to do that with a 120lb in time.
However longer it takes me to draw a heavier bow, I'll still have the same speed benefits in reloading the arrow and knocking, so overall I'll still be faster.
There are other benefits to shooting on the outside, for instance I find it easier to shoot standing upright with it on the outside, while shooting on the inside encourages leaning forward which takes more energy to maintain because your weight is now away from your center of gravity. I find it easier to draw heavier weights and for longer periods of time. All very valid and real advantages.
Quick point - I caught the smirks every time you put the two fingers up. I got to admit, I chuckle almost every time an American does that for "two" in a gesture that we definitely use for something else.
I like that you brought up the different systems for rapier and compared that the longbow. I'm not sure if it's something the "pro-right-side arrow" debaters have used when being rejected by those who claim there's only one way to properly use a bow. As someone whose been watching Shad's videos, I'm glad you decided to add your opinions on the matter.
I like it in The Colour of Magic (2 part TV film with Jason David and Samwise Gamgee) when Twoflower uses his guide book.
He does the gesture the American way at first and the innkeeper takes offence. He then checks the book and realises his mistake and corrects it.
(Enjoy my irrelevant comment)
What is the non American way?
non-american here but i also use two finger for "two", im curious what the gesture means for you
@@kaiceecrane3884 Don't know, myself, however; nearly any common handgesture may be offensive in some other culture.
*implying an american history geek watching this video wouldn't be aware of the archer's insult.
Just gonna go on record here, and say that LumpyBumpy was only tillered to 30", so if you pull it to 32" and it fills the air with beautiful pieces of firewood it's your fault :D
They would have been beautiful pieces of firewood indeed. Those are gorgeous bows that Matt has, and I really enjoyed the "character" in LumpyBumpy.
kek! from the master. I can't seem to pin this comment to the top of section.
Hey Will have you ever tried American Osage Orange? Would be interested in a comparison to English Yew.
Matt, regarding the artwork that shows archers with their legs crossed, I've seen this same position that you mention and at first I assumed it was artistic silliness but when Shad started to raise this discussion it opened up a lot of questions about medieval archery and I decided I wanted to see if there was something going on with that stance. What I noticed is that the crossed-leg position feels (to me anyway) like I'm able to engage my legs a bit more into the draw and it also (again, for me at least) felt like a more comfortable position to lean back when drawing with the arrow on the right side of the bow. I'm not sure if it proves anything but I recommend heading outside with a bow and trying the stance for yourself just to see if you notice the same things I did. I don't have any scientific testing to say something concrete but I definitely felt like the legs crossed helped me lean back to draw on the right side, putting weight on my back foot. I stood with the toes on my lead foot pointed at the target, with the rear foot angled 90 degrees so pointing the same direction as my chest would be. This kept my balance steady and let me put weight on my back foot and really sink into the draw. For reference I'm 5'11" with a 77" wingspan from fingertip to fingertip and my longbow draws at 58-60 pounds with my reach.
We need to invite athleanx to those tests. What a crossover that would be... O__O
@@TheOneWhoSeek Joe Gibbs, Matt, Shad, Todd and Joerg coming together for a collab. What an event that would be!
TheOneWhoSeeks would he bring his fake weights you think?
I should add that the position worked much better for me when I bend my rear leg at the knee. Helps lower center of gravity and keep me balanced in an otherwise awkward position. Also helps me lean back a bit more and really dig in for the draw.
Matt, back in the day when you practiced Hung Gar kung fu, did you ever use the cross-legged step ("kei lun bo"; spelling varies)? I suspect it might be similar to what medieval artists were trying to depict, but, as we know, medieval artists sometimes struggled with getting perspective right, and it's not really a natural position to begin with.
I don't have a bow to play with right now, but, substituting an exercise band, it does seem to allow for the torso a large amount of freedom to twist after the bow has already been drawn, and might allow for better tracking of moving targets.
My wife's youtube drama "so this person is cancelled by everyone because they are racist and engeneered a situation to discredit another makeup artist"
My youtube drama "THIS MAN SAYS YOU CAN DRAW A BOW A DIFFERENT WAY"
Mans have better drama.
@@Gilmaris actually i was alluding to jeffery star / shane dawson lmao
*Real men have better drama.
Sounds like Bon Appetite, except that's food instead of makeup.
There are plenty of bitchy, narcissistic and racist mens men out there. Mainstream culture is so void and pointless, controversy is the only thing that makes it interesting.
Having spent some time in the army I’ve got to say that everyone runs their gear and kit in their own special way “if it’s stupid and it works, it really isn’t that stupid.” Loved you saying into this conversation Matt!
I know this is an old video, but I wanted to say YEEEESSSSS!!!
Absolutely. I'm. A hunting archer, that's my background, and I promise I would make adaptations that would drive a target archer mad. I'm tall and skinny, and shooting my 66 lb "elk and bear" recurve is different for me, method and otherwise, than it is for my 5'10" friend who has much shorter arms and much broader shoulders.
I've taught a bunch of people "instinctive shooting" but some guys just CAN'T do it and get DEADLY at gap, or split-vision shooting.
Etc. It would all add up, and every archer would be a little different.
Sgt Majors hate that. It's uniformity above all else.
@@JayM409 yeah they sure do, but once you get in the field they leave us alone. But 🇨🇦 is cool they let the boys go to work, some other countries not so much
As for the depictions of crossed leg shooting, clearly they were using a superior knowledge of body mechanics. Winding their bodies in one direction like a spring, so they may spin and strike - performing the most complex of medieval trickshots.
The three sixty quickdraw.
360 no "scope\aim" technique for the FIRST "callofduty: medieval warfare"
I wold love to see a study into this is it just artists being... artists. Or is there some weird reason lost in history to be rediscovered
Very interesting to hear you chime in on this, but I really have to admit that the apex of this discussion can only occur once Lindybeige gets involved to specify which side of the bow they drew _fire_ arrows from (since we know they were so ubiquitous and fundamental to medieval combat).
*FIRE ARROWS!!!!*
Don't forget about studded leather. And back-scabbards
Imagine still using fire arrows instead of lava arrows?
Shad did raise the topic of shooting from the left for the sake of accuracy, versus from the right for the sake of rapidity. Incidentally, he also showed that there are mechanical advantages to drawing from the right and with a leaning-forward stance, making loosing arrows easier on him (effectively allowing him to use a heavier bow both more rapidly and for a longer span of time).
Hi I'm your Japanese fan. It's a little nitpicky but Kyudou is pronounced like "Q dough" Like a Q shaped dough I suppose.
Thanks, I will correct that!
Neo Naofumi that's a good explanation.
the amount of content you're putting out is insane, thank you so much for the dedication, you're an amazing youtuber and an inspiration as a person
I learnt to shoot a bow mostly by myself in my backyard as a kid. Putting the arrow on the right of the bow was what I did instinctively. It just felt more natural and streamlined to put the arrow on the side of the hand I was using to retrieve them from the quiver. So yeah, I would be really surprised if some people in the past didn't do the same (and it certainly didn't prevent me from hitting the target).
Same. No one told me how to do it. I was just handed an bow some arrows and a target. I naturally shot from the right,
I think its the same with any sport. In hockey, skateboarding, snowboarding, baseball the "wrong side" is called goofy. If you skateboard as a right leg person, your supposed to have your dominant leg on the back, but a lot of people (~30%) will do the opposite because its more natural, same with holding bat in baseball, or hockey stick etc. It might be thing about being kind of hybrid handed, where you feel more conformable doing something as a leftie, while your dominant hand still being right. I think archery is in this category. My own experience i have felt that this "goofy" is consistent to sport to sport, so there has to be some brain wiring behind it.
Same, but I draw on the inside of my bows while drawing with my left hand despite me being right handed.
As Matt noted near the end, longbow shooting, especially for high poundage longbows, is more instinctive than modern target shooting. The archer is already instinctively through practice compensating for the archer’s paradox. As such, accuracy with a longbow really comes down to practice.
Yep.
Even Shad said that the orthodox method is more accurate. I'd like to see someone use his method to hit targets at 50 yards. English longbow archers were tested on their accuracy at far greater distances.
@@vanivanov9571 Shad said _HE_ was more accurate orthodox because of previous practice and it *MIGHT* be easier to be less inaccurate orthodox. Not the same. Frankly I concur because the ONLY difference is that unaccounted for frictional twisting involved in the string release will tend to either roll the shaft into or away from the bow. Release the string with sufficiently low friction that string doesn't twist on release or counter twist during the draw or produce a consistent effect and this consideration goes away. Unwanted twisting of the string still affects orthodox, but as I started orthodox I couldn't tell you if it's harder to learn not to the other way around. Guess we need to finda group of noobs somewhere because all I'm learning at the moment is 'how far left' to aim.
@@buzzkrieger3913 ....Some people will shoot with the THUMB DRAW on the left side in competitions, where accuracy and points matter most. Being able to aim with the arrow is that good, in a competition, though most stick to instinctive shooting and other methods of aiming. For the Mediterranean draw, even Shad admits it is more stable and accurate, just that he claims the many issues with his draw can be solved.
You are going to have to aim pretty far to the left, because this is what happened when you shoot with the cradle draw: /watch?v=Hxvws_S1bf8
Someone mentioned testing the penetration of the cradle draw against a wooden board, and said it halved the penetration.
Instinctive... Disqualified.. And shame on mr easton for using it. You call your Block and parryies by name. Instinctive is like calling all of sword fighting fapping about
Also a serious thought. Dominate eye vs dominate hand. I for example am left eye dominate and right handed. So I shoot a pistol/revolver with my right hand and use left eye, and fire a rifle play pool use a bow etc with my left hand.
Dominant eye is pretty easy to train. When shooting handguns and rifles I used to practice switching back and forth. I make that switch a lot in photography too.
Same issue. Which works for me.
Same, I'm right handed but my right eye is way worse than my left eye.. Not every person is the same!
As far as I understand, Shad does not argue for 50/50, he is opposing the view that the right side shooting is impossible/dangerous/wrong. Nothing on prevalence of one over the other.
agreed. How prevalent right side shooting was compared to left side was never a topic of discussion, only that both methods were indeed practiced with regularity.
@pel thoron His theory has changed about a dozen times, and he declares himself proven right when he lowers his standards into the ground. He originally claimed he would test his orthodox shooting speed versus his unorthodox shooting speed... but now he's just trying to catch up to an old man, who may well have been using a heavier bow.
It's all pointless, of course... Even with the Instant Legolas, Joe Gibbs could barely shoot notably faster. I should dig up the numbers for that.
mxt mxt yah, he kinda did. i like shad, but he was a bit polemic with his initial takes.
@@midshipman8654 He didn't. Right from the start he said that right-hand side method clearly was used sometimes, but not all of the times. It is his opponents who were saying at the beginning that this method was never ever used in medieval, now changed their stance in accepting that art clearly indicates that it was used, and now talk how Shad suddenly wanted to prove that everyone shoot from the right.
All this bullcrap reminds me of AR-15 MOA-wankers, who cannot accept AKs and ideology behind it.
Van Ivanov Joe Gibbs shot significantly faster when he used the instant legolas.
Edit: I just dug the numbers for you. Instant Legolas equipped longbow shot 5 arrows while regular longbow shot 2 arrows. This just made the rest of your statement irrelevant.
Hey Matt, from a biomechanical standpoint, I can tell you a big part of how you can pull so much more, and more easily and hold it back with the arrow on the right/outside. When you draw on the outside, the bow is farther across your body, so the force of the draw is translating directly THROUGH your upper skeletal girdle instead of around it -- through the clavicles, scapulae, and upper thorasic vertebrae; plus the humeri are lined up better with them instead of hanging out front. Look at the video and see how you even get your head out of the way intuitively to let it line up through the bones.
This means your bones are carrying most of the standing pressure of the draw, and at full draw your muscles are mostly just having to stabilize the bow & string, not fight back the full draw weight. At that longer draw, your drawing elbow is also farther back, fist tighter to your body line, so the string is pulling forward on the elbow and not sideways, which makes it easier to hold there. It's built into the trigonometry.
As for aiming, it was hard to be sure from the camera angle, but it looked like you were still basically aiming with the bow looking directly forward, and not at the flight angle of the arrow itself compared to the bow. This is because your set-point at full draw -- having gotten your head out of the way -- was deeper back into/around your own centerline (and lower), so the back of the arrow was farther to the left than you usually have it, so the arrow was actually pointed farther to the right (and upward). At the close-up viewpoint of your eye, you are only looking at the front half of the arrow, so you can't see that directly.
You'll just have to compensate a few more degrees. The arrows were flying straight, so you just have to move your aim point left and down a bit to hit true. Think of aiming from the BACK of the arrow, from your drawing shoulder, not the tip or your cheekbone, and it should be good. "Shoot from the feathers."
I'm from an old archery family going back to medieval swiss woodsmen, and I had to make similar adjustments for various situations as part of family tradition & hunting. If you think about aiming the back of the arrow pushing forward, instead of the tip leading, you'll find you can adjust to a lot more "improvisational" shooting scenarios, like drawing switch-handed, arrow on either side, from behind a tree trunk, etc.
Last tip: if you need more help keeping the arrow on the thumb, don't start with your drawing hand fully closed on the string. Start with a semi-open "spear hand" hold with the string inside the last knuckle, and close your hand into a "bear claw" or semi-fist at the final position as you draw. This will put a little bit of inward torque on the string to keep it faced properly as you draw back, instead of turning outward and pulling the arrow off the rest/thumb.
Happy shooting :)
I have done archery at various points growing up using the "standard" european draw with the arrow on the left but have recently got into the thumb draw with the arrow on the right. I find that for aiming, simply shift the bow its width to the left and hey presto, you're still looking down the arrow. I think what throws people off is the fact that the bow is now "in the way". All it is is practice though. If you were to sit there, from fresh and learn how to shoot from the right, you'd be just as competent as you were on the left
Is the eastern style thumb draw comfortable when compared to a two finger pull? What about fatigue after loosing many arrows? I'm really interested in that style of draw and shooting, since many of the best archers in the world did it, so there must have been something to it.
@@-Zevin- it's different in the fact that different parts of you fatigue but its the same as 2 finger in a lot of ways. You just have to practice and youll strengthen yourself up. I still prefer European style over the eastern style but it's pretty fun and you just have to practice practice practice. I don't think it helped when I had been using a longbow all the other times and I changed over to a horse bow because the draw length is much shorter so you dont come to "rest" in a locked out position so you feel like you're half arsing the shots but yeah, its different but very very similar. just make sure you get a thumb ring and you'll be pretty much good to go
@@-Zevin- *addition* it can hurt the nail area of your thumb though if you're drawing higher poundage bows and are having to really clamp down on your thumb with your finger
@@BH-rx3ue Thanks allot for the response. I need to pick myself up an affordable re-curve horse bow and give it a go.
If you keep both eyes open, you'll see your target "through" the bow. I think this is why some historical Asiatic bows had geometric designs near the handle like on antique Manchu bows. Probably acted like a sight window.
Take a second to reflect on the fact that, “before lockdown started,” is a conversational way to mark how much time has passed....
@@alaric_3015 That would mean I was born 23BL(S?) (I'm 23 year old)
@@alaric_3015 Your suggestion is based on the assumption that this will be the only lockdown. I think that's a bit naive.
I think it should be called more broadly "before/after corona", so we can still use BC XD
Yes indeed, the government and media programming has worked really well. It's all becoming part of every day life now, new abnormal is coming.
@@RandomGuy-ej9gr I love new abnormal, it's the best flavor.
Thanks for adding to the discussion. The main thing I've taken from the whole debate, is that a longbow is not simply pulling back the string and firing it at the enemy. If one way is beneficial then it will be used when it's the best option. Thinking of the logistics of warfare, I doubt that an army was always able to have high quality arrows. Having 2 quivers could be useful for an archer the differentiate between arrow heads, or quality of arrows. There would be little point in putting extra effort into a precise shot with a damaged arrow, or an arrow that was made shoddy. However, when you're not worried about hitting a friendly then any arrow will do. To me it seems that the left side is more accurate (but that could due to experience) but the right side may be faster and easier.
We accept that a longsword will be used differently depending on the situation (armor and weapon of an opponent) but a lot of people can't accept that a bow could be used differently depending on the situation.
Matt, I think you are spot on with your assumption that expert bowman chose the side of the bow depending on his needs. I come from a Japanese martial arts background, and we were always taught that you have to be able to use the weapon with either hand, because in real combat, you might just lose the use of your good hand, so it makes perfect sense that people in the past whose lives depended on being able to use a weapon would know how to use it any which way. This idea of the 'correct' way of using weapons are a recent convention. Even in Japan, 'conventionalists' will tell you that the right hand always goes on top of the left when grasping a sword (even for left-handers!). That way of thinking came about in the Edo period when Japan was at peace. In the Warring States period that preceded it, they didn't worry about such things because surviving was the priority. One final note on pronunciation if you will allow me, I thought it was amusing that you pronounced 'kudos' the way you should have pronounced the Japanese style of archery 'kyudo'.
Shootiversity Vs. Shootagladiatoria
JoergShoot
Talking about heads, shafts, inches and shooting with Matt Easton.
context
penetration
Also the optimum amount of fingers to be used.
Higher penetration by getting 2 extra inches and a shaft breaking even because it is penetrating at an angle.
@@Olav_Hansen I flinched a bit when I read that.
Don't know why, you are talking about archery obviously.
I read a source many years ago, can't remember what it was for the life of me, that mentioned that in the artwork that depicted the archers with the legs crossed it was showing an archer that had spun around quickly to shoot dehind him and the angle of the artist showed the legs in a crossed manner. Sounds good but I don't know. Love your videos and the content Matt, keep it up!
Matt: "There's more than one way to skin a cat."
Oscar in another room: * sneezes *
I find I must agree with your assessment that a single archer may have used more than one way to shoot their bow. I wonder why this never occurred to me before. Good video, thanks.
To me, the most important aspect of Shad's video: he's essentially self-taught and has been trying to work out how's the best way to do things.
He has access to modern technology, but what he's finding is that the historical depictions are "correct" in terms of the depictions of techniqueS.
Medieval people weren't stupid, they just had different locus of knowledge.
And also different needs. Shoot on the off side for more power/range or volley shots? Shoot the standard side for more accuracy and close range? Maybe the cross legged thing has to do with more stability in the shot or something? Maybe the lean forward draw on the bow was indeed to make repeated draws in combat less tiring in a long 4 hour battle? You have to think of these things from a practical stand point, not a competition archer standpoint. Some times you will do a sub optimal technique cause there is a benefit to doing so.
@@braddl9442 Precisely! "Sub-optimal" is contextual; in software (my area of expertise), what is ideal for one problem will be worst possible for another.
In engineering, EVERYTHING is a trade-off, so why wouldn't this be the case in archery too?
@@edwardcullen1739 Doesn't even need to be for software engineering. Anyone with a basic understanding of modern firearms, which are also ranged weapons like the bow and arrow, would see this tradeoff easily. Firing in full auto is fastest but very inaccurate. Firing in a standing unsupported position in semi-auto is slightly slower, but more accurate. Tightening the sling, crouching down, or even going into a prone position would also further increase accuracy, but also take a lot more time to get into. In all these cases, there's a tradeoff between speed and accuracy, so you pick whichever one is most appropriate for the situation. You want to be as fast as possible while still being sufficiently accurate. Key point being sufficiently accurate, as it doesn't really matter in a battlefield sense whether you hit a man dead on the chest or a couple inches to the left, as you still hit in in the vital spots. No need to be more accurate than needed and slow yourself down.
Thing is, all that goes without saying for anyone who understands even the basics of modern firearms. Even if all you did was play a couple matches of Call of Duty, you'd understand this concept. So I don't know why it became a controversy with regards to archery outside of Shad's point that since archery hasn't been a battlefield weapon for centuries, everyone focuses purely on highly accurate target archery over everything else. That's fine, but it does skew perception when it comes to discussion of how bows and arrows were used in actual medieval warfare.
As a followup: look at Joe's shooting from multiple angles. ua-cam.com/video/MjY2QrU4sm4/v-deo.html
Or you can also look at Mark Stretton.
He is hinging at the HIP and keeping a neutral spine (like a deadlift) and achieving maximal expansion with his chest and back while shooting on the left side. The reason Matt is getting less draw length on the left is simply due to bending in the upper part of the thoracic spine area, nothing inherently to do with the arrow placement. The arrow placement is actually pretty much irrelevant.
not sure why, but people seem to draw bows easier with the arrow on the outside.
ua-cam.com/video/ohomC2hp3Ac/v-deo.html
Response video: ua-cam.com/video/ohomC2hp3Ac/v-deo.html
Biomechanics would like a word
just wanna say that, the archery club my parent and I used to be at (till it burned down 2 decades ago) everyone had the arrow on the right side, with any bow (old longbows up to state of the art composite bows) I also distinctly remember my father asking at a shop for a strings that were twisted the "correct" direction and was severely annoyed that they didnt have the ones for right side arrows anymore because this or that tournaments (Olympic?) rule set made them obsolete
LOL!
I thought it might be interesting to add the perspective of an archery coach in here. For context behind my opinions: I am a level 2 archery coach (UK standards) with a history of competitively competing and coach recerve and longbow, and a history degree predominantly focusing on medieval Europe (including essaying on the topic of the efficacy of longbows). Firstly, I hate to discount your findings but I believe the extra draw length achieved on the right hand side is all to do with poor form and incompatible posture (back, neck, front shoulder all noticeably different between the two shooting styles) and would probably be brought into comparability with practice and technique adaptation for the standard shooting position. The reason, I would venture, you aren't hitting with the arrow on the right is due to two aspects. The first is probably the fact that the extra draw length achieved throws your technique out and means shoulder/back muscles are not in a place to properly control the release. I would also suggest that shooting in the three finger style from the right hand side works against the mechanics of the release and encourages the arrow to skew to the right but without the body of the bow to support it (think archers paradox with the arrow flexing in the same direction but without the body of the bow in the way). I feel like to effectively shoot from the right hand side of the bow a thumb draw is better as it reverses the mechanics of the release and forces the arrow to behave as normal (but on the other side) it also has the advantage of holding the arrow to the bow without the need to lean at awkward angles (found this out after the months of working with a competitive horse-Archer). Historically speaking, I highly doubt there was a set form or way of shooting as it was probably taught locally by word of mouth with no set discipline (how could you have such a thing in a society vastly populated by the illiterate). From personal experience, with practice, it is entirely possible to shoot 15 arrows a minute from a longbow with fair accuracy, in all but utter panic scenarios, is fast enough to not need to compromise accuracy for further speed and I have no doubt that the 18/20 arrows a minutes described in some primary sources would be entirely possible after a lifetime of practice. Personally I find it difficult to place massive reliance on paintings for analysis of detailed techniques due to the fact that monks (generalisation) would not have been interested in the minutia of techniques or necessary exact portrayal of events, as often stances and gestures indicated interaction between characters more than "this is how that person was standing".
Regarding those chiefly English sources of the time, consider that neither clergy nor artisans/craftsmen-nor fine artists-were exempt from the mandate on archery being the only sport or game or like activity to occur on Sundays. Within a few decades, this became an explicit order for all men of age to train in archery on that day of the week [as well as on holidays], and it could not be ignored so easily as a result. Every household had a bow, by law, and that was the case for roughly the next three centuries.
Artwork being a poor source is a flimsy excuse, based on bad experience with and/or stereotypes of modern artists who don't look at extant examples of the things they recreate in their art. Creative licence is one thing-being ridiculed by contemporaries for a gross, obvious, and fixable mistake is another.
9:16 Funny thing is I started archery with thumb draw and whenever I try shooting med. draw with the arrow on the left I get the same fishtailing you described, but if I shoot like Shad with the arrow on the right (which I'm not used to ether) I don't get quite as much.
So it really seems to be about practice and user preference.
You're most likely fouling the draw/release by 'rolling' the string. At a short range try really focusing on how your fingers feel as you first grasp the string, draw, and then release. A thin tab/glove will really help, even a couple of shots with bare skin. Because your 3 fingers hinge at different lengths you'll need to open them in subtly different ways to usual for a clean release and be careful how you align your knuckles as you close your fingers. If your bow is light enough try the Flemish draw (just index and middle fingers) it can be helpful figuring out how your fringers interact before going back to the 3-finger Mediterranean.
Lastly pressure from your index and middle fingers can do surprising things to the arrow. If you aren't 100% sure, you can get tabs with a finger spacer or place all 3 fingers under the arrow to test.
@@buzzkrieger3913 Yeah the true culprit is my ring finger (the little bastard). But my main point was that whereas Matt has more issues making a proper release with the arrow on the right, I have more issues making a proper release with the arrow on the left.
@@comrademcsalty7676 :) NPS, thought I'd drop a little help if I could, hope it was taken that way. Matt's issue is likely more on the draw vs string and an errant input on the bow on release from his new arm positioning. Both of you are most likely increasing pressure between arrow and bow on release, amplifying flex, etc. Same problem, but opposite negative rotational input. Out of interest how do find the difference in arrow placement with a thumb release?
Matt's comment about the rapier: that there are different styles of rapiers and different systems of rapier fencing to show there can be various ways to shoot a war bow makes a lot of sense.
Practice practice and even more practice! That is all. You are instinctively aiming/compensating for the arrow on the left so ofcores you can't hit things on the right but 100% it is just all about practice! Happy to see more people trying this out rather then just saying that it is impossible
Not just practice aiming, a poor release will have more effect shooting from the right than on the left.
Matt and Shad commenting on each others videos like this makes me happy.
It's a healthy way to have a discussion, instead of name calling and just saying people are wrong.
Shitiversity is real good at that name calling. Especially when he is wrong.
I've been saying this as an American that uses ranged weapons, just more modern versions.
When I was learning sight picture for pistols and rifles, the instructors teach the general sight picture and the best ways to hold the gun to handle recoil competently, but there's actually several grips for modern sporting rifles, such as being tucked in, turning the wrist so that you're just bracing the fore grip, or the modern C clamp grip are all valid.
So they teach those and a concept called "Shooter's Preference." That is, as long as your sight picture, trigger control, and recoil management is on point, then however you hold the gun is irrelevant, because as long as the bullet goes into the target, and allows you to get a tight grouping, and manage the recoil of the gun competently and safely, then that is what you should be doing.
I wouldn't be shocked if in Medieval Europe, there was shooter's preference for bows and cross bows, and this could very well be what we're seeing.
That's my hypothesis anyways.
As the old saying goes, "There's more than one way to skin a cat."
If you found something, especially if it works, somebody else in the past might have done it the same way too. 😁
Edward III law requiring everyone to practice archery meant that in England for a couple hundred years the artists would have known how to shoot a bow.
Lovely review, i think i want to give some extra insight about bow shooting. 1st, earliest bowman have mindset that bow was basically extremely long spear, so someone that was proficient with 4 m+ pike find it not much difference between stabbing with spear tip and "stabbing" with arrow tip, this was the explanation why old bowman dislike sighting system, because they did not use sighting system with spear. Old bowman prefer to train their rate of fire than precision so they can "stab" faster with their arrow. Modern archer treat bow as marksman weapon, so they train their precision but sacrifice rate of fire, by using sight system.
"...getting another inch up the shaft."
-sigh- another quarter in the jar.
@Jon Goat Why would anyone want to buy Denmark though, or even half of it? I mean, I'd say just spend some of it on Copenhagen and then buy yourself a nice slice of Switzerland with the rest.
@@darthplagueis13 what? With the prices in Switzerland you would struggle to buy a sandwich and a pint!
@Jon Goat Why would you want to invade poland?
"Sometimes with the legs crossed over"
If you're under heavy attack, you haven't the time to undo your fly, and you wouldn't want to wet your breeches or leggings. Hold it in until you have a free moment.
Brilliant!
@@mariusmioc3045 Some historical sources regarding Azincourt say that due to dysentery some English archers fought without hose or breeches, so no need for crossed legs :)
Hey Matt, Shad has addressed most of your reservations on this. The major points he made is primarily practice drawing.
As a person who has only shot a compound bow from the left side it is very surprising and interesting that it makes such a difference when you change sides with the arrow.
Way to demonstrate the conundrum Matt. I really appreciate this video. Hopefully now, the two sides can call a ceasefire and realize the people from the time didn't give a damn and did what worked for them. I feel like I've learned something.
I did Kyudo on a competitive level a couple of years ago (Heki-ryu or Heki style), here's some pointers on the technique: In Kyudo you have to put a twist in your drawing hand counter clock to keep the arrow on the bow so it doesn't fall off. Your thumb on the bow hand is not supposed to hold it, just guide it. At the same time you are putting an "outwards" twist in your bow hand (counter clock seen from above). This double twist is intended to add more power in to the draw and is often sited as a reason why Japanese war bows were lighter that their European cousins.
In Korean archery, we pulled straight back to the jaw angle or ear, which made it easier to draw with the right-side arrow orientation.
Agreed with what you said about situational sides for the arrow, it makes perfect sense. Great video!
I discovered while shooting with a shoulder injuring that the lift and lower (as suggested) actually does work to engage different (stronger) muscles while drawing, so ...
I don't know if you will ever get around to reading this but with your style of shooting, your muscle memory is correcting for the arrow being pushed to the left by the bow. When shooting on the right you have the force in the opposite direction. obviously it can't be understated that you can't "aim" in the conventional sense with the arrow on the right and most people that do shoot on the outside of the bow shoot instinctively which requires its own practice. I shoot a turkish horsebow,( coincidently one that you have reviewed on your channel) and most of the skills that I use for reducing the force on the arrow during release don't work so well on longer heavier bows( like Khatra and string twisting), so if you want to get better with shooting on the right you may just have to practice more haha. Good luck and cheers!
Now we have even more context.
Thank you for looking into this so detailed
Coming very late to this, but anyway... with a long bow I find that canting to the right in order to shoot on the left keeps the lower limb and lower half of the string away from my legs, which would seem to be a good idea especially if i am taking a broad stance to support leaning back from the hips to make a long shot. IIRC the peoples who used thumb rings generally using short 'horse' bows and with the shorter limbs this would be less of an issue - though of course there may be a horse to consider as well...
Leaning from the hips possibly explains some of the different postures depicted by artists. The basic posture with both hands, elbows and shoulders close to being in the same horizontal plane gives you the greatest resistance to the tension of the drawn up bow. If you just drop one elbow and raise the other not only does the draw length decrease because of the changing geometry but also because you are using the body less effectively - you're not as strong this way. And because you are no longer well aligned when you loose your bodies reaction to the sudden loss of tension will be relatively chaotic, reducing accuracy. So best to keep the alignment of the arms and tilt the entire upper body for major changes in elevation.
Just off now to have a look at Shadiversity...
Your two arrows you fired from the "wrong" side of the bow looked to be a consistent landing. I'm confident it's an aiming issue from what I saw. I think Shad made a point of needing a twisting technique to help with the arrow falling away. As for the arrows hitting sideways, your arrows might not have been weighted for that style of shooting (Or possibly the twist Shad mentioned corrects for it in some way?). Since you are changing the technique, sometimes you need to change the equipment as well. Now, I would also wonder if maybe bow construction might need to be considered for trying to optimize the new style. (Assuming you want to completely convert.) If you want a shoot on either side bow maybe that needs a different construction as well? But it's been fun seeing people try it and see people fighting the conclusions and thus testing it out.
One thing I noticed is that when you were drawing from the opposite side of your dominant arm (left side for you) is that it did not appear like you were drawing with your back, rather that you were doing so with your arm. Also the primary reason (that I know of) that we draw with an arrow resting opposite of our dominant arm is that the pull from the arm then pulls the arrow into the bow helping to hold the arrow there rather than pulling off to the side.
I think it's more the release that's the issue, a right hand release displaces the string slightly to the left as it comes off the fingers so the tendency of the arrow to move right is limited by it pressing into the bow.
War bows are interesting! I have only practiced modern hunting archery technique, so my arrow has always been on the left side. I have shot a compound and recurve, burt not a longbow. I think this video along with the Tods workshop has properly stoked my intrest in traditional war bows!
Years ago, I noticed something when looking at chopstick tutorials: there are a number of different techniques, and some of them I can't mimic because my fingers seem to attach to the hand in a slightly different position than theirs. The same principle probably applies to holding arrows, different people have different shaped hands and hold things differently.
I imagine that medieval sergeants & officers would probably have the opinion: Do what you need to do to hit your target.
not necessarily a lot of time semingly obvious things were not done in history without prompting. for example, the hammock, despite its conceptual simplicity, was not known in europe until they were encountered in the new world.
I doubt it. They would more likely try and enforce their preferred style on their subordinates.
@Jon Goat actually yes, and that is the basis for my comment. I had trouble in basic training shooting because my arms have a slight deformity in that they are too short. I could not aim correctly while holding the proper arm positioning. When my drill sergeant realized that I could hit 40 out of 40 using a different arm position, he said, "If you are in my foxhole, I don't give a damn how you hold your arms, as long as you hit your target."
When a different drill sgt laid into me for improper shooting stance and I told him that I was following the instructions of my drill sgt, our Captain told him to let me shoot as I had been doing.
@Jon Goat The purpose of training instructors is to prepare you for war & to weed out those who are not mentally capable of being a soldier.
Once you leave training, unless there is a specific reason for doing something a particular way, getting the job done is paramount. Only in movies are officers barking at soldiers, "It's my way or the highway."
By mentally capable of being a soldier, I am not saying anything bad about those individuals. It is a fact of life that not everyone can be a soldier. That's not a bad thing. It's not a good thing. It is just a thing.
I love this kind of content. I guess you could call it experimental archaeology. History and Science combined, my two favorite subjects.
I haven't seen much thought going to the military unit. If a dense unit of archers are required to loose many volleys in a short period of time, the arrow on the right means that they are quicker and packed tighter - therefore more lethal per yard of frontage - and more accurate as more archers have unobscured lines of sight to target.
Sir John Smythe had this to say about shooting with two fingers in his 1594 manual: "I would have no man chosen to be an Archer that had not so practised the vse of his bow from his youth, that he should bee able to shoot strong, or at the least of a conuenient strength and long arrowes, and therewithall v∣sed by continuall exercise to draw his arrow with three fin∣gers, and not with two (according to the new fashion) to the head: of which shooters with two fingers, I would haue none to be alowed for archers,* how faire soeuer they shoot, vnlesse they could verie well reforme themselues from that fond new fashion: because that in their so shooting they loose a great deale of the strength of their draught."
Yes Smythe is a problematic source (but very cool!), due to the date. Military archery had been dying for a long while by this date, so his referring to two-finger draw as a new thing is quite weird when we see it in much earlier medieval art. I suspect, as with so many things, that we are missing some of the context behind Smythe's work and what exactly was happening with archery in England in the 1590s. If we draw a comparison with something like Silver's swordsmanship treatise of the 1590s, then it is clear that often these books were just one person's opinion and that often involved contradicting other people's opinions, but it doesn't always reliably tell us what the general opinions held by other people were, nor what was being done 10, 20, 50 or 100 years earlier. George Silver, for example, is not really representative of most English fencing of the 1590s (probably) and certainly not of swordsmanship in the 1490s. But nevertheless, Smythe is a really rare and valuable source, when we have so little else to work from.
@@scholagladiatoria why not adresse the load distribution on the hand when using two fingers vs 3, there are very good reasons to use 3 fingers, using two seem more intuitive, but higher draws strain the hand so you want that ekstra load distribution that also helps keeping the hand and wrist lined up without twisting the string., also drawing with the elbow down as seen on many pictures is also more intuitiv snd shad claim people will do is natural, yet we all know teknuiqe is important, if not sword fights would Just be flailing abou. Edge alignment etc.
@@scholagladiatoria Michel Le Noir's circa-1515 *l'Art d'Archerie* also specifies a three-finger draw: "And every good archer should, as I have said before, draw his bow with three fingers and to his right breast, as by doing so he can pull a longer arrow."
As does Roger Ascham's 1544 text: "[w]hen a man shooteth, the might of his shoote lyeth on the foremost finger, and on the ringman; for the middle finger Which is longest, like a lubber, starteth back, and beareth no weight of the stringe in a manner at all."
It is worth bearing in mind that medieval Europe covers, depending on how you count it, at least 500 years of time and many thousands of miles of space. For most people, for most of that time, travelling long distance would have been uncommon and most commoners would not have had a huge life expectancy, so considering there to be a standard way of doing anything over such a vast span of time and space with limited communication seems unlikely! My uneducated guess is that local clusters of one technique or another would spring up spreading if they worked, shrinking if they didn't, being replaced altogether as new techniques were discovered. I also suspect that no one would have been too fussed about archery technique as long as arrows were hitting the target!
Life expectancy for commoner would be no different than nowadays 70-85 years, high mortality was in early childhood, if you reached 14-15 years old you would most likely live a long life
"The head penetrates and the shaft snaps off" - story of my life :(
Dropping down is better than going up.. Dropping should use the back muscles, like a lat pulldown... Going up will use your shoulders... That being said, going up, with a lighter bow would make a great exercise for shoulder health. It reminds me of using an elastic band and stretching it out and going up and down a door frame, left hand, and right hand on each side of the door, constant shoulder pressure until you tire out.. it's a physical therapy exercise for shoulders. But that way should tire you very fast. Dropping down using the back is a much larger muscle group.
8:42 and I doon't know why anyone would think otherwise. What about human history suggests uniformity of action? Literally, you go over the hill and people do things slightly different than how you do them, doesn't mean it's the most efficient way, but it's entirely possible humans never discover the MOST efficient way to do anything, especially once things like tradition get involved. Even in our modern society where the exchange of information is hyperfast and can homogonize things across culture groups, you still get people just doing simple things their own way. It's called style, and people always assume their's is the right one.
It has indeed been interesting results from Shad, and im really looking forward seeing him getting better, and also increasing his draw weight. I think the more common way of draw today was also more common in the past, but im surprised how adamant people are what is the "right" way of doing it. Like you say "many ways to skin a cat"
to be fair, people on both sides have been quite polemic about it. it isnt just the right only crowd. some people seem to also jump on the left bandwagon because its the new hip thing.
@@midshipman8654 Another variation on the Lars Andersen 'forgotten archery' wars.
Steve Coates kinda agree. god that was stupid. but i think this is a more fruitful debate than that one. i think if a arrow was used on one side or another is a little more reasonable than if a bowman would do 360 spin shots and quick fire. although again, there was some merit to lars’s stuff too beyond the pomp and circumstance.
@@midshipman8654 Lars trick shooting is very skilful and quite entertaining as an art form I just never saw any point to it. Likewise this debate seems a bit pointless, I'm sure some archers of the period shot from the right from preference but some of the claims seem to be heading for the 'lost secrets of the ancients' territory.
Ref the crossed leg stance. In Malaysian and Indonesian martial arts there are crossed legged stances as part of moving and they are perfectly stable. It seems weird that they do not exist in rapier? It a way to defend and then move on your off side.
A considerable number of the archers in the Agincourt campaign were mounted. Many of those were used as mounted scouts. Mounted archers may have preferred to place the arrow on the left while on horseback, because the bow is tilted to the right, and on the right while on foot.
You have misunderstood something you read. Mounted archers in the English armies of the period only travelled by horse. They dismounted to shoot. From the whole Hundred Years War there is only one (quite dubious) reference to an archer shooting from horseback.
His technique is legit. I made vids shooting 125@30 with similar technique rapidly like lars anderson
I'm totally with you here.
But I think shooting the arrow from the left of the bow comes more "natural" in the beginning.
As a beginner I can tilt the bow and rest the arrow on the bow which makes it much easier for me to reload.
Most people will stick with the method learned first.
Thank you for finally suggesting it is situation dependent. I suggest that right side was used for distance. If you look at spring compression If I recall a lot of energy comes from the last 10 percent of compression.
There's a couple of reason that's likely not the case. The first is that Jack from Historical archery found no advantage, because you can easily adjust the position of your arms when drawing, independent of if the arrow is two inches to the left or right at the tip. And the second is that the arrow has a tendency to fly SIDEWAYS off the bow: /watch?v=Hxvws_S1bf8
Oh, also over-drawing or "stacking" is generally a bad idea.
Any half experienced Archer would have no problem drawing an arrow either side to maximum draw length without a thought. Once the muscle development and technique are in place it makes no difference. The question then is why shoot on the right? There may be reasons to do so, but ease of draw weight is not one of them.
@@mikegregory2492 Joe Gibbs showed there is no reason to do so. Even if the Instant Legolas, his time barely improved at all... despite using a significantly weaker bow. The IL is obviously many times better than Shad's technique, so if it barely makes a difference... there is no point.
It was about 4 seconds per arrow with a 120# IL bow, compared to 5 seconds per arrow with a normal 160# bow. Obviously, the difference will be much less, given the same draw weight.
In what situasjon do you switch to a teknuiqe you dont master and is bound to miss?
@@mikegregory2492 You may be interested to know that Shad has taken the time to reply to me three times in these comments, with some very long and personal posts. He must like me very much.
That 'high rotation' draw looks slightly risky to me for heavy bows; there's more stress added to the shoulder and minor pec than strictly necessary. Why add a range of movement to your rotator cuff when you should aim to be as efficient as possible in prising open the bow with both arms directly engaging your back muscles. Its perfectly possible to do this with a more lateral movement with an appropriate stance. This becomes quite important with longer shooting sessions, fatigue, minor dehydration (hangovers) etc. Also the point about drawing 'right of bow' being potentially more effective in draw length is moot. One month of regular practice you would be reaching full draw with ease whatever side (but slightly less with 'L&B' I trust - every time you drew it back to the limit I was starting at the big knot in terror!).
Good points. You should check out Ryd's response video, where he covers a little of that: /watch?v=ohomC2hp3Ac
Justin Ma also made a great video on the proper form with a warbow, though I expect you already saw that one.
Shad dont belive in injuries, so everything is safe... Decpite evidence.
@@mortenjacobsen5673 Did you see that when Jack was injured testing out Shad's technique for him, Shad never offered ONE word of sympathy? Instead, when we were worried Jack might've permanently ruined his shoulder or might be unable to shoot for three+ months, he said, "I look forward to more of your videos!"
He also ignored Jack's points from the video completely, and he even criticized Jack for performing the technique "incorrectly." To top it off... Jack ended up apologizing to SHAD for daring to get injured!
'arching my back more' - the clue was in 'archery' all along!
So one of the issues that comes up in modern firearms shooting is eye dominance. I wonder if that has any play with this as well? I don't know too much about archery so I don't know, but for a left and right eye dominant person using a gun can either be a bit different or completely different. It gets even more complicated when you get issues like a left eye dominance in a right hand dominant person. Because now you're wanting to use controls with your right hand but aim with your left eye. I wonder if any of that can translate into issues with shooting a bow?
This can only be settled in a duel on stream
My money is on Shad and Matt for that one.
Yu-Gi-Oh at 15 meters.
Joshua Noble petition for this?
Yes, Shad must settle this with his greatest detractors in a juul for the ages.
Doomrider sounds like the best idea
I've always thought Matt had higher Strength than Shad. Like Shad was always like a battle-sage type with average fighting skills and stats and quite high magic, while Matt was a pure swordsman with high Strength, turns out Shad was a Tank all anong?
To be fair, Shad has been building up to 100 lbs over the course of several months while Matt has not done much archery recently. Essentially, Shad has been multi classing into Ranger lately while Matt is a straight up Fighter.
Body types. Matt looks more ectomorph to me, Shad more meso..
So, not really a surprise 🙂
Also, Shad seems to have shed a few recently...
(Edit: fix autocorrect)
Different muscle groups. Archery muscles aren't the same as one would for swords and polearms.
Shad has been practicing archery a lot recently while Matt have not. Shad also got surgery which helped him be more proactive and lose some weight.
I still get the impression Matt would be the better swordsman though.
Matt, I agree with you and Shad the historically arrows were probably done on both sides of the bow, I also agree with you the splits probably close to 70/30, and I really like you bringing of the shooting stance changes because we see them in today's warbow archers as well. However on shooting stance please for the love of God stop leaning backwards You're going to hurt your lower back. This is the part that bothers me about this argument right now. Look at Joe Gibbs, Colin Gair, or Justin Ma shoot they all have that same posture of pushing their chest out to engage the big back muscles more but they hinge Forward at the hips. This takes a lot of the strain off the lower back and keeps the weight distributed across the big muscles. if you don't have that hinge and you just lean backwards you're at real risk of hurting yourself. Talk to Justin Ma him and his co-author (who's name escapes me) they did a lot of research into the body mechanics of drawing warbows for their translation of Gao Ying's historical treatise he would probably be able to put science to the positioning.
I'd expect the 'crossed legs' in artwork to be a reference to an archer with a 'twisted' torso. If your legs are oriented in one direction, but you twist your torso to shoot almost backwards then from certain angles it does look like your legs are crossed. Not sure if there's a benefit to shooting like that, but it's more feasable than actually having crossed legs.
Use a 3 fingers under technique to eliminate the pinching of the shaft. Pointing finger placed under nock, no thumb touching arrow. Get arrows 2-3 inches longer to avoid over draw and injury.
Practice makes permanent not perfect....as a self taught archer I naturally knocked on the right hand side I can group 12 arrows within 6 to 8 inches at distance knocking to the left just felt fiddly to me
Also Justin Ma and the guys at Way of Archery have absolutely mapped out to the detail how and which muscles to activate to draw extremely heavy bows with the thumb.
That felt like a TLDR of the whole drama. I need to watch no further videos on this subject.
Matt are you familiar with Khatra? Armin Hirmer has some good content on that technique and he stated that it helped with shooting from "the wrong side".
Matt, may I make the suggestion of you putting your indexfinger on the arrow when you have it on the right hand side of the bow? That is one of the methods of making sure, that your arrow doesn't drop off the bow. You might even tilt it on the side without dropping it, like in the ridicoulus new Robin Hood movie.
I’m wondering about the ways in which the “archers paradox” might have been manipulated historically to different effect? I’ve seen videos of people arcing arrows from behind cover and around corners without ever exposing themselves or exposing very little.
Do you have any information to share regarding archery from horseback or from the back of chariots?
Thank you, sir, for the wonderful content you’re so steadily releasing to the world. Your depth of knowledge is apparent, which makes for a fascinating way to spend one’s time.
Looking forward to the next one.
Onwards!
Saw a video from a Maltese archer where he explained a little twist of the string as you draw to stop the deflection of the arrow when it's on the right.
This one ua-cam.com/video/dtfwM7AfJe4/v-deo.html
The Twist is not necessary. Just need to adjust grip on the bow it self.
How does he remove Newtons laws??
Do not forget to always draw with *both* arms plus back muscles. Not only it makes easier to draw, it lessens the risk of injury, as you are distributing the force instead of concentrating in a single muscle/ body part.
No it increses the risk
Kyudo is pronounced Cue-do not kai-oo-do
I think it would be much easier for him to hear the word from a native speaker once than trying to get how to pronounce it by reading the comments. I mean, even the transcription won't help him if he doesn't know how to interpret it correctly to begin with. Case in point - literally everyone and their dogs butcher the name of Ryu from Street Fighter.
@Jon Goat It's not really difficult for an English speaking person to speak Japanese words after hearing them, since you're not really required to learn new tongue movements. It's just the fact that きゅ is not the same sound as きゅう and ど is not the same as どう . You need to either hear it or know how to read the transcription to know the difference.
@Jon Goat Actually, I should correct myself here - you may need to learn new tongue movements, but it's certainly not the case with these particular sounds.
Same with pronunciation of tachi. It is tah-chee not tashy.
Ask an Englishman to say water....you get woouaté. Accents guys, come on.
Been waiting for this for a while now !
Hey Matt: from a biomechanical point of view, when you use the 'drop down' technique with the arrow on the right you seem to be engaging more of the latissimus dorsi rather than just the interscapular muscles which give you a larger muscular cross section and therefore strength. You can also engage your lats through a much larger range and more symmetrically making the torso (with practice) much more stable.
(Disclosure: I used to be a physiotherapist so have some understanding of biomechanics and kinesiology)
You should check out Justin Ma's video on the proper draw, and also Ryd's response video: /watch?v=ohomC2hp3Ac
Moving the tip of an arrow two inches... there's no reason that should affect your draw.
Then you can explain how a isometric bow arm will be stronger reduce compexity , and put les stress and compression on the shoulder. Pluss you get to distribute the work load on your bones, and dont forget that streach reflex that loved to tear tissue, also if you could .. How levrage works and can pop joint and break bones...
@@vanivanov9571 I don't see why it wouldn't. If you are altering the angle of say, a flatbow, to accommodate the arrow being a good few degrees off to the right, then obviously the muscles being used will change assuming same stance (if you start leaning maybe you can engage the same muscle group).
It's so strange to hear someone say that a few inches doesn't make a difference in a full body action like this. A few inches in bowling is the difference between a perfectly fine throw and a giant bruise on your hip and a bowling ball flying off to the side. A few inches in skiing is the difference between pushing off the snow with a ski pole and stabbing yourself in the foot (granted it's a tough boot so you are probably fine). Every single change to your form matters.
@@Alex_Fahey To move the tip of the arrow two inches... your hand moves less than one inch. Now, keeping the arrow on the bow without tension, via Shad's technique, that can surely mess you up. Jack of Historical Archery tore his shoulder, as keeping a heavy war arrow on his bow was not easy.
Notably, Shad had said you are perfectly safe with an extreme reverse-cant ,so long as "your shoulder doesn't move." Jack's shoulder did not move, from the cant... so it wasn't very good advice.
I'm so glad that at long last, Lars Anderson's research and practice has come into the light.
At 6:02, the grin while evoking the use of two fingers... I am laughing loud and the children upstairs are wondering what is going on.
... and again at 6:26...
I'm the other way. I am way more accurate putting the arrow on the right side using an Asiatic style draw. LOL
Same, whenever I'm at the range I'm the only one shooting with a thumb ring.
Me too.
Try it next time with a Mediterranean draw on the right side, and let us know how accurate it goes. I'm amazed there are people who think these draws are interchangeable.
I’ve seen Mongols use thumb draw with the arrow on the left side. They drew right handed.
@@martytu20 That's a specialist draw only used for sport, so far as anyone is aware. You can shoot a little more accurately that way, so it makes a difference to your score. But not everyone does that in the competitions, either, so it isn't a competitive necessity.
I would love some investigation into the development of both longbow and composite bows from prehistory to 17th century. Specifically how efficiency/draw weight improved over time. For example, had an English warbow existed for centuries but was simply never made as powerful because there was no need? Did the knowledge exist to make an equally efficient 160lbs longbows exist in say 1000BC?
I've read account were apparently Egyptian chariot archers had such bows but were the designs as efficient? Kind of how Tod demonstrated a modern 150lbs crossbow having nearly as much penetration as a 850 medieval crossbow.
I appreciate your testing the standard method, but I must point out that in your first and final examples before your target practice you were still doing a bottom-up draw on both sides or mixing it in a wierd way with standard. With standard, you should not have to drop down before pulling up. instead, you raise it over your head, undrawn and then draw as you drop your bow from above your head.
Your explanation on the mechanics was spot-on.
An Englishman giving the V? That camera must be French lol.
Must be a Thomson. :D
My girlfriend wishes she was getting an extra inch or two...
Tell her shot placement is more important than draw length.
Nice video.
22:10 differences in depictions of hunt and of war?
Not kAyudo but kYudo there's no A in 弓道
Thanks
@@scholagladiatoria no problem I find that Google translate has quite good text to speech algorithms(at least for languages I know) just copy and paste and hit speaker button. I hope I didn't came as harsh critic, I am long time fan of your vids so good job cheers!👍
"kyūdō", pronounce the y as a consonant then say the ū like the name of the letter (but drag it out a little). Likewise, drag out the ō on the end of the word. The "ky" in Japanese (or other consonant-y combos) are similar to the difference between n and ñ in Spanish.
@@jamesfrankiewicz5768 Simplest way to explain it is probably to say it's pronounced "Q-do".
One thing to note is how bows were used in war usually at range and in a similar manner to a mortar. It could be a method of increasing range or counteracting windage etc
Try closing your right eye (dominate eye) when aiming with the arrow on the righthand side to test if its causing your aiming problem.
14:55 Would you actually shoot from there though, leaning back so far?
I have wondered, since this topic cropped up that shooting on the left appears to be more accurate that hunters and longbow specialists shot on the left but guys drafted in to the army and not as practised shot their warbows from the right to get the shot off from the extra weight bow. It was tolerated since in military archery rate of fire was more important than accuracy. It was not like one was going to miss that block of 2,000 Frenchmen and was bound to hit someone.
Nice theory, but unlikely. The Archers would all be capable due to the requirement for Sunday training from a young age, but also the selection of Archers for campaigns meant they had to meet decent standards. The benefit of shooting to the right of the bow in terms of efficiency of draw weight is zero. It's an internet fad! That is not to say they did not shoot from the right, or that there are other potential benefits of doing so. But as far as making it easier to draw a bow - nah!! But the thing is, the old popular image of the 100 years war is of long range shooting, but it is increasingly believed that more direct shooting was involved, requiring more accuracy. The source of this theory? Old pictures! But its pretty fair to say that long range shooting did take place too.
@@mikegregory2492 In addition to the problem that Shad's technique doesn't allow him to outshoot an old man.... even the Instant Legolas doesn't help that much. A 120# bow shot at 4 seconds per arrow, by Joe Gibbs, who can shoot a *_160#_* bow at 5 seconds per arrow. Equalize the draw weight, and the difference would be far slimmer... and the Instant Legolas is a LOT better than Shad's technique.
It's like warbow archers told him from the start... most of the time is in the drawing, not in the nocking, so it makes very little difference.