1:35 - On the point about not addressing you (or Shad) specifically: it's because I'm not addressing you or Shad. Shad and I reached an agreement where I specifically would not reference him, and from past experience that hasn't turned out positively anyway. It's purposefully not framed as a response video and was made concurrently and independently as an original viewpoint, not a response. I've been told to stay in my lane, and I'm trying to avoid drama on my channel by not name-dropping others. That you think this is "not cool" is confusing to me, and perhaps you're misunderstanding my approach. I'm open to being fact-checked and being replied to, but I'm no longer in the business of making response videos. So let's not stir the pot by guessing intentions, I'll make it clear right here.
Yeah, it makes sense to me that you didn't actually mention names, and overall, this specific video seems to address other people more than you. Even if you are the only one mentioned by name.
@@The214thRabidFangirl I think "skeptic" is a fair and accurate label nonetheless. It's very easy to be pedantic and semantic, so I encourage people who look at the original content in full and make their own interpretations. As we know, anything that is written or said will have things missing that we have to read between the lines to fully understand. These aren't peer-reviewed and edited papers; they're forum posts and comments. For example, I was confused when people suggested that I said that it was "impossible". I know it's technically possible and I casually do it too. But the quote highlighted by Thrand did include a line from my conclusion that "it couldn't have been done". Perhaps the quote was taken out of context from the entirety of the piece, which outlined numerous recognised problems, and I may have inadvertently debunked my own thread when I said that people refer to the method as ineffective rather than impossible (i.e. "it couldn't have been done [effectively]). That's the nature of online discussions though - we're quick to tunnel-vision on specific things that stand out. What's important that things are clarified in going forward so we can build a better collective understanding rather than get caught up on who said what.
Hard to raise the collective IQ when People dont listen to the People that acctualy are in the Community, and non of the arguing partiets have put Fort any science, i might have but has been ignored so the hypocritocal statements of willingnes to learn and be proven wrong is a clearly absent. When you cant kill a water bottle with 80 lbs you have imperical data and observertstion, did it work? Yes.arrow flew did it get result? No,
@@mortenjacobsen5673 Bottle was covered by gambeson basically armour thats why arrow did not penetrate. Arrow would do s pass through otherwise would need backdrop.
ThegnThrand it seems that some in the archery community are invested in not letting anything change, as if their skills will in some way be diminished if new techniques become common. Loving your channel, subscribed.
@@mikeoliver3254 That is actually something a lot of martial arts have become, cult like and keeping their ideals within and preventing new ones from changing and adapting, MMA has shown that many martial arts are not very effective in daily standards due to the years of fighting only one art style and even showing some have caused people to believe they can do ridiculous things. I can see other arts do it to.
no joke, you have no see my relatives arguing about what source to put on the dumplins... any thing can be and will be argued about, and it will get dramatic, and often nasty..... but if both party will eventually realise their mistake and apologise about it then its all good i guess
That's really weird, he's made several videos on the topic, as a response to Shad etc, where he says over and over that it ISN'T impossible, shows it isn't impossible, but strongly argues that it is still right to say that there is a "correct" and a "wrong" side of the bow, and shows a lot of very good historical examples and explains why this is the case. This reddit post seems to be made in a very different spirit than the videos he's produced on the subject? I'm confused!
From what I understand he first made the post after Shads original video, claiming it was impossible. Shad then followed up with another video where he demonstrated that it was very much so possible which probably put NU in a bit of an uncomfortable position. And because (no offense btw) he seems to be very much convinced of himself as being an authority he felt obligated elaborating on said post and shifting his position from "impossible" to just "unlikely"
@@darthplagueis13 Makes sense better not to have an ego when examining history and depictions sometimes you can be surprised or proven wrong by our ancestors they were quite ingenious.
@@darthplagueis13 Sounds like you and Mr BigCookie are right. The dude seems a bit full of himself and argues to reach his own bias, rather than a truthful and plausible statement. I mean, even historians argue that depictions are very reliable if they show up in mutliple tomes over different time with some consistency, so I assume he must be the world's leading expert on the matter. Strange I was today days old since I ever heard of him.
I was going to say, why are some people so invested into which side of the bow the arrow went? Does it shatter their worldview? Obviously it works on both sides. Why is it that big of an issue?
Gumaro R. Villamil Basically it all started with Lars Anderson, and the proposed idea that historical speed shooting for war must’ve been done on the right side of the bow, because the hypothesus goes, it should be more intuitive and biomechanically quicker. Archery experts took issue with it being presented as “rediscovering some lost art of the way archery was done in war,” and the debate war has been going and evolving on since. It’s mostly, everyone wants to always wanting to prove they’re right, and the way people say it rubs the wrong way.
It's not dogma, it's biomechanics. This technique carries a significant risk of injury, either immediate or cumulative, and at least one person who is capable of handling heavy draw weights has already been injured doing this, on a draw weight well below the maximum he is capable of using at that (ua-cam.com/video/5sjW_rCgnGg/v-deo.html). It puts the shoulder and elbow in an alignment that will cause damage. Thrand's problem is that the draw technique that he normally uses is also incorrect, so he doesn't have a proper comparison. He's comparing bad technique to bad technique and drawing a conclusion. I really don't want him to have to get surgery on his shoulder because he is trying to use raw strength in place of proper technique.
If it's wrong, but it works, is it still wrong? "Rules are made for people who aren’t willing to make up their own." - Chuck Yeager, Brigadier General, USAF (Ret.)
I like the Yeager philosophy, but sadly, try living in a world where your rules don't match those of the society and see how fast society slaps you down.
I'm kinda glad most people don't make their own rules in every regard. Often the established rules exist for a reason. But if the reason is no longer valid (or never was), well then...
@@notapplicable531 Yes, it is like +pRahvi0 is saying. The key is knowing when to take exception to a rule for the best outcome, victory. There is always the risk of reprisal, especially in environments where things like individuality, taking the initiative, and innovation are discouraged. I have definitely paid the price for it, and it is a lonely road. But who do the doctors and nurses want when the situation is horribly abnormal, or going wrong?
Man you make those heavy bows look easy! haha excellent video man, hope you all are safe through this mess. Good point on checking sides of bows for wear, could answer some doubts people have and the text you mentioned that I think you said Nusensei brought up "put it in the bow" actually has a footnote (8) i.e. nock it. Simply saying just to nock it on the string not really indicating a bow side. I wish people would stop being closed minded and maybe just enjoy all the possibilities archery has to offer. Thank you for this video, and for the mention brother!
Man that bow packs a punch. You can imagine them tuning arrow weights and bow weights to achieve what they desired. Much in the same manner a rifleman would today.
Archers still do this today, I immage they always have to some extent. Of course, war archers didn't. It doesn't really matter for massed vollies against large formations, or with being issued sheaves of arrows. I suspect that archers did keep back a few good arrows, when they found one they liked. I know exactly what arrow in my quiver I pick for those "have to make" shots. I think most of us have a few of those arrows. It is said that Howard Hill would make a batch of arrows, take them out back, and discard any that he did not bullseye with.
Seems like that guy really tries hard to convince himself of something when all evidence points to the contrary. Shad and you pulled it off, depictions are there in quite some number and are regarded by historians as very reliable. Especially when they are found in multiple tomes/scrolls and consistency. Mutliple people have pointed out that NU has more of a problem of a personal nature, rather than a firm grasp of the facts. Courageous to argue/respond to a guy like that, seems he is literally less interested in the facts than trying to sound smart. But in other news, water is wet.
Back when lars anderson showed this for most forms of archery most "archers" laughed at him. I guess some people just can't stand the fact that they were wrong.
Stop putting fuel on this fire jeez. NuSensei is a skilled archer arguing from the point of view of archery tradition. You are basically arguing with historical documentation and modern archery tradition. Just because Shad is challenging traditional notions, doesn't make this a war between Nu and Shad. Did you even watch his video on the subject? As an archer myself, I found it very informative. I actually learned a lot from his channel, he brings up many small details in archery and clarifies them. Even Shad has acknowledged Nu is a skilled archer and instructor.
@@GamelessOne nobody is talking about a war, knucklehead, but there is a scientific argument here which - as you just said yourself - is argued against by Nu by argument of tradition. A poor basis for scientific discourse. Also, you are missing several points, but then again, I didn't expect anything of value.
Daniel it isn't a challenge against traditional archery, it's a challenge against Victorian rules for target shooting. Any skill or knowledge NuSensei may have in one style doesn't excuse him being a dick about another, especially when being a dick without knowledge or experience. NS has yet to make a gracious apology, but at least he's sufficiently backpedalled to be let out of the sights. Stop fanboing.
Nu Sensei strongly dislikes Shadiversity. End of the story. Arguing with someone smart is difficult, arguing with an idiot is impossible. Guess what? It’s impossible to argue with Nu Sensei...
@incinerator950 There's a lot of open interpretation of the medieval world as a whole.. you can't know when theres no documents or evidence for something. Shad often talks about such things where there's no definitive answer, so he refrains from saying that what he talks about is absolutely true. To do so would be very arrogant.
Mawo Duffer one or two years ago, Shad did a video about archery and Nu Sensei did a response video to it and he was pretty disingenuous on a few points (in my opinion). That led to a few response videos.
@@MawoDuffer He dislikes Shad because Nusensei likes to think himself of a superior intellectual and historical scholar and above the mere masses of "consumer grade content" like Shad (I used quotes for a reason there - he actually used that "consumer grade" comment in his reddit thread on Shad). He's basically got the same mentality as that university professor that loved to huff their own farts just for being in academia and for being an intellectual that was above it all. I'm sure you know the type. And someone like Shad walks in, who tells people he's not an expert and makes the dreaded HERETICAL CRIME of not being dry and dull and occasionally even not being serious (AUDIBLE GASP) -and definitely not being salty over Shad having more subscribers than him- and you can see where this is going. Basically, Nusensei has a huge ego and arrogance and Shad is everything he hates. While being more successful than him. Oh, imagine my shock, he also doesn't like Lars Andersen, either. Yet strangely respects him more than Shad... despite Lars also using historical art examples showcasing the possibility that this was historically used. Yet Nusensei is okay with that because... "Lars did the research and can cite sources" (another actual quote). Basically, Nusensei is an asshole not worth your time.
@@Thrand11 I didn't believe you did. It' s just one thing to have a hypothesis and to try it out, test it, unbiased (quite sucessfully as you both have shown), and another to just assume that everything that is not commonly taught to be the "truth", the be all and end all, is wrong (whilst not having tried it)…….is just wrong...on so many levels. I get where he, as a "traditionally" taught sporting archer(?), is comming from….but still.
I'm completely untrained, but the outside nock just feels more natural, but it also feels more natural to tilt the bow, 15+ degrees anticlockwise. Got decent accuracy and follow ups with the renfaire bow. Tried it the other way, felt weird. Barring instruction, i'd never expect the 'traditional'' method to be correct.
I think there’s arguments to be made that both techniques could be valid and valuable. Most of the true history and archeology suggests that the massed archers shooting hails of arrows at extended distance before an attack as depicted by Hollywood is incorrect. Powerful longbow men were often the backbone of English armies and while occasional precise shooting would be used much of it centered on loosing the highest volume of powerful shots at likely 50yrds or less and whatever technique would allow the fastest reloading and shooting cycle would probably have been used for combat and the more accurate would be used for hunting
It's definitely true that for most of history The Middle Eastern and Mediterranean regions were a part of European Empires. It's absolutely true that militaries learned from each other. If there was any nation that fired an arrow on the right side of the bow, that technique would have spread and others would have done the same thing. That doesn't mean everyone would have done it, because of course not, but enough would have. In fact they must have, because it was prevalent enough to appear in artwork. This idea that no one would shoot a European bow with the arrow on the right side is frankly ludicrous to me. There is nothing that I know of that one could point to historically to say that shooting on the right side didn't happen. In fact, one step further, armies during ancient history were largely integrated, especially in the massive empires that spanned the known world, and if they weren't integrated with other people from other cultures then they were mercenaries, or were supplemented with mercenaries. All of these people would bring their own knowledge of warfare and techniques with them.
How about we just put an end these 2 disagreements, in a few words? They probably shot it from both sides depending on how you were taught as a kid and mastered one side or the other? Also, maybe depending on the Battlefield? Shooting from the right would give you a fast draw & loose a MASS amount of arrows as fast as you possibly could with an advancing Army coming down on you, and the Archers that shot from the left would take their time and pick of certain people of higher Nobility? Makes sense? Because we’ll really DON'T know? I do believe the Art Work is SPOT ON to the tiniest detail! So yes, they shot from the right & from the left?? End of discussion, no? Unless we can get into a Time Machine and witness these Battles? LOVE the Show guys! Great 👍 Job! Keep it goin... Ken
Thank you all very much... It is tremendous to get positive reviews! Though my spelling and texting skills are absolutely horrible! But I promise, my grammar is very good when I speak. Hmmm, writing, not so much... My poor mother-in-law ( God rest her soul ) was a very high-level Drama 🎭 Professor at Hofstra University and I could NEVER read her notes because her handwriting was so bad, my wife always had to transcribe her notes to me.
Rowan Nowicki Thank you.🙏 For me... my Dad was a Commercial fisherman & my Mom was Nurse... So I grew up in a lower-middle-class household. Which was fine, because we have a great family. With that said; I didn’t go right too University after Highschool. I went to work on the boat with my father. Did that all through High School and after. Then I started working a Civil Service job a got through my Mom. So I REALLY started my College Academy Until my mid 30’s. My first love has always been History and my second love was Music. But my Dad wasn’t gonna have his Son, that can play some Sea-shanties on the boat and turn that into playing gNr, Sabbath, which I loved! So I dove into History Headfirst and I haven't stopped? The point I’m trying to make: Because I was NOT raised in a Scholars home? lol, this is silly, so I can go dive right back into sounding like a blue-collar -language in a sec! So I'm ALWAYS worried at lectures and whatnot that I'm going to sound completely uneducated! But it's ALL on ME and MY Insecurity! Because while speaking, & if I slip up? Most people didn't even realize it! And it also benefits me too lol because most Adult students are just like ”just get to the effin point guy!” & I do. Thank you for the kind comments! :-)
When loosing a War Bow, the proper stance one uses removes the ability to Aim in the more accepted fashion and you are left to more or lessing instinctually Guessing and The Draw on Long Bows is so long that you lose the privilege of having a set Anchor Point since your pulling back past your face. And the those two points right there i believe already show that standard Archery practices of the time would not and could not apply to Archery with heavier War Bows and from that one can conclude that there were probably differences in the technique used between Standard run of the mill Sporting and Hunting Archery and Archery on the field of battle. and lets not forget that Most of these paintings and drawings were done by extremely well learned people and Monks who we trust in every other aspect with respect to Forging and Blacksmithing to Combat Manuals and Grappling Manuals and works of Arts, but why is it with Archery they all of a sudden are no longer reliable?
@@Thrand11 hey man im happy you saw this and agree! altho i feel like i basically just wrote out a long winded transcription of ur video haha, but love ur channel and ur videos! keep up the great work! u and shad even got me back into Archery after a 10 year hiatus haha. keep up the great work man!
Agreed too, not just that the longbow was primarily a British weapon and men were required to train with it no matter your profession (depending on time period) that made our war drafts have all the skilled archers necessary, this also meant that artists would be well versed in draw technique when doing their artwork.
How does the pull compare between a long bow and recurve? I know you mentioned Nu’s 40lb bow compared to the 100+lb long bow but I wonder about the differences between design. I am fairly big/strong and use a 60lb modern hunting recurve. I cannot imagine using a 130lb recurve bow.
Excellent video... I am enjoying watching this whole discussion play out. No need for drama here just honest experimentation and maturity to have an interesting debate. I am no adept archer but when I was younger as a right handed person I instinctively placed the arrow on the right side of the bow as I didn't know any better but I also used the thumb draw as I now know it to be called. It was only as when I became interested in archery as an adult that I learnt the classic Mediterranean draw with the arrow on the left side of the bow. Keep up the great content mate. Subbed.
i did it that way since i first made my 40 pound pvc horsebow and it is quite nice for a left handed person that doesnt have access to a left handed bow
@@Thrand11 I think you might ne totally right as most of Asian style archery have adopt both sides just fine even in modern days. This also coincided woth Lars speed archery videos on how modern sport static/still archery downgrading archery as martial arts in general.
The two arguments, people seem to have against drawing on the outside aren't really valid: 1)Safety: You can hold and draw the bow the exact same way as you hold it with the arrow on the inside, you don't have to tilt the bow towards yourself to keep the arrow from falling off, when you draw, just straighten out your thumb and make a cradle for the arrow, and hold the bow in the same orientation as normal. (Or pre-torque the string the other way) Doing it this way, you use the same muscles, in the same way, as you do while drawing on the inside. 2)Accuracy: Many bows are symmetrical, including warbows, which means: no matter which side of the bow, the arrow is, the dynamics are going to be, mostly, the same, the arrow still flexes, the archer's paradox still happens, The only major change is the fact that the bow shoots a bit more to the outside.
I have a nooby bow with an arrow rest on the left side ( an asymmetrical bow) but i still shoot from the right side and i find it to be more accurate. In the beginning i had ti aim a little to the left to hit the target but now its second nature
Have a look at Armin Hirmer's channels. He shows the correct method for 'wrong side' shooting, with tilt and 'pre -torque' of the string. Arrows do not and will not fall off. He demonstrates the technique with Mediterranean and horse archer styles and multiple bows. Excellent channel.
The reason why pulling back with the arrow on the right put less strain on your back is because how your pulling wrist is turning counter clock-wise, which allow you to fold your arm better as your bicep isn't twisted. You can test this out by doing the pulling motion with your palm facing upward and downward, you can really feel the difference in your bicep, and your back have to compensate for it. It's also why many people prefer thumb-grip, your palm is facing downward and it's arguably the most natural position to fold your arm
Historically speaking!. Archery was mandatory every Sunday after church for non nobles!. And since it was an art but a direct order from the highest authority at the time. Showing that “he” wanted people to perform the same duty in unity. It would be kind of weird if they were allowed to “wing” it and have different “styles”
Little late but damn man I can't believe you reached 130, well I can because you actually commit and put the effort into training so of course, it makes sense you'd reach it But god damn thats hellishly impressive.
Thrand, gratz to you on hitting 130#! You are closing the gap my friend! BTW, we always seem to have pleasant exchanges, and i have my my YT settings on to get all your videos but it seems like a lot of them just never show up in my feed! Any suggestions? *EDIT: as for what side it is easier to draw it from (& i am just speculating) but could this have something to do with the buyest of the string lines up along the length of the bow with and the way that spring twists? I mean, we think of a string placement representing an exact visual truth like a plumb-bob does, but i have my doubts. Similarly, a piece of wood may "look" uniform on the outside but we both know it isn't -& certainly not internally, and it doesn't flex in uniform. Just a thought. I have never shot a war bow.*
My only beef with Lars is that he proposed an arrow could penetrate through mail *and* gambeson easily without specifying if he's using a 100+ pound warbow, or using the bow he had throughout the video. Other than that, the dude is a proper madlad. He's been rocking the modern archer community since 2015.
The arrow head itself is far more important than draw weight though. A short bodkin from a bow with high draw weight will bounce off soft armor whereas a less powerful bow shooting a needle bodkin will defeat the same soft armor.
@@Turgz Draw weight is still pretty important though, especially when trying to penetrate mail armor and gambeson layers. The kind of draw weight Lars uses would never be able to penetrate proper mail/gambeson, no matter the arrowhead. Especially because he doesn't draw the bow back fully.
@@GamelessOne Of course, but the type of projectile used is still the most important thing. The wrong arrow head with a more powerful bow will still bounce off soft armor. Lars said himself he physically cannot shoot a more powerful bow, and to be fair he is quite small, plus it helps him with his trick shots.
@@Turgz The segment of his video where he shoots some LARP mail with a low pound bow on a fixed wooden surface is very bad though. Otherwise everything he does is excellent, as long as people understand that his shooting method is the worst for actually penetrating armor. It's not a big problem, as he never personally claimed to be able to penetrate armor or made more such bad "armor penetration" segments.
@@GamelessOne Why would someone who can literally shoot you in the eye from 20 yards aim for your breastplate? It's only at the times when there were 200 French knights in "modern" full plate with their tunics over the top, hunched down and slowly walking forward that the knights stood a chance of even a few getting through. Even there, someone like Lars would nail your foot to the floor.
I’ve just started shooting on the right side of my bow and I find only advantages, you get a lot more drawl length it doesn’t hurt your back you can torque the bow slightly so you don’t have to worry about Archers paradox, Or the string hitting your arm, after only doing it a couple weeks a much faster at reloading and shooting the next arrow, never really been a Long bow person, I usually made sinew backed native American style bows.
I feel like the people saying it’s impossible haven’t watched you or shads videos, and secondly NUsensei seems to think that shad was less accurate and that he struggled more but if you watch his video he clearly does much better pulling the bow sting with the arrow on the right.
I'm familiar with Nu's channel and I think he and his community are fundamentally confused about something. What he does is very low poundage archery where he focuses on form, technique, and accuracy with light bows. This is a conversation about war archery with very high poundage bows. There are differences. Is there a correct form with war archery? Of course. Is it going to be exactly the same as with low poundage archery? Not necessarily. To give you an example, with traditional low poundage archery you want to have the hand that holds the bow be very relaxed--- a light grip where you are not squeezing too much. I shoot a near hundred pound bow (not well). If I have a meek little grip with my left hand all the force that goes through that bow and into the hand is going to mess my hand up. These are two different forms of archery.
Yet another good confirmation of the viability of the cradle draw! Being pretty much limited to academic considerations (I've never before felt limited by my lack of a longbow...), I'll reflect on the manuscripts Shad has dusted off for us: Even today, fiction contains truth. Fantasy books contain realism. More than that, with common sense, it's usually fairly easy to determine what is what. Generally speaking, if the creator knew the accurate truth, accuracy wouldn't harm the story, and accuracy wouldn't require extra work, then the creator will be accurate, quite simply because inaccuracy will distract a knowledgeable public from what he's trying to convey. In the relevant manuscript images all of those factors are present. The creators knew the truth of it, there's no reason for imprecision, the audience would definitely recognize and be distracted by the needless inaccuracy. In fact, in some of the images, there's extra effort and esthetic sacrifice made to depict the cradle draw. Never mind dragons and monsters; this can only be explained by the cradle draw being a real thing, and even _expected under certain circumstances._ *If* it had turned out to be physically impossible, then that would obviously trump all other arguments. It would've been very surprising, but nevertheless the end of all discussion. As it is, though, it's clearly possible, and clearly provides some advantages in some situations. That's exactly what you'd expect, based on the images. That's pretty much the end of rational discussion on whether or not the cradle draw is historical. Unless the detractors can come up with new and significant evidence, further protestations are irrational.
If something is impossible/stupid, but it works - it is no longer impossible/stupid. It is the reality that verifies the thesis, NOT the other way round!!!
@ThegnThrand Excellent video. Could you try something with your 130#, that I've been experiencing? Applying a small torque (counter-clockwise for a right-hand shooter) will have a khatra effect, where the archers paradox gets nullified. Arrows tend to fly straight. I have no idea if this is easy or possible with a 130# but with my 50# it does wonders. I've shot self-made, random spine arrows, they all follow their full draw direction with relative consistency. As a side note I've always shot 3 finger on the right side, and besides the first few clumsy learning shots, I've never had any serious problems.
As a bit of a n00b on the subject I want to know why there's such a big emphasis on accuracy with this method? In a battle wouldn't you be with lot and lots of other archers firing as many arrows as possible at the opponents formations?
Yes and accuracy is possible with the method as well if you practice enough at it either style. That's what I believe it would be for extra power, range and speed to draw on right instead of left. Plus with possibility of accuracy over time with practice it is most likely superior for combat archery.
If archery depictions are not accurate then all the depictions of sword forms etc in historical manuals are also inaccurate which I stupid, everyday people in medieval period were familiar with weapons and their use, it was normal not everyone was trained but they were familiar, a lot of people hunted in my home the UK all men ere required to train thier archery so even artists were well versed in the use of a bow, thus the depictions are likely accurate in my opinion, I also have little difficulty loosing from the right hand side I find it more instinctive too and tend to be more accurate that way
How does having the point of the arrow and inch or so to the right or left make such a fundamental difference? Look at those who have real experience in drawing heavy bows, Joe Gibbs and Justin Ma agree on the method and mechanics of the draw, though one has the arrow on the right with thumb draw and the other on the left with Med. draw.
I was thinking that also, check bows for wear. And even more of a long shot if a shooting glove survived thru time, you would see more wear on the thumb or on the palm edge after thousands of draws depending which side the arrow was drawn on.
For anyone interested in archery there is a very good site and the is Malta Archery by Armin Hermer. Armin covers this topic and has for years because he teaches Archery technics where Turk, Asian, and others shoot using this technic. He also covers European finger draws, thumb draws from either side of the bow.
There is something why not contact a Fletcher that can make traditional arrows in a traditional manner and have people try shooting them with both methods for both speed and accuracy. On a side note I'd expect most archers would try for faster than most accurate when it came to shooting during combat. most battles had large formations of people so you just needed to go in the general direction not to mention their targets move anyway.
I would repeat my suggestion from the previous video: get out of your backyard and shoot at more realistic distances. 30 yards+. This and the previous video are practically blank baling. The issues with the right side placement and Med draw manifest themselves more clearly further out. Jack Fang had a video where he saw severely skewed arrow flight with the "wrong" side placement and Med draw, whereas both conventional Med draw and thumb draw shot straight. So...not a matter of sight picture so much as basic arrow physics.
@@Turgz it does affect arrow speed at impact and arrow that doesn't hit dead on penetrates less/glances off more easily, and may be more affected by wind. It does matter
@@Turgz Yes, it does matter. Clean arrow flight is very important for penetration. And of course consistently hitting the target in the first place is harder with poor arrow flight.
The arrow on the left of the bow being 'correct' is very much a Victorian invention along with the tiling of a longbow to be a D bow and not a C bow. I say invention as the Victorian's were the first to expressly codify the 'rules' of sport shooting with lighter poundage. The difference between C and D is the presence or absence of a riser which doesn't flex. High poundage warbows need the absence of a unflexing riser to reach the high poundage efficiently, the presence of an unflexing riser benefits accuracy. I would imagine it's probably fair to say one style is slightly more consistently accurate and the other faster and more powerful. Testing is going to take time to equalise skill.
Exactly! NuSensei tries to debunk Shad by referencing a few manuscripts, but only the Victorian source explicitly say to have the arrow on the inside of the bow, the few older sources requires a great deal of confirmation bias on Nu's part.
I really haven't been following too much the replies between NUSensei, and Shad, I did watch some of his video about this as well as a few other channels like Armin Hirmer, and your self ThegnThrand. I do know NUSensei does have some history with Shad in the past in regards to an archery video Shad has done. My personal opinion is that NUSensei from videos I have seen of his, I am a subscriber to him, that he has a bit of an ego in regards to Archery and isn't that open when it comes to new findings or techniques when it comes to Archery. Now coming back to the arrow on the far side with Mediterranean draw it is most defiantly possible, plus it's not much different then Slavic draw, and it is most defiantly possible to shoot with the arrow on the far side as seen in half of the archery in the world which does this mostly in Eastern style archery. It has it's advantages as well as disadvantages but is no more incorrect then arrow on near side as much of the western world does it. As for it being historical for Europeans to shoot the arrow on the far side, as seen in many pictures of the time it does show the archers with the arrows on the far side, and at the time in Europe at least in England it was law for every man to train with the bow regardless of occupation, and many in Europe knew how to shoot or been around or saw archery quite a lot. Now sure artists do get things wrong in these paintings as well but for it to constantly be shown in quite a few paintings and artwork from different time periods makes it defiantly more plausible that this style was used to some extent during the time. Just my two cents for what it is worth. I may have started in archery at a very early age of 3, but I am far from an expert.
You can get more draw because you are pushing the bow forward with one hand and pulling the string with the other. As long as you can be accurate it seems like a great style
Now I have NO experience with a bow that isn't made of plastic and comes with suction-cup "arrows" but I do get the impression that it could be a matter of speed vs accuracy as you mentioned with the volley bit. I mean it looks like one side is easier to aim with but slower to nock and vice versa but could just be me... Anyway it's nice to see more videos from you so best of luck to you.
Accuracy come with practice, so I don't think it matters on wich side. You can adapt pretty fast to different bows, pull methods and the side you shoot with. There are differences why you shoot on one or the other side. Thumbdraw as an example is most common on horse, on foot it shouldn't be any matter. There the position of quiver and bow case is more important to have space for a sword or an axe, so that you won't hinder yourself. Context is the magic word.
@@Trollvolk True, but I can also see that teaching levies to nock their on "thumb-side" could possibly allow them to "fire" volley's quicker... Again my only practical experience with bows, if I can even call it that, were toys back in kindergarten...
Yeah, it really doesn't penetrate that well with how much energy is lost during flight. Did some preliminary distance tests too, but so far it's been too windy and cold for a good test day, but I suspect I'll see a considerable difference in how far arrows fly med vs cradle when I get a chance.
approaching the end of the video: I think that if it is easier to draw, the result is more power at every skill level, so if there is time to practice first (from childhood), then having more power will always be preferred, but if the soldiers are to be recruited, and then taught archery from the beginning only shortly before battle, then the method that is simply easier to produce a use-able result will be desired.
Someone with the proper connections should really find out if the surviving bows from the Mary Rose could be microscopicly inspected to determine which side held the telltale marks of a shaft scoring the fiber of the wood. I don't see why it wouldn't be an acceptable test on the bows, since it is a purely visual inspection that could not harm them. Seems to me that it would be historically significant to determine this.
@@GawainSSB That is still be a useful data point. If the archers of old were so not fussed as to not even have a "top" & "bottom" of their war bow, that would be interesting in itself.
@@NigelTolley True, I agree that either way the findings would interesting. Its possible though that they're not distinguishable. I imagine someone would have noticed this given the level of detailed study the bows have been under.
I don't have a longbow on hand, but I flipped my 55-60lb recurve upside down, to have a flat section on the riser to shoot from off my thumb, and to have the bowstring set to the right and I was able to shoot from the right of the bow, on target (albeit goofy, 'cause the riser isn't conducive to it). The bow was shooting to the right generally, but to those who say it is impossible, they don't know what they're talking about. I was keeping them on the archery target from 20 yards (60 feet) or 18.28 meters. I hit the target on my first shot and it felt rather instinctive. The target surface is about 2x2 feet or 61x61 cm. I look forward to giving the right side draw method a try when I get my hands on a 80lb+ selfbow.
Nice video. Have you ever thought though. When u look at these historical dipictions of the shad draw or whatever. It looks like they are using a thumb draw it a Slavic draw. Look at the fingers.
You wonder why there's long arrows on the Mary Rose? Here's an obvious answer, the taller archers. I draw 34" on a standard target draw length, it's 40" on the 'ear draw'. A 30" or 32" arrow is near useless for me.
Could you do a penetration test or arrow speed test with left vs right side at same draw length? Some people say that shooting from the right side will lead to a bigger energy loss because of the arrow hitting the bow. I'd really like to see some testing on whether the side affects the amount of energy in the arrow or not.
@@Thrand11 Awesome! Looking forward to that then :) Btw, want to clarify, I specifically mean left vs right side with both mediterranean draw (or shaditerranean draw, lol)
Should be the same result by same drawlenght. But he can draw it more back that will make one side "Stronger" we cant fool physics :D if the only change is the side the result should be near equal. Or you use momentum that also generates more speed.
I'm a lefty and prefer the left side. Feels more natural and can pull further also. When you put the bow on the opposite side you can't pull as far as you subconsciously put some of that energy into keeping the arrow in position.
Going off prior "drama" with Nusensei, the guy is full of himself and just doesn't like that Shad has a bigger "authority" on the site than he does. He even went after little things like Shad "being difficult to understand" when subjectivity Nusensei is far worse in that regard
I feel like what it comes down to is: Right side for trick shooting, lighter bow, faster draw and shot Left side for heavy bow with an emphasis on accuracy over speed. I dont think you are more likely to injure yourself doing any way over the other unless you go too heavy without developing the proper muscles
@@mkultraification thats true but eastern archers were more skilled. You can get really good accuracy on the right it just takes more practice. If you can master accuracy from the right side you have both advantages
ngl but sometimes... NuSensei can be very arrogant on the ways he was taught... idk who taught him but damn he must have punished him hard for having different opinions because today he is basically a fanatic of his ways & nothing else seems to exist for him.
Hmmm, as someone who shoots and pulls string this is all a bit like the arguments you see regarding what's the best stance. Is it best to shoot one handed cowboy style? Yes, if want to hold your horse's reigns with your other hand and effectively draw and shoot a pistol which sends more powder than lead. Is weaver stance best? Maybe, if you want to be able to effectively shoot from cover. Is strong isosceles best? Yes, if you want to more effectively control the recoil of modern light weight high powered guns and bead quickly back on to possibly multiple targets. Is any one better enables the other? In each given situation then yes. While an experienced shooter should be proficient with all of them you would start a noob off with strong isosceles as they'll have less mishaps. Is it possible that in battle archers were taught to draw across left or right of the bow depending on the situation on the field, then pull as hard as they could? One thing is for sure, many of the fallen that have been found on British battle fields had deformed shoulders and skeletal problems which at first were attributed to genetic defects until the scientists realised the deformaties were caused by over drawing bows. These guys would have been suffering crippling injuries by the time they were 40. Hands Up everyone who has medieval castle where they live 🏰🖐️ kriii.com/english-bowmen/
You should get more footage of each form of drawing from different angles (front,back,top,down,gopro in the wrist facing the body,etc ) preferably wearing something that didn't obscure your joint/limb positioning and get some one (preferebly with extensive knowledge or a degree in bodly mecanics) to be reviewed, that could help in determine if there is a reason for the ¨ is easier in the back ¨ as many say, and maybe if ther is any diferent muscle group/chain being used that provide more room for increase power/draw. From personal experience lifting and moving heavy objects even the smallest change in positioning can result in a very different outcome
I don’t get why this is so hard to understand...these two “styles” are simply optimized for two different goals. 1)Shooting as many arrows as possible.with decent accuracy. 2)shooting in A tournament for maximum accuracy. So you wanna compete in the olympics do it the way olympians do it. You want to hunt or shoot recreationally do whichever feels best for you
When I introduced by 5 year old daughter to archery, this was the exact same way she shot her first arrow. Bow leaning to the left from vertical line and holding the arrow right side of bow.
My theory is that maybe opposing Kings or leaders burned or hid texts containing proper ways/better ways to shoot a bow to maximize strength, draw weight, accuracy and speed!
I been shooting like this for about 2 years on and off and now I can shoot like Lars and I have 70 lb bow and can use this technique full draw no problem
What do you mean Lars Andersen does this all the time? I have never seen him shoot like this, until that Shad video. He mostly shoots Slavic, or even thumb release. Also, the odd feather doesn't mater if the fleatchings are indeed feathers, and not plastic. So no need to worry about the placement if it interferes with your fast loading.
A problem I see in the argument for the historicity of the cradle draw is there hasn't been much historical evidence presented to support it. There are many pictures showing arrows from the inside of the bow, but very few of them shows the thumb cradling the arrows. If one wants to attempt reconstruction of techniques based on artworks one should follow what is actually is shown.
Shad demonstrates that he doesn't really need the thumb, and even when he uses it he drops the thumb before loosing. Just twisting your wrist slightly to the left will keep the arrow on the bow, and appears to give a stronger draw too.
Is it just me or would a three-under draw yield better results? At least when I draw heavy bows I find my fingers squeeze together so compensating takes focus and strength out of the draw. Also it looks like your left riser side draw has you stiff arming with your bow hand.
Is the debate about this type of draw based on medieval long bows or just the draw in general because it's historically proven this draw was used by Eastern bowmen on horses and off horses but with short recurve bows. So if it's based on the draw with western long bows that's different.
The "impossible" draw is the traditional draw in Asia and the Middle East, and was used by the renowned horse archers of the Eurasian steppe. Lars Andersen's claims may be exaggerated; however, history clearly demonstrates that the draw was widely used by many of the most renowned military archers; therefore, it must have been viable. If it wasn't the Huns, Mongols, Turks, etc. using it would *not* have earned their reputations as great archers.
I honestly asked why the arrows were on the wrong side several times throughout elementary school. They actually often just said they don't know. It's pretty intriguing that you and shad seem to feel it's easier to draw, because we would be talking about a time period that probably expected a lot more practice than the more modern time periods that have surviving treatise',, and it might just be easier for beginners to learn the "standard" way, (because you can rest the arrow on the bow). ,, and when drafting , the one that basically won most often was the one that could be learned in a day.
One question, it may be a stupid one, with the answer of "Interesting, I'll give it a go, safely" or "stop being an idiot you idiot" but have you tried different drawing techniques with the right sided arrow? and is there any difference? I'm sure each has it's own name but start with i presume your right hand near your face, with your torso slightly rotated to your left, arrow pointed slightly upward and push the bow out while rotating your torso back to straight and bringing the arrow point down to level or with the bow pointing near vertical and rotating your arm to push the bow away from you? if this question doesn't make sense, just ignore it, it's late-ish and i'm struggling to get my thoughts into words and im sat here miming the motions and was curious
@@Thrand11 You should really consider trying to lean forward, like I mentioned before. In all your vids with the warbows, you never lean forwards. It's not a surprise that you have an easier time pulling the 130lbs bow when you lean backwards, because leaning either way will activate you back muscles more.
I live in the UK. As a kid I took archery. We loosed on the right every time. I don't know if this was common but it's how we did it. So maybe it was regonal. The UK in the medieval period was very regonal
THEGN THRAND: See my note to Tod's Workshop (mirrored to Shadiversity) about experiments to do with war bows, force measuring computer chips and such. At this Episode of Tod's Workshop. Does WAX on ARROW HEADS Do Anything? Tod's Workshop ua-cam.com/video/oC30A6noRmY/v-deo.html
As to volley fire, think of it as analogous to shotgun fire patterns. Basically the difference between the preciseness of a sniper and the sheer volume of fire of a machine gun. As for lefties, I’ve always thought there is something sinister about them.
Here's why I think that those paintings are realistic depictions of archery. The best clue is that bows and arrows are exactly the same as the ones found on Mary-Rose. That makes me think that artists were going for realistic depictions, almost like a portrait or like a chronicle. I doubt they had any intentions or need to deceive anyone with those pictures. So I think we should take them literally as they are shown. And let's not forget that Mongolian, Japanese, Slavic, Chinese, Arabic, Ottoman and Bizantine archers all shot from the right side of the bow. So why is it so weird to some people that western Europeans might get the same idea is beyond me. Me and my siblings shot from the right side with pinch grip and Slavic draw throughout our childhood and we were able to shoot any pigeon mid air while we were moving, also we were able to shoot rabbits while they were running although that was harder because they change direction very quickly. And according to the people on the internet it's impossible to even nock an arrow on the right side of the bow.
I believe in the old God's and our ancestors. Asatru is a modern religion. I also respect all beliefs cultures of ancient warriors as my brothers at arms.
1:35 - On the point about not addressing you (or Shad) specifically: it's because I'm not addressing you or Shad. Shad and I reached an agreement where I specifically would not reference him, and from past experience that hasn't turned out positively anyway. It's purposefully not framed as a response video and was made concurrently and independently as an original viewpoint, not a response. I've been told to stay in my lane, and I'm trying to avoid drama on my channel by not name-dropping others. That you think this is "not cool" is confusing to me, and perhaps you're misunderstanding my approach. I'm open to being fact-checked and being replied to, but I'm no longer in the business of making response videos. So let's not stir the pot by guessing intentions, I'll make it clear right here.
Yeah, it makes sense to me that you didn't actually mention names, and overall, this specific video seems to address other people more than you. Even if you are the only one mentioned by name.
@@The214thRabidFangirl I think "skeptic" is a fair and accurate label nonetheless. It's very easy to be pedantic and semantic, so I encourage people who look at the original content in full and make their own interpretations. As we know, anything that is written or said will have things missing that we have to read between the lines to fully understand. These aren't peer-reviewed and edited papers; they're forum posts and comments.
For example, I was confused when people suggested that I said that it was "impossible". I know it's technically possible and I casually do it too. But the quote highlighted by Thrand did include a line from my conclusion that "it couldn't have been done".
Perhaps the quote was taken out of context from the entirety of the piece, which outlined numerous recognised problems, and I may have inadvertently debunked my own thread when I said that people refer to the method as ineffective rather than impossible (i.e. "it couldn't have been done [effectively]). That's the nature of online discussions though - we're quick to tunnel-vision on specific things that stand out.
What's important that things are clarified in going forward so we can build a better collective understanding rather than get caught up on who said what.
Mainly just feel like name checking you added nothing to the video.
Hard to raise the collective IQ when People dont listen to the People that acctualy are in the Community, and non of the arguing partiets have put Fort any science, i might have but has been ignored so the hypocritocal statements of willingnes to learn and be proven wrong is a clearly absent. When you cant kill a water bottle with 80 lbs you have imperical data and observertstion, did it work? Yes.arrow flew did it get result? No,
@@mortenjacobsen5673 Bottle was covered by gambeson basically armour thats why arrow did not penetrate. Arrow would do s pass through otherwise would need backdrop.
I really love this whole "lets test this archery" from Shad and you!
I very much enjoyed it as well!
@@Thrand11 hickory bow?
Jezz, I didn't realize that the archery community was so dramatic.
Any community can be but we should be open minded to the clues and evidence our ancestors left us.
ThegnThrand it seems that some in the archery community are invested in not letting anything change, as if their skills will in some way be diminished if new techniques become common. Loving your channel, subscribed.
@@mikeoliver3254 That is actually something a lot of martial arts have become, cult like and keeping their ideals within and preventing new ones from changing and adapting, MMA has shown that many martial arts are not very effective in daily standards due to the years of fighting only one art style and even showing some have caused people to believe they can do ridiculous things.
I can see other arts do it to.
no joke, you have no see my relatives arguing about what source to put on the dumplins...
any thing can be and will be argued about, and it will get dramatic, and often nasty.....
but if both party will eventually realise their mistake and apologise about it then its all good i guess
That's really weird, he's made several videos on the topic, as a response to Shad etc, where he says over and over that it ISN'T impossible, shows it isn't impossible, but strongly argues that it is still right to say that there is a "correct" and a "wrong" side of the bow, and shows a lot of very good historical examples and explains why this is the case.
This reddit post seems to be made in a very different spirit than the videos he's produced on the subject? I'm confused!
Agreed
From what I understand he first made the post after Shads original video, claiming it was impossible. Shad then followed up with another video where he demonstrated that it was very much so possible which probably put NU in a bit of an uncomfortable position. And because (no offense btw) he seems to be very much convinced of himself as being an authority he felt obligated elaborating on said post and shifting his position from "impossible" to just "unlikely"
@@darthplagueis13 Makes sense better not to have an ego when examining history and depictions sometimes you can be surprised or proven wrong by our ancestors they were quite ingenious.
@@darthplagueis13 Sounds like you and Mr BigCookie are right. The dude seems a bit full of himself and argues to reach his own bias, rather than a truthful and plausible statement. I mean, even historians argue that depictions are very reliable if they show up in mutliple tomes over different time with some consistency, so I assume he must be the world's leading expert on the matter. Strange I was today days old since I ever heard of him.
Nu hates Shad.
I'm so glad you're around man, we need more people experimenting with how weapons may have been used in the past. Thank you!
You are most welcome
Some people are just too stuck in their dogmas, to reasonably discuss the Shaditerranean draw
agreed
"Shaditerranean draw" 🤣
I was going to say, why are some people so invested into which side of the bow the arrow went? Does it shatter their worldview? Obviously it works on both sides. Why is it that big of an issue?
Gumaro R. Villamil Basically it all started with Lars Anderson, and the proposed idea that historical speed shooting for war must’ve been done on the right side of the bow, because the hypothesus goes, it should be more intuitive and biomechanically quicker. Archery experts took issue with it being presented as “rediscovering some lost art of the way archery was done in war,” and the debate war has been going and evolving on since. It’s mostly, everyone wants to always wanting to prove they’re right, and the way people say it rubs the wrong way.
It's not dogma, it's biomechanics. This technique carries a significant risk of injury, either immediate or cumulative, and at least one person who is capable of handling heavy draw weights has already been injured doing this, on a draw weight well below the maximum he is capable of using at that (ua-cam.com/video/5sjW_rCgnGg/v-deo.html). It puts the shoulder and elbow in an alignment that will cause damage. Thrand's problem is that the draw technique that he normally uses is also incorrect, so he doesn't have a proper comparison. He's comparing bad technique to bad technique and drawing a conclusion.
I really don't want him to have to get surgery on his shoulder because he is trying to use raw strength in place of proper technique.
If it's wrong, but it works, is it still wrong?
"Rules are made for people who aren’t willing to make up their own."
- Chuck Yeager, Brigadier General, USAF (Ret.)
"Archery is about what works... Unless Nusensei doesn't like it. Then it's bad and wrong."
Sounds like a quote from the Mighty Jingles, "If it's stupid but it works it ain't stupid."
I like the Yeager philosophy, but sadly, try living in a world where your rules don't match those of the society and see how fast society slaps you down.
I'm kinda glad most people don't make their own rules in every regard. Often the established rules exist for a reason. But if the reason is no longer valid (or never was), well then...
@@notapplicable531
Yes, it is like +pRahvi0 is saying. The key is knowing when to take exception to a rule for the best outcome, victory. There is always the risk of reprisal, especially in environments where things like individuality, taking the initiative, and innovation are discouraged.
I have definitely paid the price for it, and it is a lonely road. But who do the doctors and nurses want when the situation is horribly abnormal, or going wrong?
Forgot how much I enjoy these videos, simply for the love that goes in to them
Man you make those heavy bows look easy! haha excellent video man, hope you all are safe through this mess. Good point on checking sides of bows for wear, could answer some doubts people have and the text you mentioned that I think you said Nusensei brought up "put it in the bow" actually has a footnote (8) i.e. nock it. Simply saying just to nock it on the string not really indicating a bow side. I wish people would stop being closed minded and maybe just enjoy all the possibilities archery has to offer. Thank you for this video, and for the mention brother!
You are most Welcome was going to add a clip of you video but my down loader is not working now for some reason.
@@Thrand11 No worries man I still appreciate the shout out!
Man that bow packs a punch. You can imagine them tuning arrow weights and bow weights to achieve what they desired. Much in the same manner a rifleman would today.
Archers still do this today, I immage they always have to some extent. Of course, war archers didn't. It doesn't really matter for massed vollies against large formations, or with being issued sheaves of arrows. I suspect that archers did keep back a few good arrows, when they found one they liked.
I know exactly what arrow in my quiver I pick for those "have to make" shots. I think most of us have a few of those arrows.
It is said that Howard Hill would make a batch of arrows, take them out back, and discard any that he did not bullseye with.
or adapt a different bow like the romans with the recurve horn bow
Seems like that guy really tries hard to convince himself of something when all evidence points to the contrary. Shad and you pulled it off, depictions are there in quite some number and are regarded by historians as very reliable. Especially when they are found in multiple tomes/scrolls and consistency.
Mutliple people have pointed out that NU has more of a problem of a personal nature, rather than a firm grasp of the facts. Courageous to argue/respond to a guy like that, seems he is literally less interested in the facts than trying to sound smart. But in other news, water is wet.
Very true and thanks
Back when lars anderson showed this for most forms of archery most "archers" laughed at him.
I guess some people just can't stand the fact that they were wrong.
Stop putting fuel on this fire jeez. NuSensei is a skilled archer arguing from the point of view of archery tradition. You are basically arguing with historical documentation and modern archery tradition. Just because Shad is challenging traditional notions, doesn't make this a war between Nu and Shad. Did you even watch his video on the subject? As an archer myself, I found it very informative. I actually learned a lot from his channel, he brings up many small details in archery and clarifies them. Even Shad has acknowledged Nu is a skilled archer and instructor.
@@GamelessOne nobody is talking about a war, knucklehead, but there is a scientific argument here which - as you just said yourself - is argued against by Nu by argument of tradition. A poor basis for scientific discourse. Also, you are missing several points, but then again, I didn't expect anything of value.
Daniel it isn't a challenge against traditional archery, it's a challenge against Victorian rules for target shooting. Any skill or knowledge NuSensei may have in one style doesn't excuse him being a dick about another, especially when being a dick without knowledge or experience. NS has yet to make a gracious apology, but at least he's sufficiently backpedalled to be let out of the sights. Stop fanboing.
Nu Sensei strongly dislikes Shadiversity. End of the story. Arguing with someone smart is difficult, arguing with an idiot is impossible. Guess what? It’s impossible to argue with Nu Sensei...
Why does he dislike shad? This is new news to me.
The vikings knew how to argue with idiots. However, their style of argumentation is currently considered "uncivilized"... I say, bring back holmgangr!
@incinerator950 There's a lot of open interpretation of the medieval world as a whole.. you can't know when theres no documents or evidence for something.
Shad often talks about such things where there's no definitive answer, so he refrains from saying that what he talks about is absolutely true. To do so would be very arrogant.
Mawo Duffer one or two years ago, Shad did a video about archery and Nu Sensei did a response video to it and he was pretty disingenuous on a few points (in my opinion). That led to a few response videos.
@@MawoDuffer
He dislikes Shad because Nusensei likes to think himself of a superior intellectual and historical scholar and above the mere masses of "consumer grade content" like Shad (I used quotes for a reason there - he actually used that "consumer grade" comment in his reddit thread on Shad). He's basically got the same mentality as that university professor that loved to huff their own farts just for being in academia and for being an intellectual that was above it all. I'm sure you know the type. And someone like Shad walks in, who tells people he's not an expert and makes the dreaded HERETICAL CRIME of not being dry and dull and occasionally even not being serious (AUDIBLE GASP) -and definitely not being salty over Shad having more subscribers than him- and you can see where this is going.
Basically, Nusensei has a huge ego and arrogance and Shad is everything he hates. While being more successful than him. Oh, imagine my shock, he also doesn't like Lars Andersen, either. Yet strangely respects him more than Shad... despite Lars also using historical art examples showcasing the possibility that this was historically used. Yet Nusensei is okay with that because... "Lars did the research and can cite sources" (another actual quote).
Basically, Nusensei is an asshole not worth your time.
I shouldn't be as triggered as I am, but am I the only one who thinks that NUSENSEI has some form of personal grudge/feud going?
Maybe be but we have no animosity what so ever I nor Shad.
Shad and Nu have some history. They had disagreement about an archery video made some time ago.
@@Thrand11 I didn't believe you did. It' s just one thing to have a hypothesis and to try it out, test it, unbiased (quite sucessfully as you both have shown), and another to just assume that everything that is not commonly taught to be the "truth", the be all and end all, is wrong (whilst not having tried it)…….is just wrong...on so many levels. I get where he, as a "traditionally" taught sporting archer(?), is comming from….but still.
I should ad that I did not follow NUSENSEI's response videos and only saw his reddit post in this video
@@timporsch2669 what's ironic is probably on some jungle somewhere, a tribal hunter shoots animals down with the arrow on the right
Nice videoThrand! Thanks for sharing it ;-)
I'm completely untrained, but the outside nock just feels more natural, but it also feels more natural to tilt the bow, 15+ degrees anticlockwise.
Got decent accuracy and follow ups with the renfaire bow. Tried it the other way, felt weird. Barring instruction, i'd never expect the 'traditional'' method to be correct.
I think there’s arguments to be made that both techniques could be valid and valuable. Most of the true history and archeology suggests that the massed archers shooting hails of arrows at extended distance before an attack as depicted by Hollywood is incorrect. Powerful longbow men were often the backbone of English armies and while occasional precise shooting would be used much of it centered on loosing the highest volume of powerful shots at likely 50yrds or less and whatever technique would allow the fastest reloading and shooting cycle would probably have been used for combat and the more accurate would be used for hunting
It's definitely true that for most of history The Middle Eastern and Mediterranean regions were a part of European Empires. It's absolutely true that militaries learned from each other. If there was any nation that fired an arrow on the right side of the bow, that technique would have spread and others would have done the same thing. That doesn't mean everyone would have done it, because of course not, but enough would have. In fact they must have, because it was prevalent enough to appear in artwork. This idea that no one would shoot a European bow with the arrow on the right side is frankly ludicrous to me. There is nothing that I know of that one could point to historically to say that shooting on the right side didn't happen. In fact, one step further, armies during ancient history were largely integrated, especially in the massive empires that spanned the known world, and if they weren't integrated with other people from other cultures then they were mercenaries, or were supplemented with mercenaries. All of these people would bring their own knowledge of warfare and techniques with them.
Agreed
Great comment
I have to say I find someone actually doing something more believable than someone saying they can't do it.
How about we just put an end these 2 disagreements, in a few words? They probably shot it from both sides depending on how you were taught as a kid and mastered one side or the other? Also, maybe depending on the Battlefield? Shooting from the right would give you a fast draw & loose a MASS amount of arrows as fast as you possibly could with an advancing Army coming down on you, and the Archers that shot from the left would take their time and pick of certain people of higher Nobility? Makes sense? Because we’ll really DON'T know? I do believe the Art Work is SPOT ON to the tiniest detail! So yes, they shot from the right & from the left?? End of discussion, no? Unless we can get into a Time Machine and witness these Battles? LOVE the Show guys! Great 👍 Job! Keep it goin... Ken
Agreed
Thank you all very much... It is tremendous to get positive reviews! Though my spelling and texting skills are absolutely horrible! But I promise, my grammar is very good when I speak. Hmmm, writing, not so much... My poor mother-in-law ( God rest her soul ) was a very high-level Drama 🎭 Professor at Hofstra University and I could NEVER read her notes because her handwriting was so bad, my wife always had to transcribe her notes to me.
Rowan Nowicki Thank you.🙏 For me... my Dad was a Commercial fisherman & my Mom was Nurse... So I grew up in a lower-middle-class household. Which was fine, because we have a great family. With that said; I didn’t go right too University after Highschool. I went to work on the boat with my father. Did that all through High School and after. Then I started working a Civil Service job a got through my Mom. So I REALLY started my College Academy Until my mid 30’s. My first love has always been History and my second love was Music. But my Dad wasn’t gonna have his Son, that can play some Sea-shanties on the boat and turn that into playing gNr, Sabbath, which I loved! So I dove into History Headfirst and I haven't stopped? The point I’m trying to make: Because I was NOT raised in a Scholars home? lol, this is silly, so I can go dive right back into sounding like a blue-collar -language in a sec! So I'm ALWAYS worried at lectures and whatnot that I'm going to sound completely uneducated! But it's ALL on ME and MY Insecurity! Because while speaking, & if I slip up? Most people didn't even realize it! And it also benefits me too lol because most Adult students are just like ”just get to the effin point guy!” & I do. Thank you for the kind comments! :-)
When loosing a War Bow, the proper stance one uses removes the ability to Aim in the more accepted fashion and you are left to more or lessing instinctually Guessing and The Draw on Long Bows is so long that you lose the privilege of having a set Anchor Point since your pulling back past your face. And the those two points right there i believe already show that standard Archery practices of the time would not and could not apply to Archery with heavier War Bows and from that one can conclude that there were probably differences in the technique used between Standard run of the mill Sporting and Hunting Archery and Archery on the field of battle. and lets not forget that Most of these paintings and drawings were done by extremely well learned people and Monks who we trust in every other aspect with respect to Forging and Blacksmithing to Combat Manuals and Grappling Manuals and works of Arts, but why is it with Archery they all of a sudden are no longer reliable?
Agreed
@@Thrand11 hey man im happy you saw this and agree! altho i feel like i basically just wrote out a long winded transcription of ur video haha, but love ur channel and ur videos! keep up the great work! u and shad even got me back into Archery after a 10 year hiatus haha. keep up the great work man!
Agreed too, not just that the longbow was primarily a British weapon and men were required to train with it no matter your profession (depending on time period) that made our war drafts have all the skilled archers necessary, this also meant that artists would be well versed in draw technique when doing their artwork.
@@hismajestylordsmenkhare5878 I don't think that included monks, which many illustrators were..
Because we all know Southpaw doesn't exist, right?
Oh, wait...
How does the pull compare between a long bow and recurve? I know you mentioned Nu’s 40lb bow compared to the 100+lb long bow but I wonder about the differences between design. I am fairly big/strong and use a 60lb modern hunting recurve. I cannot imagine using a 130lb recurve bow.
130lb is 130lbs basically
ThegnThrand it’s crazy, just cannot imagine in. I’ll have to try it som day :)
How is the speed out of a bow like this?
That one shot was your war archer spirit coming out. Never aim for the thick of the armor.
I’m 63
More than 50 years ago, our games master taught us to hold, draw and loose this way. Not crossed bow.
Excellent video... I am enjoying watching this whole discussion play out. No need for drama here just honest experimentation and maturity to have an interesting debate. I am no adept archer but when I was younger as a right handed person I instinctively placed the arrow on the right side of the bow as I didn't know any better but I also used the thumb draw as I now know it to be called. It was only as when I became interested in archery as an adult that I learnt the classic Mediterranean draw with the arrow on the left side of the bow.
Keep up the great content mate.
Subbed.
Thanks and good to have you here
i did it that way since i first made my 40 pound pvc horsebow and it is quite nice for a left handed person that doesnt have access to a left handed bow
Now my it would be interesting to track how and when it became standard doctrine to shoot from inside the bow.
Agreed I am betting its mostly from the Victorian era with lighter longbows for sport not war.
@@Thrand11 I think you might ne totally right as most of Asian style archery have adopt both sides just fine even in modern days. This also coincided woth Lars speed archery videos on how modern sport static/still archery downgrading archery as martial arts in general.
The two arguments, people seem to have against drawing on the outside aren't really valid:
1)Safety: You can hold and draw the bow the exact same way as you hold it with the arrow on the inside, you don't have to tilt the bow towards yourself to keep the arrow from falling off, when you draw, just straighten out your thumb and make a cradle for the arrow, and hold the bow in the same orientation as normal. (Or pre-torque the string the other way)
Doing it this way, you use the same muscles, in the same way, as you do while drawing on the inside.
2)Accuracy: Many bows are symmetrical, including warbows, which means: no matter which side of the bow, the arrow is, the dynamics are going to be, mostly, the same, the arrow still flexes, the archer's paradox still happens, The only major change is the fact that the bow shoots a bit more to the outside.
To be honest I have adopted this new method accuracy it no longer an issue. Takes time to get use too is all.
I have a nooby bow with an arrow rest on the left side ( an asymmetrical bow) but i still shoot from the right side and i find it to be more accurate. In the beginning i had ti aim a little to the left to hit the target but now its second nature
Have a look at Armin Hirmer's channels. He shows the correct method for 'wrong side' shooting, with tilt and 'pre -torque' of the string. Arrows do not and will not fall off. He demonstrates the technique with Mediterranean and horse archer styles and multiple bows. Excellent channel.
The reason why pulling back with the arrow on the right put less strain on your back is because how your pulling wrist is turning counter clock-wise, which allow you to fold your arm better as your bicep isn't twisted. You can test this out by doing the pulling motion with your palm facing upward and downward, you can really feel the difference in your bicep, and your back have to compensate for it. It's also why many people prefer thumb-grip, your palm is facing downward and it's arguably the most natural position to fold your arm
imagine being a modern archer with no strength to draw war bow and said its impossible only to be proven wrong.
I would imagine there would be different styles within England in that age depending on who was coaching the archer's mandatory lessons
Agreed
Historically speaking!. Archery was mandatory every Sunday after church for non nobles!. And since it was an art but a direct order from the highest authority at the time. Showing that “he” wanted people to perform the same duty in unity. It would be kind of weird if they were allowed to “wing” it and have different “styles”
Little late but damn man I can't believe you reached 130, well I can because you actually commit and put the effort into training so of course, it makes sense you'd reach it
But god damn thats hellishly impressive.
Thanks and I love drawing heavy bows and feel of shooting them.
Thrand, gratz to you on hitting 130#! You are closing the gap my friend! BTW, we always seem to have pleasant exchanges, and i have my my YT settings on to get all your videos but it seems like a lot of them just never show up in my feed! Any suggestions? *EDIT: as for what side it is easier to draw it from (& i am just speculating) but could this have something to do with the buyest of the string lines up along the length of the bow with and the way that spring twists? I mean, we think of a string placement representing an exact visual truth like a plumb-bob does, but i have my doubts. Similarly, a piece of wood may "look" uniform on the outside but we both know it isn't -& certainly not internally, and it doesn't flex in uniform. Just a thought. I have never shot a war bow.*
My only beef with Lars is that he proposed an arrow could penetrate through mail *and* gambeson easily without specifying if he's using a 100+ pound warbow, or using the bow he had throughout the video. Other than that, the dude is a proper madlad. He's been rocking the modern archer community since 2015.
The arrow head itself is far more important than draw weight though. A short bodkin from a bow with high draw weight will bounce off soft armor whereas a less powerful bow shooting a needle bodkin will defeat the same soft armor.
@@Turgz Draw weight is still pretty important though, especially when trying to penetrate mail armor and gambeson layers. The kind of draw weight Lars uses would never be able to penetrate proper mail/gambeson, no matter the arrowhead. Especially because he doesn't draw the bow back fully.
@@GamelessOne Of course, but the type of projectile used is still the most important thing. The wrong arrow head with a more powerful bow will still bounce off soft armor.
Lars said himself he physically cannot shoot a more powerful bow, and to be fair he is quite small, plus it helps him with his trick shots.
@@Turgz The segment of his video where he shoots some LARP mail with a low pound bow on a fixed wooden surface is very bad though. Otherwise everything he does is excellent, as long as people understand that his shooting method is the worst for actually penetrating armor. It's not a big problem, as he never personally claimed to be able to penetrate armor or made more such bad "armor penetration" segments.
@@GamelessOne Why would someone who can literally shoot you in the eye from 20 yards aim for your breastplate? It's only at the times when there were 200 French knights in "modern" full plate with their tunics over the top, hunched down and slowly walking forward that the knights stood a chance of even a few getting through. Even there, someone like Lars would nail your foot to the floor.
It’s more in line it seems with your dominant arm when you’re right handed at least .
Glad to see some content!
Thanks me too just hope keep funds going so can just pump out videos wile everything is going on as it is.
I’ve just started shooting on the right side of my bow and I find only advantages, you get a lot more drawl length it doesn’t hurt your back you can torque the bow slightly so you don’t have to worry about Archers paradox, Or the string hitting your arm, after only doing it a couple weeks a much faster at reloading and shooting the next arrow, never really been a Long bow person, I usually made sinew backed native American style bows.
What a great vid seems like a lot of fun.
It was thanks
I just watched a video on a guy with a 240 pound bow. He didnt even fire it but it was cool to see. I dont know if he will be able to fire it at 32in.
I feel like the people saying it’s impossible haven’t watched you or shads videos, and secondly NUsensei seems to think that shad was less accurate and that he struggled more but if you watch his video he clearly does much better pulling the bow sting with the arrow on the right.
Thanks and plan on a few more videos about this method of archery.
ThegnThrand cool! I like your content, keep it up!
I'm familiar with Nu's channel and I think he and his community are fundamentally confused about something. What he does is very low poundage archery where he focuses on form, technique, and accuracy with light bows. This is a conversation about war archery with very high poundage bows. There are differences. Is there a correct form with war archery? Of course. Is it going to be exactly the same as with low poundage archery? Not necessarily.
To give you an example, with traditional low poundage archery you want to have the hand that holds the bow be very relaxed--- a light grip where you are not squeezing too much. I shoot a near hundred pound bow (not well). If I have a meek little grip with my left hand all the force that goes through that bow and into the hand is going to mess my hand up.
These are two different forms of archery.
Thanks and agreed
can you try holding extra arrows on the fingers below the grip fingers? how does it affect the draw/shot and how does it affect the left/right nocking
Just wondering, other than those Ebay listings, is there a reliable location to purchase those higher draw weight longbows from?
Yet another good confirmation of the viability of the cradle draw!
Being pretty much limited to academic considerations (I've never before felt limited by my lack of a longbow...), I'll reflect on the manuscripts Shad has dusted off for us:
Even today, fiction contains truth. Fantasy books contain realism. More than that, with common sense, it's usually fairly easy to determine what is what. Generally speaking, if the creator knew the accurate truth, accuracy wouldn't harm the story, and accuracy wouldn't require extra work, then the creator will be accurate, quite simply because inaccuracy will distract a knowledgeable public from what he's trying to convey.
In the relevant manuscript images all of those factors are present. The creators knew the truth of it, there's no reason for imprecision, the audience would definitely recognize and be distracted by the needless inaccuracy. In fact, in some of the images, there's extra effort and esthetic sacrifice made to depict the cradle draw. Never mind dragons and monsters; this can only be explained by the cradle draw being a real thing, and even _expected under certain circumstances._
*If* it had turned out to be physically impossible, then that would obviously trump all other arguments. It would've been very surprising, but nevertheless the end of all discussion. As it is, though, it's clearly possible, and clearly provides some advantages in some situations. That's exactly what you'd expect, based on the images. That's pretty much the end of rational discussion on whether or not the cradle draw is historical. Unless the detractors can come up with new and significant evidence, further protestations are irrational.
Great video-all power to your arms(& back). Hoping you all miss Covid19.
If something is impossible/stupid, but it works - it is no longer impossible/stupid.
It is the reality that verifies the thesis, NOT the other way round!!!
@ThegnThrand Excellent video. Could you try something with your 130#, that I've been experiencing? Applying a small torque (counter-clockwise for a right-hand shooter) will have a khatra effect, where the archers paradox gets nullified. Arrows tend to fly straight. I have no idea if this is easy or possible with a 130# but with my 50# it does wonders. I've shot self-made, random spine arrows, they all follow their full draw direction with relative consistency. As a side note I've always shot 3 finger on the right side, and besides the first few clumsy learning shots, I've never had any serious problems.
good show. have fun
Thanks
As a bit of a n00b on the subject I want to know why there's such a big emphasis on accuracy with this method?
In a battle wouldn't you be with lot and lots of other archers firing as many arrows as possible at the opponents formations?
Yes and accuracy is possible with the method as well if you practice enough at it either style. That's what I believe it would be for extra power, range and speed to draw on right instead of left. Plus with possibility of accuracy over time with practice it is most likely superior for combat archery.
@@Thrand11 well that's the key to the argument is it not? The difference between combat archery and target archery?
If archery depictions are not accurate then all the depictions of sword forms etc in historical manuals are also inaccurate which I stupid, everyday people in medieval period were familiar with weapons and their use, it was normal not everyone was trained but they were familiar, a lot of people hunted in my home the UK all men ere required to train thier archery so even artists were well versed in the use of a bow, thus the depictions are likely accurate in my opinion, I also have little difficulty loosing from the right hand side I find it more instinctive too and tend to be more accurate that way
Very true
with the "impossible" draw, you're chest is spread out giving you more power in your draw
You don't have to lean backwards to achieve that though. It's very common to lean forward when using a warbow.
Agreed
How does having the point of the arrow and inch or so to the right or left make such a fundamental difference? Look at those who have real experience in drawing heavy bows, Joe Gibbs and Justin Ma agree on the method and mechanics of the draw, though one has the arrow on the right with thumb draw and the other on the left with Med. draw.
I was thinking that also, check bows for wear. And even more of a long shot if a shooting glove survived thru time, you would see more wear on the thumb or on the palm edge after thousands of draws depending which side the arrow was drawn on.
Love to get proper information need to get a hold of curator of Mary Rose bows and see if he sites wear on the bows.
For anyone interested in archery there is a very good site and the is Malta Archery by Armin Hermer. Armin covers this topic and has for years because he teaches Archery technics where Turk, Asian, and others shoot using this technic. He also covers European finger draws, thumb draws from either side of the bow.
There is something why not contact a Fletcher that can make traditional arrows in a traditional manner and have people try shooting them with both methods for both speed and accuracy. On a side note I'd expect most archers would try for faster than most accurate when it came to shooting during combat. most battles had large formations of people so you just needed to go in the general direction not to mention their targets move anyway.
I would repeat my suggestion from the previous video: get out of your backyard and shoot at more realistic distances. 30 yards+. This and the previous video are practically blank baling. The issues with the right side placement and Med draw manifest themselves more clearly further out. Jack Fang had a video where he saw severely skewed arrow flight with the "wrong" side placement and Med draw, whereas both conventional Med draw and thumb draw shot straight. So...not a matter of sight picture so much as basic arrow physics.
If it hits the target it doesn't matter how straight the arrow travels.
@@Turgz it does affect arrow speed at impact and arrow that doesn't hit dead on penetrates less/glances off more easily, and may be more affected by wind.
It does matter
@@Turgz Yes, it does matter. Clean arrow flight is very important for penetration. And of course consistently hitting the target in the first place is harder with poor arrow flight.
The arrow on the left of the bow being 'correct' is very much a Victorian invention along with the tiling of a longbow to be a D bow and not a C bow. I say invention as the Victorian's were the first to expressly codify the 'rules' of sport shooting with lighter poundage. The difference between C and D is the presence or absence of a riser which doesn't flex. High poundage warbows need the absence of a unflexing riser to reach the high poundage efficiently, the presence of an unflexing riser benefits accuracy. I would imagine it's probably fair to say one style is slightly more consistently accurate and the other faster and more powerful.
Testing is going to take time to equalise skill.
Exactly! NuSensei tries to debunk Shad by referencing a few manuscripts, but only the Victorian source explicitly say to have the arrow on the inside of the bow, the few older sources requires a great deal of confirmation bias on Nu's part.
I really haven't been following too much the replies between NUSensei, and Shad, I did watch some of his video about this as well as a few other channels like Armin Hirmer, and your self ThegnThrand. I do know NUSensei does have some history with Shad in the past in regards to an archery video Shad has done. My personal opinion is that NUSensei from videos I have seen of his, I am a subscriber to him, that he has a bit of an ego in regards to Archery and isn't that open when it comes to new findings or techniques when it comes to Archery. Now coming back to the arrow on the far side with Mediterranean draw it is most defiantly possible, plus it's not much different then Slavic draw, and it is most defiantly possible to shoot with the arrow on the far side as seen in half of the archery in the world which does this mostly in Eastern style archery. It has it's advantages as well as disadvantages but is no more incorrect then arrow on near side as much of the western world does it. As for it being historical for Europeans to shoot the arrow on the far side, as seen in many pictures of the time it does show the archers with the arrows on the far side, and at the time in Europe at least in England it was law for every man to train with the bow regardless of occupation, and many in Europe knew how to shoot or been around or saw archery quite a lot. Now sure artists do get things wrong in these paintings as well but for it to constantly be shown in quite a few paintings and artwork from different time periods makes it defiantly more plausible that this style was used to some extent during the time. Just my two cents for what it is worth. I may have started in archery at a very early age of 3, but I am far from an expert.
You can get more draw because you are pushing the bow forward with one hand and pulling the string with the other. As long as you can be accurate it seems like a great style
Agreed
Oh well Odin's beard I got a notification from you
awesome
Now I have NO experience with a bow that isn't made of plastic and comes with suction-cup "arrows" but I do get the impression that it could be a matter of speed vs accuracy as you mentioned with the volley bit. I mean it looks like one side is easier to aim with but slower to nock and vice versa but could just be me...
Anyway it's nice to see more videos from you so best of luck to you.
Accuracy come with practice, so I don't think it matters on wich side. You can adapt pretty fast to different bows, pull methods and the side you shoot with. There are differences why you shoot on one or the other side. Thumbdraw as an example is most common on horse, on foot it shouldn't be any matter. There the position of quiver and bow case is more important to have space for a sword or an axe, so that you won't hinder yourself. Context is the magic word.
@@Trollvolk True, but I can also see that teaching levies to nock their on "thumb-side" could possibly allow them to "fire" volley's quicker... Again my only practical experience with bows, if I can even call it that, were toys back in kindergarten...
Yeah, it really doesn't penetrate that well with how much energy is lost during flight. Did some preliminary distance tests too, but so far it's been too windy and cold for a good test day, but I suspect I'll see a considerable difference in how far arrows fly med vs cradle when I get a chance.
approaching the end of the video: I think that if it is easier to draw, the result is more power at every skill level, so if there is time to practice first (from childhood), then having more power will always be preferred, but if the soldiers are to be recruited, and then taught archery from the beginning only shortly before battle, then the method that is simply easier to produce a use-able result will be desired.
I like that leaf-shaped arrow-head!
Someone with the proper connections should really find out if the surviving bows from the Mary Rose could be microscopicly inspected to determine which side held the telltale marks of a shaft scoring the fiber of the wood. I don't see why it wouldn't be an acceptable test on the bows, since it is a purely visual inspection that could not harm them. Seems to me that it would be historically significant to determine this.
Very true.
@@GawainSSB That is still be a useful data point. If the archers of old were so not fussed as to not even have a "top" & "bottom" of their war bow, that would be interesting in itself.
@@NigelTolley True, I agree that either way the findings would interesting. Its possible though that they're not distinguishable. I imagine someone would have noticed this given the level of detailed study the bows have been under.
out of curiosity do you never shoot left handed, or use a Thumb draw?
I have practiced it but not good at it all really except with lighter bows.
I don't have a longbow on hand, but I flipped my 55-60lb recurve upside down, to have a flat section on the riser to shoot from off my thumb, and to have the bowstring set to the right and I was able to shoot from the right of the bow, on target (albeit goofy, 'cause the riser isn't conducive to it). The bow was shooting to the right generally, but to those who say it is impossible, they don't know what they're talking about. I was keeping them on the archery target from 20 yards (60 feet) or 18.28 meters. I hit the target on my first shot and it felt rather instinctive. The target surface is about 2x2 feet or 61x61 cm. I look forward to giving the right side draw method a try when I get my hands on a 80lb+ selfbow.
Nice video. Have you ever thought though. When u look at these historical dipictions of the shad draw or whatever. It looks like they are using a thumb draw it a Slavic draw. Look at the fingers.
Some look similar others look as the draw in my video.
You wonder why there's long arrows on the Mary Rose? Here's an obvious answer, the taller archers. I draw 34" on a standard target draw length, it's 40" on the 'ear draw'. A 30" or 32" arrow is near useless for me.
Great video!
Thanks
Could you do a penetration test or arrow speed test with left vs right side at same draw length? Some people say that shooting from the right side will lead to a bigger energy loss because of the arrow hitting the bow. I'd really like to see some testing on whether the side affects the amount of energy in the arrow or not.
I could do that for sure.
@@Thrand11 Awesome! Looking forward to that then :) Btw, want to clarify, I specifically mean left vs right side with both mediterranean draw (or shaditerranean draw, lol)
Should be the same result by same drawlenght. But he can draw it more back that will make one side "Stronger" we cant fool physics :D if the only change is the side the result should be near equal. Or you use momentum that also generates more speed.
I'm a lefty and prefer the left side. Feels more natural and can pull further also. When you put the bow on the opposite side you can't pull as far as you subconsciously put some of that energy into keeping the arrow in position.
Going off prior "drama" with Nusensei, the guy is full of himself and just doesn't like that Shad has a bigger "authority" on the site than he does. He even went after little things like Shad "being difficult to understand" when subjectivity Nusensei is far worse in that regard
I feel like what it comes down to is:
Right side for trick shooting, lighter bow, faster draw and shot
Left side for heavy bow with an emphasis on accuracy over speed.
I dont think you are more likely to injure yourself doing any way over the other unless you go too heavy without developing the proper muscles
one problem with that theory. Eastern bows went up to just as high a poundage as western ones. They shot on the right and were renowned for accuracy.
@@mkultraification thats true but eastern archers were more skilled. You can get really good accuracy on the right it just takes more practice. If you can master accuracy from the right side you have both advantages
ngl but sometimes... NuSensei can be very arrogant on the ways he was taught... idk who taught him but damn he must have punished him hard for having different opinions because today he is basically a fanatic of his ways & nothing else seems to exist for him.
OoO I just got an ad for shadow of the conqueror film!
Hmmm, as someone who shoots and pulls string this is all a bit like the arguments you see regarding what's the best stance.
Is it best to shoot one handed cowboy style? Yes, if want to hold your horse's reigns with your other hand and effectively draw and shoot a pistol which sends more powder than lead.
Is weaver stance best? Maybe, if you want to be able to effectively shoot from cover.
Is strong isosceles best? Yes, if you want to more effectively control the recoil of modern light weight high powered guns and bead quickly back on to possibly multiple targets.
Is any one better enables the other? In each given situation then yes.
While an experienced shooter should be proficient with all of them you would start a noob off with strong isosceles as they'll have less mishaps.
Is it possible that in battle archers were taught to draw across left or right of the bow depending on the situation on the field, then pull as hard as they could?
One thing is for sure, many of the fallen that have been found on British battle fields had deformed shoulders and skeletal problems which at first were attributed to genetic defects until the scientists realised the deformaties were caused by over drawing bows. These guys would have been suffering crippling injuries by the time they were 40.
Hands Up everyone who has medieval castle where they live 🏰🖐️
kriii.com/english-bowmen/
You should get more footage of each form of drawing from different angles (front,back,top,down,gopro in the wrist facing the body,etc ) preferably wearing something that didn't obscure your joint/limb positioning and get some one (preferebly with extensive knowledge or a degree in bodly mecanics) to be reviewed, that could help in determine if there is a reason for the ¨ is easier in the back ¨ as many say, and maybe if ther is any diferent muscle group/chain being used that provide more room for increase power/draw.
From personal experience lifting and moving heavy objects even the smallest change in positioning can result in a very different outcome
I don’t get why this is so hard to understand...these two “styles” are simply optimized for two different goals. 1)Shooting as many arrows as possible.with decent accuracy. 2)shooting in A tournament for maximum accuracy. So you wanna compete in the olympics do it the way olympians do it. You want to hunt or shoot recreationally do whichever feels best for you
When I introduced by 5 year old daughter to archery, this was the exact same way she shot her first arrow. Bow leaning to the left from vertical line and holding the arrow right side of bow.
Whatever the method, this would sure stuff up your day.
there were special detachments of left-handed horse archers who came in from the side and fired at the enemy from the side unprotected by the shield
I was wondering , what if i use my left hand to draw on the right side , technically i am shooting it much more wrong ... But can you test it pls
My theory is that maybe opposing Kings or leaders burned or hid texts containing proper ways/better ways to shoot a bow to maximize strength, draw weight, accuracy and speed!
I bought a 65lb, 64" longbow for my first bow last week. I'm 28, never shot a bow, arrow on the right is the way for me!
Just take your time and practice in safe location and the style should work well.
@@Thrand11 lucky for me I have a 350 yard feild!
I been shooting like this for about 2 years on and off and now I can shoot like Lars and I have 70 lb bow and can use this technique full draw no problem
What do you mean Lars Andersen does this all the time? I have never seen him shoot like this, until that Shad video. He mostly shoots Slavic, or even thumb release.
Also, the odd feather doesn't mater if the fleatchings are indeed feathers, and not plastic. So no need to worry about the placement if it interferes with your fast loading.
I'm concerned the evidence in the thumbnail shows that we may have been wearing our beats upside down?
A problem I see in the argument for the historicity of the cradle draw is there hasn't been much historical evidence presented to support it. There are many pictures showing arrows from the inside of the bow, but very few of them shows the thumb cradling the arrows. If one wants to attempt reconstruction of techniques based on artworks one should follow what is actually is shown.
Shad demonstrates that he doesn't really need the thumb, and even when he uses it he drops the thumb before loosing.
Just twisting your wrist slightly to the left will keep the arrow on the bow, and appears to give a stronger draw too.
Is it just me or would a three-under draw yield better results? At least when I draw heavy bows I find my fingers squeeze together so compensating takes focus and strength out of the draw. Also it looks like your left riser side draw has you stiff arming with your bow hand.
Is the debate about this type of draw based on medieval long bows or just the draw in general because it's historically proven this draw was used by Eastern bowmen on horses and off horses but with short recurve bows. So if it's based on the draw with western long bows that's different.
Ive been shooting like this since i was 6 years old, still no injuries
The "impossible" draw is the traditional draw in Asia and the Middle East, and was used by the renowned horse archers of the Eurasian steppe. Lars Andersen's claims may be exaggerated; however, history clearly demonstrates that the draw was widely used by many of the most renowned military archers; therefore, it must have been viable. If it wasn't the Huns, Mongols, Turks, etc. using it would *not* have earned their reputations as great archers.
they draw with the thumb though
@@34566454332 thumb and Slavic draw
I honestly asked why the arrows were on the wrong side several times throughout elementary school. They actually often just said they don't know. It's pretty intriguing that you and shad seem to feel it's easier to draw, because we would be talking about a time period that probably expected a lot more practice than the more modern time periods that have surviving treatise',, and it might just be easier for beginners to learn the "standard" way, (because you can rest the arrow on the bow). ,, and when drafting , the one that basically won most often was the one that could be learned in a day.
12:35 “too high” looks more like the perfect shot 👍🏻
One question, it may be a stupid one, with the answer of "Interesting, I'll give it a go, safely" or "stop being an idiot you idiot" but have you tried different drawing techniques with the right sided arrow? and is there any difference? I'm sure each has it's own name but start with i presume your right hand near your face, with your torso slightly rotated to your left, arrow pointed slightly upward and push the bow out while rotating your torso back to straight and bringing the arrow point down to level or with the bow pointing near vertical and rotating your arm to push the bow away from you? if this question doesn't make sense, just ignore it, it's late-ish and i'm struggling to get my thoughts into words and im sat here miming the motions and was curious
Makes sense experimenting with from different draws at the moment I'll give it a try.
@@Thrand11 You should really consider trying to lean forward, like I mentioned before. In all your vids with the warbows, you never lean forwards. It's not a surprise that you have an easier time pulling the 130lbs bow when you lean backwards, because leaning either way will activate you back muscles more.
I live in the UK. As a kid I took archery. We loosed on the right every time. I don't know if this was common but it's how we did it. So maybe it was regonal. The UK in the medieval period was very regonal
THEGN THRAND: See my note to Tod's Workshop (mirrored to Shadiversity) about experiments to do with war bows, force measuring computer chips and such. At this Episode of Tod's Workshop.
Does WAX on ARROW HEADS Do Anything?
Tod's Workshop
ua-cam.com/video/oC30A6noRmY/v-deo.html
You are full metal man, and I do metal, so I know :)
As to volley fire, think of it as analogous to shotgun fire patterns. Basically the difference between the preciseness of a sniper and the sheer volume of fire of a machine gun. As for lefties, I’ve always thought there is something sinister about them.
Here's why I think that those paintings are realistic depictions of archery. The best clue is that bows and arrows are exactly the same as the ones found on Mary-Rose. That makes me think that artists were going for realistic depictions, almost like a portrait or like a chronicle. I doubt they had any intentions or need to deceive anyone with those pictures. So I think we should take them literally as they are shown. And let's not forget that Mongolian, Japanese, Slavic, Chinese, Arabic, Ottoman and Bizantine archers all shot from the right side of the bow. So why is it so weird to some people that western Europeans might get the same idea is beyond me. Me and my siblings shot from the right side with pinch grip and Slavic draw throughout our childhood and we were able to shoot any pigeon mid air while we were moving, also we were able to shoot rabbits while they were running although that was harder because they change direction very quickly. And according to the people on the internet it's impossible to even nock an arrow on the right side of the bow.
Does Thrand practice Asatru?
I believe in the old God's and our ancestors. Asatru is a modern religion. I also respect all beliefs cultures of ancient warriors as my brothers at arms.
@@Thrand11 Cool. I'm a Christian but I've always held respect for the old Norse. Thanks for the reply.