Yes, we have beat the "I'm instinctive, I don't see the arrow." argument to death. But I was Netflix surfing and started to binge watch the show Brain Games, a running narrative on how our brain works and how in its processing and filtering information, as amazing as it is, CAN fool us. There were explanations of differences in how we are hard wired applicable to the sexes, decisions we make and how magicians take advantage of misdirecting how the brain processes what the eyes take in.

The show demonstrated how the brain auto-chooses how to interpret the fuzzy images in peripheral vision, either by guessing what's missing and filling in the blanks (sometimes wrong) OR simply erases images it decides are unimportant.

In sum as it relates to aiming the arrow, if the archer does not (even instantly) switch awareness from "the spot" to the surroundings (including the arrow), the brain will within seconds literally erase what the eyes see.

Said differently, we can focus on the spot while still being conscious of whats in our field of view and the arrow will remain visible, OR concentrate on the spot so intensely that even though the eyes are taking it all in, the brain will erase what the eye sees figuring it is unimportant.

A focus so intense that the brain erases awareness of everything except target focus is hard to maintain however as ANY motion in our side vision is genetically hard wire connected to our survival instincts.

But it IS technically possible that while we DO see EVERYTHING, the brain can decide the arrow view isn't important enough to tell us its there.

Rick R.

I saw this as well. Pretty amazing stuff. The fill in whats missing aspect happens all the time. I still laugh when a CPAP commercial comes on- I always see CRAP...everytime..

I'm not human. 8^)

Kidding aside, I agree.

Rick

Thanks yorktown, that's pretty damn interesting.

This is why seeing a falling leaf or passing insect in my peripheral vision just before I release will often ruin my shot. A steady drop of leaves or a persistent swarm of bugs does nothing.

Lol! That's funny Jim! Good chuckle. Thanks Yorktown, I'm going to go check that out.

And that's why I nearly hit a doe in the hind hoof when she picked it up just as I was releasing...

The thing is, though.... It's not that we don't SEE it, it's that we don't put any attention on it - we don't KNOW that we're seeing it. Or NOT seeing it.

It's a lot like talking to my (hearing impaired) children; we keep having to explain to their teachers that you can't expect a kid to follow up with you on the stuff that they missed if they have no way of knowing that they've missed it in the first place.

Also reminds me of a piece in the back of a TBM some (many) years ago, where there was a report of a man who lost his sight, but who was nonetheless able to navigate down a hallway which had had a number of chairs placed in it as obstacles. He didn't bump into them and go around, he just walked around them the same as any sighted person would do.

'Splain, DAT, Loosey!

Ugh...

Experts said that the Arctic would be melted by 2012, before that they said the arctic ice would cut off Iceland and most of Scandinavia by 2000. Experts say a lot of things. Here is a test. Face and look at a definitive object about 90 feet or so, a rock, a fence post, a girls butt, whatever, just stare and focus hard at the center. Then point a your index finger straight at that object without taking your eye off of it. You will see two fingers. Then focus on your finger and you will see two objects. It is physically impossible to have a different result, unless you only have one eye. I don't buy the op argument. Just because the brain did not record something, that does not mean that the eyes did not see it. However, considering how many people cannot shoot instinctively past 18 or 20 yards, perhaps if they could practice acknowledging what their eyes see, they could shoot better at longer shots.

Just like driving. Somehow, sadly, I make it to work everyday, but I've never once used a bug on the windshield or a hood ornament to "aim" my way down the road. I can "instictively" drive all over God's green earth while scanning the back corners of fields for deer, too...much to my wife's consternation:) Not many have such talent!

People will go to great lengths to prove to other people that they are right and others are wrong, and vise, versa. Smart people just skip the small-crap and go about their business shooting well past 17.3 yards (ala Papa Bull).

Interesting thread, and comments.

Wow that sure explains a lot. Folks even saying others are lying when they don't know what they see or don't see. Ever notice how much the stories vary from witness's to an accident. People report what they thought they saw. >>>-----> Ken

I've watched some of the Brain Games. It's amazing how much the brain dismisses of what the eyes see when it's deemed not important enough. I believe this is what happens when we say We don't see the arrow at full draw. We've trained our mind to dismiss it as non important info. Conversely, those that train to see the arrow in periphery for gapping or split vision shooting have trained the mind to view the arrow as important info.

I think is something deeper than just dismissing because we are choosing so. IMO "instinctive aiming" has its name because instinctively we are wired to focus visually on what is the most important for the task at hand. And here I will say that the task at hand is not to send the arrow in the animal, but to pick the best moment to send that arrow.

Our brain works with all the information eyes can give and discards what is not necessary and is doing that without us being conscious about its actions.

I believe it is physically impossible to post one way or the other on this subject without someone(s) getting upset...

What he ^^^^^ said.

The last time I’ve read that someone got upset, Giordano Bruno was burned ...

Most people simply cannot concentrate enough, therefore they believe nobody else can either. Just a mind game!

This....^^^^^ Just like the ones who say you can't kill deer by stillhunting/stalking, only while in a tree/blind.

I figure, this phenomenon would be quite detrimental to a fighter pilot, especially in a dogfight.

Spaceships too. But, that's a different story.

Being able to see all, use all, yet stay focused on what your goal is, is a blessing.

Aliens I tell ya, . . . 8^)

Rick

"Being able to see all, use all, yet stay focused on what your goal is, is a blessing."

That's the way the eyes and brain work together to create what is called now "vision". Trying to do all these consciously will be a nightmare though.

PS When you decided to take a walk in the woods you pay attention to the way you are walking or just being sure you don't end in downtown instead?

Think of a college or pro basketball player trying to make a free throw when there's a thousand people directly behind the basket waving their arms or foam fingers or whatever. They filter it out, because they have to...and yet watch a pro golfer lose his cool when ONE person in the gallery sneezes or shoots a photo during his backswing. We can adapt as we need to, in terms of blurring, honing, or splitting our focus.

The eyes can see, the difference is in what we acknowledge. When I get young folks into trad archery, having them acknowledge the general sight picture and the general position of the arrow, gets them onto my target and off of my garage wall sooner. Very quickly that becomes a familiar and automatic response and they shoot the target better and hit my garage less often. Shooting form is always stated in absolutes as a fundamental standard, why some why some get upset when taking the mysticisms out of aiming is beyond me. Initial aiming can remain somewhat mechanical and it can also grow into something like an informed automatic response. It can be called instinctive, but it is instinctive with a fundamental beginning and an objective open mind. i like Bob the arrow makers test to see if arrows are drifting that may be out of spine, the straight vertical line on the target. When one employs that, how is one aiming? Do they see the arrow?

I challenge you guys to watch Brain Games.....follow along on the TV and see if you actually see all the stuff in front of your face. I doubt you'll see it all.

Proven fact that police interviewing all the reports of what people "saw" during an accident...everyone sees something different, all were there, all had their eyes open.

The brain would overload if it "saw" and categorized consciously everything the eyes took in. So some things we "see" get relegated to subconscious areas. It does it selectively and we can train it to see some things better than others.

That’s true but are two different subjects IMO: 1 what we see and 2 short term visual memory. I don’t believe we train to not see the arrow, we train to see it.

Like when ever we see a distant deer, my friend says, "It's a Great.... Big... Buck, you tell by the way he holds its head." Then i hand him the binos and he says "it must be a button buck that has big buck genes in him." Last night I saw a great big buck, a fork horn that kept circling around to check me out for three times, I tried to herd him towards my wife, but he just kept coming back, so my question is what about the nose. I thought I smelled like I needed my November shower early in the month, but apparently my nose lied and i still smelled pretty, because the little buck remained downwind of me the entire time. I have police friends, they sometimes are amazed at what people don't see. Howard Hill wrote about eye training, he was on to something, but then he probably did what he did out of need because of his left eye dominance I believe that his aiming probably became an automatic response over time. It also could be that some folks just befuddle themselves when the program gets too involved and don't want to think that something may get better and more natural over time. When i start a new piece of music that very difficult, it is pain staking and deliberate, but after many times of being studied and played, it starts to sound instinctive and i actually pay very little attention to the elaborate techniques involved, they come automatically and yet I hear ever note as an individual. My automatic response range is getting closer to 45 yards as the warm up long shots out in the field get more familiar, but I still know where that arrow was in the sight picture ratio as I release, even though I shoot faster than most, I can explain my hits and misses. Maybe I should have shot that fork horn. I guess some folks like things to always have a bit of mystery in it. Did you hear about the Waterman graveyard ghost? Some people swear they have seen it. It is on public hunting land, some bowhunters refuse to hunt there, they never want to see that ghost again.

PS Not seeing it is natural when you are in “acquiring target” mode.

I have seen that show, what they are doing is comparing what different people see or don't see in an unfamiliar scene. Comparing that to shooting a bow is comparing oranges and apples. I am not claiming that certain people don't acknowledge the arrow when they shoot, but they sure as hell would notice real quick if the arrow was not there. shooting the bow has just two very familiar things the bow and the arrow. Take the arrow out of that picture and there would be a very unfamiliar gap where the arrow was suppose to be. I personally have never been told of any accounts where a bow hunter fired his bow at a deer and forgot to put an arrow on the bowstring. I could just hear it, "I was right target too, but forgot to put an arrow on the string."

Dean you don't have to see it because you have other senses that are telling you the arrow is there. Archery training who's not developing your mental and physical awareness is 0 IMO and it doesn't matter if you see or not the arrow. Those "shooting invisible bows" are making sense just if they help you understand / being aware of what the body is doing.

As far as what people do not see. My friend has a cabin on Spirit Lake in Iowa. The water is putrid, they never noticed that before, before a big wind blew rotting algae all over the rocks on their false shoreline. Like the old Blood Sweat and Tears song 'John The Baptist', David Clayton Thomas threw in the line "Can't you see that the water's dirty". He comes from Ontario Canada and noticed how dirty the water was in most of the the US. I have a feeling he knew how clean the water was where he grew up. Down here in Iowa folks think that the area lakes are beautiful gifts from God. God would never call that dirt gravy, water.

I see dead people...

Some folks live in a more mystical world than others. I have stated this before. Where I use to live, we shot in a quonset building, no windows. There was one excellent shot that claimed that he could shoot as tight a groups as i could with my target bow if he had just one spec of light to shoot at in pitch dark conditions. A match box with a lighted sight pin inside with just a pin hole to let out a little red light, a piece of carpet nailed over the door to cover the light coming in from the cracks. You could absolute see nothing, except that tiny prick of light, that was not where the PAA targets pinned. By feel, he emptied his quiver and sprayed arrow all over the target wall, not even getting close to that pin prick of light. Most of his arrows were two feet high and from two feet high and left to two feet high and right. someone forced the door from the outside giving him some sunlight and he nicked the match box with his last of ten arrows. His mystical explanations of how he shot were gone, he obviously needed to see the arrow, in some fashion, to aim. Of course John Schulz stated, "your knuckle point of the arrow, whatever you would use, the single most important thing is to look right at the spot. Howard use to say, bore a hole through it." conditioned instinct.

Well, I shot as a youngster at candle flames in the dark. I can shoot the point blank targets well if the target is lit up and is 20ish yards and closer where my peripheral vision does not need to see the arrow arc. Good enough to win a couple of Coon Shoots where only the 3d target is lit by a glow stick or glow ring hanging on the vital and shooting on a dark night. Last coon shoot, I missed only one animal out of 15 targets, shot 4 or 5 10s, a few 8s and the rest were 5s hanging just outside the 8 ring. Shots were about 7-20 yards. So, it is possible to shoot pretty well without acknowledging the arrow if you train for it....just like it's easy to shoot by acknowledging the arrow if you train your brain and eyes to acknowledge the arrow during the shot.

He used a staple gun and had his hands on it. I have been to coon shoots as well, the light on the target helps to focus, but it is not completely black. Think of how many full daylight shots preceded that lowlight condition. Out to 30 yards I am pretty sure that I am more instinctive than secondary, but if make a bad shot, the miss does come as a surprise, the next one, i will pay more attention to my secondary. After years of shooting, things get familiar and automatic, but for newbies that little bit of secondary helps speed up familiarity of what is on target and what is not on target. What I find a bit amusing is that instinctive shooters can tolerate a string crawlers sighting down his arrow, but get all bucky when a split finger shooter suggests that the arrow is in the peripheral and it does not hurt to acknowledge its presence. Heaven help for quoting Arne, but he stated the difference between eyes closed blind bale shooting varies from actual group shooting because 'the eyes control the shot'. Not saying everyone should switch to secondary aiming, but the eyes see things which the brain uses. While secondary aiming quite often can become an automatic response, conditioned instinctive, can intentionally ignoring the arrow create tunnel vision that equals condition arrow blindness? Oh the long shot that I took at that pheasant yesterday, had about my entire bow hand plus a bit and the pasted just in front of his head by about 3 or 4 inches. At least i was not 15 feet behind it like the first one I shot at this year. I never give the first pheasant shot of the year enough lead.

I see dead animals, after I cut one loose.

Okay now I am super pissed, I just knocked my banana/chocolate with two raw eggs added malt to the floor while watching Hannity. I cannot type, watch TV and drink a malt at the same time. It's just too much. Oh the humanity. I leave ya'll to it.

The brain knows more than the mind does. It sees more, too. - lbg

I think we humans often over complicate things. The eyes take in the data, acquire the target and give the brain the commands. The body draws the bow and when the brain says “let go” you follow directions. It’s almaot like Auto pilot. As long as we don’t interrupt the flow or try and complicate it the brain will do its thing.

Target acquisition is about seeing the target. That’s how I do what I do. My eyes follow the pill into mid air. I can’t see the bow. I can feel it and my body and brain do the rest.

Target panic can come along when you allow yourself to Overthink a shot and complicate it. It’s a mental thing and in my opinion must be dealt with off the shooting line mentally. It’s not a physical problem. Anyway, we don’t need to open another can of worms. Haha

This is a nice thread. I liked the eye video.

Frank

I think the trait of Autism is that they have sensory overload i.e. they see, hear and feel EVERYTHING and the brain basically is overloaded with sensory input.

Being able to dimiss areas of sensory input is quite natural for us. My theory of Instinct v Gap is the end result is pretty much identical (once mastered the Form and aiming method), just the direction the Archer came from to reach that end result are polar opposites.

I started off shooting the instinctive route and switched to Gap method years later when I started shooting marked Field, once the Gaps were ingrained I didn't really need to pay much attention to them anymore and can focus on the spot I want to hit, it was like I came full circle back to Instinctive aiming, just that when I needed I could consciously focus on the Gaps to maintain and ingrain the distances every few weeks.

[[["I think the trait of Autism is that they have sensory overload i.e. they see, hear and feel EVERYTHING and the brain basically is overloaded with sensory input." ]]]

I have an autistic Grandson, and this is exactly how it is for him.

It often overwhelms him to the point where he has (what we call melt downs), and the best remedy for them is to help him get in an area where it is quiet & dark, and let him sort things out for himself. Leave him alone for a little bit, and when he's ready he will emerge as happy as a lark.

Rick

Back to the topic.

I see the "whole of everything" in my first look, and then start using those things to focus to my point of intent.

It's amazing how fast the brain can do that (milliseconds), and do it where your point of intent "is" your point of primary focus while still utilizing the other visual input to hold you there.

I'm always aware of "everything" in my sight picture/window, and can only best describe it as forming all those things into a conical view where the arrow is launching out the small end to that point of primary focus.

It just dawned on me, that it could be described as a "Visual Vacuum". HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA !!!! 8^)

Rick

That is the best description that I have heard. ^^^

Reminds me of Kenpo training years ago and the difference between Black Dot Focus and White Dot Focus. One is focus while being aware of and using your surroundings while the other is total single minded focus to the exclusion of all else, which is essentially Unawareness.

You see it, you go there. Motorcycle this year and have to have my head and eyes all pointed in the inside of the curve and ahead. Lose focus and you go too wide.

You guys are thinking way to far into this quest for accuracy!

Some folks work to a higher standard, whatever makes you happy is what you should aspire to, whether it be higher or a lower.

It makes no difference if one does or does not aim with the arrow at hunting close range distances. 30 yards and under teacup range for most people either way. I just find it fun when folks are so stubborn that they don't even want to consider the input of their eyes to their hand/eye coordination. Understanding split vision does get newbies on target sooner in their development, in short order the sim becomes an automatic response 20 yards and under. Getting them to shoot at 55 yards when out stump shooting is a real eye opener for them.

Hummmm?

Oh, I used the word 'sim' referring to mental simulation, jargon that is outside of trad archery.

The brain receives around 10 million pieces of information every second, but we are only aware of approximately 40. The subconscious does the work of sorting, in particular the Reticular Activating System (which tends to prioritize in order to manage threats). This is a rather ancient part of the brain, located in the brain stem, and is therefore common to lower forms of life, as well. The Reticular Activating System plays a major role in learning to shoot instinctively. It is, in many respects, the part of the brain that is "trained" to focus on the spot, the very spot you want to hit.

Now that Griz has brought this thread back up, and the majority of posters "get" the point I was making, I'm going to expand the topic a smidge. Examples such as what Brain Games has shown us make it clear that the brain makes judgement calls on the bajillion stimuli the eye takes in every instant. But the brain can and does make mistakes over what is or is not important, and we get fooled.

As amazing as the brain is, too much is going on than it can focus on at one time so it creates patterns, and shortcuts (like using or not using the arrow as an aiming aid). Imagine how long it would take to climb stairs if the brain had to calculate all the details of taking just one step and then repeat the calculation for the other foot/leg, then do it all over again for the next step. So the brain created an auto-pilot stair climbing "program".

As we learn from experience and create these automatic programs, the brain does the very same deciding with words and thoughts. As these inputs solidify into our belief systems, we accept without analysis what fits, and reject without analysis things that don't match up. If my parents, holy man and everyone in my universe told me the world is flat, and you come along saying the world is round; I can't believe you because if they lied to me, my entire belief system could crumble. I have to make you go away, and might even have to get violent if you don't.

The result is we are ALL biased, all idiots, but we can't help it. Our brain's need to pick and choose that the buzzing fly on the windshield is less important than the head on collision about to happen is what keeps us alive, but that same filtering makes us reject anyone else's differing belief system. Individuals just are not as smart as we think we are. And the refusal to acknowledge our thinking limitations and that we might be wrong about something is the source of most all human conflict.

RickR

We often think too much, or try to.

Just do it.

somewhat related. im doing a lot of experimenting with my current bow. I'm shooting 3 different spine arrows each full length & cut to 28" the shorter arrows with more point weight & if I don't conchesly tell myself the longer arrows will hit 3-4" low every time & they are lighter than the shorter ones with heavier points ...I'm not aiming but apparently my subconscious mind is & the different arrow lengths makes a big difference

I still trying to become a good archer, so I am not much for instruction, but I am a somewhat accomplished pitcher, so let me address the analogy . . .

I commonly hear "instinctive shooting" being compared to throwing a ball. But even throwing a ball is not instinctive - it's learned. Now, because I was born with a talent, I may have learned more quickly than others - so quickly that it seemed "instinctive", but it wasn't instinct - it was very fast learning. My first ever thrown balls did not go where I wanted but I was able to quickly adjust my release until they did. I think it is the same with instinctive archery - it's quick learning, not instinct. If it was truly instinctive you would never have to practice or warm up.

OK, relating this back to the topic - if it is valid to compare "instinctive" shooting to throwing a ball, let's think about throwing a ball. When you throw or pitch you never see the ball in your peripheral vision - you focus on the target (catcher's mitt) and your LEARNED "instincts" release the ball accordingly. Similarly, I doesn't seem that seeing the arrow when you draw is necessary at all, once your senses have learned where that arrow is by trial and error.

“Individuals just are not as smart as we think we are. And the refusal to acknowledge our thinking limitations and that we might be wrong about something is the source of most all human conflict.”

Amen to that!

It makes no difference to me if someone aims, shoots instinctively or even uses sights. I don't understand why some don't believe you can shoot without seeing and at least subconsciously using the view of the arrow. When you hit a baseball do you split your view between the ball and the bat? I run equipment a lot. I don't look at the controls I use. I do it automatically. If I have to stop and think about what lever does what to tell someone else I get confused. I think we all do things the way we program ourselves to do them.

Bjrogg

I hear Bach and Handel when I shoot and hunt https://youtu.be/PA5_T1QDDuw

Ya but after too many beers, I start seeing double.

Which spot I am at?

LOL

The fly on the windshield causes contact /conflict every time . Every time!

Quote ... " The Reticular Activating System plays a major role in learning to shoot instinctively"

I like to think I know a little about the workings of the human brain. I'd be interested to know the role the RAS plays in the execution of an archery shot and how do you know the RAS plays a major role in learning to shoot instinctively.

As it was explained to me, the RAS plays an important role in focus/concentration. Some while ago a neurologist gave a talk at a gathering of archers (mostly compound/sight shooters, but there were a few traditionalists in the bunch) wherein he spoke of how the brain functions when making a shot (or when throwing a pitch, much of his research seeming to have been in the realm of sport). As I recall, the RAS is very much involved in blocking out the unnecessary, allowing a person to focus intensely on the matter at hand. In effect, he stated that the RAS acts as a filter. It was very much a general presentation (obviously), but it wasn't a gathering of professionals, merely a collection of devoted archers (most of them hunters more interested in hitting a deer than the 10-ring of a target).

I'm still trying to become a good archer, so I am not much for instruction, but I am a somewhat accomplished pitcher, so let me address the analogy . . . I commonly hear "instinctive shooting" being compared to throwing a ball. But even throwing a ball is not instinctive - it's learned. Now, because I was born with a talent, I may have learned more quickly than others - so quickly that it seemed "instinctive", but it wasn't instinct - it was very fast learning. My first ever thrown balls did not go where I wanted but I was able to quickly adjust my release until they did. I think it is the same with instinctive archery - it's quick learning, not instinct. If it was truly instinctive you would never have to practice or warm up.

OK, relating this back to the topic - if it is valid to compare "instinctive" shooting to throwing a ball, let's think about throwing a ball. When you throw or pitch you never see the ball in your peripheral vision - you focus on the target (catcher's mitt) and your LEARNED "instincts" release the ball accordingly. Similarly, I doesn't seem that seeing the arrow when you draw is necessary at all, once your senses have learned where that arrow is by trial and error.

Cobra...So I'm not the only one that sees CRAP on those commercials!

Thanks Griz, we used to just call it tunnel vision. RAS adds another way to make my point that the brain can refuse to acknowledge what it decides isn't necessary and so those that claim not to see the arrow in the shot process are telling the truth.

Then we mess with their heads saying they ought to see the arrow and the instant the brain looks for it, there it is. I'm going to have to use that when I want to rattle someone at a 3D shoot. (grin)

@zog, dead on. In my opinion you’ve nailed it, completely.

Some brains work better than others. - lbg

zog you are correct it is repetetve recall, your eye and brain see it so many times that you don't have to think about the shot every time. And George is right also, we all know that the traditional bow is not effective past 17.3 yards!!!

I wonder where the Fibonacci Sequence plays in archery. Ancient stuff is supposedly designed around it, https://youtu.be/IGJeGOw8TzQ

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here