Has there been a scientific study of Release aids?

There is a translation of an old Arabic manuscript from about AD 1500 called "Arab Archery" (by Princeton University Press), that deals with several different variants of the thumb draw and many other things besides. I have it at home presently, but I have just read some small parts. But maybe you mean a more contemporary study that applies modern physics, aerodynamics and such?

/Rob

As far as I know there have been no scientific quantitative studies of the performance of different methods of releasing the arrow. Many authors have commented on their own experiences and given subjective opinions.

Once I shot a series of arrows from the same bow with different release methods, three fingers, thumb ring and mechanical release. I measured the result with a chronograph. However, as I was a practised thumb ring shooter, perhaps the results were skewed.

I have recently been designing a separate experiment with methods of reducing the problems of relative skill levels by having comparisons with other archers who were more skilled in each area to get a benchmark.

Bede, would you mind sharing the results from your experiment with me? Once I have the time to set up a measuring system I am going to conduct my own experiments.

I hope to include all the different permiatations of hooked ring, smooth ring, tab, barethumb in with thumblocks. Also mediterreanean draw without and with tab. Plus the Sassanid draw and the various american indian draws. I might throw in the odd release aid also as a comparison. This is, I hope going to be a long term project.

Has anyone else tried the Sassanid lock? (ring and middle finger under arrow, index resting on it, arrow on opposite side to regular finger shooting). Just from basic observations I think that it might require incredibly lightly spined arrows to shoot in the direction you are pointing. Perhaps this is an adaptation in technique to suit poor wood?

Mike

Michael,
I will provide the results of my tests through this forum.

With my experience of the Sassanid draw, I would consider that it is less spine specific than three finger and comparable to the thumb lock. Since you can shoot this way on either side of the bow, I believe that you can adjust your aiming depending on what side you shoot. Generally, I use the same arrows for thumb ring shooting as I do for the two fingered style. If I shoot on the same side of the bow, I get groups near each other.

Mr. Hardman, though I'm nowhere near the expert that Bede is, this is the method that I was taught to shoot with (though often using the pinky finger as well), and I've found no arrow-weight issues at all. So, in grand forum tradition, "what he said."

I tried shooting at a long distance with the 'sassanid' lock and the arrows were definitely flying off to the right. I think then it will be an error on my part, especially as I was shooting right handed instead of left. I'll try the arrows with bows of slightly different weights to see if I've got the spine wrong.

Thanks

Mike

I tested a 25# @28" bow with both thumbring and split finger (3 fingers) draw, using the same arrow, drawn 28" and could find no significant difference in arrow speed through my chrono. I averaged several groups of 10 arrows and first the thumbring would be faster by something like a few feet per second, then the split finger method would be. I should have added them all up and averaged them, but didn't. I suspect I would have found one method only a few feet faster than the other, but not by much. There was a lot of human error involved in my testing I'm sure.

J.

Bede, when you say "two-fingered style", are you referring to the Flemish release, i.e., index finger above the nocked arrow, long finger below?

This seems to have been the late medieval English archer's release, it may be significantly cleaner than the three finger.(That's conjectural, I have no proof whatever).

The Flemish release was very popular in England and on the continent of Europe. Most people agree with you in thinking that it is faster.

I was talking about the two-fingered Sassanian release. In that technique, you put two fingers, the middle and ring fingers, under the arrow.

When we test these things on a chronograph, we are trying to discover what the objective change to the speed of the arrows is. However, there is a subjective element that comes from how comfortable a given archer is with the release he or she uses. This is why we tend to talk about the objective measures because one archer is unlikely to be expert and comfortable with all the types of release being tested. Another thing is how well a technique works when the archer is under stress (e.g. while riding, hunting or fighting in battle).

Once again, I post in request of knowlegde,

Having tried on and off to use a light gate style chronograph, I have found it ineffective at best, dangerous at worst.
I have seen two types of chronograph, a gated one through which one must shoot (originally for rifles I feel), and another by 'sports sensors' which claims to work using radar and the Doppler effect.
Is there a make of chronograph anyone can recommend?

Regards

Mike

I have two chronographs at present. One is a Chrony, a small folding one and the other is the model sold by 3Rivers, a ProChrono.

With the Chrony, I made customised cardboard shields. Basically I made a tracing of the originals and cut off the tops. I had little trouble with the chronograph after that. Slow, heavy arrows that don't travel very straight at the being of their flight were a problem.

With the ProChrono, I found it worked better if I stood back about two metres from it when shooting. Since it has multiple threads and averaging build in, I found it more useful with bigger tests.

As an aside, I found the chronographs a useful training tool. Trying to get identical speeds successively really makes you concentrate on your release.

Since most of the time I use the thumb draw, I have little experience of the problems that might occur with a Mediterranean draw and the greater archer's paradox.