Search options (Page 4 of 16)

I wanted to add this here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0DHQkczUjw

Very important because most gakgung do not come stretched out like this to the point where they can be braced initially.

We could use more translated texts from older periods of Korean archery.  They would help us discuss Korean archery on this forum better.  That's basically the name of the game here and I was hoping this thread may help generate interest and or awareness of such. 

I'd hope in a few years, something comparable to what Dr. Manouchehr Moshtagh Khorasani did for Persian archery comes out for Korean archery, but at the some time I sense no urgency for something like that to appear.  It certainly would be very useful and much appreciated.

Someone reviewed the Segyue here:

http://www.koreanarchery.org/punbb/view … 5216#p5216

http://www.koreanarchery.org/punbb/view … 5040#p5040

My 2 cents on Alibow in general is that, unfortunately, its probably best to stay completely away from them due to a number of factors unless you can buy their bows from a vendor and not directly from the company.  Someone else here will have to tell you how their Korean bows specifically compare to those others.

Actually, there is quite a decent amount of information about all these people in texts and how they practiced archery.  Especially Persians.  There is an overwhelming amount of info written in Persian on Persian archery.  Some of which has been translated into a book.  Huns have a lot recorded about them and their archery from Roman sources as well as Mongols, Vikings and the like from their adversaries.  And no the Romans didn't interact with Germanic people for like just 20 years.  There is more info out there then you realize and the Romans weren't really bad historians like everyone always tries to make them out to be...

The information that you are making out to be nonexistent is not that nonexistent at all.  I myself have books that discuss what the Vikings, Mongols, Persians, Avars, and even Indians (India) did to varying degrees regarding their archery.  All of this information comes from a primary source one way or another.

You're a noob to all this and appear to have not even bothered doing any type of literature review.  The information you seek is not going to come to you if you don't go out and get it yourself.  Other than that, you're going to just invent things in your mind which there is no basis for.  Which is like what SCA people do.  Which is bad.  Its kinda like Medieval Disneyland what they do.

Anyway, we've veered off topic too much in this thread.  You should really go out and start researching this stuff yourself though so you can get better educated on it all since you yourself mention you are quite new.  Period.

So you're essentially talking about Paleo and Mesolithic societies it sounds.  We could actually extrapolate from contemporary Austronesian tribal societies as they seem to preserve more of a Paleo-Meso lifestyle.  As far as I know, they have no elaborate archery tricks or anything remotely like what is written of in Arab Archery.  There isn't too much reason to assume Paleo-Meso people did elaborate acrobatic style archery.  Its actually pointless to even discuss this.  Warfare and technology become more complex as time went on.  Hunter-gatherer societies were more likely concerned with just being able to put food on the table.

Again, probably not.  Especially if you are talking about Paleo-Meso/hunter gatherer societies.  Trick shooting more likely has its place elsewhere in a context that you're overlooking: to entertain the Sultan.  The development of trick shooting is probably better linked to the development of complex societies and seems to exist more for entertainment or exhibition purposes.

Doubtful yet again.  You can't make every warrior/soldier a master trick shooter.  Not remotely practical nor would you need to.  Totally superfluous. Just like bow hand techniques.   Now we're in the Bronze age...

I doubt this is a good apples to apples analogy here but really don't care or want to learn anything else about Dingy sailing.

That's good.

A pinch draw is probably more archaic and 'natural'.  Mostly what Paleolithic people would have done.

Some of it more than others.  Some people add more mind stuff then is really needed and others vice versa.

This much is true.  Except the war thing.  That probably doesn't happen until the Neolithic or later Meso.

So Saracen Archery is actually based off of a treatsie on archery written by Taybugha in the Middle East in the 1300s.  I find myself repeating things alot in this conversation....  Anyway, his work was not entitled 'Saracen Archery' mind you and there were plenty of other treatsie on archery not only in the middle east, but also Europe, and East Asia.  The thing with Saracen Archery is this: it is the most accessible, most comprehensive translation with insertions on Asiatic archery we have today.  There is a lot of stuff probably from Joseon era Korea but also feudal Japan that we don't have access to because it has not been translated yet for western consumption.

Good belief to have as its is actually backed by empirical knowledge too.

Not only the word, but technique too.  I mean, make sure you understand what khatra is and what it actually refers to.  Then ask a Korean archer, if in the history of Korean traditional archery, if such a technique has ever been utilized.

Also ask them what they refer to their torque technique as.  You will likely get two different terms out of them and explanations if any for the first.

Keep in mind though, some techniques may be newer then you think and clearly not as ancient.

Actually what Lars does is straight out of the exhibition style shooting section of the book entitled 'Arab Archery' which is yet another treatsie on archery written in the middle east.  Its unlikely that what he demonstrates was used by the average archer or even all that practical especially when factoring draw weights of bows used in combat at that time.  Horn composite bows for war had draw weights ranging from 90 to about 150 pounds.  Even the strongest of archers probably were not concerning themselves with all that trick shooting that Lars shows us and wants us to believe was used in a far more ubiquitous manner.

I mean, all those techniques are straight out of the 'trick' or 'exhibition' section of 'Arab Archery'.  Says it clearly in the book.  Our problem in more ways is not that our knowledge is very very small, but rather, given what we have learned or have access to is, more often than not, bluntly understood.

Many particularly on FB, YT, and elsewhere have a tendency to assign more to what is actually being presented and thus distort what the original sources have said leaving us with a poor(er) foundation then what we could have ever started with in the first place.

No I never said that.  We have discussions on torque here in the technique section of the forum and I'll provide the links below:

http://www.koreanarchery.org/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=816

http://www.koreanarchery.org/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=231

http://www.koreanarchery.org/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=612

The guy named joomong gives a very good succinct explanation albeit with a few confusing words that I'll leave out here: 'If you....grip the bow lightly, and when full draw, you twist your wrist CCW slightly'. 

So I'm in agreement that its all in the wrist.  There's also a video on youtube about somewhere that provides a very good explanation and footage of the technique in action.

Yeah, that's just called torque.  No need to associate it with khatra as its wrong.  I know youtube and FB land can be a very loud and persuasive voice since its so repetitive but ask those guys which text speaks of 'excessive forced khatra(h)'.  They may pull a rabbit out the hat at the end of the day...

Well, maybe not you but in Korea they sure can.  Go on youtube and watch what Korean traditional archers do at their range.  You'll see that bow hand torque does not always occur.  But hey to each their own as they say.  Some need it, some don't apparently. 

Quite frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if its necessity for some people is to help compensate for either poor right hand technique or something else.  These things though are really only able to be pinned down on your own or if you have a good teacher.  But I'm glad to hear that you are able to figure some of this out through your own trial and error. 

Keep at it M8.

Concerning 'lob':

intransitive verb
1a : to move slowly and heavily
b : to move in an arc

Regarding grip modding, I doubt it but you can try.  These things are usually an arrow in relation to the bow problem unless your form and or technique are really really bad but I have no way of assessing that nor care to.... 

BTW, the technique you are describing to get the arrow to pass cleanly without hitting the bow is a legitimate technique apparently used among Koreans in Korean archery.  However, its exact name is unknown and no one seems able of sourcing any literature on it.  I simply refer to it as the 'Korean torque technique' or 'torque'. 

Likewise, it has been stated by one of the more reliable sources over at the old ATARN forum that in the Middle East, the arrow slapping the bow upon release was considered to be bad or undesired.  I am not sure where this was written exactly but its not referenced anywhere as 'khatra' of any sort.

By any chance, do you post on the ATARN FB page?

For the record, there is only one khatra and that is what Taybugha describes in Saracen Archery.  Much of what you describe being 'khatra' can be characterized as both erroneous and even superfluous.

Also, all this talk and worrying about spine drives me crazy.  Really in Asiatic archery traditions, the arrow's relation to the bow was described in terms of its weight.  You can hear Lukas Nuvotny speak of this here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTbPokAabAA

Something to consider: many great archers in the past would simply be able to flex the arrow in hand and based on that could determine how to shoot the arrow.  Often times of any shape, size, length or weight.  Ergo why some say its more important to 'be the arrow' in archery rather than the bow.  Although realistically I do feel you need to know how both relate to each other and, to be quite honest, getting to that level where you can simply flex takes quite a bit of time, devotion, and practice.  Unless you are an extremely fast learner and understand the bow enough to strictly 'become the arrow'.

What we can also take away from the above is don't overthink it when it comes to spine and that type of talk.  I mean don't get me wrong.  It has its importance, especially in the beginning.  But to go on and on and on about it is just...mmmmm....tedious.

Most of what you will learn works will have to come from trial and error.  This involves trying out many different types of arrows.  No one will be able to effectively formulate what will work for you by simply discussing spine on any forum.  It will likely only lead to further confusion.  In the beginning, when I bought one of my first bows from Lukas, he gave me the exact same advice, that is to go out and experiment.  I would say though definitely get you preferred draw length down in the beginning.  You can vary things up here and there only AFTER that.

I myself usually don't think too much about spine and all that these days.  Likewise, I also don't worry about twisting the string a billion times.  But I've been doing this a while sooooo......

Be careful of what sources you check for info too.  Lots of misinformation out there plus focus on the wrong things.

Of the 2 you mentioned, I'm guessing you'd probably better be off with the Nomad due to draw length.  I had some experience with this one by Kaya and recommend:

http://www.kayaarchery.com/theme/basic/ … .php#bow_1