RE: Is the lack of handshock over hyped?
Arthur, I can understand your pain. It is really no different than flinching at the shot because your .338 Win mag hurts like hell when you pull the trigger.
Possibly I am wrong with this, but I think there are two factors that people often get confused. Recoil and hand shock. I perceive recoil to be the tendancy for a bow to jump forward out of your hand at the shot. Hand shock is the buzzing you feel afterwords (kind of like holding an orbital sander).
That being said, I prefer my bow to have some recoil at the shot, and very little hand shock. Regardless of the recoil, I use a wrist sling so the bow should not ever hit the ground. The recoil allows me to see how the bow has reacted to my last shot. It's more of a factor for a target bow, but if I torque the grip I can see the bow recoil in a way that is not inline with my shot.
The other thought is that regardless of the recoil or hand shock, by the time you feel it, the arrow is long gone. As long at it is not painful as in Arthur's case, it should not effect accuracy one iota. The exception to this is as Arthur mentioned if the bow is not tuned correctly (cams out of synch).
I think that people get too hung up on the hand shock issue. Any modern compound is more than dead enough in the hand to be accurate. While the parallel limb designs do offer significantly less recoil and vibration at the shot, I don't think they offer the same level of accuracy as a more traditional riser design.