In defence of the Television program.. you're looking at a screen. What was actually viewed out in the field and what was captured with the camera and lighting conditions could be all very different. Perhaps there was a "good blood trail." Perhaps six feet a head of that camera shot was a puddle and they figured in the editing room since they mentioned a good blood trail there was no use wasting footage of blood (which by the way many sponsors do not want them showing for fear of turning off some of the viewing population) and instead concentrate on the thrill of the track and hunt. The main thing is they had blood, and they were able to track a deer to the conclusion of the hunt. While a lot of the hunting experiences depicted on these professional hunting programs do not impress me, they seem to always find the animal they were shooting at.

I would hesitate to start judging the quality of a projectile and how well it works based on the thirty second air time of a television program. I would much rather listen to field reports from forum members. A good example is many people bad talked powerbelts. Yet Frontier Gander was able to show photographs of blood wounds, and also in the field experiences. So in that respect Frontier Gander was able to teach many members a better way to use and hunt with Shockwaves. This would be the same as I expect with Shockwaves. While some people have bad experiences with them, too many deer have fallen to them in the field. They have to be a good projectile or would not have the popularity they have.