Len in Maryland

This came up on another thread. Some suggested we discuss it; so, let's do it. I gave a seminar on a variation ofthis last year, so I'd like to hold off on my comments until others have had a chance to make their points.

MDBUCKHUNTER

Bravo Len.

I will stick with my opinion that you cannot compare a target shooter to a hunter when it comes to shooting the bow. Thus it is a mute point to compare the two and ask who is the better shooter.

Different equipment, different mentality, different venues.

I am a hunter and I don't hunt from a deer stand with a triple stabilizer that extends 4' in front of my bow to increase my stability for the upcoming shot.

On the other hand, my friend who is a target shooter does not have to worry about scent, noise, excess movement before he shoots and can focus more on the target, wind conditions, his systematic and repetitious approach to the shot.

mobow

I dunno how they would be as a hunter.......But I'm thinking they could hit what they shoot at, as long as they could control their emotions.

I saw a video once w/ Jackie Caudle. Pretty good target archer. Best in the world? No, but good. He put a ROTTEN shot on a buck......

TFOX

Just like anything else in life,there are good and bad in both and sometimes 1 helps the other but not always.


1 thing to consider,if you can't hit a target when conditions are perfect,then there is a better than average chance that you can't hit a deer when everything is not perfect.


I know for a fact that the target venue made ME a MUCH BETTER hunter.


The skill that it takes to hit a 12 ring at 40 yards has a lot in common with the skill it takes to hit a deer at 30.Focus,concentration and confidence is key to succeed in both.

TFOX

Let me add,I don't think of myself as one of the best in the world at either tagets or hunting.[:-]

Elkcrazy8

agreed, and to add, alot depends on what type of target shooting you do, 5 spot and 3-d are two different creatures. So lumping all target shooters in the same category will yield varied results. I believe that 3-d gives great practice for real world hunting situations.

I know the targets don't move etc. But you sure get a ton of yardage judging practice, and the much needed confidence in your shot.

When I hunt I have a sped up version of a shot sequence. But the mechanics are much the same. There are two people that come to mind right away when I read the original post, Randy Ulmer and Jim Horn, who both have done well in both arenas.

I am not among the best in the world either, but I look for the same qualities in my target setup as I do my hunting setup, and am not happy until both are exactly where they need to be. And along the lines of what TFOX said, if you can't hit a still target on the 3-D range, then lots of luck in the field...

TFOX

My target venue was 3-d. Should have added that,thanks elk

Straightarrow

Without a doubt, the best hunters are not the best shooters, unless by pure chance. What it takes to be a great hunter, is a different skill set. Being an adequate shot is all that is required to be a great hunter. In fact, the better hunter you are, the closer you get, the less important shooting skills are.

Every great hunter will make sure he is adequate at shooting, if not well above par, but certainly he is not spending the majority of his time practicing hitting a spot for score. He will probably spend more time shooting at different angles and body positions, practicing with hunting clothes and gloves on, shooting at dawn or dusk to simulate real conditions, paying great attention to the first shot of the day, practicing a very smooth draw that has the least movement a deer can see and a quick release, so the opportunity doesn't come and go without getting off the shot. He is also likely to spend a whole lot more time scouting deer, preparing stands, planning stategy and other strictly hunting related activities.

A great shooter practices consistency. He wants to do the same thing, the same way, every shot. In hunting this isn't even remotely possible. A shooter's goal is to hit closest to a particular mark. A hunter's goal is to make a killing shot. All killing shots, no matter where they hit, make that goal a success.

With 3D, the shooter's added challenge is to judge distances. The best hunters don't have to. They know the distance. The hunter's challenge is to learn to shoot adequately well, in brutal temperatures, at odd angles, high winds, with heart pumping wildly and knees trembling. The optimal skill sets are simply night and day.

I know a few amazing hunters. The kind of people who not only get many animals, but they get trophy size ones, seemingly with ease. They do it year after year, decade after decade. Everyone of these guys is a decent shooter, but nothing near world class. If you ask these guys what makes them a great hunter, I'd bet a lot they would not mention being the "best shooter".

gibblet

not even close. the only way to convince folks hunters are better shots is to fill them w/ disinformation and confusion. i'mhonest w/ myself. i'm not a hunter any more. i'm a shooter. i shoot deer my buddies have scouted on land they've obtained and from stands they've either set, or marked a very small area for me to choose from. i don't have time to be a hunter any more. its ok. hunting is still sacred to me - maybe the most sacred thing i take part in besides loving my family. i feel very blessed tomake so many string sets that take part in feeding people. i work a lot of hours when hunting season gets w/in a few months, a lot, and i love it. it makes me feel important to be a part of it. ishunting more sacred than target shooting - yes, of courseit is. i'm luckyfriends take pity on me, guys i do work for who know idon't have time any more to scout, to be a hunter. butare hunters better shots - no way.it ludicrous to even imagine that - an ego flaw.

AllenRead

How do we separate them? There are three national level shooters at my club and all three are also hunters. So are they a better shot on the line or in the woods? I don't think that it matters and it's certainly not something that we can generalize about.

Mosttournement shooters began as bowhunters who wanted to shoot better.As they get into competition, they learn tips and tricks that make them better tuners, thoughnot as good as guys like Len who work on bows full time. They tend to be people who will put in a lot of time & effortto learn as much about archery as possible. Can they make good shots from a treestand? Yes, all of them that I know are set up with the right equipment and understand the form differences required to make a good shot when they'recold andstiff and shooting from an awkward position. And none of them use a 3' stabilizer in a tree stand!

There are plenty of hunters, like the people on this forum, who put in just as much time and effort learning all they can about archery, but don't compete. Does this make them less a shooter? Absolutely not!Could they compete in tournementsand expect to win? Probably yes if they were willing to change theirform a bit and get equipment suited for the venue. (that 3 foot stabilizer is only one part of it )

This is primarily a hunting forum. While I am primarily a tournement shooter (definitely not national level) I also hunt, which is one reason that I come here. There is some bias against tournement shooting here, but it's not a big deal.

So who is the better shot? It can only be answered on a case by case basis. Some people can shoot better than other people. Whether they are primarily hunters or target shooters is irrelevent.