>>29789132
Yes, providing it still looks safe to use. Always inspect every arrow and bolt before reusing.

>>29789132
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEG-ly9tQGk

Stop what you're doing and watch this video, before you make any of the wrong decisions or buy into the hype that is modern archery. Lars Andersen has studied the actual historical texts that warrior archers learned from, and compiled a style created from accurate, practicality driven teachings. Modern archers will want to load you up with all kinds of compounds bows, sights, quivers, carbon fiber arrows, etc. These are all generic consumer products that will not actually help you grow as an archer, rather hinder you by building bad habits and reliance on them.

Seriously, don't fall into the modern myths of archery, the study is changing and Lars is leading the way, following him is following thousands of years of far more effective archers than we can hope to become today.

>>29789163
100% agree, before I watched these videos I could barely hit the side of a barn from 10 yards, now I'm firing 3 arrows during a midair backflip and nailing the bullseye each time.

Lars has truly revolutionized archery back to the glory days of triple backflips and CQB tactics which are far more effective and deadly than any firearm.

>>29789163
> Lars Andersen

Oh, FFS, not this shit again.

>has studied the actual historical texts that warrior archers learned from,
no he hasnt.
> and compiled a style created from accurate, practicality driven teachings.
no, he hasnt.

he does trick shooting with an extremely low draw weight bow, pulled half-way. His techniques are highly skilled, hand-eye coordination, but they are in NO way "warrior archers' techniques" or anything of the sort.

Nor are they things he's "discovered" - these have been known for decades if not centuries and in no way "lost".

the man is a showman, hyping up his achievements.

In fact, because he says it far better than me, I'm going to quote the historian, archer, and equestrian martial arts expert, Mike Loades, and his assessment of Lars' videos.

During the past 48 hours I have received a stream of messages and e-mails asking me to comment on the latest Lars Andersen video. The number of those requests has now topped 100 and so I feel compelled to give some response.
The first thing I wish to state, unequivocally, is that Mr Andersen has an extraordinary and enviable level of skill. He is very, very good at what he does. He is exceptionally quick at nocking and he has an incredible ability to track targets on the move, whether that movement be his own or the target or both. These are real skills and he is superb at them – the feat of splitting an incoming arrow is quite astonishing.
However, although there are aspects of the commentary and Mr Andersen’s approach that I do agree with, there are also things I disagree with.
First let us deal with the style of presentation. Such things will always be a matter of personal taste but, to my mind, the rather silly, over-sensational tone of the narration is extremely off-putting, not to mention the casual use of the word ‘fire’ to describe the act of shooting. Personally I find the setting of the gymnasium annoying – he makes it look too much like a kid’s playground. Mr Andersen’s antics seem a little too self-conscious and are accompanied with a rather disconcerting facial expression.
These are all things that annoy me, and I suspect many others. There are many more, I am sure, who like its deliberately punky style and think it is being irreverent and edgy, challenging old orders. Such differences in taste we will never resolve. However I mention them because it is important to be aware of what we are responding to. It would be a big mistake to dismiss the many valid points that are made here, simply because the video style made it hard for us to take it seriously.

ctd:

>>29789240 Continued:

There is a central point to all this - that war archers are able to shoot rapidly and on the move, whether they be horse archers or infantry archers. The film criticizes the modern approach to static archery. As a general principle, I agree with this. Mounted archery speaks for itself – both for rapid nocking and for shooting whilst on the move – but there is also plenty of evidence that infantry archers would at times shoot on the move. Certainly those in the Bayeux Tapestry appear to be doing so and I do believe that medieval archers , despite the fact that we often see their arrows staked in the ground, would move around to some extent when the fighting got very close. If nothing else, this film raises this as a good point for discussion.
The film begins with the lofty claim that Mr Andersen uses ‘forgotten historical methods’ and mentions holding his arrows in the hand. Well I’m not sure who he thinks has forgotten these methods – I certainly haven’t and have shot with arrows both from the draw-hand and the bow-hand long before this video.
Mounted archers all over the world regularly shoot with additional arrows held either in the bow-hand or the shooting hand. We practice on the ground walking, running and shooting at the same time. Indeed we also sometimes jump whilst shooting. We have to get used to shooting on the move and at constantly changing target angles and distances. Nothing ‘new’ here Mr Andersen. However I do wish I were as fast as you and as accurate as you – you are good, just neither unique nor revolutionary, nor a great historical investigator.
There is a splendidly comic scene dismissing the practicality and historical provenance of shoulder quivers – quite right - but did anyone, outside Hollywood, think otherwise? It is the claim of ‘new discovery’ that is at fault here – not the basic fact.

>>29789248
continued

The commentary goes on to cite an Assyrian wall relief – showing multiple arrows held in the hand – and says the practice is 5,000 years old. It may be but the 645 BC Assyrian relief they exhibited is only a little over 2,500 years old, so hardly evidence of what was done 5,000 years ago.
The narrator makes the claim, presumably on Mr Andersen’s behalf that ‘modern slow archery has led people to believe that war archers only shot at long distances’ – clearly neither have read my book The Longbow! I have long been a proponent of both rapid shooting and short-range on the battlefield.
As a performance shooter, Mr Andersen is undoubtedly impressive and at times entertaining but when his prowess is associated with military archery – archery as a martial art – then I think it starts to mislead.
I do not think military archers used incredibly lightweight bows brought back to barely half-draw. I do not think they lollopped about or shot lifting their rear leg into the air with an effeminate skip or lifted up one leg and shot under it. Hanging upside down on a climbing frame to shoot is impressive but has little military application. These are trick shots for the circus. I happen to love circuses and skills and so admire the cleverness but these are not archery as a martial art nor as regular historical practice.
There is a claim that he can shoot through a ‘chain-mail’ shirt – and he appears to be using no more than a 30lb draw-weight bow at half draw. Aside from the fact that the use of the term ‘chain-mail’, as opposed to the correct form – ‘mail’ - suggests little knowledge of medieval armour, I do not believe the claim. That it has been done on a theatrical piece of mail with large rings may be so, but that is not the same as shooting through an authentic replica or riveted mail with a tight mesh and a properly constructed gambeson beneath.

>>29789257

In ‘Going Medieval’, archers using grown-up longbows with 150lb draw weight , shot at mail and a gambeson at a range of 10 yards. Many of their arrows failed to penetrate. Now different arrows will do a different job – this is a whole PhD paper in itself but my point is that ‘proper’ armour is fit for purpose and mostly does its job. If a 30lb bow at half draw defeated it, there was something wrong with the armour!
I am not condemning the use of lightweight bows. Many mounted archers use lightweight bows, and following a wrist injury last May, which has still not healed, I am currently condemned to shooting a 30lb bow, 40lb on a good day (hopefully not for too much longer). The only problem with shooting lightweight bows is if you claim them to be other than they are. It is ridiculous for this film to suggest that Mr Andersen is shooting a bow with military power.
Although he jumps about with a jack-in-the-box energy that my aged bones can no longer muster (and I envy him that), I fear that parcours experts or gymnasts would scoff at the rather clumsy inelegance of his awkward physicality. It seems to me that there is neither a ‘martial’ nor an ‘art’ aspect to his performance.
There is nonetheless cleverness. He is quick eyed and deft and efficient at managing his arrows. He demonstrates that he can shoot equally well with both his right and left hand. That is an impressive skill. It is also historically valid, many mounted archery cultures advocated being able to shoot both left- and right-handed. I keep telling myself I am going to give that some serious practice – maybe this year.
In fact so many of Mr Andersen’s techniques are borrowed from mounted archery practice, it is a wonder he has not yet learned to ride. I am sure he would find that a galloping horse had so much more martial purpose than swanning around on roller-skates.

>>29789265 ctd:

So his claims to have ‘discovered’ an old form of archery are plainly false, This is what mounted archers do all the time. Is he good, is he incredibly fast and accurate – yes he is. He is phenomenal. Would we admire him even more if , instead of the plucking half-draw, he drew all the way to the ear and shot properly – yes we would! He has become obsessed with the clock – how to get faster and faster, and by doing so has corrupted his shooting style. Because of his reflexes and co-ordination and instinctive shooter’s eye, he would still have the potential to be the fastest shooter in the world doing it with appropriate martial style. For grace, beauty, power and unbelievably impressive speed give me a Lukas Novotny or a Cosmei Mihai any day. (If you don't know who they are - they are unbelievably good horse-archers).
However the general point of this video remains very valid. There is far too much emphasis in modern archery on standing still and at fixed distances. Obviously field archers change the distance, compared to target archers, but all archers would benefit from challenging their neural pathways and working on their instinctive aim by having a go at shooting whilst moving - just walking would be fine.
The one, very interesting historical point the film makes is the observation that a great deal of art shows soldier’s arrows on the right-hand side of the bow – even for longbows. This has always been explained as an artistic convention – not wishing for certain lines to bisect but it does make me think. It is quicker to bring the arrow to the string on the right hand side – it does not have to cross the bow. It is what thumb archers do – it is one of the many good reasons for using the thumb draw for mounted archery. However the same would apply if rapid shooting were required for infantry archery.

>>29789163
Lars is full of shit.

>>29789271

Of course the fingers, in a three-finger Mediterranean draw tend to rotate the string clockwise, which makes mounting the arrow on the right-hand side less of a good idea for that style but I suspect the effects could be managed. It is food for thought and for that Mr Andersen has my thanks.


> end of copy-paste of Mike's commentary.

There are some elements I dislike of Mikes' post - terms like "grown-up longbows" and "swanning around" do not make his comment more valid, but in fact detracts from his commentary. But I understand entirely his frustration at the sort of tricks that Lars displays, and the staggering arrogance that he claims to be the unique bearer of this knowledge.

Lars' skill is exceptional. But his research, and his application leave a lot to be desired - he is in no way a good role model to aspire to.

>>29789163
>antiquated weapon
>ancient technique
>pathological lying
>smug smile

That's no archer, what were dealing with is obviously a Category 5 Autist!

>>29789333

All bowfags are more or less by definition autists. It comes with the territory, like horse girls and crazy.

>>29789366
What about horse guys?

File: pAf1qg4.gif (952 KB, 500x685) Image search: [Google]

952 KB, 500x685

>>29789163
gr8 b8 m8 I r8 it 8\8

>>29789163
The video is ridiculous enough, but the part where he uses a bow with a high (read: normal) draw weight i die laughing every time, he can hardly pull it pack