https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/structured-bow-tuning-score Changes to this claim in Matteo Campagna's evidence registry: its status, its year-by-year history, revisions of the page. en-gb https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/structured-bow-tuning-scoreThere is a single study in favour on this question, and it cannot separate the bow from the archer. In 2022 twenty-four Indonesian club archers, shooting in the standard bow division, did sixteen tuning sessions, three a week, in two groups of twelve: with walk-back tuning the mean score at 40 metres went from 443.9 to 547.0 points (p = 0.009), with paper tuning from 419.6 to 435.1 (p = 0.002). No group, however, shot the same sessions with the bow left as it was, and in the walk-back group the lowest score rose from 188 to 424 while the highest moved only from 621 to 639: much of the gain may come from the archers who started very low, from the extra shooting or from getting used to the test. In 2026 the same research group added a control group in a study on the compound, and the controls improved too, from 213.7 to 236.2 points against a rise from 243.6 to 272.5 in the treated archers. The treated archers gain a little more, but the two groups were never compared with a test, the t values are identical and the paper's two tables give different figures for the same measures. What can be said today is that a structured tuning process has been followed by higher scores, not that it produced them.claim:messa-a-punto-compound-punteggio:revision:2026-03-25:3Wed, 25 Mar 2026 08:00:00 GMT https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/structured-bow-tuning-scoreclaim:messa-a-punto-compound-punteggio:new_claim:2026-03-09:riportatoMon, 09 Mar 2026 08:00:00 GMT