https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/stabilisers-accuracy 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/stabilisers-accuracyThe question is forty years old and still has no answer. The first measurement, in 1987, does not look at the target but at the bow: with soft torque compensators the bow moves sideways slightly more than with hard ones, 0.84 against 0.70 mm, although more repeatably. The only direct with-and-without comparison in the bibliography dates from 1990, in seven elite archers who had never shot without stabilisers: the authors find no significant difference in accuracy, while their per-archer table shows higher values with stabilisers in most cases, without stating the scale, and the sample is too small to rule out an effect. In 2023 an engineering study tried to look at the score and ended up explaining why the gap persists: with thirty arrows per configuration the scores nearly all fall inside the range expected by chance, and telling two set-ups apart would take between 900 and 1,050 arrows each. Meanwhile we know that the bow moves less during aiming on the better shots, but none of those studies varied the stabiliser: the step from the kit to the score has yet to be measured, which is why the status is "Not studied".claim:stabilizzatori-precisione:revision:2026-09-14:2Mon, 14 Sep 2026 08:00:00 GMT https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/stabilisers-accuracy#storiaA systematic review of sixteen studies confirms that a steadier body goes with better scores, and that the few data available say the same about bow sway. It deals with steadiness, not with stabilisers: after almost forty years there is still no comparison holding set-up and score together, and the status is the same as in 1987.claim:stabilizzatori-precisione:history_entry:2026-09-05:2025Sat, 05 Sep 2026 08:00:00 GMT https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/stabilisers-accuracy#storiaThe most serious attempt to reach the score mostly shows how hard the question is. One advanced barebow archer shot thirty arrows at fifty metres for each weight configuration: the scores, from 242 to 262 out of 300, all fall inside the range expected by chance, between 244 and 269, except the bare bow with no weights, which sits below at 228. The authors work out that telling two set-ups apart would take between 900 and 1,050 arrows each. That number is what explains the gap, and the status stays "Not studied".claim:stabilizzatori-precisione:history_entry:2026-09-05:2023Sat, 05 Sep 2026 08:00:00 GMT https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/stabilisers-accuracy#storiaThirty years later something closer appears: in eight national-level archers the lowest-scoring shot shows a wider bow path and more body sway than the best one. The stabiliser was not varied, though, so the measurement is about the archer's steadiness rather than the kit, and the status does not move.claim:stabilizzatori-precisione:history_entry:2026-09-05:2020Sat, 05 Sep 2026 08:00:00 GMT https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/stabilisers-accuracy#storiaThe first time anyone measures stabilisers, what gets measured is not the target but the bow. In one Italian national-team archer the bow moves sideways by an average of 0.84 mm with soft torque compensators against 0.70 mm with hard ones, though with a smaller spread. Nothing is known about the score, so the question opens unanswered.claim:stabilizzatori-precisione:history_entry:2026-09-05:1987Sat, 05 Sep 2026 08:00:00 GMT https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/stabilisers-accuracyclaim:stabilizzatori-precisione:new_claim:2026-07-27:non_studiatoMon, 27 Jul 2026 08:00:00 GMT