The less the bow moves while aiming, the better the shot

The summary today

The studies divide, and not by chance: each measures something different and calls it bow stability. The results in favour are the more numerous and, in recent years, the more solid. Within a single archer, in 7 international junior archers the window the sight travels in the final second is smaller on 10s than on arrows scoring 8 or less, in all seven of them; in 8 national-level archers the bow travels 28.8 cm on the worst arrow against 17.8 on the best. Between archers, an accelerometer on the bow of 11 Japanese university archers predicts the score of the round with R = -0.79, holding at -0.74 on archers held out of the model's training, and in 15 Turkish national-team archers the more the aiming point oscillates the lower the score (r = -0.776 with the placebo). Null results exist all the same, and at both levels: in four elite archers, reported in two papers on the same shots, the amplitude of the sight's oscillation is the same on 10s and on 8s; among the 7 juniors the archer who holds the bow stillest does not have the highest average; the tremor that predicts the round does not predict the individual arrow; and in 32 young Malaysian archers and 27 regional compound archers bow movement does not separate the stronger from the weaker. Those results come from few archers or few arrows, from regional journals or from measures that are barely described, but none of them has been explained, and as long as one study measures the area the sight travels, another the amplitude of the oscillation and a third the acceleration of the bow, the results cannot be added together.

Also phrased as: "bow stability while aiming"; "a dancing sight picture"; "bow tremor and score"; "holding the bow still"; "sight movement on the target"

Evidence

• 1976
  Context Archers Published later

  4 university archers with more than three years' practice against 6 young people who had never shot, with photographs, electromyography and radiographs: at release the experts' bow moves only towards the target, the beginners' drops or shifts sideways. It is a photographic observation, with no measurement of the displacement at all, and it concerns the bow at release, not the sway during aiming that the claim is about: for that reason it stays context.

  A STUDY OF THE PROCESS OF IMPROVEMENT IN ARCHERY · Koichiro Hayashi, Kenichi Tabuchi, Takeshi Yabuki, Kiichi Sekine, Shintaro Tachibana, Kozo Nakamura

• 1990
  Context Archers Published later

  9 experienced archers split by handicap, an elite group of national or international standard and one of good county standard, six arrows at 15 m with optical markers on the head, the elbow and the bow; the analysis covers eight archers. It measures how well the position of the bow relative to the head repeats at the moment of release, not movement during the aim: the analyses of variance do not separate the groups, and the head-to-bow distance varies from arrow to arrow more in the elite than in the others (within-archer standard deviation of 84 against 55 mm), with extremes within the elite of 7 and 161 mm. No link with score.

  Postural consistency in skilled archers · Jonathan Stuart, John Atha

• 1994
  For Archers Published later

  12 Italian recurve archers, 7 intermediates with FITA scores between 1,180 and 1,300 and 5 above 1,300, 20 shots at 12 m: those whose bow sways more laterally have lower FITA scores (r = -0.67). It is a comparison between archers, in a sample of mixed levels, in four pages of conference proceedings.

  Multifactorial analysis of shooting archery · Roberto Squadrone, R. Rodano

• 2006
  For Archers Published later

  7 international-level junior recurve archers (16 to 19), 66 arrows at 30 m indoors with optical sight tracking: the window travelled by the aiming point in the final second before release is significantly smaller on 10s than on arrows scoring 8 or less, and it is so in all seven archers. The same study, though, finds no correlation between an archer's mean window and his mean score: S1 averages 9.31 per arrow with 0.315 and S7 averages 8.72 with 0.309.

  On‐target trajectories and the final pull in archery · Jürgen Edelmann‐Nusser, Mario Heller, Martin Hofmann, Nico Ganter

• 2008
  Against Archers Published later

  8 experienced Korean university archers, three-dimensional kinematics at 200 Hz: the coefficient of variation of the bow's vertical displacement in the follow-through lies between 0.05 and 0.14 (mean 0.08 ± 0.03) and is unrelated to mean score, which runs from 8.58 to 9.50, not even at the 10% level. It measures the follow-through, not the aim. Regional journal.

  Evaluation on Kinematic Factors Affecting Scores of Olympic Round Game during the Follow Through in Archery · Chong-Ku Hah, Jae-Hun Yi

• 2009
  Context Archers Published later

  A single archer, described as good and with a stable technique, 36 arrows at 30 m with a laser pointer on the grip filmed at 1,200 frames per second: from the second and a half of aiming the authors estimate the path the bow would have followed without the release and compare it with the real one over the final twentieth of a second. The measures derived from this correlate with the error on the target mostly in the vertical: the predicted slope at -0.52 with distance from the centre and -0.66 with vertical deviation, the predicted shift between before and after release at 0.45 and 0.68, with no p values. It concerns the release rather than the aim, and one archer.

  Time series analysis during the releasing arrow stage · Kun-Shu Huang, Chi-Kuang Hwang, Kuo-Bin Lin, Chia-Wen Wu

• 2010
  Against Archers Published later

  4 elite women archers, 108 arrows at 18 m with optical sight tracking: the amplitude of the oscillation on the target is 13.7, 12.6 and 12.7 cm on arrows scoring 8, 9 and 10 horizontally and 12.0, 11.6 and 11.3 cm vertically, with analyses of variance of 1.4 and 0.6, neither significant. Within the same archer, how much the bow moves while aiming does not separate the better arrows from the worse.

  Shooting Dynamics in Archery · M. Emre Erkek, Cevdet Tinazci

• 2011
  For Archers Published later

  15 male recurve archers from sub-elite to elite: a larger vertical bow tremor while aiming goes with lower scores (r² = 0.26), and tremor power in the 3 to 8 Hz band weighs more still (r² = 0.30), reaching r² = 0.54 together. Horizontal tremor, by contrast, is unrelated to score, and in the same sample so is centre-of-pressure path length. A conference abstract.

  Biomechanical Predictors of Recurve Archery Performance · Martin H. Rose, Niels Dall, Kaare Seidelin, Bente R. Jensen

• 2011
  Against Archers Published later

  A second publication of the same 108 shots, with the same sight-oscillation figures and correlations of -0.129 and -0.108, neither significant. Here the sample is described as four male archers, whereas the 2010 paper described four women: the discrepancy is in the sources, not in the registry. It counts once.

  Shooting dynamics in archery: A multidimensional analysis from drawing to releasing in male archers · Cevdet Tinazci

• 2015
  Context Archers Published later

  8 recurve archers from the Great Britain programme at 70 m, with the hold imposed at their usual time, double and triple, 6 arrows per condition: as the hold lengthens the bow-hand wrist moves more, from 3.21 to 3.58 and then 3.87 centimetres per second, and the mean score per arrow falls from 8.60 to 8.13 and 7.75, with a significant difference only between the usual and the triple hold. It measures the wrist rather than the bow, the window also takes in 0.3 seconds after release, the triple hold always comes last and the link with score is not checked arrow by arrow: it is a master's dissertation and stays context.

  Stability of alignment during extended hold times in the aiming phase of elite archers · Lewis Marsden

• 2016
  Context Archers Published later

  2 male university archers, 18 arrows each at 70 m with accelerometers on both arms: in one of them the bow arm swayed less while aiming on 10s than on 3s. It is a visual comparison of two traces from a single archer, with no figures and no test: it serves as an illustration, not as evidence.

  Correlation between Archer's Hands Movement While Shooting and its Score · Zahari Taha, Jessnor Arif Mat-Jizat, Syed Faris Syed Omar, Edin Suwarganda

• 2017
  Against Archers Published later

  32 young Malaysian archers aged 13 to 20, 24 boys and 8 girls from a development programme, one end of 6 arrows at 50 m with an inertial sensor on the bow hand: split by cluster analysis into 20 stronger and 12 weaker archers, the two groups do not differ in bow movement (t = 1.57; p = 0.126), while they do separate on body sway measured at the pelvis (t = 4.19; p = 0.001) and on score. Six arrows each, and the groups are built from the same variables that are then compared.

  Analysis of biological and mechanical related performance parameters of Malaysian senior youth archers · Zahari Taha, Mainul Haque, Rabiu Muazu Musa, Mohamad Razali Abdullah, Ahmad Bisyri Husin Musawi Maliki, Siti Musliha Mat-Rashid, Norlaila Azura Kosni, Aleesha Adnan

• 2018
  Context Archers Published later

  4 Malaysian archers compared in pairs with a sensor on the bow hand, 6 arrows at 50 m: the medallist moves the bow less while aiming than the non-medallist, and the experienced archer less than the novice. One archer per level, charts described in words with no figures or tests, in a journal with questionable editorial standards: it carries no weight either way.

  A multidimensional analysis of physiological and mechanical variables among archers of different levels of expertise Questionable venue · Rabiu Muazu Musa, Mohamad Razali Abdullah, Hafizan Juahir, Ahmad Bisyri Husin Musawi Maliki, Siti Musliha Mat-Rasid, Norlaila Azura Kosni, Aleesha Adnan, Nadiawati Alias, Vijayamurugan Eswaramoorthi

• 2020
  For Archers Published later

  8 national-level recurve archers, 6 arrows each at 13 m with three-dimensional kinematics: comparing each archer's best and worst arrow, on the worst the bow's path is 28.79 ± 13.68 long against 17.75 ± 15.34 centimetres (p = 0.036), with huge differences from one archer to the next: from 0.64 to 44.83 on the best arrow and from 6.39 to 52.12 on the worst. Displacement along the individual axes, though, does not separate the two arrows: it is the total path length that does, not the direction.

  Relationship between bow stability and postural control in recurve archery · Karine Jacon Sarro, Thaynã de Castro Viana, Ricardo Machado Leite de Barros

• 2020
  Context Archers Published later

  6 Austrian archers of mixed level, accelerometers on the hands: the relative variability of acceleration before release does not consistently separate good shots from poor ones, on any axis or on the resultant, and the authors run no statistical tests. On the single axes, over the two hundred milliseconds before release, a smaller acceleration range goes with the better categories of shot, though not in every window; on the bow hand the range is practically the same on good and poor shots, and the relative variability on the x and y axes is lowest on the worst shots. Six people, two elite, three amateurs and one recreational archer, four ends of six arrows at 18 m: a methodological paper.

  Use of Acceleration Sensors in Archery · Markus Eckelt, Franziska Mally, Angelika Brunner

• 2020
  Context Archers Published later

  5 Olympic-recurve archers from intermediate to expert, with a sensor on the bow at 1,000 Hz: while aiming the bow's rotational speed stays between minus two and plus four degrees per second, meaning the bow is almost motionless. In the same work, in one archer the shots where a finger stayed hooked on the string already showed more shaking while aiming. It gives the scale of the phenomenon rather than linking it to score.

  Archery shots visualization by clustering and comparing from angular velocities of bows · Midori Kawaguchi, Hironori Mitake, Shoichi Hasegawa

• 2021
  For Archers Published later

  11 male university recurve archers with at least three years' practice, 36 arrows at 50 m, accelerometer on the bow: the standard deviation of acceleration in the second before release correlates with total score at R = -0.79 (p < 0.01), and the relationship holds at R = -0.74 when the model is tested on archers held out of training. The fitted line is score = 320 minus 498 times the standard deviation of acceleration, out of a maximum of 360. The top three in the group hold the bow visibly stiller than the bottom three over the final two seconds. In the same work, though, the tremor does not predict the score of the individual arrow.

  Archery Skill Assessment Using an Acceleration Sensor · Takayuki Ogasawara, Hanako Fukamachi, Kenryu Aoyagi, Shiro Kumano, Hiroyoshi Togo, Koichiro Oka

• 2021
  For Archers Published later

  15 male archers from the Turkish national squads in simulated matches at 18 m, across four conditions of a beta-blocker experiment: the correlation between oscillation of the aiming point and score is r = -0.776 on placebo and -0.516 on propranolol, both significant, while in the control condition and on bisoprolol it is not. It measures the aiming point, which is close to but not the same as the movement of the bow, and the link appears in two conditions out of four.

  Effects of beta-blockers on archery performance, body sway and aiming behaviour · Emin Ergen, Tahir Hazir, Mesut Celebi, Ayşe Kin-Isler, Serdar Aritan, Volkan Daghan Yaylıoglu, et al.

• 2022
  Context Review Published later

  Systematic review of 41 studies: on bow movement it concludes that the picture is uncertain, setting on one side the 7 international junior archers (better scores with less movement while aiming) and on the other the studies that do not discriminate. It also reports that in the 7 juniors the bow's movement before release is mostly horizontal, and that in another paper the direction of aiming corrections does not always match where the arrow lands. The review describes the fault line rather than resolving it.

  Performance assessment in archery: a systematic review · Eleonora Vendrame, Valeria Belluscio, Luigi Truppa, Lorenzo Rum, Aldo Lazich, Elena Bergamini, Andrea Mannini

• 2022
  Context Review Published later

  A review of 21 studies across several sports reporting a sample of 8 national-level recurve archers, 6 arrows at 13 m: on the better shot the centre of pressure and the bow's displacement are correlated, vertically and towards the target, while on the worse shot that synchrony does not appear. So what the bow moves with counts too, not only how much.

  The Role of Neuromuscular Control of Postural and Core Stability in Functional Movement and Athlete Performance · Erika Zemková, Ludmila Zapletalová

• 2024
  Context Archers Published later

  16 young archers aged 10 to 20, 10 recurve at 30 m and 6 compound at 50 m, accelerometer on the bow at 250 Hz: the bow's movement while aiming is concentrated below 20 to 26 Hz, with recurring peaks at 1, 3, 6 and 10 Hz, and stability varies a great deal between people (low-frequency score from 43 to 90 across the 16 archers). It makes no comparison with competition scores: it says what is being measured when we say stability.

  Archery Bow Micro-Movement Profiling Using Inertial Measurement Unit · Jonathan Then Sien Phang, King Hann Lim, Basil Andy Lease, Dar Hung Chiam

• 2024
  Context Review Published later

  A narrative review of studies from 1990 to 2023 in the precision disciplines: more experienced shooters aim stiller and with less dialogue between non-essential brain areas. It mixes archers with shooters from other disciplines, reports a single primary study on this point and brings no new measurements, so it stays context.

  Improving Mental Skills in Precision Sports by Using Neurofeedback Training: A Narrative Review · Stefano Corrado, Beatrice Tosti, Stefania Mancone, Tommaso Di Libero, Angelo Rodio, Alexandro Andrade, Pierluigi Diotaiuti

• 2025
  For Review Published later

  Systematic review of 16 cross-sectional studies: of the five that measure bow sway, three associate less movement with better performance and two find no difference between levels. The authors conclude that the direction is that one, but that the studies are few and the measures not comparable.

  Relationship Between Shooting Performance and Biomechanical Parameters Associated with Body Stability in Archery: A Systematic Review · João Santos, Joana Barreto, Tiago Atalaia, Pedro Aleixo

• 2025
  Against Archers Published later

  27 regional compound archers in Jakarta, aged 13 to 37, with a path model: bow-arm stability comes out unrelated to the 50 m score, neither horizontally (r = -0.267) nor vertically (-0.189), and in the model the coefficients are -0.089 and 0.056. How stability was measured is not described, and the measure is dominated by a few archers: among the fifteen men the median is 0.240 and the maximum 4.25, with a standard deviation larger than the mean. That zero therefore says more about the instrument than about the shooting. The journal is regional: on its own it would settle nothing, together with the Korean and Turkish null results it does.

  Pengaruh Kekuatan Drawing, Stabilitas Lengan Penumpu dan Kecepatan Laju Anak Panah Terhadap Akurasi Tembakan Divisi Compound Jarak 50 Meter · Fitriadi Sandhi Nugroho Yudho, Iman Sulaiman, Johansyah Lubis, Sujarwo

• 2025
  Context Archers Published later

  50 video clips from international competitions, with the arms' micro-movements extracted from the image: the more the drawing arm moves while aiming, the lower the arrow's score (rho = -0.393, p = 0.004), while the bow arm is unrelated to anything (rho = -0.136, p = 0.345). It measures the arms rather than the bow, on competition video rather than in a laboratory, and the result falls on the arm one would not expect. Two things about the movement measurement. It is in pixels, with a five-pixel threshold, and the pixel depends on the camera's zoom and distance, which change from shot to shot: without calibration the variable mixes tremor with optics. And the asymmetry between the arms has an alternative reading the article does not consider, because in a television close-up the string arm sits near the face and moves at release, while the bow arm is extended at the edge of the frame and partly hidden by the bow; and if the release falls inside the averaging window, that variable measures the act of release rather than tremor during aiming.

  Contactless Estimation of Heart Rate and Arm Tremor from Real Competition Footage of Elite Archers · Byeong Seon An, Song Hee Park, Ji Yeon Moon, Eui Chul Lee

Status history

1. 1976 Not studied The earliest observation in the bibliography is qualitative and concerns a different moment of the shot: in photographs of four experienced archers the bow at release moves only towards the target, while in those of six complete beginners it drops or shifts sideways. That is the release, not the aim, and there is no measurement of the displacement: sway during aiming is still unstudied.
2. 1990 Not studied The first comparison between archers of different levels concerns not movement while aiming but position at the release. Nine skilled archers split by handicap, eight of whom enter the analysis, with optical markers on the head, the elbow and the bow at fifteen metres: the position of the bow relative to the head at the moment of release is no more consistent in the elite than in the county archers, if anything less so, and the analyses of variance do not separate the two groups. It does not measure how much the bow moves during the aim and does not link it to score, so it enters as context: among the sources there is still only the 1976 observation of the release, and sway while aiming remains unstudied.
3. 1994 Reported The first study in the bibliography to measure bow sway, 12 Italian archers from intermediate to high level, finds that those who sway more laterally have lower FITA scores (r = -0.67). A single small sample and an association between different archers: the status moves from not studied to reported, and no further.
4. 2006 Reported The first measurement within a single archer comes from seven international junior archers, sixty-six arrows each filmed on the target: the window travelled by the sight in the final second is smaller on tens than on arrows scoring eight or less, and this holds for all seven. The same study, though, shows the other side: between archers, the one who moves the bow less does not have the highest average. There are now two studies in favour, one between archers and one within the archer, both small and cross-sectional: the evidence stays limited.
5. 2008 Reported The first contrary result arrives, but it does not concern the aim. In eight experienced Korean university archers, measured with three-dimensional kinematics, the variability of the bow's vertical displacement in the follow-through is not linked to average score, which runs from 8.58 to 9.50 per arrow. It looks at what comes after rather than during, on eight people and in a regional journal: one weak comparison on the follow-through is not enough to call the two measurements on the aim into question, and the status stays reported.
6. 2009 Reported A background measurement, once again not on the aim itself. In a single archer, thirty-six arrows at thirty metres with a laser pointer on the grip filmed at 1,200 frames per second, the bow's movement in the final twentieth of a second, the release, is linked to the error on the target mostly in height, with correlations between 0.45 and 0.68 in absolute value and no p values. It concerns the release rather than the aim, and one archer: the status stays reported.
7. 2010 Contested The first within-archer figure that runs the other way: in four elite women archers followed with optical sight tracking, the amplitude of the oscillation on the target is the same on tens and on eights, 13.7 against 12.7 cm horizontally and 12.0 against 11.3 vertically, with no significance. Within the archer there is now one measurement in favour, the 2006 one, and one against, and alongside the two supporting studies there is already the null result of 2008: the studies of archers point in opposite directions.
8. 2011 Contested The year clarifies the fault line rather than settling it. In fifteen recurve archers from elite to sub-elite the amplitude of the bow's vertical tremor explains a quarter of the differences in score and the power between 3 and 8 Hz nearly a third, while the horizontal tremor has nothing to do with it. In the same year the second publication of those one hundred and eight shots repeats the null result: it is the same material as the 2010 paper, so one sample and not two. What counts, then, is not how much the bow moves but in which direction and at what frequency, and the status stays contested.
9. 2015 Contested A master's dissertation on eight archers from the Great Britain programme comes at the question from another side: made to stay at full draw for two or three times their usual hold, the bow-hand wrist moves a little more, from 3.21 to 3.87 centimetres per second, and the mean score falls from 8.60 to 7.75 per arrow. Movement and score get worse together, but nobody relates them arrow by arrow, the triple hold always comes last and adds to fatigue, and the measure is the wrist, not the bow: it is context. The status stays contested, because the null result of 2010 still has no explanation.
10. 2016 Contested In one of the two university archers measured with accelerometers, the bow arm swayed less while aiming on tens than on threes. A single archer, with a visual comparison of the traces and no statistical tests, does not settle the split between the studies that find the effect and those that do not.
11. 2017 Contested A second between-group comparison, thirty-two Malaysian archers aged thirteen to twenty with an inertial sensor on the bow hand at fifty metres, again finds no difference: the twenty stronger and the twelve weaker archers move the bow the same way (p = 0.126), while they do separate on body sway. A single end of six arrows and groups built by the analysis itself, so it carries little weight, but it points the same way as the other comparisons between archers. The status does not change: both within the archer and between archers, some studies find the link and some do not.
12. 2018 Contested The same Malaysian group as in 2017 compares four archers, one per level in two pairs: the medallist moves the bow less while aiming than the non-medallist, and the experienced archer less than the novice. These are charts described in words, with no figures and no test, in a journal with questionable editorial standards, so the direction is noted but not counted. The status stays contested.
13. 2020 Contested The supporting side strengthens, and the problem becomes clearer. Within the archer: in eight national-level athletes the bow travels 28.8 cm on the worst arrow against 17.8 on the best. Another paper, five archers with a gyroscope on the bow, gives the scale of the phenomenon: while aiming the bow is almost motionless, within a window of a few degrees per second. The same year a methodological paper on six Austrian archers, with no statistical tests, gives a mixed picture: on the bow hand the acceleration range is the same on good and poor shots and the relative variability is even lower on the worst shots, while on the single axes a smaller range goes with the better shots. With no statistics and results running both ways, it stays context. The status stays contested, and the reason is clear: the measures are not comparable.
14. 2021 Contested The two strongest measurements in the record arrive, and they pull the same way: in fifteen national-level archers, the more the aiming point oscillates before release the lower the score, with r of minus 0.776 in the placebo condition, and in eleven Japanese university archers an accelerometer on the bow predicts the score of the thirty-six-arrow round with R of minus 0.79, holding at minus 0.74 even on archers held out of the model's training. The same work shows the limit, though: with the tremor set to zero the regression line would stop at 320 points out of 360, and the tremor does not predict the individual arrow. The status stays contested because the null result of 2010, republished in 2011, has not been explained.
15. 2022 Contested Two reviews say two useful things. The first calls the link between bow movement and score uncertain and points out that the supporting study it cites measures seven archers. The second adds the detail that makes the fault line intelligible: on the better shots body sway and bow sway move together, on the worse ones they do not. So it is not only how much the bow moves but what it moves with, and the status does not change.
16. 2024 Contested An accelerometer on the bow of sixteen young archers adds the detail that was missing, namely what that movement is made of: it is concentrated below twenty hertz, with recurring peaks at one, three, six and ten hertz, and it varies widely from person to person in both the slow oscillations and the tremor. No comparison with competition score, so it is context. A narrative review of studies from 1990 to 2023 repeats the common wisdom, with more experienced shooters aiming stiller, but it mixes archers with shooters from other disciplines and brings no new measurements. The status does not change.
17. 2025 Contested The contrast sharpens inside a single year. Across fifty clips from international competitions, the more the drawing arm moves while aiming the lower the arrow's score, with rho of minus 0.393, while the movement of the bow arm is tied to nothing. A systematic review finds less bow sway on the better shots in three studies out of five, and no difference between levels in the other two. In twenty-seven regional compound archers, bow-arm stability turns out not to be linked to the score at fifty metres. The status stays contested, and the reason is always the same: every study measures a different thing and they all call it bow stability.

Related

Related articles

• Stabilisers in archery: what they actually do, beyond the folkloreWhat research has measured about stabilisers: how the bow moves at release, muscle work, vibration, barebow weights and accuracy.
• Posture and stability in archery: what biomechanists revealCentre of pressure, bow movement while aiming, balance before and after the release, the trunk and balance tests: what the biomechanics of stability measures and how much it weighs on the score.
• Bow arm tremor in archery: why it happens and how to reduce itBow arm shake at full draw is two movements, a slow sway and a fast tremor. What the studies measure, where the tremor comes from and how to reduce it.

Research lines

• 48 studiesBow stability and aiming time: research since 1971
• 27 studiesTremor and sway while aiming: telling two phenomena apart since 1990

Other claims in this domain

• CorroboratedBetween one and a half and two tenths of a second pass between the clicker sounding and the arrow leaving7 studies · 94 archers measuredStatus since 1990
• ReportedA camera diagonally behind the archer measures the vertical sway of the aim well, but not the horizontal1 study · 3 archers measuredStatus since 2010
• ReportedA continuous final pull through the clicker leads to better shots9 studies · 56 archers measuredStatus since 1993
• ReportedA sound or light cue about the angle of the bow arm tightens beginners' groups2 studies · 1 archers measuredStatus since 2012
• ReportedA thumb grip on the string is less tiring than a finger grip3 studies · 9 archers measuredStatus since 1990

See all claims on technique and biomechanics