Matteo Campagna
ITEN
Menu
Menu

Research line

How long to hold the aim: shot timing and bow movement in research since 1971

Archers are taught that an aim held too long spoils the shot. Since 1971 researchers have timed the aim, first in kyudo and then at World Championships, and with sensors on the bow they have followed how much it moves in the last seconds before the release. This page sets out the studies in chronological order, up to the 2025 result that explains why for thirty years they failed to agree.

Studies in the registry
48
On archers
47
Years
1971-2026

The question

Among the rules of aiming there is one that nearly every archer hears early on: if the aim has not settled within a few seconds, let down and start again, because holding on tires the arm and the shot deteriorates. In the registry the claim that holding aim for too long makes the shot worse has been contested since 1994, and the question has been asked again in every decade with different tools, from the stopwatch to accelerometers. The same tools gave rise to a second question, how much the bow moves while the archer aims, and the two stories read better together.

This page follows the studies in chronological order. Practical advice is in the article on aiming time; here the subject is what has been measured, in whom, and how much the results weigh.

1971-1994: the first stopwatches

The first figure points away from the rule. In 1971 a Japanese group recorded electromyography in three kyudo practitioners and also timed the hold on aim, the kai: about five seconds in the expert, about two in the beginner. There were three people and no statistics, but the better archer stayed on aim longer.

In 1990 the measurement moved to elite target archers, and with them came the first sign that there is no simple link. In four elite Australian archers, followed over two sessions and 240 arrows at 30 metres, aiming time grew on the poorer arrows in two performances and shrank in three. The same year a study of seven elite archers at 70 and 90 metres found no relationship between aiming time, draw time and accuracy, and reported it in a single line without figures.

The first figure on the side of the rule dates from 1994. In twelve Italian archers of intermediate and high standard, mean aiming time correlated with FITA score at r = -0.72: those who aimed longer scored less. In the same work, archers whose bow swayed more from side to side had lower scores (r = -0.67). Both are comparisons between different archers, in four pages of conference proceedings, and from here on the studies begin to point in opposite directions.

2006: where the bow points

In 2006 the question changed instrument. An optical system fixed to the riser tracked where the bows of seven international juniors were pointing, 66 arrows each at 30 metres, and showed that the area covered by the aim shrinks second by second: between 0.85 and 1.79 square points from three to two seconds before the shot, between 0.30 and 0.59 in the last second, which was the smallest for every archer. In that last second the area was also smaller on 10s than on arrows scoring 8 or less. Between archers, though, the one who held the bow stillest did not have the highest average.

2009: world champions on the clock

The first timing in competition comes from video of the 2007 World Championships in Leipzig. The two individual recurve gold medallists and their fourteen opponents were timed phase by phase across seven matches each, and the two winners aimed in opposite ways: he for 2.65 to 4.37 seconds on average per match, she for 0.61 to 1.24, with her opponents between 2.03 and 4.60. On consistency the study gives a yes and a no: the men's champion had a more consistent aim than his opponent in six matches out of seven, the women's champion a less consistent one in all seven. The finding that holds for both is a different one: preparation and draw lengthened and shortened from one round to the next, the aim did not.

2010-2016: the time of the shot and the time of the aim

In 2010 four elite Turkish women archers, 108 arrows with optical tracking, separated two things that practice tends to run together. Time on target was 3.6 seconds on 8s and 3.7 on 9s and 10s, and the amplitude of sway was the same as well; what grew shorter on the better arrows was the total drawing time, from 5.6 to 4.8 seconds. The same year a comparison of three systems on three German national team archers set a limit on method: a single camera behind the archer reads vertical sway well, with correlations from 0.69 to 0.97, and horizontal sway not at all.

In 2011, in competition, seventeen adolescent archers showed the opposite of the rule: a longer time per shot went with higher scores, and the experts spent 28.1 seconds on each arrow against the novices' 20.2. That time, however, started when the archer took the arrow from the quiver, and the regression counted the thousand or so arrows as if they came from a thousand people. It is the confusion the 2010 study had already pointed to, and it is what makes the results on this page hard to add up: the length of the whole shot and the length of the aim are different measurements.

2016 brought two measurements pointing in opposite directions. In two university archers with accelerometers on both arms, the aim lasted 2.9 seconds on high-scoring arrows and 4.2 on low ones, over 36 arrows and with no tests. In fifteen archers of mixed standard, 449 shots at 18 metres, a longer aim went with arrows slightly closer to the centre (r = -0.117), and a model with five variables, four timings and the speed of the arrow, explained 7.7% of the distance from the centre.

2020-2021: sensors on the bow

In 2020 eight Brazilian national-level archers, compared on their best and worst arrows, gave the clearest result on the side of the rule: on the worst arrow the aim lasted 3.55 seconds against 2.07, and the bow travelled 28.8 centimetres against 17.8. The spread between archers was huge, since on the best arrow the aim ranged from 0.19 to 3.62 seconds.

In 2021 an accelerometer on the bows of eleven Japanese university archers predicted the score of a 36-arrow series with R = -0.79, but not the score of the single arrow: for the claim that a steadier bow while aiming gives a better shot it is the strongest measurement, and it also shows its limit.

2022-2026: the average that cancels out

In 2022 a systematic review of 41 studies concluded that there is no agreement on the link between aiming time and score, and noted that the five studies on the point nearly all had two to eight archers. The largest sample came the following year: sixteen young Malaysian recurve archers, 576 arrows at 70 metres. The better eight aimed longer, 3.38 seconds against 2.72, and arrow by arrow aiming time was not linked to score (r = 0.016). The same study gives the timings of the cycle: 10.33 seconds in all, with the aim taking about 69% of the time spent drawing and aiming, against the idea that the two phases split the time evenly.

The result that explains the others dates from 2025. In eight elite French archers, 549 arrows at 70 metres, aiming time did not separate good arrows from poor ones across the group; within individual archers the link appeared in two cases out of eight, in opposite directions: one aimed for 3.7 seconds on 10s and 2.0 on arrows of 8 or less, another for 2.2 on the poorer arrows and 1.6 on 9s. A group average that adds up two opposite behaviours comes out at zero. The thesis that contains that study adds a comparison between levels: elite archers aim for 2.62 seconds, intermediates for 3.36. Between different archers the shorter aim goes with the higher level; within the single archer the direction changes from person to person.

What remains open

After more than fifty years the picture has two fixed points. The first is that the bow settles as the release approaches. How much that movement says about the score depends on what is being compared: in 2006 it separated the arrows of the same archer but not archers from one another, in 2021 the series but not the single arrow. And the studies measure different things under the same name: the area covered by the aim, the amplitude of sway, the acceleration of the bow. The second is that aiming time has no winners' value. The French study of 2025 meets the three conditions the question calls for: it separates the aim from the whole shot, looks at the single arrow at competition distance and compares each archer with themselves. It is also the one that shows why the group average hides the very difference being looked for; but there are eight archers, and the link appears in only two of them. The movement of the arm and the body while aiming is covered by the trace on tremor and sway and by the page on movement variability.

How we came to know it

  1. 1971OriginKamei et al. 1971 An Electromyographic Analysis of Japanese ArcheryThree kyudo practitioners recorded with electromyography: the hold on aim, the kai, lasts about five seconds in the expert and about two in the beginner. The better archer stays on aim longer, in three people and with no statistics.
  2. 1990ExtensionKeast et al. 1990 Fine Body Movements and the Cardiac Cycle in ArcheryFour elite Australian archers, 240 arrows at 30 m over two sessions: in two performances aiming time grows on the poorer arrows and in three it shrinks. The same study gives both directions.
  3. 1990ContradictionClarys et al. 1990 Muscular Activity of Different Shooting Distances, Different Release Techniques, and Different Performance Levels, with and without Stabilizers, in Target ArcherySeven elite archers at 70 and 90 m: no relationship between muscle activity, aiming time, draw time and accuracy. The result is stated without any coefficients.
  4. 1994ContradictionSquadrone et al. 1994 Multifactorial analysis of shooting archeryThe first figure on the side of a short aim: in twelve Italian archers mean aiming time correlates with FITA score at r = -0.72, and lateral bow sway at r = -0.67. It compares archers with one another, in conference proceedings.
  5. 2006ExtensionEdelmann‐Nusser et al. 2006 On‐target trajectories and the final pull in archerySeven international juniors, 66 arrows each with an optical system on the riser: the area covered by the aim shrinks second by second, down to 0.30-0.59 square points in the last one, and is smaller on 10s than on arrows scoring 8 or less. Between archers, though, a smaller area does not mean a higher average.
  6. 2009ExtensionTakai et al. 2009 Characteristics of time spent on each phase during archery shooting: A study of the men's and women's individual gold medalists from the World Outdoor Archery ChampionshipsThe two individual recurve gold medallists at the 2007 World Championships, timed in every match: he aimed for 2.65 to 4.37 seconds, she for 0.61 to 1.24. There is no winners' duration, and aiming is the only phase the round of the match does not shift.
  7. 2010ExtensionErkek et al. 2010 Shooting Dynamics in ArcheryFour elite Turkish women archers, 108 arrows: time on target is 3.6-3.7 seconds on 8s, 9s and 10s, and the amplitude of sway does not change either. What shortens is the total drawing time, from 5.6 to 4.8 seconds: the whole shot and the aim are two different measurements.
  8. 2010MethodGanter et al. 2010 Comparing three methods for measuring the movement of the bow in the aiming phase of Olympic archeryThree systems compared on three German national team archers: a single camera behind the archer reads the vertical sway of the aim well (r from 0.69 to 0.97) and the horizontal sway not at all.
  9. 2011ContradictionCarrillo et al. 2011 Autonomic nervous system modulation during an archery competition in novice and experienced adolescent archersIn competition, seventeen adolescent archers: a longer time per shot goes with higher scores, and the experts spend 28.1 seconds on each arrow against 20.2. That time, though, covers the whole sequence, from the quiver to the release.
  10. 2016ReplicationTaha et al. 2016 Correlation between Archer's Hands Movement While Shooting and its ScoreTwo university archers with accelerometers on both arms: the aim lasts 2.9 seconds on high-scoring arrows and 4.2 on low ones. Thirty-six arrows in all, with no statistical tests.
  11. 2016ContradictionCallaway et al. 2016 Identification of temporal factors related to shot performance for indoor recurve archeryFifteen archers, 449 shots at 18 m: a longer aim goes with arrows slightly closer to the centre (r = -0.117). A model with five variables, four timings and the speed of the arrow, explains 7.7% of the distance from the centre.
  12. 2016ExtensionQuan et al. 2016 Relationship between Aiming Patterns and Scores in Archery ShootingFour Korean girls wearing nine inertial sensors: for each of them a model of the two seconds before the release predicts the score, but with different variables and a share explained from 27.9 to 72.0%.
  13. 2020ReplicationSarro et al. 2020 Relationship between bow stability and postural control in recurve archeryEight national-level archers, best arrow against worst: on the worst one the aim lasts 3.55 seconds against 2.07 and the bow travels 28.8 centimetres against 17.8. It is a group test, with huge gaps between one archer and another.
  14. 2020ExtensionKawaguchi et al. 2020 Archery shots visualization by clustering and comparing from angular velocities of bowsA gyroscope on the bows of five recurve archers and a program that groups similar shots: in one archer the aim lasted about 4 seconds in one group and 2.5 in the other, and the shorter group shook more.
  15. 2021ExtensionOgasawara et al. 2021 Archery Skill Assessment Using an Acceleration SensorEleven Japanese university archers with an accelerometer on the bow: the variability of acceleration in the last second before the release predicts the score of the series (R = -0.79) but not that of the single arrow. The shortest aim across all shots lasts 1.8 seconds.
  16. 2022ReviewVendrame et al. 2022 Performance assessment in archery: a systematic reviewA systematic review of 41 studies: there is no agreement on the link between aiming time and score, and the five studies on the point nearly all have two to eight archers.
  17. 2023ContradictionLau et al. 2023 Comparison of Shooting Time Characteristics and Shooting Posture Between High- and Low- Performance ArchersSixteen young Malaysian recurve archers, 576 arrows at 70 m: the better group aims longer, 3.38 seconds against 2.72, and arrow by arrow aiming time is not linked to score (r = 0.016). The aim takes about 69% of the time spent drawing and aiming.
  18. 2024MethodLee et al. 2024 AI-Based Analysis of Archery Shooting Time from Anchoring to Release Using Pose Estimation and Computer VisionA program measures the time from anchor to release on competition video: on 58 shots from Olympic broadcasts it is off by 0.34 seconds on average compared with measurement by hand.
  19. 2025ExtensionJacquot et al. 2025 A multi-parameter investigation of elite archery: distinguishing individual and shared performance strategies during the aiming and follow-through phasesEight elite French archers, 549 arrows at 70 m: across the group aiming time does not separate the arrows, and within individuals the link appears in two archers out of eight, in opposite directions. One archer aims for 3.7 seconds on 10s against 2.0 on the poorer arrows, another for 2.2 on the poorer arrows against 1.6 on 9s.
  20. 2026ExtensionJacquot 2026 Analyse multidimensionnelle de la performance en tir à l'arcThe thesis that contains that study compares levels in 15 archers: the elite aim for 2.62 seconds, the intermediates for 3.36. Between archers the shorter aim goes with the higher level; within the archer the direction changes from person to person.

Studies in this line

Related claims

Claims in the registry with at least one of these studies among their evidence.

162 claims · 90% with evidence on archers

Articles

Methods used

Research lines

Cite
APA

Campagna, M. (2026). Bow stability and aiming time: research since 1971. In Research. matteocampagna.com. Retrieved 16 October 2026, from https://matteocampagna.com/en/research/bow-stability-aiming-time

BibTeX
@misc{campagna2026_enresearchbowstabilityaimingtime,
  author = {Campagna, Matteo},
  title = {Bow stability and aiming time: research since 1971},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {Research, matteocampagna.com},
  url = {https://matteocampagna.com/en/research/bow-stability-aiming-time},
  note = {accessed 2026-10-16}
}