How wind, heat and humidity are measured in competition studies

Three ways of getting the weather

Archery studies have obtained their weather in three ways: from meteorological stations, from an estimate by someone on the field, or from an instrument near the shooting line; others stop at stating the conditions of the day. The results are in the research line on wind and heat; this page looks at how they were obtained, since that decides how far they can be read.

Weather stations

The largest study, on Chinese qualification rounds between 2010 and 2016, takes its weather from the national data-sharing system, with about 800 stations. For each county where shooting took place, the daily values are the average of the stations within 150 kilometres, weighted by inverse distance. For one round in ten the exact date is unknown, and the weather is then the average of the first three days of the competition. The result is a daily figure for the area, with no temperature for the hour of shooting and no wind direction, even though the authors themselves note that competition fields often display speed and direction monitors.

The Turkish study of ten female compound archers also takes temperature and humidity from the official bulletins, and finds them significantly different between the two sessions it compares, so the day is mixed up with what the study set out to measure.

Estimates made on the field

World Archery publishes competition results but not the weather, and those who have studied elite scores have filled the gap with what they saw. For his scoring models the Australian James Park chose, among the events he had attended, those with little wind, and the afternoon wind at the 2013 World Championships in Antalya, about 3 to 5 m/s, is his estimate. In the study of photographed groups from the same year, the wind in Shanghai is estimated at under 1 m/s and the afternoon wind in Belek at up to 5 m/s; the only figures described as measured are the gusts above 20 m/s during the head-to-head matches.

In 2011 the 3 m/s threshold from which scores drop came from the average wind at a number of tournaments, measured by means not stated and set beside archers' comments and the scores they shot, and the author presented it as a subjective check. The same applies to the 2025 simulation that reads photographs of targets from a World Cup in Shanghai: on one day the wind is given as about 2 m/s across and 2 m/s head-on, for the semi-final as about 1 m/s across and close to 4 m/s head-on, with no word on what measured it.

An instrument near the line

The field chronometer tested in 2005 with twenty archers from the Turkish national team and its candidates had its wind sensors at the midpoint of the shooting distance, parallel to the line, and recorded speed and direction at the instant the clicker fell. It is the only case in the registry where the wind is tied to the single arrow. When the twelve arrows at 70 m were repeated a week later, the intraclass correlation coefficient was 1.000 for wind speed, 0.938 for temperature and 0.742 for direction, with a confidence interval reaching down to 0.456. Both sessions were said to be held in the same conditions, without rain or strong wind, yet the paired t test finds significant differences in wind speed, wind direction and temperature: the weather had changed, and the instrument's reliability is mixed up with the stability of the air.

In the Taiwanese mindfulness programme from 2021 a vane anemometer recorded between 0.1 and 1.2 m/s in the initial simulated competition and between 0.0 and 1.3 in the final one. The wind was measured as a possible disturbance, then left out of the analysis.

Conditions that are only stated

The dehydration trial in Cyprus took place at 36 or 37 degrees with humidity between 81 and 83%; the study of six Turkish national-team archers at a European Grand Prix reports a mean of 14.5 °C, 47% humidity and a wind of around 6.5 miles per hour for the whole event. A Taiwanese paper from 2025 describes controlled conditions with no measurable wind, yet among its limits admits that wind was not systematically controlled. In the Malaysian single case from 2018 the conditions were defined in words: wind between 1 and 5 m/s, overcast with a breeze below 1 m/s, heat in direct sun up to 45 degrees. They say what kind of day it was, but none yields an effect of the weather.

What heat means

When the Chinese study talks about 34 degrees, it means the heat index, built from the day's mean temperature and relative humidity with the formula of the United States weather service. It is not the thermometer reading, nor the temperature on the shooting line at midday. The choice matters: in the specifications that separate the two factors, humidity on its own is never significant and temperature on its own gives smaller coefficients, so the effect reported in the entry on extreme heat belongs to the combination. Mean humidity in the sample was 75.1%, ranging from 30.4 to 98.3, and this is exactly where the entry on rain, humidity and temperature splits. Rain, too, is a daily average for the area, not what fell while the arrows were being shot.

Wind has a direction and changes along the distance

The Chinese study has only the speed, with a sample mean of 2.35 m/s, and no direction. Flight models have the opposite problem, since they choose the wind: the 2019 review points out that all of them assume still air or air moving uniformly, which is precisely what a competition field does not offer, where the wind gusts and changes along the distance. That is why the entry on crosswind against head and tail wind knows the direction of the difference but not its size on the field. How those calculations are built is covered in the pages on models and simulations and on the wind tunnel.

The days that are left out

One limit no instrument can solve: competitions are postponed when the wind is too strong and suspended in heavy downpours, so the highest wind in the Chinese sample is 5.38 m/s. And anyone testing an instrument picks days suited to shooting, without rain or strong wind, like those used for the 2005 chronometer. The effect of wind on the score therefore holds within the range in which people compete, and says nothing beyond it. The entry on getting used to heat rests on the same area weather too, with the hot days counted in the city where each archer trains.

What to check

• where the figure was taken: a distant station, the estimate of someone on the field, an instrument at the line or halfway down the range;
• over what time scale: the day's average, the session, the end or the single arrow;
• which quantity: air temperature or heat index, wind speed with or without direction and gusts;
• whether the instrument is named, and whether the figure enters the analysis or is only reported;
• whether conditions were the same across the sessions being compared;
• which days are missing, because suspended competitions and days without shooting are not in the sample.

How design and sample are weighed is explained in How we read a study; how to read the wind on the shooting line is covered in the article on wind and weather conditions.

@misc{campagna2026_enresearchmethodsmeasuringwindheatandhum,
  author = {Campagna, Matteo},
  title = {How wind, heat and humidity are measured at competitions},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {Research, matteocampagna.com},
  url = {https://matteocampagna.com/en/research/methods/measuring-wind-heat-and-humidity},
  note = {accessed 2026-10-16}
}