Matteo Campagna
ITEN
Menu
Menu

Research line

Physical training interventions: what has been tested

Eleven years of physical programmes tested on archers, from gym weights to resistance bands, from circuits to stretching. This is the story of those studies in chronological order: what they measured, which had a control group, and why gaining strength is not enough to show that the score goes up.

Studies in the registry
39
On archers
38
Years
2015-2026

The question

This is one of the questions in the registry that has seen the most experiments: does a physical programme done away from the range raise the score? Since 2015 archers have been put through weights, resistance bands, medicine balls, circuits, planks, yoga, stretching and foam rolling. The question, though, holds two questions, and they need to be kept apart: the first is whether the programme increases the strength or endurance it measures, the second is whether that gain reaches the arrow.

Here I follow the studies in chronological order, with their numbers and their limits. The exercises are in the article on specific strength for archers; this page shows where what we know comes from and how solid it is.

2015-2019: the first programmes

The first study is Indian. Sharma and colleagues gave fifteen archers six weeks of strength exercises and left another fifteen as they were: by the end the groups differed on a back and leg dynamometer, but shooting was not measured. Score comes in two years later with Sezer, whose twelve weeks of grip exercises took fifteen young Turkish archers from 68.1 to 89.7 points over twelve arrows at 18 m, while the control group stayed put; the two groups, however, were never compared with each other. In 2018 the plyometric programme of Dhawale and colleagues raised accuracy with the control unchanged, but in groups that already differed at the start.

In 2019 there were also programmes with nothing to compare against, and gains sometimes too large to put down to strength work alone, such as the 64 points over thirty-six arrows of six Iraqi archers. Twelve club archers working with a dumbbell and a band held at full draw 27.4% longer and scored 3.8% more: the gain on the test was about seven times the gain on the target. The same imbalance returns in 2023 in a game-based circuit, where balance, concentration and holding time improve by between 7.4% and 16.6%, and the score by 2.5%.

2020-2022: the first randomised trial

The most useful comparison of those years is a small one. Çelikel and colleagues followed twenty Turkish archers aged 15 to 17: after eight weeks of strength work the score over twelve arrows at 18 m rises from 93.5 to 105.5 and simple reaction times shorten by 39 to 55 milliseconds, while in the ten who did no exercises nothing changes significantly. There is no test between the groups, but a control measured on the target as well shows that over eight weeks archers who add nothing stay where they were.

The same year brings the first randomised trial, and it points the other way. Kim and colleagues randomised thirty-one elite Korean archers: after eight weeks of lower trapezius exercises the score over fifteen arrows at 70 m stays at 132.1. In 2022 Liao and colleagues tried similar work on fourteen Taiwanese university archers: the trained group went from 628 to 639 over seventy-two arrows and the control fell from 617 to 601, but the final comparison between the groups stays above the threshold (p = 0.062).

Meanwhile the Indonesian programmes multiply. With bands built into the shooting movement forty youngsters gain 12.3 points against 8.6 for the club's usual strength work, and here the difference in gains is tested between the groups. A circuit for twenty child beginners shows that fitness and score do not move together: in the second half of the programme the boys' score keeps rising while their fitness no longer does.

2023: the four-group comparison

The study that carries most weight comes from India. Chatla and colleagues split sixty national-level archers into four groups for twelve weeks: gym work, specific strength with full-draw holds, bands and a strap, both together, and a control. Over seventy-two arrows the adjusted means end at 590.7 for the combined group, 569.1 for the gym, 557.4 for specific strength and 532.6 for the control, which does not move. The groups, however, were not randomised, each trained at a different academy, and the combined group trained the most, six times a week: the combination cannot be separated from the dose.

Before shooting: stretching and foam rolling

Two studies look at the immediate effect. In 2021 Turna and colleagues had thirty intermediate archers shoot on three days in random order: after dynamic shoulder stretching the score over thirty arrows at 18 m is 244.8, after static stretching 245.5, with no stretching 246.2. After dynamic stretching the gap is clear-cut statistically and worth little more than one point out of 300; after static stretching it stays just above the threshold (p = 0.055). In 2023 Ünlü and colleagues reported that thirty seconds of foam rolling took twelve archers' score from 79 to 134.5, but the session without the roller always came first and was the only one with no warm-up.

2024-2026: more randomised trials, mixed results

In 2024 a small study of twelve district archers shows that a control that stays still is not enough: the trained group rises by almost nine points and the control stays where it was, but the direct comparison between the two is not significant. In 2025 a randomised trial of thirty recurve archers in Istanbul took six arrows at 18 m from 46.7 to 55.2 points with scapular stabilisation, against 44.7 to 47.4 in the control. The paper's arithmetic can all be recomputed, but the arithmetic itself shows that the variability between archers is too small for six arrows, a single end: the direction holds, the size of the 18% gain much less so. And even the control gains a third of what the best group gains.

In 2026 the two most readable randomised trials contradict each other. In twenty-four Turkish traditional archers Kul and colleagues added eight weeks of band work to shooting: grip and back and leg strength go up, but in the end the score does not differ between the groups, because it also rises in the group that only shoots, in all twelve archers. In thirty-eight Indonesian competitive archers Prastyawan and colleagues found instead that the score per arrow rose from 7.1 to 8.6 after twelve weeks of circuit training, with the control unchanged; the circuit, though, also involved shooting, and the comparison between the groups is not reported. The systematic review of the same year selects fifteen intervention studies out of 767 and finds them all positive, without being able to pool them in a meta-analysis.

What holds today

On the first step the registry is clear: that a strength programme increases measured strength is corroborated, with five controlled comparisons pointing the same way, two of them randomised; circuits point the same way for physical condition, on limited evidence. On the second step the picture is weaker. That physical conditioning improves accuracy is reported, because shooting on its own also raises the score. Resistance bands and scapular stabilisation are contested. Still reported, with a single study each, are combining gym and specific strength, free weights, push-ups, reaction times, foam rolling, yoga, and the two findings on stretching, a drop after dynamic stretching and no change after static stretching. That isometric endurance matters more than maximal strength is contradicted, and that on a programme those who start lower gain more is contested.

What remains open

There is still no study in which the control shoots the same number of arrows as the trained group, and where the control trains just as often, as in the 2026 Turkish study, its score rises too. Nobody has checked, archer by archer, whether those who gain the most strength also gain the most points, and where the two measures can be read side by side they do not move together. Samples range from a single archer to sixty and almost all stay at thirty or fewer, shooting tests run from six to seventy-two arrows, most of the studies appear in regional journals or in journals with questionable editorial standards, and nobody has rechecked the gains a few months after a programme ended. Finally, the 2026 review finds all fifteen studies it selects positive, including the 2022 Taiwanese study whose final comparison between groups is not significant: a gain within one group is not a comparison, and counting only those turns up no null results.

How we came to know it

  1. 2015OriginSharma et al. 2015 Questionable venue Effectiveness of six weeks training on static strength of archery playersThe first strength programme on archers with a control group: after six weeks the groups differ on a back and leg dynamometer, but within the trained group the change is not significant and shooting is not measured.
  2. 2017ExtensionSezer 2017 Questionable venue The Impact of Hand Grip Strength Exercises on the Target Shooting Accuracy Score for ArchersScore comes in: twelve weeks of grip exercises take fifteen young archers from 68.1 to 89.7 over twelve arrows at 18 m, with the control unchanged. The groups are not compared with each other and the journal's editorial standards are questionable.
  3. 2018ExtensionDhawale et al. 2018 Effect of Upper Extremity Plyometric Training on Strength and Accuracy in Archery PlayersSix weeks of upper-body plyometrics raise accuracy from 4.93 to 8.13 while the control stays still, but the groups already differed at the start and the one-repetition maximums come out identical on both sides.
  4. 2019ExtensionYachsie 2019 Pengaruh latihan dumbell-thera band terhadap daya tahan otot lengan dan akurasi memanah pada atlet panahanDumbbell and band work in twelve club archers, with no control: holding time at full draw grows by 27.4% and the score by 3.8%. The gain on the test is about seven times the gain on the target.
  5. 2019ExtensionArisman 2019 Pengaruh Latihan Square terhadap Daya Tahan Aerobic Atlet Sriwijaya Archery ClubThe first aerobic programme with a control: six weeks of walking and running round a square take the twelve-minute distance from 1.88 to 2.32 km, against 1.89 and 1.90 in the control. Score is not measured.
  6. 2020ReplicationÇelikel et al. 2020 Erkek Okçularda Reaksiyon Süratinin Hedef Atış İsabet Puanına EtkisiTwenty young Turkish archers: after eight weeks of strength work score, grip and simple reaction times improve, while in the ten without exercises nothing changes significantly. There is no test between the groups.
  7. 2020ContradictionKim et al. 2020 Effects of Lower Trapezius Strengthening Exercise on Shoulder Pain, Function and Archery Performance in Elite ArchersThe first randomised trial: thirty-one elite Korean archers, eight weeks of lower trapezius exercises. Functional balance of the arms improves, while the score over fifteen arrows at 70 m stays at 132.1.
  8. 2021ExtensionPutra et al. 2021 Development of resistance-based archery training models for athletes aged 13-15 yearsBands built into the shooting movement against the club's usual strength work in forty youngsters: 12.3 points against 8.6, with the difference in gains tested between the groups. Allocation is not random.
  9. 2021ExtensionSusanto et al. 2021 The effect of circuit training on physical fitness and archery accuracy in novice athletesA circuit for twenty child beginners raises fitness and score, but in the second half of the programme the boys' score keeps rising after their fitness has levelled off.
  10. 2021ExtensionTurna et al. 2021 Acute Effect of Dynamic and Static Stretching Exercises on Targeting Performance in ArcheryThe first study of the immediate effect of stretching, thirty archers in random order: after dynamic stretching the score over thirty arrows at 18 m drops from 246.2 to 244.8, after static stretching to 245.5, just above the significance threshold (p = 0.055).
  11. 2022ExtensionLiao et al. 2022 Twelve-Week Lower Trapezius-Centred Muscular Training Regimen in University ArchersTwelve weeks of lower trapezius work in fourteen university archers: the trained group goes from 628 to 639 over seventy-two arrows and the control drops from 617 to 601, but the final comparison between groups is not significant (p = 0.062).
  12. 2023ExtensionChatla et al. 2023 Isolated and Combined Effect of Strength Training and Specific Strength Training on Performance Levels Among ArchersFour groups of national-level archers for twelve weeks: adjusted means of 590.7 for gym and specific strength combined, 569.1 and 557.4 for each on its own, and 532.6 for the control. The groups were not randomised and the training loads were not equal.
  13. 2023ExtensionSubekti et al. 2023 Free weight vs gym machine: which is better for muscle endurance athletes of archery?The first comparison of free weights with machines, twenty boys aged 12 to 15: dumbbells lengthen bow-holding time by 1.1 seconds more. Loads and volumes are not reported as matched, and score is not measured.
  14. 2023ExtensionYachsie et al. 2023 Circuit Game Development: Implications on Balance, Concentration, Muscle Endurance, and Arrow AccuracyA game-based circuit in thirty youngsters: balance, concentration and holding time improve by between 7.4% and 16.6%, the score by 2.5%.
  15. 2023ExtensionÜnlü et al. 2023 The Effect of Different Myofacial Release Exercise Times Using Foam Roller in Archers on Reaction Balance and Arrow Shooting PerformanceFoam rolling before shooting: thirty seconds take twelve archers' score from 79 to 134.5, but the session without the roller always comes first and is the only one with no warm-up.
  16. 2024ContradictionFauzan 2024 Questionable venue The effect of specific physical training on shooting in west Sumbawa district archery athletesAnother controlled study that finds no difference between groups: the trained group rises by almost nine points and the control stays still, but the direct comparison is not significant, with six archers per group and a questionable journal.
  17. 2024ExtensionAhmad et al. 2024 The effect of 6-week different resistance training on shooting performance among elite archersTwo groups of six elite Malaysian archers: high-repetition work gains 12.0 points over thirty-six arrows at 70 m and strength work 6.2, with no comparison between groups and no control.
  18. 2024ExtensionYachsie et al. 2024 Application of push-ups and pull-ups to develop strength endurance of arm muscles in archery athletesPush-ups against pull-ups in four groups of five: the advantage of push-ups comes entirely from archers who started with good arm endurance.
  19. 2024MethodYachsie et al. 2024 Validity and Reliability of Archery Sport Arm Muscle Endurance Training Program Based on Body Weight TrainingA bodyweight arm endurance programme is rated by seven experts, physical trainers and archery coaches: this is content validity, and no archer is measured.
  20. 2025ExtensionWattimena et al. 2025 Enhancing archery-specific physical fitness: A controlled trial on the effects of medicine ball load variationsA randomised trial on strength outcomes: medicine-ball work raises push-ups and sit-ups in thirty university archers, while the control does not change significantly. The accuracy test announced in the methods does not appear in the results.
  21. 2025ExtensionYamanarda et al. 2025 The Effect of Different Exercise Methods on Shooting Performance in ArchersA randomised trial in thirty recurve archers: with scapular stabilisation six arrows at 18 m go from 46.7 to 55.2 points, against 44.7 to 47.4 in the control. The arithmetic can be recomputed, but six arrows are a single end and the variability it implies is too small to take the gain at face value.
  22. 2025ExtensionHumaid et al. 2025 A 12-week tailored sit-and-reach metrics intervention for archery athletes with flexibility deficitsTwelve weeks of mobility, stretching and foam rolling in thirty inflexible archers take the sit and reach from 13.2 to 22.6 cm, with no control group.
  23. 2026ContradictionKul et al. 2026 The Effect of Postural Mobility Exercises on the Athletic Performance Success, Proprioceptive Sense and Various Strength Parameters of Traditional ArchersA randomised trial in twenty-four traditional archers: bands added to shooting raise grip and back and leg strength, but the score does not differ between groups, and it also rises in all twelve archers who only shoot.
  24. 2026ExtensionPrastyawan et al. 2026 From play to performance: effects of fun-based circuit training on muscular strength, endurance, and competitive performance in Indonesian archery athletesA randomised trial in thirty-eight competitive archers: twelve weeks of circuit training take the score per arrow from 7.1 to 8.6 with the control unchanged, but the circuit also involved shooting and the comparison between groups is not reported.
  25. 2026ReviewSubramaniam et al. 2026 Systematic Review of Exercise Interventions in Archery: Injury Management and Performance OutcomesA systematic review: fifteen intervention studies on archers selected from 767, all reporting significant improvements, and no meta-analysis because interventions and outcomes vary too much.

Studies in this line

Related claims

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

63 claims · 87% with evidence on archers

Articles

Methods used

Research lines

Cite
APA

Campagna, M. (2026). Physical training interventions: what has been tested. In Research. matteocampagna.com. Retrieved 16 October 2026, from https://matteocampagna.com/en/research/physical-training-interventions

BibTeX
@misc{campagna2026_enresearchphysicaltraininginterventions,
  author = {Campagna, Matteo},
  title = {Physical training interventions: what has been tested},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {Research, matteocampagna.com},
  url = {https://matteocampagna.com/en/research/physical-training-interventions},
  note = {accessed 2026-10-16}
}