At this time I am still accepting new archery students, but I am being pickier about who I am accepting with respect to students.
Depending upon what happens with future lockdowns I may end up suspending lessons until after any such lockdown. I am expecting the schools to get shutdown any day now because it is obvious that the province of Ontario has not figured out a safe way to reopen schools.
If they shut down the schools but maintain Stage Three then I will continue to offer lessons. If the province decides to do another big lockdown, going back to the same conditions we had in March then any remaining lessons might end up being delayed until Spring 2021.
Knowing this I totally get why some potential archery students might just decide to delay their archery lessons until 2021 in the first place... Whilst some others might prefer to have them now because they're hoping to learn archery for hunting purposes, in which case the argument is the sooner-the-better. A percentage of my students these days want to learn bowhunting because they're worried about the COVID shutdowns causing the equivalent of the Great Depression and food shortages.
Basically everyone has their own reasons for learning archery. Some people are just bored of being at home all of the time because they work from home these days and they just want to get outside and do something fun.
Fun and potentially useful? Yep, good to go.
Of course there is also the people who just have always wanted to do archery and they just keep procrastinating. Always a new excuse for procrastinators. If you're a procrastinator then you're probably thinking of an excuse right now while reading this.
But if you cannot think of a good excuse maybe now is the time to do.
My new article for Archery Focus Magazine is now available as of September 1st 2020. The topic is "Archery Trick Shooting". Unfortunately I am not posting it here. You will just have to visit the Archery Focus website and read it there.
Also kudos to fellow Toronto archer Crispin Duenas for his review of the BOWdometer.
An one year subscription to Archery Focus Magazine is $32 USD and gets you access to their back catalogue of magazines. Learn more by visiting archeryfocusmagazine.com.
Happy Shooting!
PS. You can also view my past articles for Archery Focus Magazine in the following issues:
"Marketing Strategies for Archery Coaches", July 2017.
"A Lesson in Adaptive Archery", July 2018.
"Teaching Archery Through Narratives", November 2018.
"Rinehart Target Balls (and Alternatives)", January 2020.
After the lesson today I noticed the last joint (closest
to the tip) of my middle finger is quite sore. I noticed the same thing
the last time I shot with my new glove, bow, etc. Is this normal for a
new glove or is it an indication of something
wrong, either with my form or the glove?
Regards,
-Brian H."
A
Hey Brian!
That happens sometimes when the
glove is either not protecting the fingers enough or the person is not
used to pulling a higher poundage.
In your case
however I did notice that you sometimes pulled the bowstring unevenly,
wherein your middle finger was usually about half an inch further across
the bowstring and the bowstring was then on the joint itself (as
opposed to halfway on the fingertips). You were only doing it with your
middle finger (and you didn't always do it so at the time I wasn't too worried about it because I felt you would eventually stop doing it) and you are not experiencing pain in any other fingers,
correct? In the future I recommend making an effort to only use half
your fingertips and see if that solves the problem.
You
may recall me saying "Half your fingertips is twice as accurate." In
this case however it could also be "Half your fingertips is twice as
accurate, but also less painful." Half your fingertips also reduces the chances of plucking the bowstring during the release. Definitely something to build into a positive habit.
"Can I ask you an archery question for research/my thesis?
Okay so I’m writing a thesis about gender and gender
presentations in warrior women. I argue that gender is a construct and
that objects should not be gendered when they are tools in one’s art of
being a warrior, but my professor countered that bows and archery are
more associated with women than men (not meant to offend anyone just
looking for answers) is that true? Where does that come from?
To
me, when I think of archers I think of famous ones like Green Arrow,
Robin Hood, and Legolas...Are there other archers in literature that you
can think of that identify as a woman besides Susan Pevensie that would
dominate the symbol of archers?"
- J. E. T.
A
Gender is indeed a construct, much in the same way that
identity is a social construct. Or Zodiac signs is a superstitious
construct.
With respect
to archery it is predominantly a male sport. For example, with respect
to my local archery range, men make up over 80% of the archery range's
users, and that the "regulars" are even more male dominated, making up
at least 90% of the frequent users.
Archery
is a sport requiring strength and endurance. Far too often non-archers
are expecting the sport to be easy, and they are not at all prepared for
how difficult or strength intensive this sport is.
Part
of this misconception is the fault of mass media, Hollywood, and the
types of body types depicted in films, television and literature. People
see these depictions in a variety of media and then perpetuate the
false idea that archers are a specific body type. Eg. Skinny Legolas.
There
are a variety of films during the past 30 years wherein skinny female
characters are depicted as archers. This depiction is a double edged
sword: It creates the stereotype that skinny women are ideally suited
for archery, promotes archery to women, but also pushes the idea that
women are unsuited to hand-to-hand melee.
While
I appreciate and applaud that Hollywood is pushing the idea of more
women in archery, it is coming at the expense of saying women are
unsuitable for using axes, lances, swords or a variety of other medieval
era weaponry, while simultaneously pushing the idea that archery is not
a sport of strength and endurance.
This
all comes back to depictions of body types in my opinion. Eg. Try to
think of a film that depicts a female archer as not being skinny. I
cannot name one. Hollywood depicts female archers as being ballerina
skinny (and usually Caucasian, Asian, or giant blue alien, but that is
another topic entirely).
In
reality archers are all kinds of body types, but there is one
commonality with respect to experienced archers - They are all strong
and have built up their back muscles so that they can pull higher
poundage bows. Some archers started being reasonably strong, and then
became stronger as they built up their rhomboids, deltoids and other
muscles used for archery. Some were weaker, but built up the muscle
groups over time. Even older archers are often surprisingly robust and
strong for their age.
Thus
even if an archer started as being skinny or overweight, after 20 years
of doing the sport regularly they're going to have a more robust
stature because they've built up the muscle groups.
This
strength factor doesn't mean that women cannot excel at archery
however. While women are certainly a minority, I have met plenty of
women who excel at archery.
Eg.
Back in March (a week before COVID shut everything down) I had the
pleasure of teaching a dancer in her 40s who has what I would describe
as having an Amazonian body type. Certainly more in the direction of an
athlete, which was an asset and she did very well during her first
lesson. You can see a video of her on my Cardio Trek YouTube channel.
Her lessons are supposed to resume this Autumn.
So
does having more of a Tom Boy / Amazonian / athletic physique help when
doing archery? Absolutely it helps. It is a sport of strength and
endurance after all. However that doesn't mean it is only body type that
can excel at archery. An archer who is overweight can excel just as
easily if they build up the needed muscle groups, and likewise a skinny
will become stronger over time.
With respect to archers of literature like Green Arrow, Robin Hood and Legolas there is definitely one missing:
Hercules.
Now you might think "Wait, Hercules did archery?"
Indeed he did. He was supposedly extremely good at archery, owing to his demigod strength.
Here's another: Odysseus / Ulysses.
Ulysses
returned after 20 years of fighting Trojans & being lost at sea to
find his kingdom in turmoil and suitors trying to marry his wife and
take his kingdom. But his wife was very smart. She said she would only
marry a man who could string her husband's bow. All the suitors tried
and failed. They weren't strong enough. Then Ulysses, now an old man in
disguise, asked to try. He strung his bow easily and killed all the
suitors. There is a lovely clip of this scene on YouTube wherein actor
Kirk Douglas plays Ulysses in the scene from the 1954 film.
So what is Greek female equivalent of Hercules or Ulysses?
Atalanta, and to some extent the Amazons.
Atalanta
was abandoned on a mountain and raised by bears. Away from the social
constructs of her fellow Greeks. The Greek myth makers clearly
understood that femininity is a social construct and apparently believed
that the only way a woman could grow to maturity without such
constructs was to be raised in the wild by animals.
The
Amazons it is now believed was one part myth and one part based on the
Scythians (or the forebears of the Scythians), who were a nomadic group
of hunters from Asia Minor wherein men and women both hunted, often from
horseback, and they perfected the Scythian bow, which is a very complex
recurve-decurve-recurve shape. As such they were phenomenal archers. It
is small surprise that the Greeks mythologized such encounters with any
warrior-women they encountered from Scythia as they were doubtlessly
deadly with the bow.
Obviously I could keep going. I could probably write a nonfiction book on this subject.
So
yes, in conclusion the idea that archery is strongly associated with
women (and a skinny body type) is a stereotype perpetuated by the media.
Largely due to Hollywood and anyone influenced by that false narrative.
Archery is still very much a male dominated sport, it is a sport
requiring strength and not agility (despite what Dungeons and Dragons
would have people believe).
I
would also assert that gender identity is not a factor in archery.
People can identify as whatever gender they want to, it will make zero
difference when you hand them a high poundage bow and ask them to pull
it.
Anyone wishing to
disagree can come to my local archery range and I will hand them a 50 lb
Browning Wasp recurve bow, at which point we shall see if their
perceptions of archery being "easy" or not requiring strength is
remotely accurate. If they can't pull it I will give them a "much
easier" 24 lb Ragim Matrix recurve bow. And if they still cannot pull
that I will swap out the limbs for 18 lbs.
I
have been teaching archery for almost 12 years now. Beginners are
continually surprised at how physically exhausting the sport is. It is
the reason why my lessons are 90 minutes long. Two hours is too long.
People get tired and start making more mistakes close to the 90 minute
mark.
There is a reason
why I have blog posts on my website pertaining to weight training
exercises specifically aimed at archers, so they can build more muscle
in the needed areas of their body faster.
It
truly is a sport of strength and endurance. Anyone who has fallen for
the Hollywood fantasy that it is not... They're just perpetuating the
false narrative.
My
apologies if this is a bit of a rant. Archery is a lifestyle for me. I
have been practicing the sport for over 31 years. Teaching for almost 12
years. My wife shoots. My 3-year-old son shoots. I write both fiction
and nonfiction about archery. I am very passionate about promoting the
virtues of the sport and it annoys me that there are so many false
perceptions of it.
I
recommend including my entire email in your appendices for your
professor to peruse. If they have any questions or follow up they can
address it to cardiotrek@gmail.com.
"Hello! My wife weighs 115 lbs and isn't very big. What kind of bow should I get her for getting into archery? Matt M."
A
Hey Matt!
Her weight isn't the biggest concern, her height and strength are bigger factors. I am guessing she is petite?
Start her on a low poundage bow, like a 15 to 20 lb
recurve. I recommend a 3 piece recurve where she can get more powerful
limbs later so she can build more muscle as she progresses.
If
she is short you should also consider a youth bow. Some of my adult
archery students who are closer to 5 feet tall need to use a youth bow,
so if your wife is 5'2" or shorter this is an option, otherwise she may
have clearance issues with the bowstring rubbing against her side.
"Thank you very much. This has been a big help. She is 5'3" so I am probably gonna go with a 3 piece so I can get her stronger limbs when she improves.
I was thinking the Samick Sage for her, but I'm worried the riser might be to big for her hands any other good starters you can recommend?"
Due to her height try to find something in the 48 to 58 inches range. The bigger the bow the more likely she will have clearance issues. 60 to 66 inches might be too big and have clearance issues with the bowstring.
Looking to sign up for archery lessons, boxing lessons, swimming lessons, ice skating lessons or personal training sessions? Start by emailing cardiotrek@gmail.com and lets talk fitness!
