Just read most of these 20+ pages at 3am. It seems I need to reasses my life choices.
Much of this thread was people talking past each other. No good discussion can take place when people are using differing definitions. That and there was some definite sh*t stirring going on by persons unnamed lol. Funny thread though.
Before we revive this topic perhaps we should come to an agreement on what is meant by lobbing vs. flatlining.
To me lobbing is a considerable arc at lower distances.Flatlining would be lower trajectory at those same distances. Flatlining does NOT mean all out balls to the wall throws as you would in raw distance slinging. This was one of the false assumptions being made and it distracts from the issue.
As was brought up multiple times in this thread erroneously, lobbing has NOTHING to do with how hard a stone is hitting. Yes we can all find a way to throw a massive stone slow and it’s going to hit like a truck, still lobbing.. This is a speed issue and I have no idea why so much emphasis was put on impact when that has nothing to do with whether a shot is lobbed or flatlined. The question here is speed and how much or little trajectory is going on and if there’s any benefit from one way or the other.
The lobbers in this threads main point was that you can be more accurate with it than flatlining. They kept wanting to say you lose accuracy throwing 100% which might be true but is aside from the point since flatlining does not require 100% of your power. Never has.
To me it really comes down to just a few things- One, if power is the question, do both sides have enough power to kill? Yes, good moving on, nothing else needs be said about power.
Two, does slow throwing, high arcing at short distance throws (lobbing) offer an advantage in accuracy over slinging at say 75- 80% of full power? I’ve seen no proof of that. We’ve seen excellent slingers of both varieties.
Three, if lobbing doesn’t offer a provable definitive benefit does flatlining offer any? I would say yes, a few that are objectively provable. For example on a moving target it’s easier to hit if you don’t have to lead as far. Less arc so less potential for missing in elevation. And in hunting less time for an animal to react and move. Believe it or not I’ve had many a squirrel dodge out of the way of a stone that was flying towards it. It happens, so something to keep in mind.
Anyways those are just some points that came to mind. My opinion is that within a certain range you can be just as accurate throwing with less arc vs more arc. I’ve seen good examples of both. But one thing is for sure this thread didn’t change many minds. The best thing it offers is some very subtle and not so subtle trolling. Well done gents, 10/10.