Yee Harr, this time I'm NOT responsible for starting the argument 
Definitions have no value without agreement on the meaning of the words used.... think about it 

Equally defining a physical action without agreeing the variables is worse than pointless.

So, in order to define the most ACCURATE (not best) style the variables must be eliminated.

Or can we ?
Sorry Morphy, any trial on accuracy can only be meaningful if all participants use identical equipment.
Cheers

Zud

xud9a - call me zud 👍 wrote on Apr 4^th, 2021 at 12:03pm:


That’s why I built myself a sling factory... I can crank out a bunch of identical slings and change one thing at a time.

NooneOfConsequence wrote on Apr 4^th, 2021 at 1:04pm:



Can you give your average target score? Is your target set up under balearic standards? Actually..no it’s not. Doh... this might be a hard question to answer with so few people that can actually answer it.

The variables we need to account for are distance to target and target. Use whatever works best for you. That should be plenty. But even that is going to be difficult.

Thanks RM.

I know youve always preferred a longer sling. Some of the Balearic slingers Ive seen are the same and are quite accurate.

I would love to know how many points you could get with underarm back at your best. Its an often forgotten throw.

If we even get a couple answers from people who have done the 20 shots at 20 meters I will be surprised. So many of us just sling at whatever. Worth a shot though.

I think I agree with Morphy.  The question is which style is the most accurate.  I think a restriction on the sling would be a mistake because it was stated in the proposal to use your most accurate style, and some slings are better with certain styles that others.  (On that note, someone needs to make a video of a pirouette throw with a balearic sling.  That would be funny.)

If we were testing the accuracy of a particular sling, then I would agree with Zud.  Everyone should definitely be using the same sling in that situation.  But if the idea is to get data of the best accuracy possible, then I think each slinger needs to be using their preferred sling and style.

I don't disagree with your general point Zud.  I think certain restrictions would result in more specific data.  But in early stages of data collection, I don't see any problem with gathering fairly general data just to see what kind of response there is here on the forum.  If there's a lot of participation, then maybe we try to get more specific information.

I'll be able to get you some numbers Morphy.  I've started trying to incorporate regular target slinging into my routine now that the weather is getting nicer.  My target is almost identical to a balearic size.  I'm trying to get out and sling 3 or 4 times a week, and I do a round of 24 throws (that's how many ice balls I can make in 24 hours).  I'm pretty terrible right now because we're not far past the lull of winter.  Another thing is my target is closer to 15m away.  But maybe my accuracy can be cut to 75% since that is the proportion of 15m to 20m.  I know that's not how it would work in reality, but I'm at the max distance I can do with how I have things set up.  Anyway, I'll get the data from my last few rounds posted soon.

We are getting off subject here but for the sake of clarity, let me just say you should do a google image search on “olympic archery bows” and take a look at the amount of variety of gear they are using.

Archery being from the same time period as slings and also having grown from a weapon of war into a sport is probably the best analogue for an approach to sling competitions.

The main thing these bows have in common is they are all olympic recurves (a huge category). Look at all the different brands and styles. They are almost endless. Anyone reading this can do a quick google search and see I am not making this up. Don’t even focus on the minutia of stabilizer types and set ups. Just look at the variety in the risers themselves. Tons of different models and none of those models are shaped haphazardly. Millions of dollars go into researching and designing risers to have the best characteristics. They offer various benefits and drawbacks.



Notice the lady on the left has only a middle stabilizer. While the others have top stabilizers as well. And these are all from the same shooting team in the same competition with the exact same rules. Go look on google man. Sorry but you are incorrect.

Anyways, back to the more general discussion.

The reason forcing everyone to use the exact same type, weight, length, pouch length, material etc slings is because we are not looking for just one thing. We are looking for trends. For example, If we have 100 people competing and each is using their best sling for their style what would that show us? Well, it would show us, for example, that group A among Fig-8 slingers does better with this type of sling. That’s a general trend we can then choose to focus on. Likewise, we might see that Group H - those who use Balearic slings with 1 rotation do better (or worse) than those who also use the byzantine with say wool peruvian slings.

So yes this is about accuracy, but specifically it’s about the highest accuracy *possible* first and foremost. Once we have an upper limit we can then look at the particulars.

Dont get lost in the weeds here. You have talked about the scientific method. There is not just one way to perform a study. What I am suggesting is to focus on a meta-analysis of large amounts of studies/data. Not very specific data that only addresses one very specific aspect of the sport.

If we go in the direction you are suggesting we only know what style works best for a Balearic sling of a certain length, with a certain type of leather, with a certain braid, with a certain exact throw etc. It would be no surprise then if a Balearic style multi-rotational side arm throw then works best with a Balearic sling. But that tells us nothing. Again, I’m not looking for the best score with a certain set up. I’m looking for the best score possible with *any* set up. Which is why we cannot do it the way you are suggesting until we have a wider range of data.