Archery Feats

[damned]

You gotta watch this to the end.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEG-ly9tQGk

[seycyrus]

You gotta watch this to the end.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEG-ly9tQGk

No, not really. It's the danish charlatan Lars up to his usual parlor tricks.

[Callum]

In what way is Lars a charlatan?

[seycyrus]

His video is composed of 15 second montages, that use narrative deception in an attempt to deceive the uninformed viewer into believing that his parlor tricks might be useful in a war environment. Nearly every element of his commercial (for that is what it really is) misleads with implications from the previous element which then follow with implications to the next element. This is done on purpose.

His parlor tricks are performed with a child's bow.

[Ardem]

Not knowing much, is his Childs bow much difference from a syrian bow in use. He demonstrates it penetrating chainmail is this not true, if so could it not be viable to do the things he is doing?

Again i know nothing of archery.

[Gwaihir Scout]

Well, there are grades of chainmail, plus he was using target points instead of broadheads, which could make a difference by maybe having to push less metal aside to get through. Maybe.

The short bow has its place, but this whole thing is more a different school of thought from what we're used to than Hollywood actually being more wrong than usual.

I'm pretty sure his fletchings are in terrible shape from his nocking the arrows so quickly. Basically, he'll ONLY be good at close range with those arrows, and won't be able to get stable flights at long range.

His speed is pretty cool.

[damned]

he does have one seen where he fires off arrows at long distance hitting all the targets.
sure - he is a salesman and he is selling his product but i have yet to see a decent rebuttal with any substance - yes the arrows he splits are probably bamboo - but that takes nothing away from the accuracy of the shots. shoot a guy 6 times before he even gets one shot off at you - he probably never will get a shot off at you.
what he is doing in no way invalidates what others are doing
most of the rebuttals spend half their time calling him an amateur, bagging his running style and his inability to throw a ball

either way - i loved it - it was a great video and makes Legolas's body count somewhat more realistic

[Callum]

I came across this rebuttal on GeekDad:

https://geekdad.com/2015/01/danish-archer/

[damned]

ive read that one too - mostly the points above and then goes on to repeat some of the things he accuses Lars of like cherry picking facts...

he writes
What IS accurate is the archaeological evidence in the form of bows and physiological indicators in the archers’ bodies, such as separation in the shoulder cartilage, the thickness of bones in the bow arm and elongation of the bones of the draw arm, all of which is well-documented and known to competent historians.
coupled with
Any competent archery instructor will tell you that an archer’s power does not come from the arm, but from the back muscles, and both sides are used at the same time.

and then confusingly describing Lars
What he had learned is the usual collection of bad habits that self-taught amateur archers always display
and then pointing out that
though truthfully, there were historically very few professional archers or hunters.

and comments like:
This is accompanied by a shot of him throwing a ball very badly and awkwardly
and
Another fun exercise would be comparing Andersen’s clumsy attempts at running and jumping to actual practitioners of parkour, martial arts, or gymnastics. Frankly, I’m surprised people aren’t mocking his awkward attempts at action shots

i think its a very badly written rebuttal. he has points but why all the personal attacks?

[seycyrus]

Not knowing much, is his Childs bow much difference from a syrian bow in use. He demonstrates it penetrating chainmail is this not true, if so could it not be viable to do the things he is doing?

Again i know nothing of archery.

Mongols used strong bows, maybe not up to the higher weights that some English longbowmen shot at, but definitely stronger than the bow that Lars is using. When I use the term child's bow, I am being historical. That bow that Lars is using is what an 8 yr old boy would be using.

In general, one has to have a sense of understanding and respect for our ancestors. They were not dummies. Ask yourself this. Why would Mongol warriors use 100+ pound bows if they could just strum-push arrows out of a 20-40 pound bow and easily defeat one of the prevalent armors of the time?

The answer is, because they couldn't!

Arrows don't really go through mail armor like a hot knife through butter. Mail is actually pretty darn good at stopping arrows. Maybe not the cheap, butted links, that a bunch of us through together in 80s 90s etc, but a historical riveted, backed suit of mail was effective.

Lars goes from one little piece of footage to another, drawing the viewer by the nose, never directly making any claims, but letting the implications fall where they will.

His arrows go BETWEEN the links of the butted mail he is shooting at. Likewise I could shove a piece of uncooked spaghetti through the links, but I would hang my head in shame if others were to take that as evidence my pieces of spaghetti would be an effective weapon against mail clad soldiers of the era. Lars, however, feels no remorse as he allows (guides?) others to draw that conclusion.

I know, I know, we all want to rationalize our level 37 Archer/rogue/bard/whatevers taking out hordes of enemies, but reality is a harsher mistress.