While I was working on a method of technique, the National Archery Tournament was held in Chicago just a few miles from my home and, instead of shooting, as is my usual custom, I spent the entire time of the tournament on the shooting line, observing the various archers and particularly watching their form and comparing their present scores with their previous records. The results were not only interesting but almost astounding to me, as one who had believed as firmly as I had, in the theory of individual methods and form. A few of the things that fell under my observation are as follows:
High score is usually dependent upon good technique.
Good technique is always accompanied by good score, usually by high score.
Continued high scores, season after season, are always and without any exceptions the result of perfection in form of a most definite character.
Phenomenal high scores by "one season" archers are occasionally made with a foundation of poor technique, but in no instance has such an archer been able to repeat his performance in subsequent years.
The variation in technique by the most consistent archers is fundamentally slight.
These observations for the first time gave me something definite to work on. I confirmed them by the observation of two subsequent tournaments and verified all of the above conclusions; observing in all, about two hundred archers, most of the leading archers in the country among them. Added to this list are many of the other archers I have met, before and since, in all parts of the United States and whose form I can usually remember in detail. There are, of course, some exceptions to the statement that their form is essentially the same. These exceptions are not so numerous as I had previously thought, nor is any marked improvement in results obtained by the few who do vary decidedly in technique. Usually, those who vary greatly show marked inferiority in score.