# Reference Points, Fork Widths, and Aiming



## 3danman (Mar 29, 2012)

Hey everybody,

A few of us were having a good discussion in this Feihu thread https://slingshotforum.com/topic/111372-more-feihu-forks-on-the-way-from-china/page-4 but it was getting a bit off topic. Fiveshooter, Thwack, and myself were discussing how a shooter must adjust their reference or anchor point when shooting slingshots of different widths. We were getting a bit off-topic so I'm starting a new topic to expand my thoughts and to promote further discussion for those interested. Please feel free to catch up in the thread I linked, and to comment your own thoughts or observations.

Continued:

Included should be a digital sketch to help explain myself. The drawings represent a profile cross-section of two slingshots, drawn back to simulate a shooter taking aim. On the top, a narrower fork. On the bottom, a wider one. Both held so that the forks are situated on top of each other in the sighting picture. The shooter would line up the bands, both with each other and with the target, to accommodate for windage. This way the shooter only has to adjust for elevation when they aim.

The capital I shape is identical in each image, representing the distance between the shooter's eye and their anchor point. Same shooter, same anchor point. The gray line represents the path of the ammo as it travels from the pouch to the target. The green line represents the shooter's line of sight as they line up their shot. In both examples, the shooter is using the corner of the upper fork tip as a reference point.

In the top example, the line of sight and the ammo's path of travel end up being fairly close as they converge on the left side of the image. The shooter releases, the shot falls. The point of impact and the shooter's line of sight harmonize, and the ammo hits the target. Nice.

In the bottom example, the fork is wider. Using the same reference point, the shooter lines up their shot. But, because the ammo's flight path is lower (because of the wider slingshot), the shot falls short. The gray and green lines are still converging, but they aren't as close to each other as they are in the top example. For the shooter to account for this, they must select a lower reference point (perhaps the bottom of the fork tip instead of the top), and aim higher.


----------



## Brook (Mar 4, 2018)

This is a really interesting topic I've been going through recently.. I used to do exactly as you've described aiming higher or lower for different width frames..now I'm changing anchor to suit


----------



## Tag (Jun 11, 2014)

Awesome post Just a subtle change can make a big difference on accuracy. Thanks for posting.


----------



## skropi (Mar 22, 2018)

I've found that to be on target with a 10cm fork width, I have to anchor below the cheek bone, thumb nail on my teeth, while with a fork width of about 8.5cm I have to be on top of my cheek bone.
Apart from the anchor point, there is another way to change point of impact, and that is head tilt. More extreme head tilts result in lower points of impact and the reverse. As a result, one can actually keep the same anchor, or change it only slightly, and compensate with a different tilt of his head.
My view, however, is that the head tilt should be the same always, so as to promote consistency, and only change a single variant. I am a bit unsure which variant is better to change, tilt or anchor, but I lean towards the anchor point.


----------



## Grandpa Grumpy (Apr 21, 2013)

I keep the same reference point for aiming and the same anchor point for different width forks. I adjust the speed of the bands or the weight of the ammo. After a little experimenting you know which bands and ammo will allow you to keep the same aiming and anchor points on any of your frames.


----------



## Northerner (Nov 9, 2010)

Many years ago I started using an "ear-walking" aiming style to deal with different frame widths and distances. I quickly realized that a narrow fork allowed for more distance so I settled on about 3 1\4" outside width and rarely go over 3 1\2". My anchor point is just above my ear canal or 10 yards, right on the triangular flap for 20, just below ear canal for 30 and on the ear lobe for 40-50. I borrowed the idea from the Traditional archers who use face-walking for aiming at various distances. For distances between my 4 point-ons I used a slight gap at the target.


----------



## 3danman (Mar 29, 2012)

Thanks for the comments everyone. Changing other factors like anchor point and head tilt are also viable, but I prefer to alter my reference point and elevation. That doesn't mess with my muscle memory as much and I get more consistent results. Northerner has evidently used a variable anchor system to great effect so it definitely works.


----------



## M.J (Nov 1, 2010)

I sometimes think that guys who come from a background in another shooting sport are at a disadvantage when it comes to slingshots.
Always focused on finding a hard reference point and a hard anchor and a hard aiming line. Trying to get everything just so on every shot and then not being able to understand why shots go astray if they think they're repeating every motion exactly as before.
Slingshot shooting isn't rigid like archery or riflery. We deal in squishy elastic and soft leather. Even if you have all of your "hard points" in place, the slightest bend in the pouch will send your ammo off of what you intended for the course to be.


----------



## skropi (Mar 22, 2018)

M.J said:


> I sometimes think that guys who come from a background in another shooting sport are at a disadvantage when it comes to slingshots.
> Always focused on finding a hard reference point and a hard anchor and a hard aiming line. Trying to get everything just so on every shot and then not being able to understand why shots go astray if they think they're repeating every motion exactly as before.
> Slingshot shooting isn't rigid like archery or riflery. We deal in squishy elastic and soft leather. Even if you have all of your "hard points" in place, the slightest bend in the pouch will send your ammo off of what you intended for the course to be.


The importance of pouch hold can't be stressed enough, and I totally agree with MJ on that. 
As for having a hard point of reference, well, I guess that is a personal thing, I am not yet at an advanced point to express a solid opinion, but pouch hold is objectively the single most important factor of accuracy.


----------



## THWACK! (Nov 25, 2010)

Mr Brooks said:


> This is a really interesting topic I've been going through recently.. I used to do exactly as you've described aiming higher or lower for different width frames..now I'm changing anchor to suit


Your mate Gamekeeper John only raises or lowers his frame to adjust for elevation, he does not change his anchor point. So how does one see

the target if one's hand/frame obscures it???????


----------



## THWACK! (Nov 25, 2010)

skropi said:


> I've found that to be on target with a 10cm fork width, I have to anchor below the cheek bone, thumb nail on my teeth, while with a fork width of about 8.5cm I have to be on top of my cheek bone.
> Apart from the anchor point, there is another way to change point of impact, and that is head tilt. More extreme head tilts result in lower points of impact and the reverse. As a result, one can actually keep the same anchor, or change it only slightly, and compensate with a different tilt of his head.
> My view, however, is that the head tilt should be the same always, so as to promote consistency, and only change a single variant. I am a bit unsure which variant is better to change, tilt or anchor, but I lean towards the anchor point.


I lean towards moving the bullseye to match the point of impact.


----------



## THWACK! (Nov 25, 2010)

Grandpa Grumpy said:


> I keep the same reference point for aiming and the same anchor point for different width forks. I adjust the speed of the bands or the weight of the ammo. After a little experimenting you know which bands and ammo will allow you to keep the same aiming and anchor points on any of your frames.


That makes WAY too much sense for us mere mortals.

Good thinking!


----------



## THWACK! (Nov 25, 2010)

Northerner said:


> Many years ago I started using an "ear-walking" aiming style to deal with different frame widths and distances. I quickly realized that a narrow fork allowed for more distance so I settled on about 3 1\4" outside width and rarely go over 3 1\2". My anchor point is just above my ear canal or 10 yards, right on the triangular flap for 20, just below ear canal for 30 and on the ear lobe for 40-50. I borrowed the idea from the Traditional archers who use face-walking for aiming at various distances. For distances between my 4 point-ons I used a slight gap at the target.


Just wondering if the triangular flap is near the Bermuda Triangle...


----------



## THWACK! (Nov 25, 2010)

M.J said:


> I sometimes think that guys who come from a background in another shooting sport are at a disadvantage when it comes to slingshots.
> Always focused on finding a hard reference point and a hard anchor and a hard aiming line. Trying to get everything just so on every shot and then not being able to understand why shots go astray if they think they're repeating every motion exactly as before.
> Slingshot shooting isn't rigid like archery or riflery. We deal in squishy elastic and soft leather. Even if you have all of your "hard points" in place, the slightest bend in the pouch will send your ammo off of what you intended for the course to be.


"Real men" don't have squishy elastic, soft leather and bends in their pouches ... at least they won't admit it...


----------



## THWACK! (Nov 25, 2010)

Great topic. BTW, you mentioned "THWACK!" What was his thoughtful contribution to the discussion?

THWACK!


----------



## 3danman (Mar 29, 2012)

THWACK! said:


> Mr Brooks said:
> 
> 
> > This is a really interesting topic I've been going through recently.. I used to do exactly as you've described aiming higher or lower for different width frames..now I'm changing anchor to suit
> ...


He shoots with a lower anchor, by the corner of his mouth. The will put his shots higher, even considering the wide gap of the PPMG he shoots.

Also, shooting with both eyes open solves the frame obstruction problem. Even if the target dips below the frame in your sighting picture, both eyes open allows you to see the frame in the foreground and the target in the background.


----------



## Jolly Roger (Aug 14, 2017)

I heard a story about a man driving past a big barn with several targets painted on one side. In the center of each target was an arrow. The man stopped and asked the farmer how he became such an expert marksman with the bow and arrow. The farmer handed him a bow and said shoot an arrow into the side of the barn, anywhere will do. After hitting a blank spot on the barn wall, the farmer handed the man a can of paint and said, now go paint a bulls eye around the arrow you just shot. That is how to become an expert marksman with the bow and arrow.


----------



## THWACK! (Nov 25, 2010)

3danman said:


> THWACK! said:
> 
> 
> > Mr Brooks said:
> ...


AHA! said the mime.

That was helpful. Not financially, unfortunately, but helpful nonetheless.

Filed under: "Good to know stuff"

Thank you, brother, for enriching my slingshooting experience.


----------



## skropi (Mar 22, 2018)

3danman said:


> THWACK! said:
> 
> 
> > Mr Brooks said:
> ...


Corner of the mouth with even a 10cm fork width sends my shots way too high, I would have to do a lot of guess work in order to hit anything. 
As for the eyes, aren't we all keeping both eyes open? I thought it was what we all did.


----------



## 3danman (Mar 29, 2012)

skropi said:


> 3danman said:
> 
> 
> > THWACK! said:
> ...


Most find it easier to dial in their aim just focusing on the reference point, with the target in the background, by closing their non-dominant eye. Just a personal preference thing. I also shoot with both eyes open.


----------



## ash (Apr 23, 2013)

I used to shoot with my non dominant eye partly open, but now I have it fully closed and it has helped improve my consistency.


----------



## THWACK! (Nov 25, 2010)

skropi said:


> 3danman said:
> 
> 
> > THWACK! said:
> ...


You can meet us half-way by squinting.


----------



## skropi (Mar 22, 2018)

I am sorry guys but I am way too professional to squint..... ????????????


----------



## THWACK! (Nov 25, 2010)




----------



## scouser (Jul 18, 2017)

Hi guys,

It is a very good topic. I also have a question regarding it.  Do you tilt the upper fork towards or backwards when the target is at a lower or higher level than the "ideal" which is about at the height of your shoulder?

I am 194 cm tall, I shoot from ~ 10-12 meters at targets around 1 - 1.2 m high and I have the feeling that I should tilt the top fork a bit forward to avoid shooting too high, about which I do not know whether a good "habit/method" or not. 

Just for the record, I am a TTF shooter (gangsta style), I use my cheekbone as the anchor point and the middle of the top band as the reference point, I mostly shoot tapered (13 mm x 17 mm) TBG or 0.66 orange GZK bands to shoot 9.5 mm (3/8") ammos.


----------



## skropi (Mar 22, 2018)

Tilting the top fork isn't a good idea. You get uneven band stretch that way, and you will be more prone to fork hits anyway. What you want is to have both bands stretch exactly the same, for consistency. 
Elevation isn't controlled by tilt, but by your anchor point and partially your head tilt and position.


----------



## scouser (Jul 18, 2017)

skropi said:


> Tilting the top fork isn't a good idea. You get uneven band stretch that way, and you will be more prone to fork hits anyway. What you want is to have both bands stretch exactly the same, for consistency.
> Elevation isn't controlled by tilt, but by your anchor point and partially your head tilt and position.


I forgot to mention that not only do I tilt the top fork a bit forward but I also elevate my pouch holding hand (I mean my elbow) and lower the one in which I hold the slingshot (so basically I try to keep them parallel and just adjusting the angle between the left hand, right hand and band "treesome" and the ground). Although I understand your viewpoint about tilting the forks and the increased possibility of forkhits I do not entirely share it. Imagine a situation when the target on the ground or on a tree (e.g. in a hounting situation), with a "basic/ideal" stance (the forks are parallel with eachother, perpendicular to the even floor, etc.), without tilting the forks it is not just impossible to hit the target but in my view there is a bigger chance of a forkhit. As for the uneaven band stretch, eg. if you do not tilt the top fork backwards a bit when you try to shoot a pigeon on the top of a big tree the tension in the upper band will be bigger so as the chance fir a forkhit.


----------



## skropi (Mar 22, 2018)

Maybe we are saying the same thing, I am not sure. What I mean is that, ideally, the pouch, the bands and the fork tips, should form an isosceles triangle  the angle at which you hold the isosceles triangle isn't important, as long as it retains its shape. That way you don't get uneven tension, no matter where you shoot.
I dont know if my example is clear though.


----------



## AUSSIE4 (Nov 21, 2019)

Interesting topic and definitely a good one to read!


----------

