Comments on: Sport Science: Human vs. Bow

By: jack

jack — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:13:59 +0000

Actually back in the day Redskin QB Sammy Baugh did knock out a pass rusher by hitting in the face with FB.

By: rp

rp — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:26:07 +0000

Not to belabor the point, but archers shooting at 20 meter shoot at a 40cm target, (1/3 the size of the one shown, and using the type of bow shown (compound – a type not allowed in Olympic competition), need to hit the inner 10-ring for a 10 (the smaller circle).

Good archers can hit 25 out of 30 regularly, with all 30 being 10′s an 9′s … again with a gold spot 1/3 the size they are showing.

Olympic archers shoot exclusively at 70 meters, and the full size target you see in the video (120 cm) with a type of bow (recurve) that is inherently more difficult to shoot with the same accuracy as a compound bow.

By: The Physics of a Quarterback’s Pass | Open Culture

The Physics of a Quarterback’s Pass | Open Culture — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 08:22:47 +0000

[...] Discover Magazine’s Cosmic Variance blog [...]

By: Brian137

Brian137 — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 23:20:00 +0000

I thought the video was a lot of fun to watch. I was stunned by Brees’ accuracy.

Hell some people here might have been quarterbacks.

The Cleveland Browns once had a quarterback, Frank Ryan, with a Ph.D. in math. He was a pretty good player, although not outstanding by NFL standards.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1077719/index.htm

By: paulbk

paulbk — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:50:21 +0000

Tevor — I’ll give Drew Brees credit for being an excellent QB. But there is no fair comparison. That’s why spear throwing cultures lost to archers. End of story. It is a stupid demonstration aimed at the ill informed.

fyi.. I define a “good archer” as anyone who has released as many arrows as Drew Brees threw footballs. Includes practice and competition.

By: Archer

Archer — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:30:08 +0000

Trevor, the show was clearly implying that the quarterback can throw more accurately than a top archer can shoot, which is simply false. They made no mention of the different distances involved.

Your calibration would be reasonable if you wanted to set up a fun competition between people from different sports, but since there was no competing archer in the video it makes no sense here. All you can deduce is that Bree is more accurate than other quarterbacks.

Hugely impressive skills though, no doubt about that!

By: Trevor

Trevor — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 15:08:42 +0000

@paulbk: “Any good archer should consistently better a QB in a fair contest.” Well, that wouldn’t be a fair contest then, by definition!

@Archer: How the heck is your definition of a fair comparison the same distance?

What if you wanted to know who was more accurate: a winning archer or a spitting contest winner? Would you have the spitter spit 70 meters? Or the archer shoot at 5 meters?

To make up for the obvious advantage in accuracy having a bow and arrow compared to either the spitter or the quarterback, you need to calibrate them. The show attempted to do that by noting that archers at 70m hit the the target 50% of the time, and a reasonable quarterback hit the moving target dummies 50% of the time at 20 yards.

Whether that calibration is spot on or not, it is certainly at least *trying* to equalize the abilities, rather than the insane idea of a fair comparison being the same distance for both.

By: cope

cope — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 14:39:08 +0000

Did they say the ball is revolving at 600 RPM at release? That can’t be right.

By: Archer

Archer — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 13:57:08 +0000

Sorry Sean, this is a dumb comparison. Olympic archers shoot at 70m, not 20 yards.

At 20 yards a top archer would expect 100% in the 10 ring (‘bullseye’) even on a target half that size.

By: paulbk

paulbk — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 05:36:44 +0000

Any good archer should consistently better a QB in a fair contest. In my teens I use to shoot rats at the dump, on the run, 10-50 feet, at night, in the snow. They would slide down the arrow and bite my leather finger guards. (For folks under 50, in those days a ‘city dump’ was 10 acres of open smelly garbage and almost anything else you can imagine. It was wonderful. I collected speaker magnets and learned electronics by playing with tubes.)