[HN Gopher] Archery World Record: Most arrows through a keyhole
___________________________________________________________________
Archery World Record: Most arrows through a keyhole
Author : zdw
Score : 181 points
Date : 2022-10-22 13:17 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
| tele_dude wrote:
| rufus_foreman wrote:
| Had more keyhole arrows than that shooting at womp rats.
| aardvarkr wrote:
| Of all the weird random records in the world this is one of the
| weirder ones
| judge2020 wrote:
| Not as weird as "largest cake with an image of someone falling
| off a horse" [0]
|
| 0: https://slate.com/culture/2019/08/john-oliver-last-week-
| toni...
| lostlogin wrote:
| Wow, that's one hell of a stance from The Guinness Book of
| Records.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| I respect it.
|
| An open door to anyone who wants to make records for the
| sake of fun and glory.
|
| Closed door if your stated purpose is to belittle people or
| make controversy.
| throwaway346434 wrote:
| Yeah. Nah.
|
| https://www.iphronline.org/turkmenistan-continued-
| repression...
|
| Human rights track record bad? No problem! We're all
| having fun right?
|
| Participate in TV show that mocks things? Ooh, no, we're
| the gate keeper of moral choices now.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| I doubt we will be able to come to a mutual
| understanding, but the thought and morality held by many
| is as follows:
|
| I will work with a bad person to do a good thing. I will
| not work with a good person to do a bad thing. My
| participation is based on the morality of the thing that
| _I am doing_ , not the other person's past or context .
|
| To put it technically, the focus is on the first order
| action and effect.
|
| This is in contrast to an increasingly popular moral
| assessment based on speculative second and third order
| effects.
| lostlogin wrote:
| How do you apply this to things like international trade
| with countries committing atrocities? Obviously it's
| complicated as the those who suffer with sanctions can
| easily be the most disadvantaged.
|
| However opening up trade with North Korea, Iran, Russia
| etc doesn't seem a good way of handling the situation.
| judge2020 wrote:
| If they were raising money to save puppies I'd side with
| you.
|
| But this is an attempt to obscure human rights
| atrocities, or at least using the money they gain from
| them to say "we hold a world record!".
| zepolen wrote:
| Would you help Hitler kill Stalin?
| throwaway346434 wrote:
| Going to guess you didnt read the link in a lot of
| detail.
|
| There are accusations of forced participations in public
| spectacles in there, regardless of environmental
| conditions (ie: heat). If they'll do that for his
| birthday, would they do that for a world record attempt?
|
| How much of a "good thing" is a world record attempt if
| the participants are compelled by the state and end up
| putting themselves at risk?
|
| Further, the stated rationale from Guinness is "we are a
| family oriented brand". I can understand them not having
| done much research about a dictator initially, and maybe
| being unaware.
|
| Only they haven't actually done anything consistent with
| that when it has been highlighted this individual is
| using their records as part of a propaganda machine in a
| very oppressive state. They in fact _defended "their
| record holders"_.
|
| Family oriented? Or profit oriented?
| kortex wrote:
| It's fine if one wants to avoid working with a good
| person to do a bad thing. But if you make that choice,
| then it's often seen as highly hypocritical to work with
| a bad person in any capacity. Badness is an absorbing
| value if you will.
| NaturalPhallacy wrote:
| It costs like $30,000, but if you have that you can have
| just about any record you can make up.
| buzzy_hacker wrote:
| I remember this viral video from this guy a few years back
| https://youtu.be/BEG-ly9tQGk
| oneoff786 wrote:
| It seemed like a parody in tone, but it was pretty great all
| the way through
| dalmo3 wrote:
| "Or on a horseback" is my favourite line.
| ultrahax wrote:
| FWIW whilst superficially impressive, that video was thoroughly
| debunked https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDbqz_07dW4
| Sebguer wrote:
| I can't stand the tone of this video, so couldn't watch the
| whole thing but skipped through, and afaict it's debunking
| the idea that people ever really did this in battle? Not that
| the stunts in the video are fake?
|
| Kind of a misleading thing to say it's 'thoroughly debunked'
| when it's very clearly for entertainment and just says
| they're 'myths'.
| isitmadeofglass wrote:
| Your correct. Lars isn't faking his feats. But his
| narrative that he "rediscovered the ancient true way of
| archery" is fake, and originally before his rise to fame,
| that was his "claim to fame" he was a snake oil salesman
| who ended up being successful because even though his
| claims about the product where false, people still
| genuinely liked the product just for what it was,
| impressive archery skills, no need to wrap it up in claims
| about ancient lore or some modern conspiracy to "suppress
| true archery".
| titanomachy wrote:
| I agree, after watching both videos it seems plausible that
| at least some historical warriors could have used a style
| like Lars and been very effective with it. I don't think
| that claim is really "debunked".
|
| They seem to have attacked the least charitable
| interpretation of his video. For example, I don't think he
| was seriously claiming that warriors would routinely catch
| opponent's arrows and fire them back in combat, I thought
| he was just presenting that as a cool trick.
| karaterobot wrote:
| Superficially impressive? Those archery trick shots were
| amazing! Obviously nobody was doing 360 no-scopes with arrows
| in the Battle of Crecy, I didn't take that as the thesis
| statement of the 'debunked' video.
| systemvoltage wrote:
| The debunking video actually does the opposite, it just made
| the original video even more impressive because they couldn't
| debunk it well.
| ugh123 wrote:
| Insane. After watching the world-record video I was left
| feeling suspect it was fake. Now i'm a believer
| Semaphor wrote:
| Wow, that does make legendary archers in movies actually seem
| less impressive, I'd rather face Legolas than Lars after
| watching this.
| srik wrote:
| Lars was heavily involved in the Robin hood movie production,
| the one with Taron Edgerton from a couple years ago. Despite
| how incredulously "blockbustery" the action sequences looked,
| the archery itself was all heavily grounded in reality and
| research from manuscripts of that era. I gained a lot of
| respoect for Taron Edgerton for his dedication to pulling all
| that off without resorting to stuntsmen or cgi. Wish the
| movie did better, so all their work could have had more
| exposure.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZsQmlZclTo
| js2 wrote:
| He seems to not want to have to look away from the target between
| shots, but his quiver is placed out of view and he has to look
| toward it after his fifth arrow. He also subtly repositions his
| stance after the third arrow. In general, I'm surprised at the
| amount of motion in his body compared to the stillness you see
| with say precision rifle or pistol shooters. e.g. 10m air rifle:
|
| https://youtu.be/iTmiMwQnres
|
| Or Olympic archery:
|
| https://youtu.be/fOt4uz-bkfA
|
| Even pool players are extremely still in their motion:
|
| https://youtu.be/-FHz4kf_cus
| tharkun__ wrote:
| You can also see how he's really fast. This is a completely
| different style of archery from Olympic, which has stabilizers
| and a sight. Olympic style archers "aim a lot".
|
| Lars shoots a different style, which is basically "draw and
| loose" with very little "aiming". The aiming done in that
| situation is to basically "look at what you want to hit".
|
| Here's a Smarter Every Day episode that shows some of that. You
| see Byron Ferguson there already putting the arrow on but
| there's no aiming. When the mint is thrown in the air, he just
| looks at the mint and instinctively aims and shoots it in mid
| air.
|
| https://youtu.be/Q8Yp9SjCU5E?t=225
|
| I recommend the whole episode.
|
| Also Legendary Howard Hill:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36R7cLzPNuw
|
| It's amazing how well this works if you don't need to hit a
| mint and no worries of shooting a person and even without
| exactly spined arrows and with just a stick and a string for a
| bow. Source: I do this for fun (with larger targets).
| mmanfrin wrote:
| > Lars shoots a different style, which is basically "draw and
| loose" with very little "aiming". The aiming done in that
| situation is to basically "look at what you want to hit".
|
| Reminds me of a friend's bachelor party out in the woods
| where we were shooting guns. A couple friends brought big
| revolvers and so I tried shooting them at some targets.
| Missed every one. I decided if I wasn't gonna hit anything, I
| should at least have fun, so I took two of them and did a
| Yosemite Sam impression firing them akimbo at the targets in
| rapid fire and I heard a _PING_ _PING_ _PING_ _PING_ of 4
| shots hit in a row from 2 different guns fired in tandem.
|
| Sometimes the best aim is no aiming at all.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| If video game experience is of any relevance, I noticed
| that taking shots on the move with no time to react yields
| better results than consciously aiming.
|
| There are times where I have time to line up my shot and
| track the enemy in my sights and yet in some cases I miss
| all my shots (I actually end up being out of sync with the
| enemy's lateral moves, essentially lagging behind).
|
| On the other hand, there are times where an enemy surprises
| me and I move my mouse in a sudden motion, shooting while
| it's still moving - I manage to land the vast majority of
| those shots (sometimes shooting twice in panic, but the
| first one turns out to be a hit - this is on PC so no aim
| assist as far as I know).
|
| Not that I would like to "prove" this hypothesis in actual
| combat, but I wonder if taking shots "by feel" is actually
| better than doing so carefully and consciously.
| pencilguin wrote:
| US military had a training program for this some decades
| back (Viet Nam era?) called, IIRC, "Quick Kill". Gun was
| held well below shoulder level, and pointed by whole-trunk
| motion.
| conductr wrote:
| Reminds me of my preteen years when shooting rubber bands was
| a useful skill to have if you wanted to show off. We made up
| all kinds of competitions and would hit different targets. I
| even did it at home (practice). I felt like I got pretty good
| at it. The quick release method was almost always better for
| me. I had associated the draw and the aim as a fluid motion.
| If I drew then took time to aim, it was as if my brain would
| over analyze the situation trying to account for
| wind/gravity/etc and I had a higher miss rate because of it.
| I somehow accounted for these things intuitively better than
| intentionally. But it does take practice to get there.
| Arcanum-XIII wrote:
| It's call instinctive in fact, because, as he explain himself
| he's not aiming in the traditional sense. Practicing this
| style is harder than using an Olympic bow with a visor, but
| you gain a lot of flexibility in 3D shooting, tricks shoot
| and other techniques where the distance is not known. As my
| teachers explains to me, your whole body is used instead of
| your eyes.
| tharkun__ wrote:
| Yes exactly. I like Clay Hayes for this kind of stuff
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mzWQ5_1bXtM (and the entire
| channel) in case you aren't aware of him.
|
| Lots of "muscle memory". Kind of like someone else
| mentioned, throwing a ball. You don't have a sight you aim
| with when you throw a ball. You look at what you want to
| hit and throw. You don't do that very consciously though.
| Your body and subconscious just do it for you.
|
| Not sure if that was in that video or another one but he
| trains every day. He's got a deer target right outside his
| door at a typical range for hunting and every time he walks
| out he just takes a shot at it (plus a really nice outdoor
| 3D course right on his property).
| TomVDB wrote:
| Reminds me of the "Can I move? ... I'm better when I move"
| scene...
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AoCK5r2TWg
| js2 wrote:
| > Lars shoots a different style, which is basically "draw and
| loose" with very little "aiming". The aiming done in that
| situation is to basically "look at what you want to hit".
|
| Indeed, it's closer to a field athlete (basketball, soccer,
| etc) shooting/throwing a ball.
| bombcar wrote:
| There's a similar form of pistol shooting I like to call
| "point and click" involving using your middle finger for the
| trigger and your pointer finger pointing down the barrel.
| Basically finger guns with a gun.
|
| Works surprisingly well for unsighted shots.
| teawrecks wrote:
| > I do this for fun (with larger targets).
|
| What are we talking? Like a peanut m&m? A macaroon?
| tharkun__ wrote:
| Sorry, I know that part was ambiguous. I meant shooting my
| bow using an instinctive aiming technique. I don't throw
| things in the air usually. Just regular or 3D targets ("3D"
| in archery terms meaning fake animals).
|
| People that do shoot moving targets from what I've seen
| might just use frisbees or the like. You kinda need a barn
| full of straw behind it.
|
| If you want to learn more about instinctive archery, here's
| something on that from Clay Hayes ("Alone" season 8
| winner): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mzWQ5_1bXtM and the
| whole channel is full of (serious - not stunt) archery
| stuff.
|
| Here, found youtube footage of him shooting the deer that
| helped him win: https://youtu.be/tI5812NwiS0?t=86
| mrisoli wrote:
| Nitpicking your comment but that's not Olympic archery, olympic
| archery doesn't include compound bows, only recurve bows(also
| the Olympics specifically uses 70m distance only).
| js2 wrote:
| Oops, too late to edit.
| ydnaclementine wrote:
| Enjoyed the video more just because it's short, to the point and
| doesn't include the "heywhatsupguys don't forget to like and
| subscribe"
| [deleted]
| nurettin wrote:
| One youtube content creator explained that after he started
| "suggesting" that people like and subscribe, he got a
| significantly higher income. So that's why they do it.
| [deleted]
| Simon_O_Rourke wrote:
| There's no doubt they do it for the extra cash, what's also
| indisputable is that it's becoming a trope unto itself.
| bombcar wrote:
| YouTube needs to add dynamic videos such that if you're
| already liked and subscribed that part is skipped.
|
| Some of them work the l&s in pretty well with the
| theme/topic of the video.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| The SponsorBlock extension (and the associated ReVanced
| patch for the Android app) do this. People can tag
| sponsor segments and 'annoying reminders' and you can set
| them up to be automatically skipped.
| dukeofdoom wrote:
| wouldn't this camera angle be easy to fake. just a mask over half
| the screen. and layer two videos. second from close distance
| Aperocky wrote:
| Guinness world record and world record are just completely
| different.
|
| Usain Bolt have a world record, anybody can have a Guinness World
| Record if you have money, and challenge things like most helium
| balloons tied to a paddleboard while paying Guinness staff to fly
| around and some big fee to put it in their books.
|
| This one from Lars is actually one of the 'better' ones.
| Kiro wrote:
| I don't think it's that much of a difference. I can say that I
| hold the world record in replying the fastest to your comment
| in this thread. But for the world record to actually mean
| something it needs to be backed by an organisation, which is
| what Guinness is doing just as World Athletics is doing for
| Usain Bolt's records.
| Retric wrote:
| The important bit is how many people are competing for the
| record not who is keeping track.
|
| There are any of a thousand of video game speed runs you
| could probably beat with a week of solid effort, but breaking
| the Mario 1 speed run is a different league.
| bombcar wrote:
| Even in video game speed runs "hello you absolute legends"
| there is a kind of "that seems good" that can be reached -
| where people knowledgeable recognize that the run must be
| interesting, even if nobody did it before.
|
| And of course on the tracking sites one of the best ways to
| get noticed is beat a famous record by a bit, or beat an
| unfamous one by a lot (because a large beat likely means it
| can be improved more, and so people will try).
|
| This is also why record runs In track mania for example
| often "calm down" until a new path is shown to work (even
| in a tool assist) and then there's a flurry of interest.
| thrwyoilarticle wrote:
| I find it vexing when publications treat 'official world
| record' as a synonym for 'Guinness world record'. They have no
| official capacity. They just have very good PR to be able to
| capture the term for themselves and for us to be able to ignore
| their novelty Christmas book associations and friendliness with
| despots.
| matsemann wrote:
| That's no different than sport records, though. For instance
| 100m running. Some agency has decided their rules (equipment,
| drugs, wind etc), but someone could run it faster in a non-
| sanctioned event not following those rules. Which one to
| claim as WR?
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| It is somewhat "decentralized" though. Not just Guinness.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| Sure, but if we take same discipline, they align into same
| effort. Its just that Guiness corp makes making up disciplines
| stupidly easy I guess for their own profit/promotion. And
| nobody sane cares about Guiness world record on 100m for
| example
| MrsPeaches wrote:
| This reminds me of the People's Book of Records in the UK:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEBLCPV26LE
|
| Which includes the record for pulling socks off pensioner's feet
| with your teeth.
| eitland wrote:
| Some say that the old stories about the vikings (and others from
| other cultures) clearly weren't true or weren't even possible,
| but examples like this shows it is easy to wildly underestimate
| what is possible.
| bombcar wrote:
| We vastly underestimate what can be done if someone dedicates
| insane amount of time to something. People often mistake
| "really hard for me to imagine doing" with "actually
| impossible".
| eitland wrote:
| Exactly.
| isitmadeofglass wrote:
| Friendly reminder that guineas book of records is a company you
| pay a lump sum of money to, and they stage an event to give you
| an award for publicity.
|
| So it begs the question. How much did Lars pay to put on this
| event, of all the possible arrow related records he could have
| made up, why make up this particular one. It seems obvious that
| it would have been a more honest record to look at consecutive
| bullseyes or arrows split or something like that, but perhaps the
| established records from regular competitive archers where to
| hard for him to beat. And naturally, why is he trying to create a
| social bus now? Does he have a book coming out or something like
| that?
| hanoz wrote:
| > guineas book of records
|
| Apologies if that's just a spelling error, but if it's an
| eggcorn / mondegreen, I feel duty-bound to point out that it's
| _Guinness_ Book of Records, as in _a pint of_.
| JohnJamesRambo wrote:
| rnk wrote:
| This guy Lars Anderson is fascinating, doing so much more with
| arrows. He has a great video, trying to rediscover or recreate
| the Comanche capabilities. Well worth 5 minutes of your time if
| you have any interest in historic military or the abilities of
| humans to do amazing things.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liHlCRpS70k
| rices wrote:
| galangalalgol wrote:
| This is what happened on /. too, and why I eventually left for
| here. A larger and larger percentage of stories were clickbait,
| or designed to provoke heated discussion. Vim now better than
| emacs! Climate change may be responsible for hosting center
| failures. Go has features no other languages have! It promoted
| fun conversations sometimes even enlightening ones, but then
| they just started repeating them and I realized I wasn't
| learning things anymore.
| the_lonely_road wrote:
| I like Ruby, Javascript, and lifestyle posts. The next guy
| likes x language and y technology and lifestyle posts. I
| ignore his tech posts and he ignores my tech posts but we
| meet in the middle through lifestyle posts. The larger t he
| community grows the more engagement each post gets but the
| most engagement goes to lifestyle posts. Since posts rise due
| to how much engagement they get, you are destined to see more
| and more lifestyle content dominate the front page as the
| community grows larger.
|
| There is a subset of every community that hates something and
| you seem to hate lifestyle posts but most of the community
| appears not too making this trend inevitable unless
| moderation decides to change the rules.
| galangalalgol wrote:
| Now that you put it that way, lifestyle posts weren't an
| issue on /. because you could filter on topics labeled by
| moderators that were meta moderated. I actually like
| lifestyle posts, but I don't want this site to be nothing
| else. That would be like the grocery store only carrying
| GPUs. I like them just fine but I'll still need to find a
| new place to get food.
|
| And the problem I was pointing out with /. wasn't lifestyle
| posts, it was intentional controversy for the sake of it.
| _joel wrote:
| It's interesting therefore worthy imho. Not every post has to
| geeked out to the max
| judge2020 wrote:
| https://lobste.rs/
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| I'm not sure about general trends, but Lars Anderson has been
| discussed here numerous times for years.
| europeanguy wrote:
| ouid wrote:
| I'm not sure I believe this just from the video. Was the video
| supposed to be posted as proof that this happened?
| mikkergp wrote:
| He has lots of videos in his YouTube channel showing various
| feats of archery, this is a pretty good one:
|
| https://youtu.be/BEG-ly9tQGk
|
| Maybe he faked all the videos and got the Guinness book of
| world records to put a fake record on their website, but they
| doesn't seem like the simplest explanation.
| Bakary wrote:
| From what else I've seen of the author of this feat, I can
| fully believe it.
| tharkun__ wrote:
| Lars Andersen does a lot of "crazy" stuff with archery that
| people would probably not believe can even be done. But it
| can. You may think what you will of the "stunt" aspect of it
| (I'm not a fan) but it doesn't change the fact that this is
| definitely possible.
|
| It may also seem "impossible" because you don't see Lars
| using what people might expect of an archer: a compound bow.
| You really don't need it. You can get incredibly accurate
| with a traditional bow, especially on the short distance you
| see in the video.
|
| Source: I shoot traditional bows.
|
| Smarter Every Day episodes that seem relevant:
|
| Episode on archery w/ Byron Ferguson:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Yp9SjCU5E
|
| Episode on the Archer's Paradox is very interesting in this
| regard as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKMS2wO7WTI
| Bakary wrote:
| This is exactly why I believe Lars: from everything that I
| can deduce about him, his driving force is to prove that
| he's correct about what can be done with traditional
| archery.
| bombcar wrote:
| He's like the Stonehenge guy with weights and balance -
| cheating would entirely be pointless because it would
| defeat the whole point - showing that it could be done.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| This is the attitude we need to teach average people to take
| every time they see a video as proof of something. _Especially_
| if the video otherwise reinforces some sort of ideological
| position they hold.
| mikkergp wrote:
| This is an incredibly inefficient way of learning the world
| and while it may optimize for being wrong less, you will also
| be right less often as well. One should be critical in
| assessing whether one should be critical.
| dotBen wrote:
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I doubt that video of a vaccine is going to immunize
| anyone. Better to get the actual jab.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| I think huristics of scepticism are useful when there is
| really something at stake, however they can become toxic to
| simply enjoying the wonder of life. They specifically require
| you to not assume positive intentions of others.
|
| In this case, I'm fine to assume it could easily be faked,
| but wasn't.
| bombcar wrote:
| The bar I'd set is - how hard would it be to fake this such
| that Lars wouldn't be suspicious?
|
| It might be easy to fool me, but an expert archer would
| notice tons of this I'd miss if trying to fake it.
| dymk wrote:
| Not really. Can you show some evidence that Guinness has been
| party to falsifying their world record certifications in the
| past? Or give any reason to believe that Lars (who is well
| known in the trick archery world) faked the video?
|
| What you're doing is spreading FUD, which is far worse and
| erodes basic trust - a tenant that society depends on.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > What you're doing is spreading FUD, which is far worse
| and erodes basic trust - a tenant that society depends on.
|
| If you think trusting videos on the Internet is something
| that society depends on, we are fucked. Wow.
| dymk wrote:
| I'll take that as a no, you can't provide any evidence to
| support your suspicion that this video is faked. Even
| just something like "He's lied in the past" would
| suffice, but you can't even do that.
| kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
| Nobody is trusting the video alone. Guinness has
| certified this (NOT via the video), and Guinness has a
| reputation that - so far that I know - is beyond
| reproach. As does the archer himself.
| varjag wrote:
| If you ever do precision sports you'll see what a trained human
| body is capable of. In precision pistol shooting disciplines
| (standing, single handed, without support) multiple consecutive
| hole-in-hole hits are very common. This one with arrows is
| likely more challenging but is entirely believable.
| mhb wrote:
| _This is a small video made quickly and many people have since
| asked different questions about how I do it. I am going to make
| a longer video about this record and how it is possible to
| shoot arrows through a keyhole.
|
| Sincerely Lars Andersen_
| nwatson wrote:
| If one were moderately skillful and wanted to hoax, I wonder
| what kind of setup would let one make this video as "proof".
| What kind of "funnel" would you need? A straight cone?
|
| I imagine the archer made several real-time videos from several
| vantage points to prove no shenanigans.
| jstanley wrote:
| The near-perfectly-straight vertical division in the video
| would seem to make it particularly easy to fake, especially
| when combined with the fact that you don't see the other side
| of the door.
|
| He can just shoot 7 consecutive arrows at the back of a door,
| then leave the camera running as he shoots 7 consecutive
| arrows through the keyhole (with the tip starting out in the
| keyhole so he can't miss), and then composite the footage of
| the arrows going through the keyhole on to the footage of the
| arrows coming out of the bow.
|
| The time gaps in between the arrows will be different, but
| nothing much is happening to the back of the door during this
| time, so you can just slow down or speed up the "back of
| door" footage during the dead time to line it up.
|
| (I'm not saying he's done that -- I think it's real -- but
| that is how I would do it).
|
| I'm not sure about the audio, but it doesn't seem too much of
| a stretch to fake the audio as well.
| bombcar wrote:
| Audio is easy - and captain dissolution could easily fake
| this particular video - but faking it in person would be
| much harder.
|
| The real proof is all the other videos of Lars doing
| absolutely insane things.
| Someone wrote:
| I agree the video isn't the best of evidence. There are views
| from the other side of the keyhole, but they're in different
| shots. Who says they didn't fit a steel funnel at the other
| side of the door to guide the arrow through the hole?
|
| The record is at https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-
| records/691706-mo..., though, and I do trust them to have
| checked that.
| cplusplusfellow wrote:
| Plot twist : a huge funnel on the other side of the door.
| niklasd wrote:
| There is also the serious looking man with a notepad.
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| Verified by a beer company official.
| extraduder_ire wrote:
| The world records company has always been a separate entity
| founded as "Guinness Superlatives LLC", and now called
| "Guinness World Records". It was owned as a subsidiary
| initially, however.
|
| I presume so that any records held by themselves aren't
| called into question.
| Ambolia wrote:
| Why stop at 7 arrows and not just keep going until he failed?
| MobileVet wrote:
| Right?! They only had 7 setup from the start. If you are
| breaking a record why would you ever quit before you were
| spent? If I was ever in a position to break a record I would go
| until I failed to ensure the record held as long as possible.
| nwatson wrote:
| You can break your own record the next time and get more
| publicity. The hype dies down otherwise.
| germinalphrase wrote:
| Or get beat by somebody so you can create a rivalry.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Soviet athletes were paid a premium every time they broke
| some world record. So it makes perfect sense to break your
| own records _incrementally_ , by as little as possible.
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| Maybe p(keyhole) = 0.25, and so it takes about 4^7 tries before
| getting 7 in a row. They only filmed the successful try to
| avoid viewer boredom :-).
| citizenpaul wrote:
| People do this all the time in these things. That way now you
| can win another award for 8 shots next year or whatever. Pretty
| soon you are the top winner of awards for XXX.
|
| Otherwise you just get one award you can never beat.
|
| Double so if there are monetary prizes involved.
| troymc wrote:
| Maybe there are only 7 keyhole arrows in the entire world, and
| each one costs a zillion dollars to make, and you have to wait
| three days before shooting one again, to let it cool down.
| Maybe not.
| johnfn wrote:
| Yes yes, this is certainly the correct answer. No reason for
| me to read the rest of the thread.
| highwaylights wrote:
| That's what they want you to think.
|
| I've been saying for years that someone needs to reign in Big
| Keyhole Arrows but the regulators have been asleep at the
| wheel as per usual. Thanks a lot,
| (Congress)/(Brussels)/(Obama I guess).
| lostlogin wrote:
| I assumed he did and that they had cut the video.
| bombcar wrote:
| His quiver was empty after seven - I'd have kept going myself
| but maybe there's a whole "proper etiquette" around keyhole
| arrowing.
| Someone wrote:
| Maybe he shot a hundred, and he finally did it with the
| last 7, and missed the next one, after collecting his
| arrows.
|
| Or maybe he had to stop because the arrows break down when
| passing through the hole. For example, I don't think it's
| good for the fletching
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletching)
|
| Or he had 1000 arrows, fired them all through they that
| keyhole 10 times in a row and they cut out the first 9,993
| hits because that made the video boringly long ;-)
| dymk wrote:
| But the word record cert at the end says 7 arrows, and not
| any more.
| milansm wrote:
| I assume so that they can break the record again later on.
| MobileVet wrote:
| It is a deal to pull in the official Guinness people etc.
| seems like a waste to not take yourself to the limit.
| tromp wrote:
| Ah yes, Sergey Bubka [1] or Armand Duplantis [2] style...
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Bubka
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armand_Duplantis
| dasloop wrote:
| "From 1991 through 1994, Sergey Bubka topped his own mark
| nine times, each time besting his previous mark by only
| 0.01 meters."
|
| https://nowiknow.com/the-man-who-inched-away-at-history/
| bombcar wrote:
| Pole vaulting seems a bit different because if you set it
| too high you might miss.
|
| Whereas the eight shot here - if you miss it you still
| have your seven good ones.
| hillacious wrote:
| It would be the same for pole vaulting. You can enter the
| competition at a lower height and continue to clear as
| the height increases. Once you fail at a height you still
| have the highest height you did clear for the competition
| which you can still win with. That was probably a
| horrible explanation - my apologies if so.
| [deleted]
| 988747 wrote:
| The actual rules, from Wikipedia:
|
| "Once the vaulter enters the competition, they can choose
| to pass heights. If a vaulter achieves a miss on their
| first attempt at a height, they can pass to the next
| height, but they will only have two attempts at that
| height, as they will be out once they achieve three
| consecutive misses. Similarly, after earning two misses
| at a height, they could pass to the next height, when
| they would have only one attempt.
|
| The competitor who clears the highest height is the
| winner. "
|
| So, it takes some planning, and some athletes start at
| heights that they know they will clear easy, just to
| guarantee them 2nd or 3rd place. Then they continue their
| attempts at higher bars. Once they know they have won
| they have 3 more attempts to try and break the record.
| gus_massa wrote:
| You probably get tired if you jump too much, so instead
| of increasing the height by 1cm, it's probably better to
| skip most of them.
| [deleted]
| siliconc0w wrote:
| It's interesting they don't mention the distance in the 'record'.
| That is a pretty key variable. Looks like maybe 10m?
| Jeff_Brown wrote:
| How far away was he?
| brianpan wrote:
| Denmark, I think.
|
| ;)
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| I guess this record will be eventually broken by a robot.
| PebblesRox wrote:
| Reminds me of bowling robots, although in the case of bowling,
| being too consistent is a problem because it wears away the
| oil, impacting the path of the ball.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob4DPCQPBOo
| bombcar wrote:
| To make bowling robots fun we need them to be on a bowling
| alley on a cruise ship in super rough seas.
| fishtoaster wrote:
| Would that really even be breaking the record? Usain Bolt could
| easily be beaten in a race by, say, a car. A cannon would win
| the olympic shot put contest handily. The record is "who is the
| best human at X," not "what is the best X."
| jdoliner wrote:
| This is the type of feat that sets you up to marry the lovely
| Penelope.
| smsm42 wrote:
| Well, actually to prove you're the legal husband of Penelope
| already. Not having an universally acceptable form of ID led to
| some major inconveniences...
| stavros wrote:
| No, you're thinking of 1/Penelope.
| Someone wrote:
| You'd need 12 keyholes, with a single shot.
| [deleted]
| teekert wrote:
| Refreshingly short.
| sizzzzlerz wrote:
| Coming this spring, only on the Discovery Channel: Keyhole
| Archers. A new reality series following the men and women on the
| "shooting arrows into really teeny-tiny places" circuit as they
| shoot for fame and fortune, attempting to win the prestigious
| "golden arrow".
| blahgeek wrote:
| Why don't we see him in Olympics or somewhere?
| tharkun__ wrote:
| The Olympics have a completely different style of archery than
| Lars practices. Just look at the bow and compare. Also
| distances that come with it. You won't even see compound bows
| at the Olympics, only Recurves but with stabilizers, a sight
| and such. Lars mostly does Traditional Archery, meaning a stick
| with some string and "trick/stunt archery" on top of that (see
| his other videos). There are of course also recurves that
| aren't all highly engineered pieces of metal.
|
| But still, completely different worlds. The closest you get to
| that is "Barebow" and that's not Olympic but "Lancaster
| Archery" does a competition that includes a Barebow category.
| But even that allows for too much "modern" stuff (small
| stabilizer) and it's all modern recurves.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUmD80K-pOw
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| I used to compete at college level in barebow archery.
|
| The draw weight of the bows Lars tends to use is around 15-20
| pounds tops, really low draw weight, low power, for extremely
| fast stunt/trick shooting.
|
| The draw on the bows I'd use to compete with were 30-35
| pounds usually - at 18 meters with no sights and whatever low
| profile stabiliser/weight you could get away with, anything
| heavier is a waste of time.
|
| Olympic style recurve shooters usually go around the same in
| draw weight, there's a tradeoff between better flight
| characteristics of heavier draw/heavier arrows and the amount
| of time you can sustain holding back that amount if
| weight/force.
|
| As an aside, there is a fun niche market for "within the
| rules" bow weights in barebow - the main function of the
| weight is to pull the bow "down" out of recoil/the path of
| the arrow as fast as possible after release so it doesn't
| kick back and impact the arrows trajectory. I made a few
| prototype ones back then out of brass, steel, etc. Good fun.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-22 23:00 UTC)