The quicker the reaction to the clicker, the better the shot

The summary today

Across skill levels the picture is clear: after the clicker drops, elite archers release sooner than beginners, and beginners sooner than people who have never shot. Inside a group of archers who are already strong, the same rule is hard to see. In the largest sample, thirty-nine elite archers at a World Cup, a shorter reaction goes with higher scores, but the gap between the quickest and the slowest in the group is worth half a point. In eight high-level French archers, arrows scoring eight or less come after a longer reaction than tens, and the same study adds the limitation that changes everything: the difference is there when you look at the group and appears in none of the eight archers taken on their own. Two laboratories, eleven people between them, find no link with score at all, and two reviews conclude that among the elite what predicts performance is not the length of the reaction but how steady it stays from arrow to arrow. Nobody has tried shortening it through training to see what happens to the points.

Also phrased as: "clicker reaction time"; "release as soon as the clicker clicks"; "clicker reaction and score"; "time between clicker and release"; "consistency of clicker reaction time"

Evidence

• 1984
  Context Archers Published later

  12 university archers at three levels, 20 shots at 10 m: in the most skilled the release came about 175 ms after the clicker, with little spread; in intermediates between 150 and 210 ms and in beginners between 190 and 230 ms, more scattered; the authors infer that an optimal moment to release exists, not that quicker is better.

  An Electromyographical Analysis of Purposive Muscle Activity and Appearance of Muscle Silent Period in Archery Shooting · Hidetsugu Nishizono, Koya Nakagawa, Tsutomu Suda, Katsumasa Saito

• 2003
  For Archers Published later

  10 elite archers, 10 beginners and 10 non-archers, forearm EMG synchronised with the clicker, 12 arrows each: peak finger extensor activity, which the authors read as the start of the release, came about 100 ms after the clicker fall in the elite, 200 ms in beginners and 300 ms in non-archers (elite against non-archers at 300 ms, p = 0.010).

  Activation patterns in forearm muscles during archery shooting · H. Ertan, B. Kentel, S.T. Tümer, F. Korkusuz

• 2005
  Context Archers Published later

  20 elite archers from the Turkish national squad or candidates for it. A field chronometer reliably measures, across two sessions, what the article calls clicker reaction time: 0.180 ± 0.042 and 0.179 ± 0.039 seconds, with a mean of 0.177 and individual values from 0.102 to 0.502. That measure also includes the start of the finger movement, so it comes out on average 31 milliseconds longer than the electromyographic one. The study does not relate it to score, and the spread shows how much the person matters.

  Reliability and validity testing of an archery chronometer · Hayri Ertan, Behzat B. Kentel, S. Turgut Tümer, Feza Korkusuz

• 2010
  Against Archers Published later

  4 elite women archers from the Turkish national squad, 30 arrows each at 18 m indoors with a chronometer linked to the clicker, 108 analysable arrows: mechanical reaction time is 143.4 ± 18.6 ms on arrows scoring 8, 142.5 ± 15.8 on 9s and 142.3 ± 14.4 on 10s (F = 0.05; r = -0.029). Within the same archer, the quickness of the reaction does not separate the arrows.

  Shooting Dynamics in Archery · M. Emre Erkek, Cevdet Tinazci

• 2010
  Context Archers Published later

  The same study, read archer by archer: in the first, reaction time falls from 159.8 to 146.0 to 140.4 ms going from arrows scoring 8 to 9s and 10s (r = -0.455, F = 2.9), so the direction the claim predicts is there but does not survive the test; the other archer the authors mention has no clear figure in the table. With four people, one case is not a rule.

  Shooting Dynamics in Archery · M. Emre Erkek, Cevdet Tinazci

• 2011
  Against Archers Published later

  The second publication of the same experiment, 4 elite archers and the same 108 arrows: 143.4 / 142.5 / 142.3 ms for arrows scoring 8, 9 and 10, F = 0.05 and r = -0.029, figures identical to the 2010 paper. It is the same sample and counts once: it is not an independent replication.

  Shooting dynamics in archery: A multidimensional analysis from drawing to releasing in male archers · Cevdet Tinazci

• 2012
  Against Archers Published later

  7 archers from the German junior and senior national squads, 30 arrows at 18 m indoors with timings taken from a microphone and a stepwise multiple regression: the mean time between clicker and release, between 144 and 176 ms, does not enter the model and does not explain the mean score. It is the first contrary result from an independent laboratory.

  Evaluation of arrow release in highly skilled archers using an acoustic measurement system · Mario Heller

• 2016
  Context Archers Published later

  15 archers of mixed level, 30 shots each at 18 m: the predictors of distance from the centre included each shot's deviation from the archer's usual clicker-to-release time, not the length of that time; the full model explained 7.7% of the variance.

  Identification of temporal factors related to shot performance for indoor recurve archery · Andrew J. Callaway, Johanna Wiedlack, Mario Heller

• 2017
  For Archers Published later

  39 elite recurve archers, 10 arrows at 70 m: a shorter clicker reaction time (mean 0.163 ± 0.017 s, that is 10.4% variation across archers) was one of three predictors of better shots, but the score range that variation can explain is only 0.54 points; the authors warn that even shorter times may mean the click is being anticipated.

  Postural stability, clicker reaction time and bow draw force predict performance in elite recurve archery · Wayne Spratford, Rhiannon Campbell

• 2020
  Context Archers Published later

  One skilled recurve archer, three drawing techniques over three arrows each at 12 m on two force plates: clicker reaction is 161 ± 34 ms with the high draw, which is his habitual one, 163 ± 22 with the low draw and 304 ± 149 with the straight draw (significance set at p < 0.1). Within one archer, reaction time changes with the drawing path: if it depends on technique, comparing it across different archers says less than it seems to.

  Effect of bow drawing technique on skilled archer postural stability: a case study · A. Kuch, J.-F. Debril, M. Domalain, R. Tisserand, T. Monnet

• 2020
  Context Archers Published later

  10 male archers aged 15 to 17 from a Turkish provincial squad, measured before and after eight weeks of strength training: laboratory reaction time relates to score in one of the eight combinations measured (auditory, right hand, after training: r = -0.729, p = 0.019), and in the other seven nothing happens. One correlation out of eight carries no weight, and the journal is a regional one.

  Erkek Okçularda Reaksiyon Süratinin Hedef Atış İsabet Puanına Etkisi · Baha Engin Çelikel, Süreyya Yonca Sezer, Mustafa Karadağ

• 2022
  For Review Published later

  Systematic review of 41 studies: across four studies a shorter clicker reaction goes with better performance, with typical elite times around 150 ms. It draws on samples already counted here, so it serves as confirmation of the reading rather than as an extra study.

  Performance assessment in archery: a systematic review · Eleonora Vendrame, Valeria Belluscio, Luigi Truppa, Lorenzo Rum, Aldo Lazich, Elena Bergamini, Andrea Mannini

• 2022
  For Review Published later

  The same review, the part that corrects the claim: inside an elite group the best predictor is not the mean time but its variability from shot to shot, and the mean value alone is not enough to explain performance. It supports the idea that the clicker reaction matters, not that its quickness is what matters.

  Performance assessment in archery: a systematic review · Eleonora Vendrame, Valeria Belluscio, Luigi Truppa, Lorenzo Rum, Aldo Lazich, Elena Bergamini, Andrea Mannini

• 2022
  For Review Published later

  A scoping review of 21 studies on postural control in precision sports: for archery it reports the work on the 39 elite archers at a World Cup, where lower sway speed after release, higher draw force and a quicker clicker reaction predict the better arrows. The coefficients are not reported in the review, and it is the same sample already counted here.

  The Role of Neuromuscular Control of Postural and Core Stability in Functional Movement and Athlete Performance · Erika Zemková, Ludmila Zapletalová

• 2023
  For Archers Published later

  6 elite and 7 sub-elite archers, 18 shots at 70 m filmed with a high-speed camera: the time from clicker fall to release averaged 146 ms in the elite and 156 ms in the others.

  Postural adjustments preceding string release in trained archers · A. Kuch, R. Tisserand, F. Durand, T. Monnet, J-F. Debril

• 2025
  For Archers Published later

  8 high-level French recurve archers, the best scoring 654.6 out of 720, 549 arrows at 70 m split into 163 low ones, 220 nines and 166 tens: clicker reaction time is longer on arrows scoring eight or less than on tens (Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon with Bonferroni correction, p < 0.05), with no difference between nines and tens. The values appear only in a figure.

  A multi-parameter investigation of elite archery: distinguishing individual and shared performance strategies during the aiming and follow-through phases · Raphaël Jacquot, Khaireddine Ben Mansour, Kévin Bouillet, Jean-Philippe Jehl, Gérôme Gauchard

• 2025
  Against Archers Published later

  The same study, archer-by-archer analysis: the difference visible at group level appears in none of the 8 archers taken on their own (table 5). This is the limitation that matters for someone shooting, because a result that exists only in the group average cannot be applied to one person.

  A multi-parameter investigation of elite archery: distinguishing individual and shared performance strategies during the aiming and follow-through phases · Raphaël Jacquot, Khaireddine Ben Mansour, Kévin Bouillet, Jean-Philippe Jehl, Gérôme Gauchard

• 2026
  Context Archers Published later

  The doctoral thesis that contains the 2025 study and widens it: across 15 recurve archers, clicker reaction time does not distinguish elite from intermediate archers (p = 0.216). Between archers of different levels, within competitive archery, the measure separates nothing.

  Analyse multidimensionnelle de la performance en tir à l'arc · Raphaël Jacquot

• 2026
  For Archers Published later

  The same thesis, the within-archer part: in the 8 elite French archers, 72 arrows at 70 m each, tens come after a quicker clicker reaction than arrows scoring eight or less (Kruskal-Wallis with Bonferroni post-hoc, p < 0.05), with no difference from nines; the values appear only in a figure. These are the same 549 shots as the 2025 paper and count once.

  Analyse multidimensionnelle de la performance en tir à l'arc · Raphaël Jacquot

Status history

1. 1984 Not studied In the registry's bibliography the earliest study of clicker timing, on 12 university archers, finds experts quicker than beginners but some intermediates quicker still, and infers an optimal moment to release: it does not show that a quicker reaction gives better shots.
2. 2003 Reported An electromyographic study of elite archers, beginners and non-archers finds the release ever closer to the clicker fall as skill rises: an association across skill levels, in small samples.
3. 2005 Reported In twenty archers from the Turkish national squad the clicker reaction measured in the field averages under two tenths of a second, but ranges from a tenth to half a second from archer to archer. The figure says how long the interval is and how much it varies, without relating it to the score: the status stays reported.
4. 2010 Contested The first measurement within a single archer arrives, and it goes the other way: in four elite women archers the clicker reaction time is identical on arrows scoring eight, nine and ten, 143 thousandths of a second against 142. In one of them the reaction really is quicker on the better arrows, but the comparison does not survive the test. With the supporting evidence from 2003 and this contrary result, the studies on archers no longer point the same way: contested.
5. 2011 Contested The second publication of the same experiment reports the same 108 shots with figures identical to the decimal, so it counts once: it is not an independent confirmation and the status does not change. Up to here the contrary results come from a single sample of four people, published twice.
6. 2012 Contested The contrary result becomes independent: seven archers from the German national squads measured with an acoustic system show that the mean time between clicker and release, between 144 and 176 thousandths of a second, does not explain their mean score. Only its steadiness enters the model. The status stays contested, but the weight shifts, because among archers who are already expert, quickness does not seem to count.
7. 2016 Contested A third group, on fifteen archers of mixed level with thirty shots each, repeats the same thing from inside the single archer: the predictors of distance from the centre include each shot's deviation from that archer's usual clicker-to-release time, not the length of the time. The status stays contested and the question is reframed: not how quick the reaction is, but how closely it repeats.
8. 2017 Contested The sample changes scale: thirty-nine elite archers from four countries at a World Cup, and a quicker clicker reaction enters the score predictors alongside draw force and sway speed. It is the first supporting evidence measured inside a group of elite archers only, but the effect is worth half a point between the quickest and the slowest, and the two contrary results from 2010 and 2012 still stand with nobody having repeated them. The status stays contested.
9. 2020 Contested Two new measurements, both weak, leave the status where it is. A skilled archer measured on force plates reacts in 161 thousandths of a second with his habitual draw, matching elite values, and in 304 with a straight draw: reaction time changes with the technique used, not only with the archer's level. In ten boys aged fifteen to seventeen, reaction time measured in a laboratory relates to score in one of the eight combinations measured, which is what chance alone would give.
10. 2022 Contested Two reviews from the same year line up what exists and correct it at the same time. Four studies agree that a quicker reaction goes with better performance, with typical elite times around one hundred and fifty thousandths of a second. Inside an elite group, though, what predicts the score is not the mean time but how steady it stays from arrow to arrow. The reviews photograph the disagreement without adding new samples, so the status does not move.
11. 2023 Contested Six elite and seven sub-elite archers filmed with a high-speed camera at seventy metres give 146 thousandths of a second against 156: the difference between levels turns up again with a different method and in a new laboratory. It is a group description and does not relate the time to the score of each arrow, so it does not resolve the disagreement and the status holds.
12. 2025 Contested For the first time the link is looked for inside a group of elite archers only, and the same study both finds it and takes it apart. In eight high-level French recurve archers, arrows scoring eight or less have a longer clicker reaction time than tens, but the difference appears when looking at the group and emerges in none of the eight archers taken on their own. A result that contradicts itself leaves the status contested.
13. 2026 Reported The doctoral thesis that contains that study adds the comparison between levels on the same measurement set-up, with fifteen archers: between elite and intermediate archers clicker reaction time makes no difference, while within the archer tens come after a quicker reaction than arrows scoring eight or less. Counting the evidence on archers, the supporting results now outnumber the contrary ones, and the two heaviest contrary results come from samples of four and seven people measured before 2013 that nobody has repeated: the status returns to reported. It returns by a narrow margin, and the within-archer part is the same sample as in 2025.

Related

Related articles

• The clicker: the science of a tenth of a secondWhat research measures about the clicker: reaction time, the muscles of the release, its weight on the score and what happens to draw length without it.
• The final pull: what happens in the last millimetres before the clickerHow many millimetres and seconds the final pull takes, how it differs between better and worse arrows, and what the aim and the muscles do as the clicker drops.
• Pre-shot routine in archery: how to build one on evidenceWhat to put in a pre-shot routine, how long it should last and what the data say: consistent timing, breathing, target panic and relaxing before the shot.

Research lines

• 24 studiesThe passive release: fifty years to take an idea apart
• 46 studiesShooting EMG from 1971 to today

Other claims in this domain

• CorroboratedBetween one and a half and two tenths of a second pass between the clicker sounding and the arrow leaving7 studies · 94 archers measuredStatus since 1990
• ReportedA camera diagonally behind the archer measures the vertical sway of the aim well, but not the horizontal1 study · 3 archers measuredStatus since 2010
• ReportedA continuous final pull through the clicker leads to better shots9 studies · 56 archers measuredStatus since 1993
• ReportedA sound or light cue about the angle of the bow arm tightens beginners' groups2 studies · 1 archers measuredStatus since 2012
• ReportedA thumb grip on the string is less tiring than a finger grip3 studies · 9 archers measuredStatus since 1990

See all claims on technique and biomechanics