Grip Hand Technique Discussion: Khatra and Tenouchi

[geoarcher]

I've given up on finding any source beside Taybugha ("Saracen Archery"). It seems to me the word khatra is mistaken for another and shorter word for followthrough. And I perfectly get a shorter word is easier to use. But just because khatra is some sort of a follow through doesn't mean any form of follow through is the same as the khatra-follow-through. Just like a tree is a plant but not all plants are trees.
With the "trending word" roaming through the internet - anyone tries to hop on that particular hypetrain. Sometimes for clickbait-reasons, sometimes for other reasons.
But to be clear: Khatra is clearly described as a forward rotation of the bow in the bowhand in Saracen Archery.

What I have in bolded from your quote is what I figured it would be. I was very cautious not to ask the FB ATARN group about this because I figured they would treat 'sideways khatra(h)' as some sort of canonical technique written by an ancient sage of some by gone era without question. And so I would have expected a response from them to sound something like 'yeah its definitely written but by who well and exact meaning, blah, blah, but we are 99.9% sure its this.'...or something like that.

I find not only discussions on youtube and FB regarding khatra somewhat suspect but also the re-examination of a certain right hand draw technique very questionable with annoyingly cherry picked evidence. Regardless, I wonder then what the basis is for that sideways technique? I suspect it has something to do with all those murals that keep popping up on the FB page showing archers with a bow in a somewhat similar position as what is demonstrated with so called 'sideways khatra(h)'. Although, I thought I heard somewhere that that's actually a 'Chinese' technique. But I'll digress for the moment....

[Amarutu]

Well there are archery-traditions with some sort of sideway motion. If there are Chinese ones - I can't tell, because I am not familiar with Chinese archery and sources at all. Though I picked up sth like a "painting the ground/floor" name in that context but as I just wrote ... I don't know Chinese archery.
But there is Tenouchi in Kyudo. Of course a lot more complicated and embedded in an archery-tradition with the odd yumi. I just wanted to mention it.
In Korean archery the archer grasps the bow caring about the distance between the bowstring and forearm. Depending on your choice of the distance you can get sth like 'sideways khatra' as a result. But I am not familiar enough with Korean archery to tell if this would be desirable at all or 'bad luck at understanding' for cherrypicking- or maybe even self-confirmation-bias-reasons.
But something tickled me in my process of understanding was a German (!) source from the 1900's for shooting an English longbow (!). The author (Dr. med. E. Mylius) wrote in his booklet "Das Bogenschießen - als Sport und zum Jagdgebrauch" (translating to 'Archery - as a Sport and for Hunting') about twisting the bow with its string into the bracer while advocating for most likely too stiff arrow-shafts (ash of the same diameter instead of English made softwood arrows for durabilitys sake).
That is - what I came up with before losing interest and focused again on what kind of archery I like to practice and teach.

[geoarcher]

Well there are archery-traditions with some sort of sideway motion. If there are Chinese ones - I can't tell, because I am not familiar with Chinese archery and sources at all. Though I picked up sth like a "painting the ground/floor" name in that context but as I just wrote ... I don't know Chinese archery.

I think some of this is covered in the 'Way of Archery' book but I have never bothered to investigate further.

But there is Tenouchi in Kyudo. Of course a lot more complicated and embedded in an archery-tradition with the odd yumi. I just wanted to mention it.

Indeed. Sometime after making this thread I started practicing 'renmei style' Kyudo (since summer 2016) and am affiliated with actual an budokai-dojo-club. So I'm familiar with the technique and even discussed it with Bede a bit in this thread before becoming a kyudo-kai. Interesting thing which I have come to learn about the tenouchi: it was not required or actually desired in Kyujitsu ('skill of the bow') - the actual military tradition in Japanese archery that the samurai would have practiced. Kyudo ('way of the bow') comes into play much later in Japanese Budo-history and is primarily meant to preserve the sacred practice of shooting the yumi after its relevance in warfare ceased. Kyudo also emphasizes other less tangible things through shooting the bow hence it often being referred to as 'Zen archery', which according to someone at my dojo from Japan, is not a cliched term to describe this type of archery. The actual purpose of tenouchi is unclear as most sensei will explain. It doesn't seem to ensure a 'center shot' interestingly enough which many think it does and have proclaimed in various sources. And I'll stop here for now regarding that....

In Korean archery the archer grasps the bow caring about the distance between the bowstring and forearm. Depending on your choice of the distance you can get sth like 'sideways khatra' as a result. But I am not familiar enough with Korean archery to tell if this would be desirable at all or 'bad luck at understanding' for cherrypicking- or maybe even self-confirmation-bias-reasons.

I have Korean bows too and shoot them and have been interested in what seems to be a 'torque' that some achieve when shooting the Korean bow. I think Bede and I discussed this in this thread but are we talking about 'torque' now in Korean archery or the 'sideways khatra(h)'-trending-term that looks 'Chinese' that all those FB guys seem to do? Confusing isn't it? I know from talking to Thomas Duvernay and having his older publication, there doesn't seem to be mention of this although I think I talked to someone from Korean eons ago who practices gungdo who described a technique like tenouchi that looks more 'torque'-like.

But something tickled me in my process of understanding was a German (!) source from the 1900's for shooting an English longbow (!). The author (Dr. med. E. Mylius) wrote in his booklet "Das Bogenschießen - als Sport und zum Jagdgebrauch" (translating to 'Archery - as a Sport and for Hunting') about twisting the bow with its string into the bracer while advocating for most likely too stiff arrow-shafts (ash of the same diameter instead of English made softwood arrows for durabilitys sake).
That is - what I came up with before losing interest and focused again on what kind of archery I like to practice and teach.

Now that's a new one but like you I don't have too much interest in western longbow shooting anymore.

[Amarutu]

Well there are archery-traditions with some sort of sideway motion. If there are Chinese ones - I can't tell, because I am not familiar with Chinese archery and sources at all. Though I picked up sth like a "painting the ground/floor" name in that context but as I just wrote ... I don't know Chinese archery.

I think some of this is covered in the 'Way of Archery' book but I have never bothered to investigate further.

You could be right, but if it is from the 'Way of Archery' book, then it is Ming Dynasty. Therefore a central Asian version of it could exist as the Ming-Chinese were somewhat influenced from there, too.

In Korean archery the archer grasps the bow caring about the distance between the bowstring and forearm. Depending on your choice of the distance you can get sth like 'sideways khatra' as a result. But I am not familiar enough with Korean archery to tell if this would be desirable at all or 'bad luck at understanding' for cherrypicking- or maybe even self-confirmation-bias-reasons.

I have Korean bows too and shoot them and have been interested in what seems to be a 'torque' that some achieve when shooting the Korean bow. I think Bede and I discussed this in this thread but are we talking about 'torque' now in Korean archery or the 'sideways khatra(h)'-trending-term that looks 'Chinese' that all those FB guys seem to do? Confusing isn't it? I know from talking to Thomas Duvernay and having his older publication, there doesn't seem to be mention of this although I think I talked to someone from Korean eons ago who practices gungdo who described a technique like tenouchi that looks more 'torque'-like.

Another possibility would be the FB guys are influenced by such a Korean technique maybe via Turkey and call it 'sideways khatra(h)' to give it a non-Korean label.

But something tickled me in my process of understanding was a German (!) source from the 1900's for shooting an English longbow (!). The author (Dr. med. E. Mylius) wrote in his booklet "Das Bogenschießen - als Sport und zum Jagdgebrauch" (translating to 'Archery - as a Sport and for Hunting') about twisting the bow with its string into the bracer while advocating for most likely too stiff arrow-shafts (ash of the same diameter instead of English made softwood arrows for durabilitys sake).
That is - what I came up with before losing interest and focused again on what kind of archery I like to practice and teach.

Now that's a new one but like you I don't have too much interest in western longbow shooting anymore.

My thought on this was: I can shoot an ELB without that by using fitting arrows. If shooting a reflexed bow with a fitting arrow as well I could avoid 'sideways khatra(h)'. So I ditched it and went on shooting without and not bothering anymore about any source for it since.

[geoarcher]

You could be right, but if it is from the 'Way of Archery' book, then it is Ming Dynasty. Therefore a central Asian version of it could exist as the Ming-Chinese were somewhat influenced from there, too.

This is another possibility where this whole 'sideways...' is from. See at 0:25:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSvxlwvhjjA

What he demonstrates first before 0:25 looks like what Taybugha describes, but from 0:25 he goes 'sideways' with his khatra. To me this isn't a 'naturally produced torque' resulting from forming or positioning the right hand a certain way but rather a very deliberate turn of the hand. I don't know for sure where he got this, I don't think its from 'Saracen archery', but perhaps its in 'Arab archery' (?).

Another possibility would be the FB guys are influenced by such a Korean technique maybe via Turkey and call it 'sideways khatra(h)' to give it a non-Korean label.

And that's the thing, I think 'torque technique' and 'sideways khatra(h)' are two different things that seemed be mooshed together at times. This guy seems to demonstrate the 'natural torque' that the person I talked to from Korea mentioned:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDn7bb-OBPY

According to the guy I corresponded with from Korea, this is achieved by slightly rotating the hand counter-clockwise at full draw which will allow for the torque to occur naturally upon release. I wager to say, somewhere, the Koreans have their own term for this and I don't believe it really has anything to do or even should be assigned to the concept of khatra that Taybugha writes of especially since the 'torque' occurs differently from the 'sideways khatra(h)'. I also suspect that these two things have two different purposes.

My thought on this was: I can shoot an ELB without that by using fitting arrows. If shooting a reflexed bow with a fitting arrow as well I could avoid 'sideways khatra(h)'. So I ditched it and went on shooting without and not bothering anymore about any source for it since.

Oh I see I think now if I understand you correctly: just use an appropriate arrow matched for the bow.

Actually according to Bede here on this thread, the reason to ensure a nice khatra happens per Saracen Archery/Taybugha is to have maintained an appropriate push-pull ratio of the bow and draw hand. That is if I understood him correctly. I believe it follows that if your push pull was done correctly, you'll look like the helmeted fellow on page 132 of Saracen Archery with the bow slightly forward and draw hand slightly elevated back. To compare, in Kyudo its considered important to maintain a proper push pull ratio and then after release your arms will be in a certain expected position if you drew correctly. I'm not sure if this is the intent here with khatra though or not. Like I said, it seemed that was being suggested here on this thread. Khatra I don't believe has anyone that has ever been able to prove convincingly that it really does anything for the arrow's performance like some 'torque' techniques do. So if not that, then I suppose it could be to ensure you have drawn correctly after release thus maintaining the proper push pull ratio required.

[Amarutu]

This is another possibility where this whole 'sideways...' is from. See at 0:25:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSvxlwvhjjA

What he demonstrates first before 0:25 looks like what Taybugha describes, but from 0:25 he goes 'sideways' with his khatra. To me this isn't a 'naturally produced torque' resulting from forming or positioning the right hand a certain way but rather a very deliberate turn of the hand. I don't know for sure where he got this, I don't think its from 'Saracen archery', but perhaps its in 'Arab archery' (?).

But you can see his sideways motion originates from the shoulder instead of the wrist. His whole arm moves. Therefore I consider it sth else. He mixes khatra with a sideways motion of the arm as if he was moving the bow-handle away from the arrowshaft.

This one here is older and you can see a variety of sideways motions. https://youtu.be/2xJ5AYeb_iY?t=52

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDn7bb-OBPY

According to the guy I corresponded with from Korea, this is achieved by slightly rotating the hand counter-clockwise at full draw which will allow for the torque to occur naturally upon release. I wager to say, somewhere, the Koreans have their own term for this and I don't believe it really has anything to do or even should be assigned to the concept of khatra that Taybugha writes of especially since the 'torque' occurs differently from the 'sideways khatra(h)'. I also suspect that these two things have two different purposes.

What I see here in the video is the arrow hitting the bow-handle at about the fletching-area. Then the arrow goes sideways and a fix for the issue is the interpretation of torque/sideways khatra(h) he follows.

I agree on a balance in pushing and pulling. It is taught in Kyudo and Olympic archery and for good reasons as well. But khatra does not automatically make you archieve it. When you look at the bows in Saracen Archery, you see the upper limb is longer. If you tilt such a bow a bit forward to stress both limbs equally I think you get harder hitting arrows from it. And with the bow rotating a bit forward you can get a longer powerstroke as well without messing up too much of your technique.
Either way you could get a bit more power in your arrows. I'd like to repeat the experiment with a chrony some day. But some years ago the result was sth like +3fps. That could be within user error range. But still the bow feels more steady in the hand shooting with (Taybugha-)khatra - while messing with vertical precision a bit.

[geoarcher]

But you can see his sideways motion originates from the shoulder instead of the wrist. His whole arm moves. Therefore I consider it sth else. He mixes khatra with a sideways motion of the arm as if he was moving the bow-handle away from the arrowshaft.

This one here is older and you can see a variety of sideways motions. https://youtu.be/2xJ5AYeb_iY?t=52

People on FB and elsewhere will refer to techniques demonstrated in that youtube video I posted quite often as 'sideways khatra(h)' which naturally adds a bit of confusion to the mix whether or not it actually resides in that technique genre or not. I think even the Malta archery guy calls out doing a 'sideways khatra(h)' and it looked like that. What you had shown in the second video's early moments looks like some archer attempting to do what I'd consider a 'Korean-type-torque' with some exaggerated left arm motion that Taybugha I'd wager to say would view as an overly forced movement in attempt to throw in some type of 'khatra concept' at the last moment. The whole thing did not look all that natural and appears, I must say, to underscore the interpretive problems that ensue when there is a broken tradition in the teaching of an ancient martial art.

I looked over Arab Archery last night and there is something regarding the bow's position after release in which the string faces down to the ground. Not sure if that's the interpretive basis here for what's in the video I posted and 'sideways khatra(h)' talks in general. I may flip through my copy of 'Persian Archery' tonight to see if there is anything useful to add.

What I see here in the video is the arrow hitting the bow-handle at about the fletching-area. Then the arrow goes sideways and a fix for the issue is the interpretation of torque/sideways khatra(h) he follows.

Yes and of course he labels this supposed 'Korean torque' as 'khatrah' per his video title and discussion. But I'm viewing khatra as just being a slight forward movement of the bow per Taybugha and anything with a leftward movement or rotation as specific to some other technique category.

I agree on a balance in pushing and pulling. It is taught in Kyudo and Olympic archery and for good reasons as well. But khatra does not automatically make you archieve it. When you look at the bows in Saracen Archery, you see the upper limb is longer. If you tilt such a bow a bit forward to stress both limbs equally I think you get harder hitting arrows from it. And with the bow rotating a bit forward you can get a longer powerstroke as well without messing up too much of your technique.
Either way you could get a bit more power in your arrows. I'd like to repeat the experiment with a chrony some day. But some years ago the result was sth like +3fps. That could be within user error range. But still the bow feels more steady in the hand shooting with (Taybugha-)khatra - while messing with vertical precision a bit.

I somewhat recall chronographing for an effect that khatra may or may not have on the arrow's velocity when I first began chronographing but threw my hands up in the air because the results would vary so much in what appeared to be a tight range of values. And so I was not convinced that it could be demonstrated fairly or even clearly. The only thing I can say regarding what can make a real difference for velocity that was repeatable and clearly significant that's not so obvious to many at times was whether or not I was shooting with a well fitted thumb ring and its material composition. My metal ring I found to be the best and Karpowicz even mentions all this a bit in his book. Oh and of course what your arrow is made of in addition to weight, spine, fletching, length etc like you mention earlier. Whether or not your overall technique is good/well executed is yet another thing to consider here. I may re-investigate this matter in relation to Taybugha's khatra in the future but am fairly certain the same interpretive problem will be encountered again.

Its interesting though, because after revisiting Saracen Archery just now, the author's do in fact suggest that khatra does improve speed. The problem like I mentioned above is being able to prove that clearly and effectively. I always wondered however, if the way these ancient texts being not literal translations, such as with Saracen Archery, but rather a type of retelling heavy with commentary, causes some of the interpretive problems we encounter (?).

[Amarutu]

I looked over Arab Archery last night and there is something regarding the bow's position after release in which the string faces down to the ground. Not sure if that's the interpretive basis here for what's in the video I posted and 'sideways khatra(h)' talks in general. I may flip through my copy of 'Persian Archery' tonight to see if there is anything useful to add.

If you look for the description of bows in Arab-Archery, you won't find any mention of a bulbous part on the back (unless I've missed it). I thik this is a difference worth noticing. And the author advises to relax the bow-hand upon release and I think that doesn't go well with any way I can understand khatra. So I think Arab-Archery is about a shooting of different bows and without khatra then Saracen-Archery.

Yes and of course he labels this supposed 'Korean torque' as 'khatrah' per his video title and discussion. But I'm viewing khatra as just being a slight forward movement of the bow per Taybugha and anything with a leftward movement or rotation as specific to some other technique category.

Do you by chance know, why the Koreans use torque? I didn't get an answer beyond "its tradition/ works well/ I was taught so." I can respect all these, but always suspected it was necessary for shooting the sport-bows with <70lbs with their traditional bamboo-arrows while the Korean bamboo-species is cultured for making arrow-shafts for stronger bows. Maybe my suspicion is from the Mylius-Booklet and I am biased to a self-confirmation here.

Its interesting though, because after revisiting Saracen Archery just now, the author's do in fact suggest that khatra does improve speed. The problem like I mentioned above is being able to prove that clearly and effectively. I always wondered however, if the way these ancient texts being not literal translations, such as with Saracen Archery, but rather a type of retelling heavy with commentary, causes some of the interpretive problems we encounter (?).

Thats why I want to repeat the experiment. At least a 100 shots per bow, some actual statistics, different bows. I suspect it works well for some kinds of bows - just like tenouchi works well for asymmetrical yumis with the bowstring outside the center of the grip. But I do not know therefore the curiosity.
But the commentary-heavy style of these books is just an Arabic literature-genre. It's called ذهاب meaning opion/view/commentary/the author paints the former text he quotes in gold. In simplification you can compare it to a news-show. First actual news then commentary to help to understand. And yes of course it is just one of many aspects making these texts hard to understand.

[geoarcher]

Do you by chance know, why the Koreans use torque? I didn't get an answer beyond "its tradition/ works well/ I was taught so."

No one from Korea has ever explicitly said why they do this to me and I'm not even sure which shooting context its supposed to be used in exactly. All I can say is that the existence of such a technique is acknowledged by them. Among every westerner, the common view for why these 'torque' or 'rotational' techniques exist is that they effect the flight/accuracy of the arrow or even speed although this is questionable ground for a number of reasons it seems more evident to me these days.

To compare-contrast, flight correction/accuracy does not appear as the explanation among the Japanese as to why 'yugaiety' or 'yugaeri' (the actual term for the turning rotation of the bow in the left hand) occurs after forming proper left hand technique (tenouchi). Neither does improving arrow speed. If you poke around on FB and wander over to Kyudo World, you'll come across a study and discussion about all this. At Budokai's where Kyudo is taught, the exact reason is portrayed as an unknown. A few things here and there actually don't have clear explanations even in Kyudo despite the art having a fairly well established curriculum, with a ruling body for the mainstream styles in addition to an actual manual/text book developed by the ruling body. Likewise, all these details in KTB may have the same understanding or lack thereof. Based on what I've come to learn from Kyudo, this happens sometimes because the original intent was developed long ago but not recorded properly in some way for future generations to fully know and understand. Some things in Kyudo though almost appear to be kept secret and or the meaning occluded for let's just say less tangible reasons. But the later here is more my feeling. Some things I'm fairly sure were just not recorded properly but usually this does not concern technique I find interestingly enough.

But the commentary-heavy style of these books is just an Arabic literature-genre. It's called ذهاب meaning opion/view/commentary/the author paints the former text he quotes in gold. In simplification you can compare it to a news-show. First actual news then commentary to help to understand. And yes of course it is just one of many aspects making these texts hard to understand.

Which parts though of Saracen archery are not direct translations of Taybugha? I thought I heard somewhere that some of what is written is injection by J. D. Latham and W.F. Paterson but was never sure which was what exactly.

[Amarutu]

Thank you for the kind answer on the torque-question. The Mylius-booklet is the one I mentioned earlier as the German one on shooting a longbow.

Which parts though of Saracen archery are not direct translations of Taybugha? I thought I heard somewhere that some of what is written is injection by J. D. Latham and W.F. Paterson but was never sure which was what exactly.

The obvious parts by Latham and Paterson are between the table of contents and beginning of the doxology, image-plates (p136-137) and p174 to the end. Sometimes there are looser translations like on page 16-17 on bows but without a bunch of manuscrips predating Taybugha's with very similar content one can not tell where he quotes older works on the subject or therelike. There is basically no such thing in Arabic literature. You even need weird ways to indicate indirect speech in the Arabic language, because these are modern requirements. There is a lot of copying involved and you find anecdotes on scholars in their old age worrying about having one single error in their books being copied for eternity and therefore considering and sometimes not just considering burning all the books they ever wrote.

[geoarcher]

______

[geoarcher]

The obvious parts by Latham and Paterson are between the table of contents and beginning of the doxology, image-plates (p136-137) and p174 to the end. Sometimes there are looser translations like on page 16-17 on bows but without a bunch of manuscrips predating Taybugha's with very similar content one can not tell where he quotes older works on the subject or therelike. There is basically no such thing in Arabic literature. You even need weird ways to indicate indirect speech in the Arabic language, because these are modern requirements. There is a lot of copying involved and you find anecdotes on scholars in their old age worrying about having one single error in their books being copied for eternity and therefore considering and sometimes not just considering burning all the books they ever wrote.

I see. It looks like on page 68, the comment section appears to have some of Latham and Paterson's interjections (if not solely Latham and Paterson?). The part before where its talked about khatra improving the velocity of the arrow seems to be all Taybugha (?). However, the comment section here underscores the confusion that I often find in this book because Latham and Paterson talk about a 'raison d'être' for khatra that seems contrary to what Taybugha says, but then again I may not completely understand what Latham and Paterson are explaining here. Or is that all Taybugha in the comments section?

[geoarcher]

Actually I revisited my correspondence with my Korean contact from years ago concerning the 'torque' technique used in KTB. Here it is:


'you should more twist the handle, counterclockwise, when you release like a japanese technic,( tenouchi)

when the arrows is away, arrow must keep distance from bow body.'

His English was a bit rough here you can see, but I think 'arrow must keep distance from bow body' actually most likely does mean 'the arrow should cleanly pass by the bow's riser w/o touching'. Yes I know I am putting alot of inference on this rough bit of English but I do believe this is what he meant. This would imply perhaps that the 'torque' required here does improve accuracy from a Korean source albeit without explicitly saying so. Regardless, its a little more in depth then 'its how I was taught' or 'just works well'.

[geoarcher]

Well there are archery-traditions with some sort of sideway motion. If there are Chinese ones - I can't tell, because I am not familiar with Chinese archery and sources at all. Though I picked up sth like a "painting the ground/floor" name in that context but as I just wrote ... I don't know Chinese archery.

I think some of this is covered in the 'Way of Archery' book but I have never bothered to investigate further.

Yes. 'painting the ground' is in fact in 'Way of Archery'. It was a grip hand technique advocated by Tang Jingchuan. The one that appears in all those murals with the belly of the bow facing closest to the ground in the depcited archer's bow grasping hand. Gao Ying apparently did not like the technique and advised against it. I think I'll summarize grip hand techniques here:

Khatrah: forward movement of the bow gripping wrist after release. Referenced in 'Saracen Archery'. Used to improve arrow velocity.

Tenouchi: used in the Japanese tradition of kyudo. Involves grasping the bow handle in such a way that allows the bow itself to spin in the grasping hand after the arrow is released. The spinning of the bow is known as 'yugari' or 'yugaity'. The actual spinning of the bow/'yugari' in the grasping hand is the product of correct 'tenouchi' or correct left hand grasping technique. The two terms should not be confused with each other and the purpose of this technique seems unique to kyudo. Publications have shown that it does not improve speed or accuracy. The arrow seems to touch upon the bow still after the release according to some slow-mo videos. Its reason for use is actually unknown.

Korean torque technique: involves 'pre-loading' the grasping hand counter-clockwise (clockwise if holding the bow in the right hand) in order to make the wrist torque to the left or right depending on bow hand dexterity. This ensures a clean pass of the arrow over the bow without it touching the riser area at all. Improves accuracy and overall flight of the arrow. Used in the context of Korean traditional archery and probably elsewhere although I have yet to come across it referenced outside of KTA. Early in this thread, I believe Bede was alluding to that it can be found in old Middle Eastern archery texts although I have yet to come across any. In Korean, there are a few terms to refer to it as:

흩혀쥐기 or 'heu-tyuh-jwi-gi': has many meanings such as to 'scatter' or 'misalignment of grip'
쥐어 짜기 or 'jwi-uh-jja-gi': meaning 'squeezing' or 'twisting'
고자채기 or 'go-jah-chae-gi': meaning 'kicking the siyah'
활대 엎기 or 'hwal-dae-up-gi': meaning to 'laying down the bow'

Tang Jingchuan's 'painting the ground' technique: upon release, the upper tip of the bow 'paints the ground' and the lower tip of the bow moves towards the draw side of the upper arm. Essentially, what this guy does:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udr1YOVtzQc

According to Gao Ying, this technique lacks utility and is simply executed for the aesthetic it creates. It is often depicted on all those ancient murals from the Shahnameh. Perhaps, because artists recognized its aesthetic qualities?

Throughout the years I have been learning and practicing various forms of Asiatic archery, I have come to witness these techniques mixed and mashed in various internet posted videos. It is important to categorize them and thus understand them in the unique role and or context which they were developed and to be utilized in.