Interesting article. How can you with statistics and data make decided validation? You can't. Why ? Every shot stands on its own. This was a experienced hunter giving his totality of years of hunting. I've personally concluded after my many years of archery hunting that I've found shot placement to be the most critical aspect. Over cut size and even pass thru. Well placed, critical damage I'll take 1st. The rest as I gathered from the article was the advancement of Broadheads and how they've become more effective and how mechanicals have gotten much better as have Broadheads. We all win. Just pick the head that works for you. It's all good. Sent from my iPhone
I have to thank all the participants in this comical rant of a thread! It was very entertaining. Shoot straight friends!
I think a lot of people are confusing "Kill faster" with better blood trail. I agree with the fact that two holes is better then one but that is referring to creating a better blood trail. A better blood trail has little to do with how far a deer runs. It just helps you find the deer after it runs off and dies. When I read the article, I was assuming elapsed time after the shot not distance traveled. In most cases when he talked about how far the deer went before it died the elapsed time was about the same. The blood trail has nothing to do with that.
Excellent observation and point. Just who do you think you are, introducing reason and logic into this discussion...
Back in the day, I killed 9 unicorns and an entire pack of chupacabras in a single season. All were shot with 7" expandables out of a 97# bow and every single one of them was dead before it hit the ground.
I fear the thread went south since this post but I agree with you, the deer would have most likely died within yards either way, I just believe the exit hole is big for aiding in recovery.
