Question those sources. If the argument is made that a shorter riser is better for hunting strictly for using in a blind or more “maneuverable” than maybeeeeee. But you can just get a longer riser and then get short limbs, problem solved.
I have a 16” riser and 19” riser takedowns and a 21” ILF riser. Night and day difference between the 21” and 16” in my ability to stay consistent shot to shot and it’s more forgiving.
I have long limbs making it a 66” bow that I will use for range fun/3d stuff. As well as take hunting in more open areas. I also have mediums that make it 64” for which is a happy medium I can do about anything with minus hunt out of some blinds if I ever needed to. And if I want I can go ahead and get some shorts to make a 62” bow for some thick vegetation hunting or in the blind, (but I already have 2 62” takedown recurves.) With that 21” riser I get some added mass weight, it sits better in the hand, floats less in the wind, shot is dead in the hand, I can maintain consistency shooting 1 riser that has the same grip that I’m used to and switch out all the limb lengths and poundage I want from 62 with shorts to 68 with X longs.
If shorter risers were the way to go from an overall accuracy standpoint than wouldn’t more target archers in every discipline shoot them?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk