緒論：平行與開放式為最盛行的射箭站姿，在反曲弓奧運射箭排名賽滿弓至放箭時，可能因各階段射箭數的增加使上肢肌肉活化產生差異，而降低分數與整體平衡。故有必要釐清頂尖選手以不同慣用站姿在各階段成績、上肢肌肉活化與平衡差異，才能更客觀選擇適當站姿來提升射箭成績。方法：以立意取樣於各高中與大專院校招募公開組男性選手共14名，以慣用站姿均分為平行與開放組，模擬反曲弓標準弓賽局中射擊36箭並紀錄成績，以無線表面肌電儀與足底壓力板同步收取引弓手斜方肌、肱二頭肌、肱三頭肌、伸腕肌與屈腕肌活化、整體平衡與身體晃動速度，再以混合設計二因子變異數分析考驗四階段成績、各肌群上肢肌肉活化、平衡與身體晃動速度差異(α=.05)。結果：兩站姿皆不會造成各階段成績有差異，但兩站姿皆會隨著階段數增加而提高斜方肌肌肉活化。開放式屈腕肌活化在各階段皆顯著高於平行式。兩站姿對整體平衡與晃動速度皆無差異。結論：頂尖選手採用各自慣用站姿皆不會導致各階段成績有差異，但皆會隨著階段數增加而提升斜方肌活化，但不會導致平衡與身體晃動速度有所不同，關鍵差異在於平行式之屈腕肌活化相較開放式低。建議教練及初學選手在訓練前選擇站姿時，可評估自身斜方肌與屈腕肌肌力作為上肢持弓參考依據，兩站姿皆需具備一定斜方肌肌力，若屈腕肌肌力較薄弱則可選擇平行站姿，選擇開放站姿除了射箭專項技術與斜方肌肌力訓練外，需特別著重遠端屈腕肌肌力來維持射箭表現，但整體站姿選擇仍需進一步檢驗核心與下肢肌群活化差異，釐清整體動作控制策略，才能完整提供客觀依據。

Introduction: The parallel stances and the open stances are the most popular archery stances. When the bow is full to release the arrow, the difference in muscle activation of the upper limbs may reduce the score and overall balance due to the increase in the number of archers at each stage in an Olympic archery ranking tournament in recurve bow. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the differences in the performance of each stage, upper limb muscle activation and balance between the top players in their habitual standing posture (parallel or open) in the recurve bow Olympic archery ranking game. By analyzing the data, the players can more objectively choose the appropriate standing posture to improve their archery performance. Methods: A total of 14 male contestants in the open group were recruited from various high schools and colleges with intentional sampling, and they were divided into parallel and open groups in their usual standing posture. They shot 36 arrows in the simulated recurve bow and recorded their scores. Wireless surface electromyography and plantar pressure plate simultaneously collected the trapezius muscle, biceps brachii, triceps, wrist extensor and wrist flexor activation, overall balance, and body swaying speed. Mixed design two-factor analysis of variance was used to test the differences in four-stage performance, each group of the upper limb muscle activation, balance, and body swaying speed (α = .05). Results: Neither standing posture resulted in a difference in the performance of each stage, but both standing postures increased trapezius muscle activation with increasing stages. The activation of the open carpi flexors was significantly higher than that of the parallel pose at all stages. There was no difference in overall balance and body swaying speed between the two standing postures. Conclusion: The scores of top players are not caused by different standing postures. Both standing poses increase trapezius activation as the number of stages increases, but neither result in any difference in balance and body swaying speed. The key difference is that the parallel pose has lower activation of the wrist flexors than the open pose. It is recommended that coaches and beginners can choose an appropriate standing position when holding the bow based on the strength of the oblique and wrist flexor muscles. Both stances require a particular strength in the trapezius muscle. If the practitioners’ wrist flexors are weak, they may be advised to choose a parallel stance. If players use the stance in the open position, they will need to focus on distal wrist flexor strength in addition to archery specific techniques and training of the trapezius muscles to maintain archery performance. Future research needs to examine further the differences in muscle activation between core and lower limb muscle groups and clarify overall movement control strategies to provide a more objective and complete reference for training.