# Why is recurve archery not popular in the US?



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Most people who buy shotguns don't shoot Olympic skeet or Bunker trap either. They go to the range to practice for shooting bambi or ducks. Most of the people who buy bows do so to deer hunt. Compounds are much easier to master for people who are hunters first and really not all that into being "archers". It is that reason why compounds are far more popular.

If the olympics changed to compound I would expect the countries with the most government or societal support of olympic archery to dominate.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ArrowNewB said:


> Almost everyone I see in archery ranges shoot compounds.
> 
> Why is recurve so unpopular with the locals (US) here?
> 
> US will probably dominate the Olympics if Olympic archery was changed to compounds instead of recurves and the round targets get swapped out with animal shaped targets


Between archers of equal skill, compounds shoot smaller groups. People who really want to make small groups often tend towards compound shooting. And compounds are more powerful--no question about it.

But, it also depends on what range you go to. Different ranges have different cultures. Some ranges are dominated by FITA Recurve. Some by stickbows. And most by Compounds.

Most competitive sports, I think, are about doing something the hard way. Golf would be a lot easier if you could just pick up the ball and walk to the hole. Archery might be easier with a bipod and a stick with a release to make the bow work like a sort of cross bow. So, if you want to challenge yourself you get to pick just how hard you want to work. Some people pick compound, some recurve....


----------



## Dave T (Mar 24, 2004)

I have been told over and over again, bowhunting is where the interest and money is spent. Compounds dominate hunting so the compound rules in the US. Can't argue with that in any intelligent way, but I also can't help but wonder why the challenge Warbow alluded to doesn't draw any more than it does.

I remember a post a couple years ago, I think it was here on AT, that listed the total number of recurve archers by country, based on national organization memberships/data. I was a bit surprised to see the US with something like only 6,000 while Italy had 22,000 and France was upwards of 40,000. Now don't quote me on those numbers (my memory isn't that good - lol) but the ratios are about right. Those countries are the size of some of our states. I have trouble believing bowhunting accounts for all that difference.

Dave


----------



## scriv (Jan 31, 2008)

*Lack of interest...*

People in this country do love to "push the easy button" as the ad says. ukey:


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Dave T said:


> I have been told over and over again, bowhunting is where the interest and money is spent. Compounds dominate hunting so the compound rules in the US. Can't argue with that in any intelligent way, but I also can't help but wonder why the challenge Warbow alluded to doesn't draw any more than it does.


...and gadgets you have to upgrade every year are where the big sales are. I shot once with a national barebow recurve champion. He was the best in his class that year for the nation. He couldn't get a sponsor to save his life--not even so much as a wrist guard, let alone bows or arrows. But compounders? Heck, **local** compound shooters have sponsors, including full rigs from their sponsors, but national barebow recurve champion? Nothin'...and I suppose the same goes for money for organizations, too.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

Dave T said:


> Those countries are the size of some of our states.


Country size means nothing. Population density is a telling feature. Western Australia is 3.5 times bigger than Texas, but the population is nowhere near as big.

There is less frustration with compound. Less people walk than drive cars in the USA too. 

It's not real hard to figure out....


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Dave T said:


> I have been told over and over again, bowhunting is where the interest and money is spent. Compounds dominate hunting so the compound rules in the US. Can't argue with that in any intelligent way, but I also can't help but wonder why the challenge Warbow alluded to doesn't draw any more than it does.
> 
> I remember a post a couple years ago, I think it was here on AT, that listed the total number of recurve archers by country, based on national organization memberships/data. I was a bit surprised to see the US with something like only 6,000 while Italy had 22,000 and France was upwards of 40,000. Now don't quote me on those numbers (my memory isn't that good - lol) but the ratios are about right. Those countries are the size of some of our states. I have trouble believing bowhunting accounts for all that difference.
> 
> Dave



Might be interesting to note if any of those countries even allow bowhunting.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Warbow said:


> ...and gadgets you have to upgrade every year are where the big sales are. I shot once with a national barebow recurve champion. He was the best in his class that year for the nation. He couldn't get a sponsor to save his life--not even so much as a wrist guard, let alone bows or arrows. But compounders? Heck, **local** compound shooters have sponsors, including full rigs from their sponsors, but national barebow recurve champion? Nothin'...and I suppose the same goes for money for organizations, too.


At the NFAA/IFAA indoor championships in Louisville in 2005, my student, Melissa Ash won the under 18 (young adult) title, set the IFAA record and ended the year as the #1 ranked cadet (based on another girl pulling a big upset at JOAD nationals in all fairness) in the NAA. She shot next to another very nice young lady who was a very good compound archer but not the #1-2-3 in the USA. That young lady had a shirt that had as many sponsors as Dave Cousins or GRIV had on their shirts that weekend. Melissa's sponsors-until she made Jr USAT were her parents, and me. She made a comment that some 15 year old compound kids had more sponsors than John Magera or Doug Pritchett who were right behind Vic and Butch at that shoot. At our shop we went out of our way to give "shooters bows" from those that made recurves-to recurve archers. However, that was rare. The fact is-Hoyt and Martin and PSE probably sell 100 compounds in the USA for every X-factor, Nexus or the late great Aurora. Same with sight makers in terms of their sales. 

Now I have never bought a bow because of what Vic, or Ed, or Darrell or Vic Berger or Hardy Ward shot but if I thought people did, I can see why big makers want to sponsor the wheel bow shooters. 

Is it "fair"? It's BUSINESS.


----------



## engtee (Oct 2, 2003)

I'm sorry to say it, Dave, but I believe the number of Olympic recurve shooters, in the entire US, is only between 2000-3000. There are probably more who choose to use a recurve for hunting. The really sad fact is that the majority of recurve shooters I see are old farts, like us. The younger shooters want instant gratification.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Jim C said:


> Is it "fair"? It's BUSINESS.


I never questioned the "fairness" of it. It is what it is, and only through recognizing it can one work around it. Just pointing out the same things you just did.

But I do think engtree has touched on something, "The younger shooters want instant gratification." Well, not just the younger set, but the population in general. Compounds are popular over recurves, I suppose, for some of the same reasons that cross bows and guns over took longbows--easier to learn to be adequate.


----------



## jhinaz (Mar 1, 2003)

engtee said:


> .......instant gratification.


+1 :teeth: John


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

Ok, Lets consider countries like Korea and Japan. These are countries with far less population than the US. They are probably also countries that do not allow private firearms ownership nor hunting. 

How is it that they can maintain the popularity of archery, recurve archery, among their youths?

Reverse the thought. If firearms and hunting were to become illegal to the people, would Olympic archery thrive? Would archery as a whole even survive since now there will be even less commercial support?


----------



## 6X60 (Jan 5, 2009)

Seattlepop said:


> Might be interesting to note if any of those countries even allow bowhunting.


I don't believe that they do. In fact, I don't think there is much bowhunting outside of North America. Some, I believe in Australia. None that I am aware of in Europe.


----------



## 6X60 (Jan 5, 2009)

Jim C said:


> At the NFAA/IFAA indoor championships in Louisville in 2005, my student, Melissa Ash won the under 18 (young adult) title, set the IFAA record and ended the year as the #1 ranked cadet (based on another girl pulling a big upset at JOAD nationals in all fairness) in the NAA. She shot next to another very nice young lady who was a very good compound archer but not the #1-2-3 in the USA. That young lady had a shirt that had as many sponsors as Dave Cousins or GRIV had on their shirts that weekend. Melissa's sponsors-until she made Jr USAT were her parents, and me. She made a comment that some 15 year old compound kids had more sponsors than John Magera or Doug Pritchett who were right behind Vic and Butch at that shoot. At our shop we went out of our way to give "shooters bows" from those that made recurves-to recurve archers. However, that was rare. The fact is-Hoyt and Martin and PSE probably sell 100 compounds in the USA for every X-factor, Nexus or the late great Aurora. Same with sight makers in terms of their sales.
> 
> Now I have never bought a bow because of what Vic, or Ed, or Darrell or Vic Berger or Hardy Ward shot but if I thought people did, I can see why big makers want to sponsor the wheel bow shooters.
> 
> Is it "fair"? It's BUSINESS.


Way more than 100, I bet.

Sponsorship is a funny thing. 

For one thing, a shooters shirt covered with patches doesn't mean that shooter is getting much of anything. Sometimes it's little more than just a shirt and some patches. Maybe just some discounts on products. I know one guy locally that wears a shooters shirt that has never received even so much as a discount on a bow. 

That local shooter that Warbow mentioned might not be getting near as much as he might lead you to believe. But, also, he might have made himself very valuable to the local rep. That's worth a lot. A good local shooter can sell more bows than all the national champs in the world. 

Plus, shooters have to promote themselves. Not many want to do that. They think the factories will just hand them stuff. They won't. Even the top shooters have to aggressively promote themselves to get the sponsors they have.


----------



## sawtoothscream (Apr 19, 2008)

i shoot both and love to shoot recurve. recurve is tricky but im shooting really good groups now out to 30 yds.


----------



## 6X60 (Jan 5, 2009)

engtee said:


> I'm sorry to say it, Dave, but I believe the number of Olympic recurve shooters, in the entire US, is only between 2000-3000. There are probably more who choose to use a recurve for hunting. The really sad fact is that the majority of recurve shooters I see are old farts, like us. The younger shooters want instant gratification.



I don't know how many recurve shooters we have in this country but I don't agree that all we left is "old farts".

At a recent star fita I attended college and joad recuvers outnumbered senior and 50+ about 3 to 1.

Not saying the future is bright by any means but we aren't reduced, yet, to nothing but old farts.


----------



## scriv (Jan 31, 2008)

*Popularity*

This is another reason (Lack of recurve shooters) why JOAD is so important. At my club I am nearly the only adult shooting there with a target recurve. Yet the JOAD program has more than doubled since it started(we are in our third year). If we get these kids when they are young, and have not yet experienced "instant success" they are hooked by the true "magic" that is archery. In JOAD, the compound shooter is rare at our club.


----------



## 6X60 (Jan 5, 2009)

Another thing to consider, and tied closely to the bowhunting element is the NFAA.

US archers have had, since the 1940's, a choice in tournament archery.

But, there was no international organization until 1970 when the IFAA was founded. The IFAA is still not a very large organization worldwide with something like 25,000 members.

So, any tournament archery that developed outside the US would almost have to have been recurve.


----------



## FrayAdjacent (Oct 20, 2008)

ArrowNewB said:


> Reverse the thought. If firearms and hunting were to become illegal to the people, would Olympic archery thrive? Would archery as a whole even survive since now there will be even less commercial support?


As a (not very seriously in the last few years) participant in a few types of shooting (firearms) competitions, IDPA, NRA Highpower Rifle, Tactical Carbine... Part of my interest in archery is due to my interest in shooting. There are commonalities in all shooting, whether it's a gun or a bow. 

I would predict that if many firearms were banned in the US, many would turn to archery as a sport. I also see that with such desire for instant gratification, most of the interest would go to compound shooting. This would be reinforced by hunting having to fall back on. 

There are some like me - when I get into something, I generally go as traditional as I can. When I bought a muzzle loading rifle, I went with a flintlock. When I bought a Sharps style rifle, I bought all the accouterments to cast my own bullets and load my own cartridges using black powder. 

I had been thinking about buying a longbow to get into archery, but found a local JOAD group that has an adult program. I did a little research and decided that I would be more satisfied with recurve shooting.

... and I was right! I'm loving it so far!


----------



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

Japan and Korea have revered the bow as part of their respective cultures for centuries. Being of japanese descent myself, I have been exposed to archery both at boy scout camps, and at kyudo demonstrations held at the local Buddhist temple, alongside other cultural activities such as judo, karate, ikebana (flower arrangement) and shuuji (japanese calligraphy). I suspect this has at least something to do with the large # of participants vs. population. 

Korea also treats archery as a national sport. The program is state-run, and tons of kids get run through it. I wonder what the actual # of active adult shooters is though, my understanding is that if you are not on the national team, or any of the university or corporate teams, you don't shoot. 

My (limited) understanding of Japan is that there are a fair # of clubs w/ access to a range. Once again, though, I don't have specific details.


----------



## Mark Hedges (Dec 18, 2008)

I think the main reason is because most people in the US who shoot bows do it in order to hunt. There are quite a few compound shooters who shoot targets and shoot all year round, but I think they are the minority. And it seems to me that the recurve "traditional" crowd values target shooting even less than compound shooters.

I am not sure what is the best way to increase interest, but I think one thing that hurts the sport is the fact that slot of the people who do shoot recurves are lousy shots, and people see them shoot and think you cannot be a good shot with a recurve. 

Mark


----------



## AT_X_HUNTER (Aug 10, 2005)

Here's my take. I learned to shoot archery with a compound. Then after some years I decided to give the revurve a try. I was very fortunate at that time as I had a good job that would allow me to afford the equipment. I bought a Hoyt Axis, two sets of FX limbs, X-10 arrows, and all the other cool stuff to go along with it. I really enjoyed shooting that style. I won our indoor state and outdoor American round (still have the record). And I took 5th in 1st flight at Nationals all in my first year.

So, why did I go back to the compound? One reason was the lack of competition. I didn't have anyone else around shooting that style. It kinda sucks going to a shoot and being the only person there shooting a recurve. Another reason was a lack of FITA or NAA style shoots in the area. Everything I shot at the time was NFAA. Third was time. This was a big one. It takes a lot of time to shoot well with a recurve. It is tougher than a compound and requires more work, but there are only so many hours in a day. If I wanted to be able to afford the best equipment I had to work the hours. If I worked the hours I couldn't train like I knew I had to. Forth is that there is way more money to be won in compound archery than recurve. It's nice to be able to go to a shoot and at least have a chance to win gas money for the ride home.

Now this next point is probably going to ruffel some feathers. I don't mean it to but I know this will sound kinda bad. Here in the U.S. olimpic shooters are the best of the best that can afford to be there. And I am not trying to take away from the men and women that are on our teams. Let me explain that a little. In other countries, such as Korea, the government provides for the athlete and his or her family while he or she is on the team. Here, if I want to get good enough to even try out for the team I have to provide my own way 100%. And I have to be able to take off of work to not only train but travel aswell. If I took that much time to go to the training center, regional and national shoots and then the Olympics I know I wouldn't have a job to come back to. Or at least not the same one.

So, I shoot a compound. Not because I can't shoot a recurve but because I can't afford the time to shoot one.

Once agian, this is just my insight and opinion. I am in no way speaking for anyone else. It's just the way I personally see it and why I shoot a compound at paper.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

AT_X_HUNTER said:


> So, I shoot a compound. Not because I can't shoot a recurve but because I can't afford the time to shoot one.
> 
> Once agian, this is just my insight and opinion. I am in no way speaking for anyone else. It's just the way I personally see it and why I shoot a compound at paper.


It is a good summary, and I bet it is similar to the reasons for many compound shooters. But, as a semantic point, I'd say you have just as much time for shooting a recurve as a compound but you wouldn't be satisfied with your ability with a recurve given the same input of time.


----------



## CJSdrftFLAT (Dec 5, 2007)

Well from a new archer's point of view, Warning: this will be long.
I first learned about archery from a friend who took the class at sf state. He said it was, "hella fun." So next semester I took the class. it was fun, but the teacher was seriously lacking. I liked the class so much that I hopped on craigslist and bought a used compound for 100 bucks. It was a blue long ata hoyt. It was good to shoot around with, but wasn't accurate because of my improper form. Then while shooting at golden gate park, I saw my first real archer. He was shooting a hunting style compound from about 70 meters. I was so amazed that I wanted to be just as good at him. So I would watch him and try to pick up what he was doing and emulate it. I cruised over to pacifica archery to buy a new bow. I was so confused and put off by the hard sell and super high prices that they were giving me, I just left and ventured to the internet to buy. A couple of weeks later I bought my first new bow: a browning micro adrenaline. I didn't know much about bows, so I did some research on the internet about draw length and such and based the purchase on what I learned from that. I took it to the sf archery pro shop on balboa street run by ed rosario. I asked him if he could set my draw length and install my peep. He said that I would have to leave the bow with him to do that because it would take too long, but he could install the peep now. I was a bit worried because it did not seem like he knew what he was doing because he kept on referring to the instructions, a clear sign that he did not know what he was doing. So he finished installing it and gave it to me to try. I drew it back and the peep was way below my eye. I asked him to adjust it higher, but he said that you are supposed to bend your head down to see into it. Not knowing that was not right, I just left and went home. I looked at the instructions and thought I could just adjust the draw length myself. I completed it in under 5 minuites. Ed at the sf archery pro shop told me it would take way longer. 
So I shot that way, scrunching my head down for two months, until a somewhat experienced compound shooter corrected me and told me what to do with my peep. Fast forward a couple of months. I met some cool archers who taught me alot; Victor maquinana, Chelly and Art owens, Glen Mori****a, Richard, Pat, Al, and forgive me if I forgot anyone else. They taught me about proper form and shot execution. Soon after that I bought a proper compound bow here on AT from Martin girl and trained hard because the Cal cup was coming up. I entered the Cal cup not expecting much because it was my first competition. In the first half which consisted of 90m and 70m I was only 2 points away from 5th place! By the end of it all I dropped down because another archer and I had the same score, but he had 1 more x so he got sixth and I dropped down to seventh. Not bad for someone who only has done archery for 9 months.

Synopsis: Archery shop owners here are only out to make a quick buck off of you, and in the case of sf archery pro shop: lazy guy who doesn't care if he teaches you the wrong thing. You learn from other archers around you, and I am lucky to be surrounded by the people I am.

Back on topic:
I shoot compound because it's what I thought was cool. I just stuck with it.
I am trying to shoot recurve now, but it's not as easy as it looks.


----------



## Poor Shooter (Jun 25, 2008)

You are forgetting one simple fact too. Most Kids want to be like Dad. Most Dad's hunt with a compound. Kids want a compound. Up until lately there was a sad excuse for good kids bows and they still wanted a compound to be like DAD.


Another thing is my son is very good with a compound (NFAA300/50x) and JOAD Nat'l campion with a recurve. He is teased about shooting the recurve by kids in school. They have obviously never shot a recurve to see how hard it is.

I shoot a compound because I cant shoot a recurve to feel good about myself shooting in front of people. They are difficult to become good at period.


----------



## 6X60 (Jan 5, 2009)

Poor Shooter said:


> You are forgetting one simple fact too. Most Kids want to be like Dad. Most Dad's hunt with a compound. Kids want a compound. Up until lately there was a sad excuse for good kids bows and they still wanted a compound to be like DAD.


You're onto something there. Is someone more likely, youth or adult, to choose a recurve where they may be the only one at the shop that shoots that way or are they going to chose a compound because that's what all their friends shoot? Plus you're going to see a lot more ads with the top compound people than you are recurve. In fact, depending on what publications you read you may not see any.

While instant gratification might be part of the equation the truth is that to reach the top in either discipline requires a huge amount of talent and hard work.

Which Vegas division would be harder to win...Classic limited, where you have to beat maybe 30 guys, or Compound Unlimited, where you have to beat over 200?

Better than asking why there aren't more recurve shooters in the US perhaps we need to ask what we can do to make recurve more attractive.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

6X60 said:


> Way more than 100, I bet.
> 
> Sponsorship is a funny thing.
> 
> ...



all you say is true-however, I know for a fact that the young lady with the sponsors patches was indeed sponsored. ANd I totally agree that an outgoing and helpful local shooter did sell alot more bows for the two shops I was associated with than some world champions.


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

Dave T said:


> I have been told over and over again, bowhunting is where the interest and money is spent. Compounds dominate hunting so the compound rules in the US. Can't argue with that in any intelligent way, but I also can't help but wonder why the challenge Warbow alluded to doesn't draw any more than it does.
> 
> I remember a post a couple years ago, I think it was here on AT, that listed the total number of recurve archers by country, based on national organization memberships/data. I was a bit surprised to see the US with something like only 6,000 while Italy had 22,000 and France was upwards of 40,000. Now don't quote me on those numbers (my memory isn't that good - lol) but the ratios are about right. Those countries are the size of some of our states. I have trouble believing bowhunting accounts for all that difference.
> 
> Dave


Dave you also need to remember that folks can't own guns in the countries you mentioned or if they can it comes at a very high price. Thusly, the only real shooting sport they can participate in (the average man) is archery.


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

Warbow said:


> It is a good summary, and I bet it is similar to the reasons for many compound shooters. But, as a semantic point, I'd say you have just as much time for shooting a recurve as a compound but you wouldn't be satisfied with your ability with a recurve given the same input of time.


That's true...most hunters shoot a compound because they can lay the bow down after archery season. Not pick it up until a week before hunting season the next year and in an afternoon be as good as they were when they quite last season. 

Now that most States have allow X-bows to be hunted with by anyone it is going to be even worse. X=bows should have stay relegated to handicapped people...the lazy butts who use them do because they are to lazy to actually get a deer with range and think an X-bow will allow then to shoot farther. Fortunately they actually perform worse than a compound.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

ArtV said:


> That's true...most hunters shoot a compound because they can lay the bow down after archery season. Not pick it up until a week before hunting season the next year and in an afternoon be as good as they were when they quite last season.
> 
> Now that most States have allow X-bows to be hunted with by anyone it is going to be even worse. X=bows should have stay relegated to handicapped people...the lazy butts who use them do because they are to lazy to actually get a deer with range and think an X-bow will allow then to shoot farther. Fortunately they actually perform worse than a compound.


in states where compounds are the easiest archery tackle to hunt with are those who use it the lazy butts in that state? I have seen lousy archery hunters use all types of bows Art. I never had a crossbow archer shoot a hole in the roof of my range. I had about 15 lights shot out by compound-release shooters and a couple TRAD archers btw. I think if we never would have had compound bows, we'd have more real archers who shot year round but since hunting is an individual pasttime where another hunter IS NOT COMPETING AGAINST ME, I couldn't care less. As you said, xbows are not more efficient than compounds and since compounds are legal, there is NO RATIONAL reason to keep crossbows out

BTW Brad Jarman is a crossbow archer. I doubt he can outshoot me with any type of archery tackle. But he is one of the best HUNTERS I have ever met. Put him up against my world xbow junior, one of my gold olympian recurvers or my former FITA indoor compound world record holder and he would lose. Put him out in the field with any type of bow he is gonna come home with venison and most of those kids would not.


----------



## TheShadowEnigma (Aug 16, 2008)

All I know is I love my recurve. I love the feel and the look of it. I'm also not an old fart  

Compounds have that modern look which I think is another thing that draws people to them.


----------



## omega_archer (Aug 25, 2008)

I started shooting with a compound and after a couple of months, I was shooting in the gold at 60yds. I would watch the "experienced as in 5 plus years" recurvers shooting 10-15 inch groups at 60yds and remember thinking to myself, these guys can't shoot worth a *&%#, I would give it up if I shot that bad after that long. I figured, how hard could it be so I tried it..... then I learned how hard it was to find arrows.

I stuck with it because when I shot the recurve, I realized that archery wasn't about hitting the 10, it was about putting your blood, sweat and tears behind every arrow. That's hard to explain to a new shooter because all they want to do is hit the bullseye. 

Patience is what I feel is something we are all losing and frustration is the unfortunate outcome. If JOAD is the future of archery in america, the kids need to be successful in order to want to stick with it otherwise they loose interest and go back to playing video games.


----------



## 442fps (Dec 23, 2003)

6X60 said:


> I don't believe that they do. In fact, I don't think there is much bowhunting outside of North America. Some, I believe in Australia. None that I am aware of in Europe.


Absolutely wrong !

Here you can see a map from Europe , the green marked country's are the ones were bowhunting is allowed : http://www.dbjv.org/bogenjagdineuropa/index.html

There's are also a lot of bowhunting in Africa , but i dont know exactly in how many counytry's it's possible , but there are some .

But in Europe , for example in France , in the meantime they have around 50.000 olympic recurve archers , although 90% of the bowhunters use compound bows .


----------



## michigan ken (Mar 25, 2007)

In Michigan alone there is over 300,000 bow hunters of which 99.9% use a compound. Most of the people I know shoot leagues or 3D just to keep in form for hunting.


----------



## scriv (Jan 31, 2008)

omega_archer said:


> I figured, how hard could it be so I tried it..... then I learned how hard it was to find arrows.
> 
> I stuck with it because when I shot the recurve, I realized that archery wasn't about hitting the 10, it was about putting your blood, sweat and tears behind every arrow. That's hard to explain to a new shooter because all they want to do is hit the bullseye.
> 
> Patience is what I feel is something we are all losing and frustration is the unfortunate outcome. If JOAD is the future of archery in america, the kids need to be successful in order to want to stick with it otherwise they loose interest and go back to playing video games.


I agree. When my kids are out shot by another with a compound (they shoot recurves)they don't care because they are aware of the difference the equipment makes. We have to make sure all of the kids realize that or they will be uncomfortable shooting in front of other as another archer here posted in this thread. 

I have shot leagues where I was the only one shooting a longbow against the compounds. You can guess the outcome. I can't tell you how excited I was when I posted a better score than any compound shooter. I shoot for my enjoyment, to do the best I can do with my gear.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Archers around (FITA and IFAA), from unofficials infos:

- France 65,000
- Germany 35,000
- UK 30,000
- Italy 24,000
- Spain 9,000
- Switzerland 3,500
- Japan 30,000
- Korea 2,000
- Hong Kong 1,500
- Ivory Coast 300
- Taipei 3,000

In all bove countries, average rate is (based mainly on Italy) :
- 55 % recurve Olympic style
- 18% recurve Bare Bow style
- 22% compound 
- 5% other styles (Bow Hunting, Long Bow) 

Bare Bow is increasing very rapidly, Compound is slowly decreasing, Olympic style is stable. 
Hunting has almost no influence in all above countries, so Compound means target compound only, and being the most expensive o the 3 divisions is logically decreasing in percentage. Olympic style is stable as all efforts from governing bodies is to keep the numbers at levels suitable to generate Olympic team members. Bare Bow is increasing as less demanading in terms of personal commitment and cheaper.

USA are of course in a situation that can't be compared to any of the above coutries.


----------



## AT_X_HUNTER (Aug 10, 2005)

Warbow said:


> It is a good summary, and I bet it is similar to the reasons for many compound shooters. But, as a semantic point, I'd say you have just as much time for shooting a recurve as a compound but you wouldn't be satisfied with your ability with a recurve given the same input of time.


Absolutely. I shoot about 2 or 3 times a week right now. That's not enough time to train with a recurve to not only have the form but also the strength and stamina to shoot a full indoor round, let alone a full FITA. But with my compound I can maintain my skill level with the amount of time I have avaliable.


----------



## Z-MAN (Jan 25, 2004)

Hunting has a large cultural hold in the U.S.. It's an affordable pastime for most people. Pennsylvania has approximately 273,000 licensed bowhunters alone. No wonder bowhunting is big business. Just look at the time and money devoted to bowhunting at the ATA Show taking place this week. Hunting in Europe is very limited and very expensive from what I've been told. 

It's sad to know that in the U.S., we have many more talented people who call archery one of their favorite past time sports, but are unable to pursue the sport to another level due to the lack of time and resources. Other sports, such as team sports, have become more of a year around commitment for young peoples' time, talent and money then just a seasonal sport.

Target archery,both recurve and compound, require more time and commitment then most people are willing to afford.


----------



## rgauvin (Feb 20, 2007)

IMO it takes alot of time and dedication to get proficient and to maintain that skill level when it comes to recurve. Compound is easier and you don't need to work as hard or as long to feel satisfied with your shooting abilities.

If I can go shootin 2 days a week and the best I can do with a recurve is 230's and I see Jimmy over there who shoots once a week and he is clipping along with his compound in 250's with less effort then I will be tempted to switch. I may even ask him to let me shoot his bow, and if I do, the ease of it will only help draw me to compounds. If "jimmy" asks to try my bow and I let him, he'll shoot worse then with his compound so no way in hell he'll switch.

for the most part, it's a one way street...


----------



## Greg Bouras (Nov 17, 2006)

Recently a young gentleman who was sighting in his compound for the upcoming deer season here in Missouri seemed to have an interest in my recurve barebow and finally asked what kind of a bow is that; it’s not a normal bow is it? I explained the recurve to him the best that I was able, telling immediately that he had no interest in anything that seemed so primitive. 

Myself having begun with a recurve and having shot a compound barebow for many years, each August I put the compound down to begin shooting the recurve again to be prepared for the upcoming October deer season. That just seemed normal to me.


Still there is much good is realized from economic and conservation perspectives in the fact that most bow hunters opt for fast shooting, sighted compound bows with release aids.

So much is missed by not having experienced recurve archery.

Probably the best thing a recurve archer can do for his fellow man is take a friend stump shooting!


----------



## scriv (Jan 31, 2008)

Greg Bouras said:


> So much is missed by not having experienced recurve archery.
> 
> Probably the best thing a recurve archer can do for his fellow man is take a friend stump shooting!



Absolutely!


----------



## Flint Hills Tex (Nov 3, 2008)

442fps said:


> Absolutely wrong !
> 
> Here you can see a map from Europe , the green marked country's are the ones were bowhunting is allowed : http://www.dbjv.org/bogenjagdineuropa/index.html


Thanks for posting that link, 442fps, 'cause if you hadn't, I would have! I think the difference is primarily cultural. Americans tend to be more the "rugged outdoorsman" type than folks in other cultures (maybe that's why compound is so popular in Australia as well).

FITA style archery is sort of a "genteel" sport, the tournaments quiet and disciplined, taking place on a manicured range (the atmosphere reminds me of golf or tennis matches). 

Field, 3-D, and hunting, by their nature, are more outdoorsman type events. The compound has obviously established itself in hunting circles due to it's "easier" accuracy. The carry-over to the other "outdoorsman" types of archery a logical result.

I'm not saying Europeans or Asians aren't attracted to outdoor activities, but they lack the recent "frontier" past that America has.

As to firearm ownership, it is by no means prohibited in Europe. Anybody who has a clean record (background checks are mandatory) can be issued a license to own firearms. The laws governing how and where they may be used are much stricter than in the US, but basically anybody who wants to can own a gun. Yet recurve is by far more popular than compound in Germany!

Take a look at your in school (NASP) and after school archery programs aimed at getting kids interested in our sport: 99 out of 100 such programs use the Matthew's Genesis compound! That doesn't do much to promote recurve!


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

rgauvin said:


> IMO it takes alot of time and dedication to get proficient and to maintain that skill level when it comes to recurve. Compound is easier and you don't need to work as hard or as long to feel satisfied with your shooting abilities.
> 
> If I can go shootin 2 days a week and the best I can do with a recurve is 230's and I see Jimmy over there who shoots once a week and he is clipping along with his compound in 250's with less effort then I will be tempted to switch. I may even ask him to let me shoot his bow, and if I do, the ease of it will only help draw me to compounds. If "jimmy" asks to try my bow and I let him, he'll shoot worse then with his compound so no way in hell he'll switch.
> 
> for the most part, it's a one way street...


In our club, I have seen only one make a switch from compound to recurve. That was my daughter. Her first archery experience was shooting compound, but Olympian Ruth Rowe put the Olympic dream into her head, and its been recurve ever since. Role models are important!


----------



## ArrowNewB (Nov 13, 2008)

So I guess there we have it ... Olympic style recurve archery is too gay for Americans 

Also to point out, this forum we all frequent is clearly targeted for compound shooters. Look at the picture above ... big macho men with their compounds taking aim and getting ready to murder bambi


----------



## FrayAdjacent (Oct 20, 2008)

ArrowNewB said:


> So I guess there we have it ... Olympic style recurve archery is too gay for Americans
> 
> Also to point out, this forum we all frequent is clearly targeted for compound shooters. Look at the picture above ... big macho men with their compounds taking aim and getting ready to murder bambi


It's not their fault that bambi is so TASTY!!  


I'm 32 (not too old) and don't hunt, and recently got into recurve target archery. I like the challenge. I think compounds are ugly. I respect what they do, but they are ugly. Fugly even.


----------



## skydog (Sep 20, 2004)

*My take*

I shoot both compund and recurve strickly target. And i have been just beside my self for years trying to get leagues started with no luck. every body would rather shoot 30 arrows at a "tv screen". The response i get is spots are boring & i can't shoot 60 arrows with my poundage. I belive they say spots are boring because you can't "wound" a 10 its either a 10 or its not.
I love to shoot my recurve why because when i do get one in the gold i feel like i have really done something. I will never be a good shot with my recurve but that does not lesson the enjoyment i get by shooting this style. All though its sad that i have to join an online league with people from england just to keep my hopes of target archery alive. Also i remember shooting in a target league 4 man teams we had a waiting list of people wanting to shoot
26 lane range. so i am always asking myself where did all of the target shooters go?


----------



## SidneyArcher (Sep 23, 2008)

In America you can often find out what is going on by "following the trail of money." I believe this to be true in archery. Several years ago I made a job switch to sales, thinking "Oh I love the product, so I should be able to do very well with it." I was wrong. Knowing the product was only a very small part of it. Next to "following the trail of money",the elements of marketing and advertising are key to what becomes popular in America (Just look at Fast Food advertising on the TV). This involves how you market yourself or product, who do you know, how many referals can you get, how much will it cost to advertise, what is the rate of return. If i spend x amount of $$$ on an ad will it be a good investment or did I just flush it down the tube. Next, in America the TV is very important. Look at the sports that have a high tv profile such as baseball, football, basketball, golf, ect. All of these sports have Billiions of dollars involved with them, I remember several years back when Tiger Woods was the highest paid athlete at about $40 million. (In my opinion golf is similar to archery in that almost anyone can do it, the equipment cost a lot of money, it in not very much fun to watch on tv, takes a lot of room to do out side, must invest a lot of time to become good at it, and the list goes on). Anyway for some reason golf is very popular, which I feel is inpart due to the TV. 

When someone is able to find a Recurve archery format( though I feel football is much more complicatd than any of archery current formats) that is easy to understand and more importantly easy to watch on TV, get the right people with money behind them, and with the right marketing archery will explode here in the states. 

in order to make a living those in the archery biz must be diver


----------



## FrayAdjacent (Oct 20, 2008)

You're pretty right on SidneyArcher. If it doesn't sell or you can't advertise, it won't become popular. Soccer is not popular in the US... because it doesn't stop enough for beer commercials!


----------



## cc46 (Jan 22, 2005)

Well...here are a few thoughts as I recall, 

--Recurves use to be popular...but in the 70's that changed, Allen, Jennings and Bear built compounds, doesn't matter who was first, they kicked the recurve world on it's butt. Suddenly arrows were flying 50% faster, you could use a weaker arrow for an equivalent poundage and hold it forever to aim, wow!!, we watched in awe! And experiments with releases, maginifing scopes and peeps all contributed to the ability to hit gold on your first weekend. Hunters saw the advantage of this and with a few hours of practise they could be proficient. That was it the hunting compound market was born and archery changed in North America. 

--and hunters realised their season could be extended with a bow. 

--also along the way the recreation programs for recurve joad and school archery started to wane over funding but mostly over fear of weapons in the hands of kids.

The "archery market" in NA became primarily a hunter's compound market...as it is today, it was a "perfect storm" ...


----------



## cc46 (Jan 22, 2005)

forgot one thing ...
Jimmy Carter banded the US from competing in the 1980's Olympics, and Canada did too ... that did not help recurve popularity 

by 84 I think the change was irreversible


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

SidneyArcher said:


> In America you can often find out what is going on by "following the trail of money." I believe this to be true in archery. Several years ago I made a job switch to sales, thinking "Oh I love the product, so I should be able to do very well with it." I was wrong. Knowing the product was only a very small part of it. Next to "following the trail of money",the elements of marketing and advertising are key to what becomes popular in America (Just look at Fast Food advertising on the TV). This involves how you market yourself or product, who do you know, how many referals can you get, how much will it cost to advertise, what is the rate of return. If i spend x amount of $$$ on an ad will it be a good investment or did I just flush it down the tube. Next, in America the TV is very important. Look at the sports that have a high tv profile such as baseball, football, basketball, golf, ect. All of these sports have Billiions of dollars involved with them, I remember several years back when Tiger Woods was the highest paid athlete at about $40 million. (In my opinion golf is similar to archery in that almost anyone can do it, the equipment cost a lot of money, it in not very much fun to watch on tv, takes a lot of room to do out side, must invest a lot of time to become good at it, and the list goes on). Anyway for some reason golf is very popular, which I feel is inpart due to the TV.
> 
> When someone is able to find a Recurve archery format( though I feel football is much more complicatd than any of archery current formats) that is easy to understand and more importantly easy to watch on TV, get the right people with money behind them, and with the right marketing archery will explode here in the states.
> 
> in order to make a living those in the archery biz must be diver


Well, I attend several all traditional shoots every year, no compounds and no bows with elevated rests...strictly shooting off the shelf. This has been the fastest growing part of archery in America for many years now. They don't make much noise about it. All the major compound manufacturers have now come along with a line of traditional bows. One shoot I attend has over 6,000 participants and none of them are shooting for score it is totally non-competitive. People have falling back in love with archery for archery's sake. Granted, the vast majority of traditional shooters are hunters, but that is in fact the driving force in the archery business. Not tournament shooting. Most of the other shoots I attend will easily have over 400 participants...some are competitive 3-D shoots but many are none competitive.

I make a living from the archery business. I know many others that do to, but we are all custom makers. 
Art


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

ArtV said:


> Well, I attend several all traditional shoots every year, no compounds and no bows with elevated rests...strictly shooting off the shelf. This has been the fastest growing part of archery in America for many years now. They don't make much noise about it. All the major compound manufacturers have now come along with a line of traditional bows. One shoot I attend has over 6,000 participants and none of them are shooting for score it is totally non-competitive. People have falling back in love with archery for archery's sake. Granted, the vast majority of traditional shooters are hunters, but that is in fact the driving force in the archery business. Not tournament shooting. Most of the other shoots I attend will easily have over 400 participants...some are competitive 3-D shoots but many are none competitive.
> 
> I make a living from the archery business. I know many others that do to, but we are all custom makers.
> Art


a plug for ARt's quivers-he made one for one of my kids who is now shooting for ASU-Tyler Hoge. Its really nice.


----------



## airwolfipsc (Apr 2, 2008)

Here in the U.S, a lot of compound shooters and hunting. just my 2 cents.
other countries take the sport to the olympics.


----------



## glassblastertoo (Dec 31, 2008)

I'm one of the "old farts" who got into archery in the early '60s, and got out in the late '60s. Now that *I'm* in my early 60s, I'm in the very early stages of getting back into it. (I still have my old recurves, an American Archery Cheetah Supreme, with one of the original Accra sights, and a Hoyt Pro Medalist. Now I have to re-educate myself as regards new arrows, and other improved equipment.)

I got into archery before releases and before compounds. When those "advances" first came out a lot of us who were shooting Amateur (waiting, hoping, for archery to be put back into the Olympics) thought they were for cheaters. They still turn me off. Although I first got into archery because I wanted to hunt, and my father wouldn't allow me to own a gun, once I was exposed to shooting at paper I was hooked. (When I was in high school I used to get up early enough that I could shoot for an hour before school, and then I'd shoot two hours in the evening before going to bed, outdoors, in the dark, with a spotlight on my target at 30 yards. I was an addict.) An awful lot of people took to the use of releases first, and then the new bows, because success, as measured by scores, was easier to come by. That motivation is still a powerful thing.

I don't know if I've "still got it" (I shot at 'A' level in field, can't even remember my FITA scores.), or how bad I might be now, but I always looked at the sport as a personal challenge to get better, irrespective of how others were doing. The idea that a mechanical device could help me shoot a higher score was of no interest to me. Plus, the old wooden-riser recurves were/are beautiful to look at. I still think compounds are uuuugleee!

I recently found this forum, and I'm reading, mostly lurking. I'll probably be asking some questions shortly, to pick the brains of those of you more knowledgeable about modern equipment (It is definitely more complicated now, with many more options as to equipment.). Archery was a big part of my life for several years (It helped pay my way through college, as I instructed at summer camps while in school.), and I'm really looking forward to getting back into the sport.


----------



## adamg32 (Feb 1, 2008)

I've read through this thread and would like to offer my perspective. As a college student who just began shooting a little over a year ago, it was easy for me to pick up recurve because that's what the professor on campus was starting the club with. Olympic style recurve, nothing else. If I had had the choice and the knowledge I do know, I probably would have grabbed a compound. I like to entertain the fact that I shoot they way Olympians do (not at their skill level, mind you), and perhaps someday with enough practice I could be good enough. 

However, I spent a lot of money on a beginning setup that I will be upgrading for a while to come. I can find a compound bow for 350, plus sight and arrows, for a total of 600 (rough estimate), and have the proper equipment for a long time's worth of shooting. With recurve, I spent about 600 on my basic setup, and have had to get new limbs, a new sight, and will be getting new arrows at some point. There are more compound shooters, therefore more compound bows, which means they can be found for less money, which is a big draw as a kid with student loans. And they are easier to master.

I shot a 300 "tournament" at 18m tonight at the local range, and was pleased with my 247. Not my best work, but good. I look down the score sheet and see a bunch of compound shooters breaking 280. I know that they are very, very different, but it is still a little disheartening. I would love to go to the Olympics, but that would require a time and money commitment that our lifestyle (as well as the college student's!) does not encourage. I figure that the best chance I have at even becoming competitive at the National level is to drop all my other hobbies, come into enough money to make buying equipment less painful, and find a way to practice every day without driving 45 minutes in LA traffic.

With all that taken into consideration, it becomes very tempting to buy a used compound and start shooting. I could be better in less time with less money. I think that's what it boils down to, and I think that's why so many people would rather shoot a compound.


----------



## SidneyArcher (Sep 23, 2008)

*ArtV* great post. I was not aware of such a large following in the barebow "underground." lol However you are right about the love link to barebow shooting. I love to set down the modern recurve from time to time with all its bells and wistles and shoot a one piece barebow, off the shelf. 

Having read though the thread, I believe everyone has a fairly good insight on the many angle of why " recurve archery is not popular in the US."


----------



## Mark Hedges (Dec 18, 2008)

ArtV said:


> Well, I attend several all traditional shoots every year, no compounds and no bows with elevated rests...strictly shooting off the shelf. This has been the fastest growing part of archery in America for many years now. They don't make much noise about it. All the major compound manufacturers have now come along with a line of traditional bows. One shoot I attend has over 6,000 participants and none of them are shooting for score it is totally non-competitive. People have falling back in love with archery for archery's sake. Granted, the vast majority of traditional shooters are hunters, but that is in fact the driving force in the archery business. Not tournament shooting. Most of the other shoots I attend will easily have over 400 participants...some are competitive 3-D shoots but many are none competitive.
> 
> I make a living from the archery business. I know many others that do to, but we are all custom makers.
> Art


Well first let me say that the "no elevated rest" rule is infuriating and not based on the actual history of the development of the modern (glass laminated) recurve bow.

I think part of the problem is that there are so few competitive recurve events. Many people like to compete, and there is just not a lot of opportunity to compete with large numbers of other recurve shooters. Why would someone who likes to compete switch from a compound (where they have practically unlimited events that they can compete at) to a recurve where most of the time you will be at events dominated by compound shooters and you may well be the only shooter in your class.

The biggest trad event (denton hill) has no competition at all, which to me is nuts. 

Please post or PM me all the competitive events that you attend. Maybe there are some more out there that I do not know about.

Mark


----------



## Recurve Artemis (Mar 6, 2008)

*Why recurve is popular in Japan*

I think there are a lot of factors, but the biggest one, I think, is hunting. 

In Japan it is legal to hunt with a shotgun, but it is illegal to use a bow for hunting. The reason, I am told, is that because a bow is quiet, it could promote illegal hunting and a missed arrow is more dangerous than missed pellets. So in Japan archery is strictly a target sport.

Here's a cultural difference...
Japanese archery, Kyudo, is one of the "arts" like Judo or Kendo and it has very close ties to religion and the Samurais. Many Kyudo schools are part of Shinto shrines and archery is used to pray for good harvest, health and happiness, or to ward off bad spirits, etc. So the image of archery is different - more of a ceremonial and mental training tool, not a hunting tool. 

Another big difference is in Japan, collegiate archery is strong. They have over 150 colleges and universities with archery clubs and probably 99% of them have their own range on school grounds. About 97% of them shoot olympic recurve. At the top tier schools, they require club members to shoot at least 90 minutes (one class period) a day, more if possible, Monday-Friday and practice all day Saturdays. During winter and summer vacation, they practice 9-4 every day Monday - Friday. On top of that most schools hold intensive camps twice a year for 10-12 days off-site which usually runs Monday to Friday the following week. Again shooting and training 7-8 hours a day with one day in the middle being the "fun" day. They have a national self-governing body that runs the collegiate championship tournaments in cooperation with the regional committees. This is possible because most Japanese college students are supported by their parents and they do not have as many homework as American college students do. 

Another difference is the structure of the archery associations. Under the All Japan Archery Association are 4 groups: All Japan Collegiate Archery Association, All Japan High School Athletic Association Archery Division, All Japan Business/Company Archery Association (archery clubs at workplaces), and the Prefectural (like the states in the US) Archery Associations. Above the All Japan Archery Association are FITA, the Japanese Olympic Committee and the Japanese Athletic Association. I think this structure promotes archery as a competition sport and gives advantage to olympic recurve. I am not saying that this structure is good or bad - it's just different.

I did not answer the question directly, but just wanted to share some possible reasons for recurve being popular in another country.


----------



## Steve N (Apr 27, 2004)

adamg32 said:


> ...without driving 45 minutes in LA traffic.


Adam, thats only 2 miles. You can walk it faster. 

Ok, back to the thread.


----------



## TheShadowEnigma (Aug 16, 2008)

Well, going with the other thread, compounds are for slackers. And since half of America are slackers, it's a match made in heaven!

I enjoy sarcasm.


----------

